Forum Post: facebook tracking you even when you are not logged in
Posted 12 years ago on May 6, 2012, 1:25 p.m. EST by gestopomillyy
(1695)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
so why did the administrators of this site see fit to put that like button on here?
Facebook and Your Privacy
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/facebook-and-your-privacy.html?page=1
AOC grilling Mark Zuckerberg. Carole Cadwallader's piece on it is worth a read.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/oct/26/what-happened-when-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-came-face-to-face-with-facebooks-mark-zuckerberg
“Mr Zuckerberg, I think you of all people can appreciate using a person’s past behaviour in order to determine, make decisions or predict people’s future behaviour, and in order for us to make decisions about Libra I think we need to kind of dig into your past behaviour and Facebook’s past behaviour with respect to our democracy. Mr Zuckerberg, what year and month did you personally become aware of Cambridge Analytica?”
"Our elections are not safe. And this month Facebook took the decision to make them even more unsafe. Just over a week after Zuckerberg held a closed-door meeting with Donald Trump, we discovered he’d changed Facebook’s policy to allow posts by politicians or parties containing “deceptive, false or misleading content”. It’s an extraordinary decision championed by Zuckerberg in a speech in which he said: “I believe we must continue to stand for free expression.”
Facebook’s global head of policy, Nick Clegg, who once railed against the “blatant lies” told in the European referendum, has now sanctioned their use in all political adverts in all elections in all countries across the world.
We’re not helpless. Ocasio-Cortez shows us that. We are just being betrayed by our government and our opposition. “Why is this lying bastard lying to me?” is a traditional approach to journalism. We in Britain should be asking: why are these lying politicians not taking action over this lying company that is allowing lying politicians to lie to me?"
The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution allows the speech of many kinds so Facebook being a U.S. company naturally tends to allow the same. It's no accident that Facebook is banned by Red Fuckgina, for example. Facebook and Google ( whose gmail accounts of Red Fuckgina's political dissidents were being hacked by Red Fuckgina so Google realized that it was no match technically or otherwise going against the state-owned hacking and many more COLLUDING teams of Red Fuckgina so Google withdrew its user [account] data from the mainland to Hong Kong servers as well as asking our No-Such Agency for help coping with the Redtide bloom,) and YouTube ( people's free-speech ) are national security threats to Red Fuckgina as Huawei is a national security threat to our Farterland and Shitterland. No force can shake the status of our great Farterland, and no force can stop the congress of the Shitterland people and the Shitterland nation. I have a huge problem with Red Fuckgina censoring free speech by U.S. citizens who are subject to U.S. laws. Extraterritorial application of Red Fuckginian censorship through the mighty yuan amounts to the imposition of Unequal Treaties ( the U.S. Government didn't censor the idiotic speech emanating from the caged beings inside of the stinky Red Fuckgina ) on the U.S.A. so it's what we go to wars for ( a part of our Constitution records what our Founding Fathers had fought for) - state sovereignty of the U.S.A.
If U.S. corporations sell out to foreign countries just because they are multinational, we should seize their possessions within U.S. jurisdiction and sanction them worldwide. We are all brothers and sisters of the U.S.A. but brotherhood and sisterhood have their privileges, obligations, and responsibilties. Those who don't abide are automatically and justly cut out. We draw and maintain rule-based boundaries, subject to mercy and grace.
I understand this position against foreign interference because my Mom cancelled her intended punishment of me because of the interference from an outsider visiting our family at the time. She said that due to the visitor having said and pushed for how severely I should be punished for my worst childhood conflict with my Big Brother ( when I come to think of this incident, I suddenly realized why he had likened me to what he called "little" Imperial Japan because I had managed to draw the ire of him, my Mom, and the visitor all at the same time - enraged by my Big Brother's inequity, I was one terribly tough cookie! Tora! Tora! Tora! It was etched so deeply into his memory that he can still recall it to this very day, many decades later after the incident which had apparently registered more deeply in his mind than his being spanked by Mom over the issue of my "stealing" the next-door girl's iridescent slipper, which he no longer recalls ) she had to rescind the punishment lest I should attribute the origin and severity of my punishment to the visitor's utterance. She stood by her assertion, previously enunciated after butt-spanking my Big Brother ( who didn't give a shit about the innocence of others - Mom insisted on him NOT calling me a thief and beating me up for having "stolen" the next-door girl's iridescent slipper until the completion of the investigation ) that as long as she was alive, my punishment would be up to her and her alone. The process of justice shouldn't be interfered with. No others ( such as the victims' political representatives who might be corrupt ) but the aggrieved ones can truly forgive the sex-and-rape-crazed patriarchs.
Should the U.S. unleash Japan after giving it nuclear weapons so that it may defend itself against its nuclear-armed neighbors? "It takes a good gun to stop a bad gun." Kim Jung-un seems to think that getting the U.S. out of the DPRK's neighborhood is a good idea but it may turn out to be yet another turkey's butt plug. By the way, Japan doesn't have any nuclear weapon ( nor does ROK which does have an excellent reason to become yet another nuclear-weapon state as soon as all of its neighbors have become nuclear-weapon-armed ) but the U.S. does therefore as soon as the U.S. leaves ( beware of the potential consequences of what one wishes for - last time around it was the nuclear bombs and the fear of Soviet instead of American occupation { think about why both Wernher von Braun with his rocket-engineers' team and Imperial Japan chose to surrender to the U.S. instead of Stalin's U.S.S.R. - the U.S. unlike Germany was in my Dad's words an "immigrant country" which doesn't own Siberian prisons whose reputation had even scared the Nazi soldiers of Operation Barbarossa; American-desert and island accommodations for the "prisoners of peace" were far better than those imagined or real in the Soviet Siberian gulag; Russia and a few former Soviet Republics do have "Wide roominess for dreams and for living" but the outdoor temperatures can be brutally cold - temperatures do matter for decent living; Russia has much natural gas for keeping people warm but it is often in remote places so far away from where people live that the lack of an adequate supply of it can sometimes become a huge problem for people } which brought peace, for the next time around with a nuclear-weapon-armed Japan, has anyone invented antimatter bombs yet?) Japan which already possesses much plutonium ( in quantity sufficient to make quite a few nuclear weapons ) reprocessed from its spent nuclear reactor fuel rods will quickly become a nuclear-weapon state. I don't understand why Japanese nuclear weapons can even be a concern of the DPRK at all ( although once the U.S. leaves, it'll be up to nuclear-weapon-armed Japan's neighbors to deal with it!) There is none. Japan was defanged and its constitution prohibits nuclear weapons and much more ( Japan is probably the only truly constitutionally postwar country in the whole world,) as General Douglas MacArthur's troops' occupation and reconstruction of postwar Japan compelled. Japanese women gained more freedom due to the American occupation but it's very hard to please some patriarchs with that - yeah, Dad, having learnt all 26 Roman alphabets and thereby "knowing English," I know all about life, too: C GAT Uracil. Mom told me that "the trend of the times creates heroes" so we might well be the generation that would end the Korean Conflict after Trump's 2040 election victory ( Trump needs to be an extended-term life-scoring Supreme Leader to match the many other lifers around the world in order to improve their maturity in wielding statecraft; for the sexually frustrated but becoming more gentlemanly males, baseball is a more all-American game played upon the Yin diamond where the homeplate symbolizes a uterus than getting into the 18++ holes of golf; with yeast infection, even Cheatose matures into moonshine; I wonder whether Cheatose actually knows of midnight all-lights-out non-NBA basketball games; "Would she like a game of basketball?" was a very hot vexing question for the pubescent imaginative bachelors who drank her soapy bath water; there was the globally consequential Doppler-effect "ping pong" alright.)
Facebook started out fairly early by pretty much ignoring all rules in pursuit of the mighty dollar. Chasing after the mighty dollar is what U.S. corporations do so there's nothing unusual there but breaking rules ( or even just the unspoken or unwritten norms of acceptable behaviors ) is a whole different matter altogether.
There are limits to "free speech," even in the U.S. because all of our laws including the First Amendment were made to serve our people, at least in principle. Collecting data from nearly every activity of users may collide with other U.S. constitutional amendments against unreasonable searches ( sucking device data to corporate or governmental servers,) the stationing and upkeep of troops in private homes ( computer cookies occupying memory space and using users' electricity,) etc. Facebook's failure in safeguarding the data, or even selling them for profits to unscrupulous parties, amount to the breaking of U.S. users' constitutional rights. Hence, Facebook ( and other technology companies that abuse user data ) must be brought to justice.
Communication between two parties should generally be considered as being private unless the applicable search warrants exist. When the number of parties exceeds two, some regulations may need to be imposed, especially since Facebook algorithms "push" recommendations to often multiple users. We have regulations on mass media published contents so Facebook's cheapening of the idea of friends moves it towards being a kind of mass media and it's therefore subject to such similar regulations.
I always have someone looking over for shoulder
so I don't seek privacy on the internnet
download do not track plus and install it in google chrome ive blocked nearly 5000 ads, trackign companies, and social sites, in just over a week!
"so why did the administrators of this site see fit to put that like button on here?"
Good question. Better question:
"So why is any political activist with shit for brains logging into Fakebook anyway?"
And YES, please DO ask this question of the dozens of Occupations that have no online presence other than a Fakebook page - where not only every posting but every access is tracked and recorded, and both "privacy" and "delete" are laughable terms.
Exactly! Which also begs the question, how many FB users actually read the Terms of Agreement? Everything posted to FB becomes the property of FB, so technically, those Occupy pages are FB's property.
[Removed]
Great post! Good exposing!
There was nothing new about Fakebook "exposed" in this article.