Using a Chrome app to delete Facebook data is more than little like taking aim squarely at the other foot, after you've blown off the first one. Who slurps more data than Facebook ever dreamt of doing? Google/Alphabet, that's who.
Also, am I remembering Facebook's T&C wrong, or don't they keep your data for a year after you've said you want to delete it, in case you change your mind and want to return to the fold?
Using a Chrome app to delete Facebook data is more than little like taking aim squarely at the other foot, after you've blown off the first one. Who slurps more data than Facebook ever dreamt of doing? Google/Alphabet, that's who.
Also, am I remembering Facebook's T&C wrong, or don't they keep your data for a year after you've said you want to delete it, in case you change your mind and want to return to the fold?
Unless you can script Safari to do the job, your choices are few. Chrome doesn't track you unless it's open. Yes, you have to sign into the Chrome web store to get the web app. Nothing is perfect. Provided you don't let Chrome save passwords for you, and abandon it as soon as you're done, you're not taking aim at the other foot - but you have to decide your level of risk for yourself.
You're not exactly correct on FB's retaining the data. They used to only allow you to deactivate the account, and kept the data so that it would all come back if you made one wrong move and used FB for anything (comments on some external webpage, etc.) Since they started allowing you to delete the account (more than just deactivate it), they say they're actually deleting the data, and it won't come back. They do say to allow as much as 90 days for a full deletion based on how much you have stored with them. Whether or not you believe them is another matter.
I don’t understand. This is common knowledge that the democrats where mining data back in the 2012 elections in the way Republicans were not, but now that the Republicans play catch up, all hell breaks loose? Plus Google probably has tonnes more data on all of us then the Democrats or Republicans could ever get... it’s why I switched to duck duck go.
I think it has to do with the way the data was obtained. I need to go back and see how the Dems got the data. The way the Repubs got it, while it may not have been directly by them, seems shady.
... Facebook's own constant buggy functionality, it's the most hostile experience for attempting meaningful communication I've yet experienced. But then, Facebook is not meant for meaningful communication. It's meant for exactly the thing we are currently complaining about: data collection. Even without the scams, the business model is antisocial.
For sure. While I can appreciate the concept of connection and the ease of having millions of users at your fingertips, I never really understood the attraction to Facebook in the first place. The user-experience is simply horrific. BBSs (pre-Internet, even) were far better for communication than Facebook or most of modern social media, for that matter. I'm especially baffled by the success of Facebook Groups and people's willingness to use them, convert their private ones over to them, etc. They are nearly unusable!
dysamoria said: But as I said in the "kill your account" article, I can't just casually delete my account, as much as I would like to. Not without losing contact with the wider scope of people I keep up with there...
Yea, same here. Even if I dumped it personally, I'd need to maintain it and my knowledge of it for business reasons. For me to completely dump it, a successful alternative would have to emerge and gain substantial traction. That said, I now only log on from time to time, as minimally as possible. I don't have any apps that maintain connection, and sometimes go weeks between logins.
Reuters/Ipsos poll: only 41% of Americans trust Facebook to obey privacy laws while 66% trust Amazon, 62% trust Google, 60% trust Microsoft, and 53% trust Apple (Reuters)
At least until some security breach regarding the others is revealed.
Facebook's problems have been revealed over and over again across a period of many years. People either simply aren't paying attention, or don't care.
asdasd said: Obviously there is a data breach there. How it influenced anybody is yet to be seen.
Yea, the whole 'influencing' thing, whether it be this or 'Russians' is just political posturing.... ironically, in hopes that it will influence the outcome of the next election cycle. Facebook, or the MSM for that matter, would just love you to think that they have that much power over what we all think and believe. i.e.: 'Look, send us a little ad-spend and we can change the world for you.'
vmarks said: Provided you don't let Chrome save passwords for you...
And, if you do that.... please stop immediately and get a real password manager!!!
After a while, we get so used to our bookmarks being organized in a certain way that we browse the web without even thinking about it. Rearrange your bookmarks a bit. It'll help you get out of the habit of browsing facebook because you'll open the folder where that bookmark should be and it won't be there... and you'll remember why you moved it (or even deleted it) in the first place.
Reuters/Ipsos poll: only 41% of Americans trust Facebook to obey privacy laws while 66% trust Amazon, 62% trust Google, 60% trust Microsoft, and 53% trust Apple (Reuters)
Thats totally arse over tit. Although I am guessing the 47% of people who don't trust Apple are Android users. A large proportion of the 62% who trust Google must be. So it is just OS tribalism. Apple makes it so hard to get information about its customers entire categories of apps that work on Android just don't work, or work in a much reduced fashion on iOS. You can't even get the MAC address of your own device, or the devices on the network.
This discrepancy, however, makes me feel that some of this concern about privacy is still a concern amongst journalists and others who don't like FB and Google stomping on their turf. Theres only so much about the Cambridge Analytica story I believe. Obviously there is a data breach there. How it influenced anybody is yet to be seen.
Most people don't deal in facts, they deal in "feelings". And Apple is a big company, so they don't trust it on that basis. The American public is largely dumbed down and fact impaired. We still have large numbers of people who believe Obama was not born in the U.S. And regardless of whether one feels that new gun regulations are a good or bad idea, I've seen hundreds of postings from people who maintain that the Parkland kids are paid actors, some of whom have graduated several years ago. Today, it's not just that people have different opinions - we've always had that (and should) - it's that people just make stuff up to fit their opinions or form opinions based upon memes because it's easier than actually researching what the facts are.
I probably posted this before, but in 2011, Newsweek gave the citizenship test to 1000 Americans, who failed miserably. 73% couldn't say why we fought the Cold War, 44% couldn't define the Bill of Rights, 29% couldn't name the vice-president and 6% couldn't even circle Independence Day on a calendar. Ever watch the Jimmy Kimmel "Lie Witness News" bit? Although probably edited to only show the idiots (because that's what's funny), they make up an event that never happened, then ask people if they've seen it and to react to it, like "Don't you think it was terrible that Mike Pence cheated on his wife with Hillary Clinton?" (not an actual example). And everyone says they've seen it. There was also allegedly a survey done last year in which 6% of those asked thought chocolate milk came from brown cows. You really can't make this stuff up. We really have become "Idiocracy".
And even though Americans might not have trust in Facebook or the other tech firms, it doesn't stop them from using these sites/apps endlessly. Besides, your data is just as used by credit card companies and retail store membership cards. So closing a FB account, but still using the discount card at the supermarket or drug store doesn't really accomplish all that much.
As far as Cambridge Analytica is concerned, I agree with you when it comes to people who are solidly Democratic or Republican. If one is an issues voter, I can't see anything that anyone posts really affecting one's decision in a Presidential election (the Primary is another matter) because the positions and platforms are so different, one wouldn't even give consideration to the other candidate. The chance of me voting for a politician who is a member of the opposite party who I vote for is incredibly tiny. The chances are higher of me not voting at all and therefore, I am not going to be affected by any kind of campaign advertising or postings. And Cambridge supposedly marketed to people who were likely to vote for Trump anyway. What was the point of that? I don't ever remember seeing anything besides posts in support of Trump on FB, although if there were pop-up ads, Safari would have blocked them. But in this dumbed down country, that's not the way that millions vote. They vote on personality or the way a candidate looks. And for those kinds of voters, posts, ads and memes do apparently affect how they vote, otherwise, we would only see big spends on campaign advertising in the few tossup states.
zoetmb said: Most people don't deal in facts, they deal in "feelings". And Apple is a big company, so they don't trust it on that basis. The American public is largely dumbed down and fact impaired. We still have large numbers of people who believe Obama was not born in the U.S. And regardless of whether one feels that new gun regulations are a good or bad idea, I've seen hundreds of postings from people who maintain that the Parkland kids are paid actors, some of whom have graduated several years ago. Today, it's not just that people have different opinions - we've always had that (and should) - it's that people just make stuff up to fit their opinions or form opinions based upon memes because it's easier than actually researching what the facts are.
I probably posted this before, but in 2011, Newsweek gave the citizenship test to 1000 Americans, who failed miserably. 73% couldn't say why we fought the Cold War, 44% couldn't define the Bill of Rights, 29% couldn't name the vice-president and 6% couldn't even circle Independence Day on a calendar. Ever watch the Jimmy Kimmel "Lie Witness News" bit? Although probably edited to only show the idiots (because that's what's funny), they make up an event that never happened, then ask people if they've seen it and to react to it, like "Don't you think it was terrible that Mike Pence cheated on his wife with Hillary Clinton?" (not an actual example). And everyone says they've seen it. There was also allegedly a survey done last year in which 6% of those asked thought chocolate milk came from brown cows. You really can't make this stuff up. We really have become "Idiocracy".
And even though Americans might not have trust in Facebook or the other tech firms, it doesn't stop them from using these sites/apps endlessly. Besides, your data is just as used by credit card companies and retail store membership cards. So closing a FB account, but still using the discount card at the supermarket or drug store doesn't really accomplish all that much.
As far as Cambridge Analytica is concerned, I agree with you when it comes to people who are solidly Democratic or Republican. If one is an issues voter, I can't see anything that anyone posts really affecting one's decision in a Presidential election (the Primary is another matter) because the positions and platforms are so different, one wouldn't even give consideration to the other candidate. The chance of me voting for a politician who is a member of the opposite party who I vote for is incredibly tiny. The chances are higher of me not voting at all and therefore, I am not going to be affected by any kind of campaign advertising or postings. And Cambridge supposedly marketed to people who were likely to vote for Trump anyway. What was the point of that? I don't ever remember seeing anything besides posts in support of Trump on FB, although if there were pop-up ads, Safari would have blocked them. But in this dumbed down country, that's not the way that millions vote. They vote on personality or the way a candidate looks. And for those kinds of voters, posts, ads and memes do apparently affect how they vote, otherwise, we would only see big spends on campaign advertising in the few tossup states.
I agree with most of what you've said, especially about people dealing in 'feelings' instead of facts. But, we also have to keep in mind that it isn't totally the people's fault, as this is a result of an education and media system that promotes 'what to think' instead of 'how to think.' Also, our media systems are designed to manipulate via feelings, as the facts have become irrelevant much of the time. The MSM regularly 'sweetens' audio/video clips to induce emotional reaction and distorts headlines (knowing few will even read the details, *if* they are even included). The government has a fairly large budget and department that works with the MSM, movies, etc. to introduce propaganda.
In other words, this isn't accidental, nor really a reflection of the dumbness of the average American (or much of the West for that matter). And, whether the Parkland kids are paid actors or not is somewhat irrelevant to the fact that they are caught up in some pretty high-stakes, big-money and power campaigns.
But, yes, your data is being collected in a huge number of ways and aggregated (actually bought and sold, aside from what governments might be doing with it) such that if you use any of it in any way, you're in there to some extent.
I also agree about the influence aspect. Most people either vote on issues or personalities/parties. It is quite unlikely they'd be swayed in the manner that all the fuss is about, ***BUT*** this isn't really about that. From the political side, the fuss is power-battle to keep a general positive/negative buzz top of the news until the next election cycle. From companies like Facebook, this is a prime PR opportunity to overhype their services.
For example, in all the initial hoopla over Facebook and 'Russian' collusion, we're talking about $46k (vs the $81M Clinton/Trump spent on Facebook). Note, that the bigger numbers some media listed was pre and post election spend. Only $46k was pre-election, so might have even possibly mattered. Supposedly, this reached 126M people. That's 2739 people per $1... where do I sign up? $0.36 CPM. It's baloney... that's what it is.
Comments
Also, am I remembering Facebook's T&C wrong, or don't they keep your data for a year after you've said you want to delete it, in case you change your mind and want to return to the fold?
You're not exactly correct on FB's retaining the data. They used to only allow you to deactivate the account, and kept the data so that it would all come back if you made one wrong move and used FB for anything (comments on some external webpage, etc.) Since they started allowing you to delete the account (more than just deactivate it), they say they're actually deleting the data, and it won't come back. They do say to allow as much as 90 days for a full deletion based on how much you have stored with them. Whether or not you believe them is another matter.
Yea, same here. Even if I dumped it personally, I'd need to maintain it and my knowledge of it for business reasons. For me to completely dump it, a successful alternative would have to emerge and gain substantial traction. That said, I now only log on from time to time, as minimally as possible. I don't have any apps that maintain connection, and sometimes go weeks between logins.
Facebook's problems have been revealed over and over again across a period of many years. People either simply aren't paying attention, or don't care.
Yea, the whole 'influencing' thing, whether it be this or 'Russians' is just political posturing.... ironically, in hopes that it will influence the outcome of the next election cycle. Facebook, or the MSM for that matter, would just love you to think that they have that much power over what we all think and believe. i.e.: 'Look, send us a little ad-spend and we can change the world for you.'
And, if you do that.... please stop immediately and get a real password manager!!!
MOVE YOUR BOOKMARK.
After a while, we get so used to our bookmarks being organized in a certain way that we browse the web without even thinking about it. Rearrange your bookmarks a bit. It'll help you get out of the habit of browsing facebook because you'll open the folder where that bookmark should be and it won't be there... and you'll remember why you moved it (or even deleted it) in the first place.
I probably posted this before, but in 2011, Newsweek gave the citizenship test to 1000 Americans, who failed miserably. 73% couldn't say why we fought the Cold War, 44% couldn't define the Bill of Rights, 29% couldn't name the vice-president and 6% couldn't even circle Independence Day on a calendar. Ever watch the Jimmy Kimmel "Lie Witness News" bit? Although probably edited to only show the idiots (because that's what's funny), they make up an event that never happened, then ask people if they've seen it and to react to it, like "Don't you think it was terrible that Mike Pence cheated on his wife with Hillary Clinton?" (not an actual example). And everyone says they've seen it. There was also allegedly a survey done last year in which 6% of those asked thought chocolate milk came from brown cows. You really can't make this stuff up. We really have become "Idiocracy".
And even though Americans might not have trust in Facebook or the other tech firms, it doesn't stop them from using these sites/apps endlessly. Besides, your data is just as used by credit card companies and retail store membership cards. So closing a FB account, but still using the discount card at the supermarket or drug store doesn't really accomplish all that much.
As far as Cambridge Analytica is concerned, I agree with you when it comes to people who are solidly Democratic or Republican. If one is an issues voter, I can't see anything that anyone posts really affecting one's decision in a Presidential election (the Primary is another matter) because the positions and platforms are so different, one wouldn't even give consideration to the other candidate. The chance of me voting for a politician who is a member of the opposite party who I vote for is incredibly tiny. The chances are higher of me not voting at all and therefore, I am not going to be affected by any kind of campaign advertising or postings. And Cambridge supposedly marketed to people who were likely to vote for Trump anyway. What was the point of that? I don't ever remember seeing anything besides posts in support of Trump on FB, although if there were pop-up ads, Safari would have blocked them. But in this dumbed down country, that's not the way that millions vote. They vote on personality or the way a candidate looks. And for those kinds of voters, posts, ads and memes do apparently affect how they vote, otherwise, we would only see big spends on campaign advertising in the few tossup states.
I agree with most of what you've said, especially about people dealing in 'feelings' instead of facts. But, we also have to keep in mind that it isn't totally the people's fault, as this is a result of an education and media system that promotes 'what to think' instead of 'how to think.' Also, our media systems are designed to manipulate via feelings, as the facts have become irrelevant much of the time. The MSM regularly 'sweetens' audio/video clips to induce emotional reaction and distorts headlines (knowing few will even read the details, *if* they are even included). The government has a fairly large budget and department that works with the MSM, movies, etc. to introduce propaganda.
In other words, this isn't accidental, nor really a reflection of the dumbness of the average American (or much of the West for that matter). And, whether the Parkland kids are paid actors or not is somewhat irrelevant to the fact that they are caught up in some pretty high-stakes, big-money and power campaigns.
But, yes, your data is being collected in a huge number of ways and aggregated (actually bought and sold, aside from what governments might be doing with it) such that if you use any of it in any way, you're in there to some extent.
I also agree about the influence aspect. Most people either vote on issues or personalities/parties. It is quite unlikely they'd be swayed in the manner that all the fuss is about, ***BUT*** this isn't really about that. From the political side, the fuss is power-battle to keep a general positive/negative buzz top of the news until the next election cycle. From companies like Facebook, this is a prime PR opportunity to overhype their services.
For example, in all the initial hoopla over Facebook and 'Russian' collusion, we're talking about $46k (vs the $81M Clinton/Trump spent on Facebook). Note, that the bigger numbers some media listed was pre and post election spend. Only $46k was pre-election, so might have even possibly mattered. Supposedly, this reached 126M people. That's 2739 people per $1... where do I sign up? $0.36 CPM. It's baloney... that's what it is.