Page 3 of 60

Best bogus social media scams going

Posted: Wed Jun 12, 2019 12:48 pm
by Jim Malone
No rhyme nor reason to the who what where and when.

As on Twitter I practice a follow back policy until some weird post appears in my timeline.
Had to stop it as I cannot keep up with it.
So now if account is not private I will follow back.

Don't get me started on what is exchanged in DMs.

Exhibit A

13.7K followers
I know my sister, cousin, 5 acquaintances from car forums and three pals I grew up with.
IG.png
IG.png (90.16 KiB) Viewed 3452 times

Re: Facegram & Instabook

Posted: Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:24 am
by ChairmanOfTheBoard
https://thehill.com/policy/technology/4 ... acy-issues
Facebook has turned over internal emails to regulators that appear to show that CEO Mark Zuckerberg was at least partially aware of third parties amassing user data from the social network, according to The Wall Street Journal.
should we be surprised? of course not. he was a criminal at the founding of facebook, so why not the whole way.

Re: Facegram & Instabook

Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2019 4:18 pm
by ChairmanOfTheBoard
some interesting words here from an interesting source (at an interesting forum): https://www.axios.com/tim-cook-stanford ... c3b8a.html

Re: Facegram & Instabook

Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2019 4:26 pm
by HooDat
ChairmanOfTheBoard wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2019 7:10 am this could call into question whether anything we see is actually real or not: https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/ywyx ... deo-policy
of course it's not....

Re: Facegram & Instabook

Posted: Thu Jun 27, 2019 12:59 pm
by ChairmanOfTheBoard
High-profile attempt to write a national privacy law snags

https://www.axios.com/senate-privacy-bi ... 59334.html

Re: Facegram & Instabook

Posted: Sat Jul 13, 2019 9:27 pm
by ChairmanOfTheBoard

Re: Facegram & Instabook

Posted: Wed Jul 24, 2019 1:08 pm
by ChairmanOfTheBoard
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-r ... strictions
The $5 billion penalty against Facebook is the largest ever imposed on any company for violating consumers’ privacy and almost 20 times greater than the largest privacy or data security penalty ever imposed worldwide. It is one of the largest penalties ever assessed by the U.S. government for any violation.

The order requires Facebook to restructure its approach to privacy from the corporate board-level down, and establishes strong new mechanisms to ensure that Facebook executives are accountable for the decisions they make about privacy, and that those decisions are subject to meaningful oversight.

“Despite repeated promises to its billions of users worldwide that they could control how their personal information is shared, Facebook undermined consumers’ choices,” said FTC Chairman Joe Simons.

More than 185 million people in the United States and Canada use Facebook on a daily basis. Facebook monetizes user information through targeted advertising, which generated most of the company’s $55.8 billion in revenues in 2018. To encourage users to share information on its platform, Facebook promises users they can control the privacy of their information through Facebook’s privacy settings.

Following a yearlong investigation by the FTC, the Department of Justice will file a complaint on behalf of the Commission alleging that Facebook repeatedly used deceptive disclosures and settings to undermine users’ privacy preferences in violation of its 2012 FTC order. These tactics allowed the company to share users’ personal information with third-party apps that were downloaded by the user’s Facebook “friends.” The FTC alleges that many users were unaware that Facebook was sharing such information, and therefore did not take the steps needed to opt-out of sharing.

Re: Facegram & Instabook

Posted: Thu Jul 25, 2019 2:10 pm
by runrussellrun
probably old news, but, Figured I would put this here:

https://thehill.com/policy/technology/4 ... hip-claims

"In the hours following the 1st debate, while millions of Americans searched for info about Tulsi, Google suspended her search ad account w/o explanation," the campaign said. "It is vital to our democracy that big tech companies can’t affect the outcome of elections."

Re: Facegram & Instabook

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2019 11:48 am
by seacoaster
Thought this might interest some folks here. I am not on any of these platforms:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technolo ... 1df699ef1c

"Soon after, Hughes was contacted by two prominent antitrust scholars, Scott Hemphill of New York University School of Law and Tim Wu of Columbia Law School. The two academics and longtime collaborators had been developing an argument for breaking up Facebook in the form of the slide presentation. To them, the purchase of Instagram and WhatsApp represented a “plain-vanilla violation of antitrust law, just low-hanging fruit,” Wu said in an interview. They began to pitch lawmakers and regulators together.

Academics and lawmakers who have worked with Hughes say he has helped explain the motivations and viewpoints of key players at Facebook, including Zuckerberg — although Hughes says he has no specific insider knowledge. They say Hughes can frame the business practices of present-day Silicon Valley in ways that jibe with largely untested antitrust laws that were written for major oil and rail companies decades ago."

Re: Facegram & Instabook

Posted: Tue Jul 30, 2019 12:11 pm
by ChairmanOfTheBoard

Re: Facegram & Instabook

Posted: Tue Jul 30, 2019 3:21 pm
by youthathletics
Cap One is the devil. They are opening a new Cap oNe Cafe right on the corners of Wisconsin and M street...smack dap in the middle of Georgetown. They paid, from what I have gathered close to 75 million for the 3 row house store fronts the occupy....all that so you can drink coffee for $3:50 a cup , use free wifi, and talk shop.

Re: Facegram & Instabook

Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2019 6:29 pm
by runrussellrun
youthathletics wrote: Tue Jul 30, 2019 3:21 pm Cap One is the devil. They are opening a new Cap oNe Cafe right on the corners of Wisconsin and M street...smack dap in the middle of Georgetown. They paid, from what I have gathered close to 75 million for the 3 row house store fronts the occupy....all that so you can drink coffee for $3:50 a cup , use free wifi, and talk shop.
Pay cash for burner debit cards and you will most likely never have this problem. Good luck trying to pay for a washPost subscription with a burner card tho, they WANT your information beyond the joke that is amazing-on. why is everything I evah want to buy from amazing-on "sold out"

I lie, I nevah buy from amazing=on.

alexa, why don't russellhoney badger NOT give a F?

Re: Facegram & Instabook

Posted: Wed Aug 14, 2019 12:06 pm
by ChairmanOfTheBoard
Facebook Paid Contractors to Transcribe Users’ Audio Chats
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... sers-audio

Re: Facegram & Instabook

Posted: Wed Oct 30, 2019 11:47 am
by ChairmanOfTheBoard

Re: Facegram & Instabook

Posted: Fri Nov 01, 2019 5:11 am
by seacoaster
A letter to Zuckerberg:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/31/opin ... d%20Brooks

"It was hard not to feel the irony while I was reading excerpts from your recent speech at Georgetown University, in which you defended — on free speech grounds — Facebook’s practice of posting demonstrably false ads from political candidates. I admire your deep belief in free speech. I get a lot of use out of the First Amendment. Most important, it’s a bedrock of our democracy and it needs to be kept strong.

But this can’t possibly be the outcome you and I want, to have crazy lies pumped into the water supply that corrupt the most important decisions we make together. Lies that have a very real and incredibly dangerous effect on our elections and our lives and our children’s lives.

Don’t say Larry Flynt. Not even Larry Flynt would say Larry Flynt. This isn’t the same as pornography, which people don’t rely upon for information. Last year, over 40 percent of Americans said they got news from Facebook. Of course the problem could be solved by those people going to a different news source, or you could decide to make Facebook a reliable source of public information.

The tagline on the artwork for “The Social Network” read, in 2010, “You don’t get to 500 million friends without making a few enemies.” That number sounds quaint just nine years later because one-third of the planet uses your website now.

And right now, on your website, is an ad claiming that Joe Biden gave the Ukrainian attorney general a billion dollars not to investigate his son. Every square inch of that is a lie and it’s under your logo. That’s not defending free speech, Mark, that’s assaulting truth.

You and I want speech protections to make sure no one gets imprisoned or killed for saying or writing something unpopular, not to ensure that lies have unfettered access to the American electorate.

Even after the screenplay for “The Social Network” satisfied the standards of Sony’s legal department, we sent the script — as promised over a handshake — to a group of senior lieutenants at your company and invited them to give notes. (I was asked if I would change the name of Harvard University to something else and if Facebook had to be called Facebook.)

After we’d shot the movie, we arranged a private screening of an early cut for your chief operating officer, Sheryl Sandberg. Ms. Sandberg stood up in the middle of the screening, turned to the producers who were standing in the back of the room, and said, “How can you do this to a kid?” (You were 26 years old at the time, but all right, I get it.)

I hope your C.O.O. walks into your office, leans in (as she suggested we do in her best selling book), and says, “How can we do this to tens of millions of kids? Are we really going to run an ad that claims Kamala Harris ran dog fights out of the basement of a pizza place while Elizabeth Warren destroyed evidence that climate change is a hoax and the deep state sold meth to Rashida Tlaib and Colin Kaepernick?”

The law hasn’t been written yet — yet — that holds carriers of user-generated internet content responsible for the user-generated content they carry, just like movie studios, television networks and book, magazine and newspaper publishers. Ask Peter Thiel, who funded a series of lawsuits against Gawker, including an invasion of privacy suit that bankrupted the site and forced it to close down. (You should have Mr. Thiel’s number in your phone because he was an early investor in Facebook.)

Most people don’t have the resources to employ a battalion of fact checkers. Nonetheless, while you were testifying before a congressional committee two weeks ago, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez asked you the following: “Do you see a potential problem here with a complete lack of fact-checking on political advertisements?” Then, when she pushed you further, asking you if Facebook would or would not take down lies, you answered, “Congresswoman, in most cases, in a democracy, I believe people should be able to see for themselves what politicians they may or may not vote for are saying and judge their character for themselves.”

Now you tell me. If I’d known you felt that way, I’d have had the Winklevoss twins invent Facebook."

Re: Facegram & Instabook

Posted: Tue Nov 05, 2019 5:36 pm
by ChairmanOfTheBoard
well young people are just smarter. aren't they? https://www.cnet.com/news/say-what-youn ... t-smarter/

self-serving from one of our all-time top narcissists.

did he not think he would get old? ;)

Re: Facegram & Instabook

Posted: Fri Nov 08, 2019 3:12 pm
by Bandito
They censor conservative viewpoints. Twitter is the worst of them all.

Re: Facegram & Instabook

Posted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 11:54 am
by ChairmanOfTheBoard
the "smarter" people are at it again! https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/12/tech/fac ... index.html

Re: Facegram & Instabook

Posted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 3:07 pm
by kramerica.inc
ChairmanOfTheBoard wrote: Wed Nov 13, 2019 11:54 am the "smarter" people are at it again! https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/12/tech/fac ... index.html
I noticed this bug a few days ago too...disable camera on the app.

Re: Facegram & Instabook

Posted: Sat Nov 23, 2019 1:21 pm
by Kismet


Marvelous and very serious speech by satirist/comedian Sacha Baron Cohen on the dangers to civilization of social media unchecked. Worth your time to listen to it in full...and then think about what it means for all of us and the world