Mark Zuckerberg talks about reinventing Facebook privacy

[KBU2]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wa...-reorient-company-towards-encryption-privacy/



Whats your opinion about Mark Zuckerberg reinventing Facebook privacy.

Mine is have you ever heard anybody sneeze and it sounded like they said Ahaaa bullsheeee?

 

[psionandy]

If he wanted to have privacy in facebook... facebook would have privacy.

QED

 

[lunatic59]

The horse is gone. No need to lock the barn now.

 

[lvt]

He'd better step down and use his billions wisely.

 

[Hadron]

Genuinely respecting privacy would run counter to Facebook's core business model. So of course it's just hogwash in an attempt to fend off regulation.

 

[Deleted User]

I can't read the linked article. What does he mean by "reinventing privacy"?

 

[lvt]

I can't read the linked article. What does he mean by "reinventing privacy"?

Maybe he was drunk while saying it.

 

[Hadron]

I can't read the linked article. What does he mean by "reinventing privacy"?

A man who has made billions out of disrespecting other people's privacy and spends many millions on protecting his own isn't someopne who I would allow to define the term in the first place.

 

[Deleted User]

Yes but I would still like to know what aspect of privacy he thinks is remaining on your Facebook account, to protect.

 

[Unforgiven]

Facebook knows everything about you, whether you are a member or not. Now they simple want to prevent anyone else from getting what they already have.

 

[Hadron]

Well I could get to the linked article. The direct link is https://www.washingtonpost.com/tech...privacy/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.42cf49de48f4 (the GDPR tickbox was very faint and hard to see).

To be honest it doesn't say much, and I can't be bothered to read Zuck's longer article linked from there. It seems to be about planned changes to things like Messenger and Instagram, which most observers reckon are about making it difficult to separate these things in future should regulators demand (a line Microsoft tried with Internet Explorer more than a decade ago, and failed miserably since it was always a patently false claim).

You should always treat corporations like politicians: judge them on what they do rather than what they say, and by the outcomes rather than what they claim were the intentions.

(Except that corporations are worse, because they are legally required to be amoral and self-serving (that's what maximising returns to shareholders means), whereas a politician isn't obliged to be like that).

 

[Deleted User]

Oh I see, it's about encrypting your data while having it swimming around the ecosystem of Facebook products and advertisers. Big deal.

The alternative is to charge users for use of the Facebook platform, and that simply wouldn't work because people wouldn't pay it. There are too many "free" social applications being used.

But ultimately, the reason why the Facebook business model works, is that most people really don't care that their information is being shared.

 

[dontpanicbobby]

I think he should take his ball and let the other kids play something else.
Where is he going to spend his billions?
Is there some kind of codicil that prevents him from cashing in?
It seem like it's not about money anymore but ego.
OT: At the very least buy a new wardrobe dude.

 

[KBU2]

Yes but I would still like to know what aspect of privacy he thinks is remaining on your Facebook account, to protect.

I'm not surprised the link has been taken down from the time I posted it.. humm go figure

 

[KBU2]

Maybe he was drunk while saying it.

Me or Zuckerberg?

 

[dontpanicbobby]

 

[lvt]

Me or Zuckerberg?

Zuck of course.

 

[tranhoang345]

I always think if you want to go online, you already accept the risk of revealing your identity.