Billion-dollar investor tells Facebook: Just Zuck off, already!

Time for Zuk to join Kalanick

Channel4 reported that some of the 50m data is still freely in circulation.

So much for deletion! Zuk just doesn't get it.... Is he a Neocon obsessed with disruption, or naive about the world? Either way, he's sure ruthlessly efficient at marrying User-Slurp with Broker-Data to produce Individual-Tailored-Pricing. Look forward to that coming to a Newsfeed near you...

Got to laugh when Zuk keeps defending himself by saying FB is free, therefore Ad Slurp... How convenient a lie, considering his user posse produce most of the content! So free, hardly when you have user slaves!

But I still can't get my wider family to see that -WhatsApp = Facebook-. So Zuk will probably bank another billion or so users before getting lynched!

"I find that argument, that if you’re not paying that somehow we can’t care about you, to be extremely glib and not at all aligned with the truth."

Just like a farmer cares for his cattle...

Nice bit of camouflage ..

.. for the fact that Stringer decided to invest capital in Facebook and now had his financial rear end handed to him when reality hit.

Stringer, who estimates his city's fund has sunk about $1bn into purchasing Facebook shares, called on the board to make changes in the wake of revelations on the company's cooperation with Cambridge Analytica in the run-up to the 2016 elections.

If I had money in that fund I'd sue the crap out of him and have him removed for investing in vapour without proper due diligence. It's not exactly a secret that FB forever teethers on a knife edge between making money off people mining and simply breaking the law.

It would be interesting if Zuckerberg did get fired from Facebook. No doubt he would cry and whinge about it, more or less forever, but his gaffes as CEO (rampant ageism, calling users 'dumb f--ks', etc etc) are bound to come back and bite him sooner or later. These things always do.

When you're in the rapids on Shit Creek in a barbed wire canoe...

It may be time to rethink your strategy.

Tim Cook's claim that Apple don't monetise customers through data is completely specious - I'm surprised it isn't more widely challenged.

Random example: here is a link to Apple's "advertising guide for news publishers" and associated "Workbench" tool

https://developer.apple.com/library/content/documentation/General/Conceptual/News_Advertising/WorkbenchHelpBasics.html

isn't there a name for this?

so an Elected Government Official (most states if not all, Comptroller is an elected position), as part of a 4 year term, can use government employee money (very little if any of which is his own, or will affect him financially if its lost due to errors in his judgement or "bad luck"), to attempt to control a Private Sector company (by trying to use "big investor level powers" to change leadership), outside of any legal actions or law enforcement mandate?

isn't there some sort of near-derogatory term for that sort of government/business relationship?

That's too bad

""We're not trying to harm Facebook, we're trying to make it a stronger company," the comptroller contends."

That's too bad. Facebook is harmful to pretty much everybody. I hope (against hope) that it goes down in flames.

Forgetting something? Maybe a bit of bias?

It is not exactly breaking news that the Obama campaign leveraged FB data in almost exactly the same way as CA. I believe that I read about it at the time. Wasn't the website called "The Register"? And what is new about that story is that within the last couple of weeks, we have an admission from a FB employee that they were completely cool with it because Obama was one of the good guys? Again, did I not read about it on "The Register"?

FB is perfectly happy to provide its user data as an (undeclared) in-kind contribution to left-leaning causes. That this article only mentions CA is straight-up bias.

'Maybe a bit of bias'

We learned today that up to 2 Billion users may have had their information exposed, and you want to play petty politics here?

"Facebook Inc. said data on most of its 2 billion users could have been accessed improperly, giving fresh evidence of the ways the social-media giant failed to protect people’s privacy while generating billions of dollars in revenue from the information."

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-04-04/facebook-says-data-on-87-million-people-may-have-been-shared

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-43649018

Mega-Problem

Looking forward to Zuk's Apr 11th testimony. But the current talking points aren't enough. There's a much wider problem here. Even if you close out your Facebook account etc, Zuk's Industrial Spying-Advertising Complex tracks you everywhere anyway (both users and non-users).

Everyone is tokenized and that activity is tracked across all sites that share data with Facebook, sites with FB Like buttons, and Experian or other Data-Brokers who have their own tokenization. This is a major privacy issue.

If you're not even a FB user, how do you opt out? Will Washington pick up on this vicious cycle... And how about managing info held by Data-Brokers? Congress has done zuk all about Equifux! Want to opt out? Hell is waiting for you there. Not many Investigative journalists have succeeded at that joy!

Threatening democracy? Meh.

Threatening shareholder value? Outrage!