let's just stop using facebook
what it says in the title.
Facebook apparently blocked Russia Today – the Kremlin-bankrolled broadcaster now known as RT – from posting anything other than text messages on the social network. On Wednesday, RT said Facebook had instituted the ban as the station was live-casting President Obama's final press conference. The channel said any articles, …
You and me both. :)
Furthermore, from the article:
"Whether or not the ban was over a copyright kerfuffle, the Kafkaesque stone-walling is not a great look for a social network that's used by more than a billion people and wields unprecedented power over the media and populations. Facebook declined to comment when poked by El Reg last night.®"
Is it not hilarious that when it comes to stonewalling legitimate questions FarceBook manages to out-Kremlin the Kremlin? Indeed in a contest to treat your "voters/customers" with studied contempt I am not sure who would win, Vladimir Putin or Mark Zuckerberg.
Given that most people seem to have a generally unfavorable opinion of the Zuck (can't think why) - how is it that in a nation with so many guns, he can just walk down the street without fear of imminent assassination?
I'm not suggesting that any El Reg readers should do such a thing, merely that I'd be terrified in his position.
The Kevlar one with the ceramic inserts.
> how is it that in a nation with so many guns, he can just walk down the street without fear of imminent assassination?
He is rich enough to afford his own security detail, his own massive houses with high walls and big doors, and most likely will spend most of his time socialising within those same walls, or within the walls of other likewise rich people.
As for how he gets between those different places, there are many ways. However I doubt he will just walk a street alone like that. Even if someone didn't mind him personally and didn't want him dead, an opportunity for a kidnapping and some ransom money payout from the family would cross certain minds.
In many ways, the rich live a far more imprisoned life than the rest, the metaphorical "golden handcuffs". It is far worse if you are famous though. If you are rich and anonymous, you can just attempt to blend in, and most will not know your net worth. However if you are rich and famous, then you can't go anywhere without being recognised for what you are.
I know, it doesn't have quite the glamorous ring of a Golden Cleric—but we need some way of celebrating companies and individuals who manage to be even more ethically bankrupt and hypocritical than the people who did so much to set record low standards: politicians.
The citation for Zuckerberg's Gold Hypocrite (he'll be accepting it on behalf of everyone at Facebook whether they want it or not) will read in part—
"... not content with attempting to lower the mean IQ of the human species by 30 points through an aggressive distribution of purposeless clicking, endless time-wasting, advertising drivel, trite photographs, regurgitated "jokes", marketing, pseudo-news, kittens and the cheapest friends an internet user can bulk-buy, Zuck has sustained the decade-long and growing reputation of Facebook for truly repellent moral cowardice, all in the name of healthy full-fat high-octane American greed ..."
For a long time, Facebook has tried their best to become a replacement for the World Wide Web, to a point where many businesses worry more about creating a Facebook profile than a website.
And now - surprise - the reports about questionable decisions on blocking or allowing certain content are on the rise. So many people are not aware that Facebook is a profit oriented business which deals with the content its clients generate and which pretty much runs counter to all of the internet's ideas about "openness" and freedom.
Facebook controls substantial parts of the global internet communication, has created its own "sub-web", and behaves pretty much like a totalitarian state: It tracks and spies on its "citizens", has practically no accountability, censors content at will, spreads known-false information, and has a "leader" who lives by a different set of rules. Preaches "sharing is caring"-like statements to justify its snooping while trying to sue his neighbors in Hawaii to vacate their premises so that he has some privacy.
Anybody who does not see the irony - and danger - in this, should read up on recent history, especially about East Germany.
At least stop seeing Facebook as a more convenient alternative to the World Wide Web. It's like thinking life in North Korea must be great since you don't have to worry about unemployment.
stop seeing Facebook as a more convenient alternative to the World Wide Web
That's just what stupid people do. The exact same people that thought AOL was the internet. The exact same people that put contests & promotions on FB and wonder why I can't/won't get to them.
I've even run into businesses whose entire presence was a FB page. "Oh just go to our FB page" "No, I don't have a FB account so I can't get to it [demonstrates "f*ck off if you don't have an account" on phone]" "[boggle]"
You're preaching to the choir here, as people on El Reg are not these people.
Of course I try to stay away from stupid people of this sort, but they're what makes FB tick.
A few years ago, Youtube shut down NASA's youtube channel after an automated copyright claim from a broadcaster was filed - in the middle of a shuttle launch.
That took a while to get resolved _and_ the same stonewalling was observed.
Yes, there are criminal provisions for false DMCA declarations, but the claimants get around that using the Chewbacca defense - "I claim I own this, therefore you must take down that" (Where this and that are not related.
DMCA law needs an overhaul. It's unfit for purpose.