Break up of Facebook?

[Bodhicitta]

A founder wants government to do it - will it happen?

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/09/opinion/sunday/chris-hughes-facebook-zuckerberg.html

[OldDog]

Wow, interesting article.

 

Wonder how it will be received. Pretty sure no one will care or look deep enough into what he is trying to say to understand the implications.

 

Every day we become more of an oligarchy.  Nobody to hold accountable.

[silent thunder]

I remember when Ma Bell was broken up when it became apparent they exherted too much influence on their overall market.

 

 

[joeblast]

the Sherman-hammer needs to be wielded a bit, methinks

[OldDog]

2 hours ago, joeblast said:

Sherman-hammer

 

Yeah, need to scrape off the rust.

[Stosh]

Um, Back in the old days , we had what was called a phone book, and you could find everybody who had a phone , by name. It seems to me , that right now , one really must go through one of the social media giants. Is that essentially correct ? If so then it seems that a phone book app could be made available , and everybody can make their own social networks , but still be open to 'guests',and probably dictate the parameters of their own "account",, (just not anyone elses). 

I don't see why anyone has to tolerate the lucrative selling of ones private information, the censorship of content , or any of it. 

There's money in them thar hills too 

 

But I don't have a facebook or twitter page , so I am not really sure how that crap works. 

[OldDog]

Oh yeah, phone books. I remember them. I actually found one when I was cleaning out some old boxes of stuff we had stored away. My wife said maybe we should hold on to them to show the grandkids.

[Bodhicitta]

4 hours ago, Stosh said:

Um, Back in the old days , we had what was called a phone book, and you could find everybody who had a phone , by name. It seems to me , that right now , one really must go through one of the social media giants. Is that essentially correct ? If so then it seems that a phone book app could be made available , and everybody can make their own social networks , but still be open to 'guests',and probably dictate the parameters of their own "account",, (just not anyone elses). 

I don't see why anyone has to tolerate the lucrative selling of ones private information, the censorship of content , or any of it. 

There's money in them thar hills too 

 

But I don't have a facebook or twitter page , so I am not really sure how that crap works. 

 

No techie am I, but for persons, keep their email & snail addresses in your Contacts file.  For websites, make bookmarks & favorites.

 

I never used or joined Twitter, Facebook etc. 

[aotvoid]

There's decentralized (open source and otherwise) social media that isn't bad, but I've never gotten a chance to use it.

 

The main problem is getting anyone to use it is a little difficult because everyone seems to prefer to use the giants like FB and so on. Also they already have their servers set up; you'd need, for a given community, probably someone willing to pay to run a server or otherwise rent server space. I think it'd be worth the headache but the tendency is to just set your good sense aside and flock to the centralized megasites where nobody actually does much talking or anything, but where everyone else is, and besides, it's "always free."

 

Convenience and shortsightedness taking the day, as usual. It bothers me a lot when I think about it. Then again much of how the internet works and is set up these days seriously bothers me.

[Stosh]

Hang with me a sec, I ,as a user can really only read one page at a time. Right? Two eyes, one portion of a page at a time. 

That is true for every single individual using a file server. 

So for each ..phone, the actual data load is one page at a time, which takes virtually no time to load... And I can store all the data I would even choose to share on this phone.. 

So why the heck does a file server need to be in the mix at all? 

It is temporary storage stop which allows any provider of the server the right to look at and sell your private info, so salesmen can squeeze more money out of YOU or me. 

How much upload time per day, does your personal social life really use? Realistically. ...

Hold your own data, allow others to access it, and you don't need to feed Zuckerberg.

No?

[Aetherous]

34 minutes ago, Stosh said:

Hold your own data, allow others to access it, and you don't need to feed Zuckerberg.

No?

 

Doing this, individuals could get paid to be advertised to, rather than Facebook making money off of users being advertised to.

[Stosh]

14 minutes ago, Aetherous said:

 

Doing this, individuals could get paid to be advertised to, rather than Facebook making money off of users being advertised to.

Makes sense to me, The thing this method won't allow, is viral millions of viewers per hour to my one phone, .. but,.. I don't know that many people, and don't care to supply all those strangers anyway.

Each person could scale up their device as they chose ,perhaps be paid as an advertiser, to do exactly that n pay your phone bill to boot.

[joeblast]

16 hours ago, Aetherous said:

 

Doing this, individuals could get paid to be advertised to, rather than Facebook making money off of users being advertised to.

but they wont be able to have their apps auto installed on every single cel phone and have the executable run no matter what and you cant shut it off like facebook does

[joeblast]

Quote

"THE ZUCKERBERG DOSSIER

"MARK ZUCKERBERG IS A FRAUD USED BY THE CIA

'To Every Facebook User,

"Mark Zuckerberg, and all of us who were there from the beginning, are lying to you and using your personal life as a government-controlled experiment in brain-washing and mind-control – basically a weaponized system of the military (CIA especially) that got out of control. At this point, Mark Zuckerberg has lost control of a company that he never really owned or operated. Truly, anyone who has ever worked with Mark knows that his mind is a blank and that he is nothing more than a parrot for the government handlers who created him. Mark is incapable of running a McDonald’s, let alone one of the most powerful companies in the world. Not even his name is real and his identity has always been covered up. Mark was chosen as child for a CIA training program because his relatives were some of the people creating the program...."

" Mark Greenberg (Zuckerberg) did not write one single line of programming source code for Facebook. Those are lies and propaganda generated by his government, military handlers. Everyone knows that the Winkelvoss twins (Aaron and Cameron) won a $65 million dollar lawsuit settlement against Mark because they knew that their little HarvardConnection (HC) piece was just adjunct code attached to the original stolen source code – which was given to Mark by Professor James Chandler and IBM. That $65 million bit of dirty knowledge was pretty profitable for a couple of cute Harvard Crew rower jocks... "

https://aim4truth.org/2019/06/13/facebook-insider-confesses-all/

 

 

 

Quote

Mark was supposed to simply be the fake “boy genius” of Larry Summers’ (Harvard’s president) social media project funded by DARPA/In-Q-Tel (CIA)/IBM and the secretive international “public-private” group called The Highlands Group organized with the DoD Office of Net Assessment.

 

It was Summers and a group of government officials who fabricated, produced and directed Mark throughout the entire fraudulent creation of the Facebook propaganda story at Harvard. These claims are explosive and allege that the entire fraudulent social media network called Facebook was always controlled by the government through the people who were at Harvard directing Mark. The anonymous author of the letter below, who we will call “John”, also points out why Facebook was created, how Mark was controlled by Eric Schmidt, James Beyer, Larry Summers, Sheryl Sandberg and the evil intellectual property thief Professor James Chandler.

 

 

Quote

The author of this expose offers a quite different story and for the first time tells of the involvement of high-level government players who made a fortune off of the sky-rocketing overnight growth of Facebook stock on NASDAQ. The players mentioned by “John” (anonymous author) check out to be the people who made enormous amounts of money from Facebook stock. These insider traders then took their Facebook winnings and started other social media companies that, coincidentally, sky-rocketed beyond most companies in history.

 

Hmmm…do you own any Facebook stock? Might be cash-out time!

 

 

 

cia's go-corporate model, you've all been watching it unfold

[Stosh]

1 hour ago, joeblast said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

cia's go-corporate model, you've all been watching it unfold

I couldn't say if any of that is fact , or not ,, but if so..it makes me wonder if AOC is being so handled ultimately... It would make sense , Somehow she ends up chairing in the house , and siphoning influence from the Speaker ?? They asked her who she would endorse for president , she curls up to make herself look small - as if nobody told her yet what to say on that subject ... or maybe she doesn't know what an endorsement is ?! ... But at least we know the 'animus was real'  

[joeblast]

1 hour ago, Stosh said:

I couldn't say if any of that is fact , or not ,, but if so..it makes me wonder if AOC is being so handled ultimately... It would make sense , Somehow she ends up chairing in the house , and siphoning influence from the Speaker ?? They asked her who she would endorse for president , she curls up to make herself look small - as if nobody told her yet what to say on that subject ... or maybe she doesn't know what an endorsement is ?! ... But at least we know the 'animus was real'  

highly doubtful, she's not making it out of the primary this time around

[dawei]

1 minute ago, joeblast said:

highly doubtful, she's not making it out of the primary this time around

 

It does feel like a one time EKG blimp

 

[dawei]

The irony of considering to break them up in face of they buy up all their competition with millions of dollars... 

[Lost in Translation]

On 5/11/2019 at 5:18 PM, Stosh said:

Hang with me a sec, I ,as a user can really only read one page at a time. Right? Two eyes, one portion of a page at a time. 

That is true for every single individual using a file server. 

So for each ..phone, the actual data load is one page at a time, which takes virtually no time to load... And I can store all the data I would even choose to share on this phone.. 

So why the heck does a file server need to be in the mix at all? 

It is temporary storage stop which allows any provider of the server the right to look at and sell your private info, so salesmen can squeeze more money out of YOU or me. 

How much upload time per day, does your personal social life really use? Realistically. ...

Hold your own data, allow others to access it, and you don't need to feed Zuckerberg.

No?

 

What you are describing is a peer-to-peer network. This works for small groups when the data access is intermittent - for example, Napster back in the 2002. The problem with this is scalability and availability. Have a dozen friends? No problem! Have a million friends? It will crash your device. Likewise, you'll only be available when the network is up. In a tunnel or gone camping? No one can see your content.

Edited June 18, 2019 by Lost in Translation

[Stosh]

1 hour ago, Lost in Translation said:

 

What you are describing is a peer-to-peer network. This works for small groups when the data access is intermittent - for example, Napster back in the 2002. The problem with this is scalability and availability. Have a dozen friends? No problem! Have a million friends? It will crash your device. Likewise, you'll only be available when the network is up. In a tunnel or gone camping? No one can see your content.

Ill take your word for it , but you don't have a million friends , and neither do I. Technical difficulties may need to be addressed , but there's no reason why Facebook's model needs to be re-created - 

Going 'viral' serves no real purpose ,

that set up is designed to force the idea of giant servers that need to be maintained ,,

by someone ,, and that someone ,, now has access to all sorts of data ,, controls that data. 

If the idea is similar to peer to peer , fine. Nobody in China really needs to watch a vid of my cat. 

Think outside the box , do something else. 

Parler , mimics facebook , and will face the same mission creep IMO. 

 

[Lost in Translation]

17 minutes ago, Stosh said:

Going 'viral' serves no real purpose ,

 

Facebook is also used for business. Going viral is modern advertising.

 

18 minutes ago, Stosh said:

you don't have a million friends

 

No, but many celebrities have millions of followers. The technical limitations are fatal at that scale. 

[Stosh]

13 minutes ago, Lost in Translation said:

 

Facebook is also used for business. Going viral is modern advertising.

 

 

No, but many celebrities have millions of followers. The technical limitations are fatal at that scale. 

What business needs to handle millions simultaneously? 

There's no reason 50 Cher followers could each rebroadcast her breakfast if they want to, to the next 50. 

( If Cher - post to Garfunkle ,, if Garfunkle- notify Grassley and Beto. )

Again , you are deciding that the set up has to be the same as Facebook now, filter the number of contacts to the functional number you can handle. Businesses,  or Cher , can scale up their private server. The idea is decentralization. 

[Lost in Translation]

33 minutes ago, Stosh said:

What business needs to handle millions simultaneously?

 

Any business with a million or more followers. For example, a business like Apple could announce a limited time sale with promo-code. They would want this announcement to go out instantly to all their listeners.

 

36 minutes ago, Stosh said:

you are deciding that the set up has to be the same as Facebook now

 

No. I am not saying that. I am simply pointing out a limitation of peer-to-peer networks.

[Stosh]

19 minutes ago, Lost in Translation said:

 

Any business with a million or more followers. For example, a business like Apple could announce a limited time sale with promo-code. They would want this announcement to go out instantly to all their listeners.

They still can,  if they 1 ) have a private server that can cover it  , 2) pay an advertising firm to release it. 

3) they can accept a reasonable delay , since instantaneous-ness is not really required

4) they can still relay through the network and credit anyone who presents their ad with a premium for releasing it at 7:15

 

Quote

 

No. I am not saying that. I am simply pointing out a limitation of peer-to-peer networks.

Since I did not promote an existing peer to peer network , merely described a network that you likened to a peer to peer network , and I said that some issues would still need to be ironed out, I dont have to defend peer to peer networks that exist. 

 

The importance of privacy , justifies some adjustment of the expectations that a person would have for a platform. If you cant do a promo code simultaneous to a million cola consumers using peer to peer - too bad. Use a sales gimmick that will work. 

Anything one wants to show to a million people , isn't in need of any privacy protection.

 

What does need protection is the privacy of individuals. Facebook sells personal data .. which can be used against the individual ,  centralizing censorship , or attributing virtue scores also,  violate privacy and freedoms of individuals. 

.... 

 

Didnt we already discuss this a long time ago , I'm  getting  the de ja vous vibe. 

 

..... anyway if you have a better counter offer , lets hear it , lets hear how you want to approach consumer protection in this arena..Its my turn to take a few pot shots  

Edited June 18, 2019 by Stosh