+ Reply to Thread
Page 9 of 12 FirstFirst 1 9 12 LastLast
Results 161 to 180 of 221

Thread: The Problems with Facebook

  1. Link to Post #161
    UK Moderator and Librarian Tintin's Avatar
    Join Date
    3rd June 2017
    Location
    Trowbridge/Bath - UK
    Age
    49
    Posts
    1,442
    Thanks
    14,147
    Thanked 9,164 times in 1,424 posts

    Default Re: The Problems with Facebook

    Here's an offering from Craig Murray's blog today:

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Blocked By Facebook and the Vulnerability of New Media

    26 Apr, 2018 in Uncategorized by craig | View Comments


    This site’s visitor numbers are currently around one third normal levels, stuck at around 20,000 unique visitors per day. The cause is not hard to find. Normally over half of our visitors arrive via Facebook. These last few days, virtually nothing has come from Facebook.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	Screenshot-438.png
Views:	32
Size:	208.1 KB
ID:	37641

    What is especially pernicious is that Facebook deliberately imposes this censorship in a secretive way. The primary mechanism when a block is imposed by Facebook is that my posts to Facebook are simply not sent into the timelines of the large majority of people who are friends or who follow. I am left to believe the post has been shared with them, but in fact it has only been shown to a tiny number. Then, if you are one of the few recipients and do see the post and share it, it will show to you on your timeline as shared, but in fact the vast majority of your own friends will also not receive it.

    Facebook is not doing what it is telling you it is doing – it shows you it is shared – and Facebook is deliberately concealing that fact from you.

    Twitter have a similar system known as “shadow banning”. Again it is secretive and the victim is not informed. I do not appear to be shadow banned at the moment, but there has been an extremely sharp drop – by a factor of ten – in the impressions my tweets are generating.

    I am among those who argue that the strength of the state and corporate media is being increasingly and happily undermined by our ability to communicate via social media. But social media has developed in such a way that the channels of communication are dominated by corporations – Facebook, Twitter and Google – which can in effect turn off the traffic to a citizen journalism site in a second.

    The site is not taken down, and the determined person can still navigate directly to it, but the vast bulk of the traffic is cut off. What is more this is done secretly, without your being informed, and in a manner deliberately hard to detect. The ability to simply block the avenues by which people get to see dissenting opinions, is terrifying.

    Furthermore neither Facebook nor Twitter contact you when they block traffic to your site to tell you this is happening, let alone tell you why, and let alone give you a chance to counter whatever argument they make. I do not know if I am blocked by Facebook as an alleged Russian bot, or for any other reason. I do know that it appears to have happened shortly after I published the transcript of the Israeli general discussing the procedures for shooting children. [<<< an interesting and revealing article this and worth absorbing: "Condemned By Their Own Words" - Tintin Q]
    “If a man does not keep pace with [fall into line with] his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music which he hears, however measured or far away.” - Thoreau

  2. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Tintin For This Post:

    BMJ (1st July 2018), Ewan (27th April 2018), Foxie Loxie (26th April 2018), Hervé (26th April 2018), Michelle Marie (26th April 2018), Paul (26th April 2018), Valerie Villars (27th April 2018)

  3. Link to Post #162
    Avalon Member
    Join Date
    5th January 2011
    Posts
    757
    Thanks
    2,006
    Thanked 4,793 times in 685 posts

    Default Re: The Problems with Facebook

    Health insurer: More Americans depressed Brett Molina


    http://usatoday.newspaperdirect.com/epaper/viewer.aspx

    New data from insurer Blue Cross Blue Shield says major depression among Americans is on the rise.

    The report released Thursday finds more than 9 million commercially insured people in the U.S. suffer from major depression, a 33% jump from 2013 through 2016.

    Millennials and teenagers have experienced even faster rates of depression. According to the data, it’s up 47% for Millennials and 63% for teens.

    “The high rates for adolescents and Millennials could have a substantial health impact for decades to come,” said Trent Haywood, senior vice president and chief medical officer for Blue Cross Blue Shield Association, in a statement.

    One potential factor for the quick jump in major depression rates among teens and kids is increased screen time. Last year, a study from researchers at San Diego State and Florida State universities found nearly half of teens who spent five or more hours in front of screens daily experienced thoughts of suicide or prolonged periods of hopelessness or sadness.

    “In preliminary literature, high users of social media have been linked with higher rates of social isolation than low users,” Haywood added. “It is important to further explore this relationship.”

    The American Academy of Pediatrics updated its guidelines this year on treating teen depression, including endorsing universal screening for children 12 and older.

    Another factor contributing to more depression: other chronic health conditions. The data found 85% of people who reported major depression had another serious chronic condition.

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ramus For This Post:

    Michelle Marie (30th June 2018), Valerie Villars (17th May 2018)

  5. Link to Post #163
    UK Avalon Founder Bill Ryan's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th February 2010
    Location
    Ecuador
    Posts
    21,414
    Thanks
    74,443
    Thanked 269,503 times in 19,899 posts

    Default Re: The Problems with Facebook

    Did anyone catch this?
    Facebook: Send Us Your Nudes to Stop “Revenge Porn”
    May 23, 2018

    Zuckerberg wants your nude photos for “safe keeping”

    Facebook is asking users to send nude pictures of themselves to “prevent” them from being shared publicly on the company’s various platforms.

    “We’re now partnering with safety organizations on a way for people to securely submit photos they fear will be shared without their consent, so we can block them from being uploaded to Facebook, Instagram and Messenger,” Facebook said in a statement. “This pilot program, starting in Australia, Canada, the UK and US, expands on existing tools for people to report this content to us if it’s already been shared.”

    In the UK, Facebook users will call the “Revenge Porn Hotline” which will allow them to submit nude photos of themselves that Facebook will then flag as “not for distribution.”

    In other words, Facebook wants to see your nude pics to “block” them from being spread on-line.

    That’s right, Facebook, whose CEO once famously called his users “dumb f*cks” for trusting him with their secrets, now expects you to submit your nudes for “safe keeping.”

    Back in March, NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden said Facebook was a surveillance company rebranded as social media.

    “Businesses that make money by collecting and selling detailed records of private lives were once plainly described as ‘surveillance companies,'” he said. “Their rebranding as ‘social media’ is the most successful deception since the Department of War became the Department of Defense.”

    “Facebook makes their money by exploiting and selling intimate details about the private lives of millions, far beyond the scant details you voluntarily post,” Snowden said earlier in the day. “They are not victims. They are accomplices.”
    ~~~

    Here's the Facebook statement, posted on 22 May:
    People shouldn’t be able to share intimate images to hurt others
    By Antigone Davis, Global Head of Safety

    It’s demeaning and devastating when someone’s intimate images are shared without their permission, and we want to do everything we can to help victims of this abuse. We’re now partnering with safety organizations on a way for people to securely submit photos they fear will be shared without their consent, so we can block them from being uploaded to Facebook, Instagram and Messenger. This pilot program, starting in Australia, Canada, the UK and US, expands on existing tools for people to report this content to us if it’s already been shared.

    My team and I have traveled to nine countries across four continents, listening to stories about the abuse and cruelty that women face online. From Kenya to Sweden, women shared their painful, eye-opening experiences about having their most intimate moments shared without permission. From anxiety and depression to the loss of a personal relationship or a job, this violation of privacy can be devastating. And while these images, also referred to as “revenge porn” or “non-consensual pornography,” harm people of all genders, ages and sexual-orientations, women are nearly twice as likely as men to be targeted.

    Today, people can already report if their intimate images have been shared without their consent, and we will remove each image and create a unique fingerprint known as a hash to prevent further sharing. But we can do more to help people in crisis prevent images from being shared on our services in the first place. This week, Facebook is testing a proactive reporting tool in partnership with an international working group of safety organizations, survivors, and victim advocates, including the Australian Office of the eSafety Commissioner, the Cyber Civil Rights Initiative and The National Network to End Domestic Violence in the US, the UK Revenge Porn Helpline, and YWCA Canada.

    People who worry that someone might want to harm them by sharing an intimate image can proactively upload it so we can block anyone else from sharing it on Facebook, Instagram, or Messenger:
    • Anyone who fears an intimate image of them may be publicly can contact one of our partners to submit a form
    • After submitting the form, the victim receives an email containing a secure, one-time upload link
    • The victim can use the link to upload images they fear will be shared
    • One of a handful of specifically trained members of our Community Operations Safety Team will review the report and create a unique fingerprint, or hash, that allows us to identify future uploads of the images without keeping copies of them on our servers
    • Once we create these hashes, we notify the victim via email and delete the images from our servers – no later than seven days
    • We store the hashes so any time someone tries to upload an image with the same fingerprint, we can block it from appearing on Facebook, Instagram or Messenger
    This is one step to help people who fear an intimate image will be shared without their consent. We look forward to learning from this pilot and further improving our tools for people in devastating situations like these.

  6. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Bill Ryan For This Post:

    Alekahn2 (24th May 2018), BMJ (1st July 2018), Hervé (24th May 2018), Hym (24th May 2018), Joe from the Carolinas (6th June 2018), KiwiElf (6th June 2018), littleOne (24th May 2018), Michelle Marie (30th June 2018), Paul (28th May 2018), Tintin (24th May 2018)

  7. Link to Post #164
    UK Moderator and Librarian Tintin's Avatar
    Join Date
    3rd June 2017
    Location
    Trowbridge/Bath - UK
    Age
    49
    Posts
    1,442
    Thanks
    14,147
    Thanked 9,164 times in 1,424 posts

    Default Re: The Problems with Facebook

    Quote Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
    Did anyone catch this?
    Facebook: Send Us Your Nudes to Stop “Revenge Porn”
    May 23, 2018

    Zuckerberg wants your nude photos for “safe keeping”

    Facebook is asking users to send nude pictures of themselves to “prevent” them from being shared publicly on the company’s various platforms.

    “We’re now partnering with safety organizations on a way for people to securely submit photos they fear will be shared without their consent, so we can block them from being uploaded to Facebook, Instagram and Messenger,” Facebook said in a statement. “This pilot program, starting in Australia, Canada, the UK and US, expands on existing tools for people to report this content to us if it’s already been shared.”

    In the UK, Facebook users will call the “Revenge Porn Hotline” which will allow them to submit nude photos of themselves that Facebook will then flag as “not for distribution.”

    In other words, Facebook wants to see your nude pics to “block” them from being spread on-line.

    That’s right, Facebook, whose CEO once famously called his users “dumb f*cks” for trusting him with their secrets, now expects you to submit your nudes for “safe keeping.”

    Back in March, NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden said Facebook was a surveillance company rebranded as social media.

    “Businesses that make money by collecting and selling detailed records of private lives were once plainly described as ‘surveillance companies,'” he said. “Their rebranding as ‘social media’ is the most successful deception since the Department of War became the Department of Defense.”

    “Facebook makes their money by exploiting and selling intimate details about the private lives of millions, far beyond the scant details you voluntarily post,” Snowden said earlier in the day. “They are not victims. They are accomplices.”
    ~~~

    Here's the Facebook statement, posted on 22 May:
    People shouldn’t be able to share intimate images to hurt others
    By Antigone Davis, Global Head of Safety

    It’s demeaning and devastating when someone’s intimate images are shared without their permission, and we want to do everything we can to help victims of this abuse. We’re now partnering with safety organizations on a way for people to securely submit photos they fear will be shared without their consent, so we can block them from being uploaded to Facebook, Instagram and Messenger. This pilot program, starting in Australia, Canada, the UK and US, expands on existing tools for people to report this content to us if it’s already been shared.

    My team and I have traveled to nine countries across four continents, listening to stories about the abuse and cruelty that women face online. From Kenya to Sweden, women shared their painful, eye-opening experiences about having their most intimate moments shared without permission. From anxiety and depression to the loss of a personal relationship or a job, this violation of privacy can be devastating. And while these images, also referred to as “revenge porn” or “non-consensual pornography,” harm people of all genders, ages and sexual-orientations, women are nearly twice as likely as men to be targeted.

    Today, people can already report if their intimate images have been shared without their consent, and we will remove each image and create a unique fingerprint known as a hash to prevent further sharing. But we can do more to help people in crisis prevent images from being shared on our services in the first place. This week, Facebook is testing a proactive reporting tool in partnership with an international working group of safety organizations, survivors, and victim advocates, including the Australian Office of the eSafety Commissioner, the Cyber Civil Rights Initiative and The National Network to End Domestic Violence in the US, the UK Revenge Porn Helpline, and YWCA Canada.

    People who worry that someone might want to harm them by sharing an intimate image can proactively upload it so we can block anyone else from sharing it on Facebook, Instagram, or Messenger:
    • Anyone who fears an intimate image of them may be publicly can contact one of our partners to submit a form
    • After submitting the form, the victim receives an email containing a secure, one-time upload link
    • The victim can use the link to upload images they fear will be shared
    • One of a handful of specifically trained members of our Community Operations Safety Team will review the report and create a unique fingerprint, or hash, that allows us to identify future uploads of the images without keeping copies of them on our servers
    • Once we create these hashes, we notify the victim via email and delete the images from our servers – no later than seven days
    • We store the hashes so any time someone tries to upload an image with the same fingerprint, we can block it from appearing on Facebook, Instagram or Messenger
    This is one step to help people who fear an intimate image will be shared without their consent. We look forward to learning from this pilot and further improving our tools for people in devastating situations like these.
    Kind of ironic when you consider this line in the 'Terms of Service' agreement: https://www.facebook.com/legal/terms

    3. Safety
    7. You will not post content that: is hate speech, threatening or pornographic; incites violence; or contains nudity or graphic or gratuitous violence.
    “If a man does not keep pace with [fall into line with] his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music which he hears, however measured or far away.” - Thoreau

  8. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Tintin For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (24th May 2018), BMJ (1st July 2018), Elpis (24th May 2018), Hervé (24th May 2018), Hym (24th May 2018), KiwiElf (6th June 2018), Michelle Marie (30th June 2018), Paul (28th May 2018), Valerie Villars (1st July 2018)

  9. Link to Post #165
    United States Avalon Member Elpis's Avatar
    Join Date
    3rd March 2018
    Posts
    47
    Thanks
    522
    Thanked 309 times in 46 posts

    Default Re: The Problems with Facebook

    Quote Posted by Tintin Quarantino (here)
    Quote Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
    Did anyone catch this?
    Facebook: Send Us Your Nudes to Stop “Revenge Porn”
    May 23, 2018

    Zuckerberg wants your nude photos for “safe keeping”

    Facebook is asking users to send nude pictures of themselves to “prevent” them from being shared publicly on the company’s various platforms.

    “We’re now partnering with safety organizations on a way for people to securely submit photos they fear will be shared without their consent, so we can block them from being uploaded to Facebook, Instagram and Messenger,” Facebook said in a statement. “This pilot program, starting in Australia, Canada, the UK and US, expands on existing tools for people to report this content to us if it’s already been shared.”

    In the UK, Facebook users will call the “Revenge Porn Hotline” which will allow them to submit nude photos of themselves that Facebook will then flag as “not for distribution.”

    In other words, Facebook wants to see your nude pics to “block” them from being spread on-line.

    That’s right, Facebook, whose CEO once famously called his users “dumb f*cks” for trusting him with their secrets, now expects you to submit your nudes for “safe keeping.”

    Back in March, NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden said Facebook was a surveillance company rebranded as social media.

    “Businesses that make money by collecting and selling detailed records of private lives were once plainly described as ‘surveillance companies,'” he said. “Their rebranding as ‘social media’ is the most successful deception since the Department of War became the Department of Defense.”

    “Facebook makes their money by exploiting and selling intimate details about the private lives of millions, far beyond the scant details you voluntarily post,” Snowden said earlier in the day. “They are not victims. They are accomplices.”
    ~~~

    Here's the Facebook statement, posted on 22 May:
    People shouldn’t be able to share intimate images to hurt others
    By Antigone Davis, Global Head of Safety

    It’s demeaning and devastating when someone’s intimate images are shared without their permission, and we want to do everything we can to help victims of this abuse. We’re now partnering with safety organizations on a way for people to securely submit photos they fear will be shared without their consent, so we can block them from being uploaded to Facebook, Instagram and Messenger. This pilot program, starting in Australia, Canada, the UK and US, expands on existing tools for people to report this content to us if it’s already been shared.

    My team and I have traveled to nine countries across four continents, listening to stories about the abuse and cruelty that women face online. From Kenya to Sweden, women shared their painful, eye-opening experiences about having their most intimate moments shared without permission. From anxiety and depression to the loss of a personal relationship or a job, this violation of privacy can be devastating. And while these images, also referred to as “revenge porn” or “non-consensual pornography,” harm people of all genders, ages and sexual-orientations, women are nearly twice as likely as men to be targeted.

    Today, people can already report if their intimate images have been shared without their consent, and we will remove each image and create a unique fingerprint known as a hash to prevent further sharing. But we can do more to help people in crisis prevent images from being shared on our services in the first place. This week, Facebook is testing a proactive reporting tool in partnership with an international working group of safety organizations, survivors, and victim advocates, including the Australian Office of the eSafety Commissioner, the Cyber Civil Rights Initiative and The National Network to End Domestic Violence in the US, the UK Revenge Porn Helpline, and YWCA Canada.

    People who worry that someone might want to harm them by sharing an intimate image can proactively upload it so we can block anyone else from sharing it on Facebook, Instagram, or Messenger:
    • Anyone who fears an intimate image of them may be publicly can contact one of our partners to submit a form
    • After submitting the form, the victim receives an email containing a secure, one-time upload link
    • The victim can use the link to upload images they fear will be shared
    • One of a handful of specifically trained members of our Community Operations Safety Team will review the report and create a unique fingerprint, or hash, that allows us to identify future uploads of the images without keeping copies of them on our servers
    • Once we create these hashes, we notify the victim via email and delete the images from our servers – no later than seven days
    • We store the hashes so any time someone tries to upload an image with the same fingerprint, we can block it from appearing on Facebook, Instagram or Messenger
    This is one step to help people who fear an intimate image will be shared without their consent. We look forward to learning from this pilot and further improving our tools for people in devastating situations like these.
    Kind of ironic when you consider this line in the 'Terms of Service' agreement: https://www.facebook.com/legal/terms

    3. Safety
    7. You will not post content that: is hate speech, threatening or pornographic; incites violence; or contains nudity or graphic or gratuitous violence.
    Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

    Yea, I think I'll pass on giving Facebook any further personal information.
    “My life is like a stroll upon the beach, as near to the ocean's edge as I can go.”

    ― Henry David Thoreau

  10. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Elpis For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (29th May 2018), BMJ (1st July 2018), Foxie Loxie (28th May 2018), KiwiElf (6th June 2018), Michelle Marie (30th June 2018), Paul (28th May 2018), Tintin (25th May 2018)

  11. Link to Post #166
    Avalon Member Carmody's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th August 2010
    Location
    Winning The Galactic Lottery
    Posts
    11,379
    Thanks
    17,589
    Thanked 82,040 times in 10,210 posts

    Default Re: The Problems with Facebook

    Facebook and twitter descend into noise (study):


    Quote It's not much harder or more expensive to send a tweet or a Facebook post to hundreds or even thousands of people than to just a handful. So you'd think that the ease of communicating with lots of people via social networks would result in more and more people sharing their thoughts, political views, and cat videos.

    But that's not the case, says Associate Professor Zsolt Katona at UC Berkeley's Haas School of Business (pictured, left). The flood of tweets and posts washing across cyberspace has created a huge imbalance in the number of people creating content and the number of people who receive it. That imbalance stems from some content creators giving up on actively contributing to social networks, while others choose to send out more and more messages to users in an effort to be noticed.

    In a new research paper, Competing for Attention in Social Communication Markets, Katona and co-author Ganesh Iyer, Edgar F. Kaiser Chair in Business Administration at Berkeley-Haas, (pictured, right) suggest a seemingly counter-intuitive thesis: The cheaper and easier it becomes to reach large numbers of people via social media, the fewer "content creators" choose to participate and the more cluttered the networks become. If it were as difficult to post messages to large numbers of people as it was just a few years ago - before the rise of mobile messaging apps—more users would create content.

    Although more and more people are participating in social networking, a smaller percentage of users are actively creating and sharing content. Industry reports estimate that just 10 percent of Twitter users broadcast 90 percent of the network's tweets, while only a tiny fraction of the 55 million users who blog post daily, notes Katona.

    The relative scarcity of message creators has been noticed before. But what hasn't been understood are the mechanisms responsible for the imbalance of senders and receivers and the implications for the social networking industry.

    The research suggests that social networking is a bit like a market: People who create and send content are investing effort to win customers—in this case the "receivers" who will view their content.

    But unlike businesses that use social networking as a marketing tool, individual senders aren't looking for a definable economic reward. They want status, or the satisfaction of being heard. Instead of actual sales, senders measure their payoff by the number of receivers who listen to her, while the effort required to reach them is the cost of sales, say the researchers.

    Social distance between senders and receivers largely determines the effort required to reach them. If a social network is small, and each sender targets just a few receivers, there's not much competition for attention; receivers aren't getting many messages. On the other hand, senders aren't getting a large payoff so they only make a minimal effort to be heard.

    That changes when senders attempt to increase their payoff by targeting people who are more socially distant. Receivers, who once were the recipient of messages from only a few senders, are now targeted by many senders, leading to increased competition for attention. And the more distant the receiver, the harder it is for the sender to craft relevant messages, say the researchers.

    As competition grows, some senders decide the payoff isn't worth the trouble and drop out, and others decide not to enter the market, which explains why the proportion of senders to receivers is so low. It may also explain why some users turn away from popular social networks and are looking for more intimate places to share items with just a handful of people, say the researchers.

    Facebook recognized this trend and modified its algorithms to present users with more news from people who are close to them. There have even been attempts to create new, more intimate social networks from scratch, although they have so far met with limited success.

    When messaging costs go down, senders decide they can target more and more people and compete with other senders by sending messages more frequently. "But what is interesting is senders are worse off by making this choice," say Iyer and Katona. Too much messaging creates clutter and lowers payoffs for everyone in the market.

    When the cost and difficulty of messaging increases, senders have less incentive to compete by creating a flood of messages. That, in turn, makes it more likely that users will read a sender's message, meaning his or her payoff is higher and senders are more likely to stay in the network.

    The paper's conclusions are based on mathematical modeling of social networking behavior along with an analysis of empirical data from a 2011 study of real-world social networks in a French primary school. It will be published in Management Science later this year.
    the greater the number of users or involved people in the given system, the less relevant it is, is kinda how it works. "Relevance" is defined, in this case, around the idea of change or societal motion. In this case, the noise is the corral, it's the bushes that hide the walls of the box and make it (the box) look infinite, when it is the opposite of that. It's the death of intelligence, not it's aid, or creation, or even it's maintenance. Nay, it is the crushing of intelligence, the death of intelligence, the lowering of intelligence. More on that later.

    That trend and condition was easy to see at the outset, which is why I declined to be involved, right from the first moment I heard about Facebook.
    Last edited by Carmody; 28th May 2018 at 17:08.
    Interdimensional Civil Servant

  12. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Carmody For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (29th May 2018), BMJ (1st July 2018), Foxie Loxie (28th May 2018), Michelle Marie (30th June 2018), Paul (28th May 2018), Valerie Villars (28th May 2018)

  13. Link to Post #167
    United States Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Age
    71
    Posts
    27,723
    Thanks
    28,846
    Thanked 129,170 times in 20,634 posts

    Default Re: The Problems with Facebook

    Quote Posted by Carmody (here)
    the greater the number of users or involved people in the given system, the less relevant it is, is kinda how it works. "Relevance" is defined, in this case, around the idea of change or societal motion. In this case, the noise is the corral, it's the bushes that hide the walls of the box and make it (the box) look infinite, when it is the opposite of that. It's the death of intelligence, not it's aid, or creation, or even it's maintenance. Nay, it is the crushing of intelligence, the death of intelligence, the lowering of intelligence. More on that later.

    That trend and condition was easy to see at the outset, which is why I declined to be involved, right from the first moment I heard about Facebook.
    The "Social Contract" works in traditional villages, communities and families. Humans, as social animals, are tuned to honor this "Social Contract". We learn to share what we can offer, and not to receive in excess proportion. We learn not to be "Chicken Littles" or "Attention Whores" or "Loud Mouths". We speak, we listen, we converse ... in some semblance of a balance.

    The "Social Contract" breaks down, when a small effort of one person to create a message can generate an immense effort, when summed up over thousands or millions of people people, each reading or listening to that message, even if for just a few seconds each, and when, moreover, the size of the audience depends on superficial "click bait" characteristics of the message, not on the quality of its truth, accuracy, caring, good intentions, or insight.

    We end up with variants of Edward Bernays manipulation of the masses instead, mixed in with tons of garbage.

    It's like a 10,000 watt power amplifier plugged into a 1000 big speakers, with the sound source being someone singing into a single, cheap, microphone, in the midst of the speakers, feeding the amplifier. The screeching feedback overwhelms the song. Fortunately, the microphone has "push to talk" button, thus stopping the feedback loop whenever the would-be singer lets off the button. But with a thousand such singers and a thousand such microphones, the cacophony never ceases.

  14. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Paul For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (29th May 2018), BMJ (1st July 2018), Carmody (5th July 2018), KiwiElf (6th June 2018), Michelle Marie (30th June 2018), Valerie Villars (1st July 2018)

  15. Link to Post #168
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    28th December 2013
    Age
    61
    Posts
    383
    Thanks
    733
    Thanked 969 times in 311 posts

    Default Re: The Problems with Facebook

    Thanks Callista I like your response to the post and I feel the same, I just want to add : many of us had being forced to go thru FB do to the fact that many of our relatives and friends overseas had quit the e-mail tho I think is a very private and secure method to communicate each other. Even worst , now many are using tweeter or wasap, I don't.
    I refuse to go thru this market drive technology crap ! that make people to adopt a new communication toy every year keeping the business rolling and waisting money in unesesary devices.

  16. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Yetti For This Post:

    BMJ (1st July 2018), KiwiElf (6th June 2018)

  17. Link to Post #169
    Avalon Member
    Join Date
    5th January 2011
    Posts
    757
    Thanks
    2,006
    Thanked 4,793 times in 685 posts

    Default Re: The Problems with Facebook

    Facebook Scandal --

    IT JUST KEEPS GETTING WORSE : What will we find next ?


    Facebook made deals with 60 device makers that gave them access to users’ data

    Published: June 4, 2018 3:29 p.m. ET

    By
    Ciara
    Linnane
    Corporate news editor

    https://www.marketwatch.com/story/fa...ata-2018-06-04

    Facebook Inc. made agreements with at least 60 makers of phones and other devices that gave them access to the personal information of users’ friends without their consent, the New York Times reported Monday, citing company officials.

    The companies involved include Apple Inc. AAPL, +0.87% BlackBerry Ltd. BB, +2.32% Microsoft Corp. MSFT, +0.86% and Amazon.com Inc. AMZN, +1.35% the paper reported. The agreements allowed Facebook to expand its reach and let device makers offer customers features, such as messaging, “like” buttons and address books.

    The scope of the partnerships has not been reported before and raises concerns about the company’s privacy protections, as well as compliance with a 2011 consent decree with the Federal Trade Commission.

    Most of the agreements are still in place, though Facebook FB, -0.30% began to wind them down in April, after coming under scrutiny from lawmakers and regulators over data used by Cambridge Analytica, which has declared bankruptcy.

    Read now: The sad truth about how much your Facebook data is worth on the dark web:

    https://www.marketwatch.com/story/sp...web-2018-03-20

    Facebook has said that the access granted to Cambrdige Analytica, a political consultancy, in 2014 was cut off by 2015, when the company explicitly banned developers from collecting data on users’ friend. But it did not disclose that the makers of phones and tablets were excluded from the ban.


    Read now: Facebook reveals the 87 million accounts affected by privacy violation — what to do if you’re one of them:

    https://www.marketwatch.com/story/fa...hem-2018-04-09

    Related: Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak says he’s quitting Facebook: ‘You are the product’

    Facebook said Monday in a blog post that it “controlled [APIs] tightly from the get-go” and that the device makers it partnered with “signed agreements that prevented people’s Facebook information from being used for any other purpose than to recreate Facebook-like experiences.”

    Facebook also said that its team had to approve these new “experiences” and that device partners like Apple Iand Amazon could not “integrate the user’s Facebook features with their devices without the user’s permission.”

    See: What Facebook and other tech leaders must do now to win back our trust
    Mark Zuckerberg’s Face-Off With European Parliament: The Highlights

    Facebook said that the private APIs in question were “very different from the public APIs used by third-party developers, like Aleksandr Kogan” of Cambridge Analytica.

    The New York Times said that one of its reporters, Michael LaForgia, used the Hub app on a blackberry Z10 to log into Facebook and found the app was able to retrieve detailed data on 556 of his friends. The data included relationship status, religious and political leanings and events they planned to attend.

    Twitter was predictably unhappy about the news.

    Shares of Facebook were down 1% in early trade, but are up 26% over the past 12 months, while the S&P 500 index SPX, +0.44% has gained 12% and the Dow Jones Industrial Average DJIA, +0.74% has added 17%.
    Last edited by ramus; 4th June 2018 at 20:07.

  18. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to ramus For This Post:

    BMJ (1st July 2018), KiwiElf (6th June 2018), Michelle Marie (30th June 2018)

  19. Link to Post #170
    United States Avalon Member Theresa's Avatar
    Join Date
    27th May 2018
    Location
    Alpena Michigan
    Age
    48
    Posts
    23
    Thanks
    39
    Thanked 107 times in 23 posts

    Default Re: The Problems with Facebook

    This is common and in just about every single app you have on your phone currently. They have the right the moment you get an app to record you, listen to you, bounce signal off you, shut you off etc, check the permissions, this is standard operating procedure right now. This does not make it right. I am just stating this incase you were not aware that this is not new or unique. I am not sure how different "We can access everything you do on your phone" can be. You can shut off these options or just not use those apps. Even your emergency light app could turn your phone on and record you picking your nose. You might want to take a look at the access your apps have.

    Always know the difference between what can be posted as public and in closed groups. The rules are different. Facebook is a tool when you use it, understand what that tool is going to do. We are not accidental victims that often. Being attentive about ever changing guidelines in a young technology should be a personal priority.
    Last edited by Theresa; 4th June 2018 at 21:01.
    I did an astrological birth chart and all it told me was this... She likes water. She likes odd people. “To be is to do - Socrates To do is to be - Sartre Do Be Do Be Do - Sinatra”― Kurt Vonnegut

  20. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Theresa For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (5th June 2018), KiwiElf (6th June 2018), Michelle Marie (30th June 2018), mojo (5th June 2018)

  21. Link to Post #171
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Posts
    11,085
    Thanks
    26,982
    Thanked 47,477 times in 9,660 posts

    Default Re: The Problems with Facebook

    Here is the New York Times article: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...s-to-user-data
    By GABRIEL J.X. DANCE, NICHOLAS CONFESSORE and MICHAEL LaFORGIA JUNE 3, 2018

    Facebook’s chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, at a Senate hearing in April. The company gave at least 60 phone and other device makers access to large amounts of user data. Leah Millis/Reuters
    Quote As Facebook sought to become the world’s dominant social media service, it struck agreements allowing phone and other device makers access to vast amounts of its users’ personal information.

    Facebook has reached data-sharing partnerships with at least 60 device makers — including Apple, Amazon, BlackBerry, Microsoft and Samsung — over the last decade, starting before Facebook apps were widely available on smartphones, company officials said. The deals allowed Facebook to expand its reach and let device makers offer customers popular features of the social network, such as messaging, “like” buttons and address books.

    But the partnerships, whose scope has not previously been reported, raise concerns about the company’s privacy protections and compliance with a 2011 consent decree with the Federal Trade Commission. Facebook allowed the device companies access to the data of users’ friends without their explicit consent, even after declaring that it would no longer share such information with outsiders. Some device makers could retrieve personal information even from users’ friends who believed they had barred any sharing, The New York Times found.

    [Here’s what we know about Facebook’s partnerships with device makers.]

    Most of the partnerships remain in effect, though Facebook began winding them down in April. The company came under intensifying scrutiny by lawmakers and regulators after news reports in March that a political consulting firm, Cambridge Analytica, misused the private information of tens of millions of Facebook users.

    In the furor that followed, Facebook’s leaders said that the kind of access exploited by Cambridge in 2014 was cut off by the next year, when Facebook prohibited developers from collecting information from users’ friends. But the company officials did not disclose that Facebook had exempted the makers of cellphones, tablets and other hardware from such restrictions.

    “You might think that Facebook or the device manufacturer is trustworthy,” said Serge Egelman, a privacy researcher at the University of California, Berkeley, who studies the security of mobile apps. “But the problem is that as more and more data is collected on the device — and if it can be accessed by apps on the device — it creates serious privacy and security risks.”

    In interviews, Facebook officials defended the data sharing as consistent with its privacy policies, the F.T.C. agreement and pledges to users. They said its partnerships were governed by contracts that strictly limited use of the data, including any stored on partners’ servers. The officials added that they knew of no cases where the information had been misused.

    The company views its device partners as extensions of Facebook, serving its more than two billion users, the officials said.

    “These partnerships work very differently from the way in which app developers use our platform,” said Ime Archibong, a Facebook vice president. Unlike developers that provide games and services to Facebook users, the device partners can use Facebook data only to provide versions of “the Facebook experience,” the officials said.

    Some device partners can retrieve Facebook users’ relationship status, religion, political leaning and upcoming events, among other data. Tests by The Times showed that the partners requested and received data in the same way other third parties did.


    Facebook’s view that the device makers are not outsiders lets the partners go even further, The Times found: They can obtain data about a user’s Facebook friends, even those who have denied Facebook permission to share information with any third parties.

    In interviews, several former Facebook software engineers and security experts said they were surprised at the ability to override sharing restrictions.

    “It’s like having door locks installed, only to find out that the locksmith also gave keys to all of his friends so they can come in and rifle through your stuff without having to ask you for permission,” said Ashkan Soltani, a research and privacy consultant who formerly served as the F.T.C.’s chief technologist.

    How One Phone Gains Access to Hundreds of Thousands of Facebook Accounts
    ce
    Gabriel J.X. Dance
    606 friends
    of Mr. Dance

    Michael LaForgia, a New York Times reporter, used the Hub app on a BlackBerry Z10 to log into Facebook.

    After connecting to Facebook, the BlackBerry Hub app was able to retrieve detailed data on 556 of Mr. LaForgia's friends, including relationship status, religious and political leanings and events they planned to attend. Facebook has said that it cut off third parties' access to this type of information in 2015, but that it does not consider BlackBerry a third party in this case.

    The Hub app was also able to access information — including unique identifiers — on 294,258 friends of Mr. LaForgia's friends.

    By Rich Harris and Gabriel J.X. Dance

    Details of Facebook’s partnerships have emerged amid a reckoning in Silicon Valley over the volume of personal information collected on the internet and monetized by the tech industry. The pervasive collection of data, while largely unregulated in the United States, has come under growing criticism from elected officials at home and overseas and provoked concern among consumers about how freely their information is shared.

    In a tense appearance before Congress in March, Facebook’s chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, emphasized what he said was a company priority for Facebook users.“Every piece of content that you share on Facebook you own,” he testified. ”You have complete control over who sees it and how you share it.”

    But the device partnerships provoked discussion even within Facebook as early as 2012, according to Sandy Parakilas, who at the time led third-party advertising and privacy compliance for Facebook’s platform.

    “This was flagged internally as a privacy issue,” said Mr. Parakilas, who left Facebook that year and has recently emerged as a harsh critic of the company. “It is shocking that this practice may still continue six years later, and it appears to contradict Facebook’s testimony to Congress that all friend permissions were disabled.”

    The partnerships were briefly mentioned in documents submitted to German lawmakers investigating the social media giant’s privacy practices and released by Facebook in mid-May. But Facebook provided the lawmakers with the name of only one partner — BlackBerry, maker of the once-ubiquitous mobile device — and little information about how the agreements worked.

    The submission followed testimony by Joel Kaplan, Facebook’s vice president for global public policy, during a closed-door German parliamentary hearing in April. Elisabeth Winkelmeier-Becker, one of the lawmakers who questioned Mr. Kaplan, said in an interview that she believed the data partnerships disclosed by Facebook violated users’ privacy rights.

    “What we have been trying to determine is whether Facebook has knowingly handed over user data elsewhere without explicit consent,” Ms. Winkelmeier-Becker said. “I would never have imagined that this might even be happening secretly via deals with device makers. BlackBerry users seem to have been turned into data dealers, unknowingly and unwillingly.”


    In interviews with The Times, Facebook identified other partners: Apple and Samsung, the world’s two biggest smartphone makers, and Amazon, which sells tablets.

    An Apple spokesman said the company relied on private access to Facebook data for features that enabled users to post photos to the social network without opening the Facebook app, among other things. Apple said its phones no longer had such access to Facebook as of last September.

    Samsung declined to respond to questions about whether it had any data-sharing partnerships with Facebook. Amazon also declined to respond to questions.

    Usher Lieberman, a BlackBerry spokesman, said in a statement that the company used Facebook data only to give its own customers access to their Facebook networks and messages. Mr. Lieberman said that the company “did not collect or mine the Facebook data of our customers,” adding that “BlackBerry has always been in the business of protecting, not monetizing, customer data.”

    Microsoft entered a partnership with Facebook in 2008 that allowed Microsoft-powered devices to do things like add contacts and friends and receive notifications, according to a spokesman. He added that the data was stored locally on the phone and was not synced to Microsoft’s servers.

    Facebook acknowledged that some partners did store users’ data — including friends’ data — on their own servers. A Facebook official said that regardless of where the data was kept, it was governed by strict agreements between the companies.

    “I am dumbfounded by the attitude that anybody in Facebook’s corporate office would think allowing third parties access to data would be a good idea,” said Henning Schulzrinne, a computer science professor at Columbia University who specializes in network security and mobile systems.

    The Cambridge Analytica scandal revealed how loosely Facebook had policed the bustling ecosystem of developers building apps on its platform. They ranged from well-known players like Zynga, the maker of the FarmVille game, to smaller ones, like a Cambridge contractor who used a quiz taken by about 300,000 Facebook users to gain access to the profiles of as many as 87 million of their friends.

    Those developers relied on Facebook’s public data channels, known as application programming interfaces, or APIs. But starting in 2007, the company also established private data channels for device manufacturers.

    At the time, mobile phones were less powerful, and relatively few of them could run stand-alone Facebook apps like those now common on smartphones. The company continued to build new private APIs for device makers through 2014, spreading user data through tens of millions of mobile devices, game consoles, televisions and other systems outside Facebook’s direct control.

    Facebook began moving to wind down the partnerships in April, after assessing its privacy and data practices in the wake of the Cambridge Analytica scandal. Mr. Archibong said the company had concluded that the partnerships were no longer needed to serve Facebook users. About 22 of them have been shut down.


    The broad access Facebook provided to device makers raises questions about its compliance with a 2011 consent decree with the F.T.C.

    The decree barred Facebook from overriding users’ privacy settings without first getting explicit consent. That agreement stemmed from an investigation that found Facebook had allowed app developers and other third parties to collect personal details about users’ friends, even when those friends had asked that their information remain private.

    After the Cambridge Analytica revelations, the F.T.C. began an investigation into whether Facebook’s continued sharing of data after 2011 violated the decree, potentially exposing the company to fines.

    Facebook officials said the private data channels did not violate the decree because the company viewed its hardware partners as “service providers,” akin to a cloud computing service paid to store Facebook data or a company contracted to process credit card transactions. According to the consent decree, Facebook does not need to seek additional permission to share friend data with service providers.

    “These contracts and partnerships are entirely consistent with Facebook’s F.T.C. consent decree,” Mr. Archibong, the Facebook official, said.

    But Jessica Rich, a former F.T.C. official who helped lead the commission’s earlier Facebook investigation, disagreed with that assessment.

    “Under Facebook’s interpretation, the exception swallows the rule,” said Ms. Rich, now with the Consumers Union. “They could argue that any sharing of data with third parties is part of the Facebook experience. And this is not at all how the public interpreted their 2014 announcement that they would limit third-party app access to friend data.”

    To test one partner’s access to Facebook’s private data channels, The Times used a reporter’s Facebook account — with about 550 friends — and a 2013 BlackBerry device, monitoring what data the device requested and received. (More recent BlackBerry devices, which run Google’s Android operating system, do not use the same private channels, BlackBerry officials said.)

    Immediately after the reporter connected the device to his Facebook account, it requested some of his profile data, including user ID, name, picture, “about” information, location, email and cellphone number. The device then retrieved the reporter’s private messages and the responses to them, along with the name and user ID of each person with whom he was communicating.

    The data flowed to a BlackBerry app known as the Hub, which was designed to let BlackBerry users view all of their messages and social media accounts in one place.

    The Hub also requested — and received — data that Facebook’s policy appears to prohibit. Since 2015, Facebook has said that apps can request only the names of friends using the same app. But the BlackBerry app had access to all of the reporter’s Facebook friends and, for most of them, returned information such as user ID, birthday, work and education history and whether they were currently online.

    The BlackBerry device was also able to retrieve identifying information for nearly 295,000 Facebook users. Most of them were second-degree Facebook friends of the reporter, or friends of friends.

    In all, Facebook empowers BlackBerry devices to access more than 50 types of information about users and their friends, The Times found.
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  22. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    Alekahn2 (5th June 2018), Bill Ryan (5th June 2018), KiwiElf (6th June 2018), Mike (6th June 2018), mojo (5th June 2018), Paul (5th June 2018)

  23. Link to Post #172
    Moderator Joe from the Carolinas's Avatar
    Join Date
    20th July 2017
    Location
    Carolinas US
    Posts
    1,005
    Thanks
    5,667
    Thanked 7,884 times in 995 posts

    Default Re: The Problems with Facebook

    Zuckerberg is saying he wants users to send nudes in to protect themselves? Isn't that kind of like the mafia?

    Also another thought. Lots of users of facebook, I assume, are underage. Is zuckerberg wanting ALL users nude photos now? Isn't that against the law?

    Wouldn't someone like that, asking people for their nude photographs in public, be charged with soliciting as well as sexual harassment?

  24. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Joe from the Carolinas For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (1st July 2018), Billy (1st July 2018), Foxie Loxie (6th June 2018), KiwiElf (6th June 2018), Michelle Marie (30th June 2018), Mike (6th June 2018)

  25. Link to Post #173
    United States Avalon Member Michelle Marie's Avatar
    Join Date
    5th June 2011
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    2,630
    Thanks
    27,304
    Thanked 16,969 times in 2,584 posts

    Default Re: The Problems with Facebook

    In this video, an article is reviewed that reports FaceBook is deleting pages having to do with Health, Wellness, Organic and Natural Living accounts in the name of Fake News.



    That part starts at 10:12.
    _______________________
    And here is an article that lists pages that have been deleted.

    http://www.inspiretochangeworld.com/...-of-fake-news/
    _________________________
    And the original article came from
    Www.healthfreedomidaho.org

    June 24, 2018

    https://healthfreedomidaho.org/facebook-fake-news

    Deleted accounts include:

    * Natural Cures Not Medicine
    * Collectively Conscious
    * Viral Alternative News
    * Organic Health
    * Natural Cures from Food
    * Organic Wellness
    * Meditation Masters

    And many more.

    MM
    Last edited by Michelle Marie; 30th June 2018 at 22:11.
    ~*~ "The best way to predict the future is to create it." - Peter Drucker ~*~ “To laugh often and much; to win the respect of intelligent people and the affection of children...to leave the world a better place...to know even one life has breathed easier because you have lived. This is to have succeeded.” -Ralph Waldo Emerson ~*~ "Creative minds always have been known to survive any kind of bad training." - Anna Freud ~*~

  26. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Michelle Marie For This Post:

    avid (1st July 2018), Bill Ryan (1st July 2018), Billy (1st July 2018), BMJ (1st July 2018), dynamo (1st July 2018), Foxie Loxie (1st July 2018), Hervé (1st July 2018), KiwiElf (30th June 2018), Valerie Villars (1st July 2018)

  27. Link to Post #174
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,766
    Thanks
    60,316
    Thanked 95,027 times in 15,475 posts

    Default Re: The Problems with Facebook

    From Jim Stone:


    DELETE YOUR FACEBOOK IF YOU STILL HAVE IT.

    At the same time they appeared to be attempting to legitimize pedophelia with a STAFF POSTED survey, they deleted alt health pages with a total of 26.5 million followers, and that's just what is known of at this point in time.

    FACEBOOK DELETED THE FOLLOWING ALT HEALTH SITES, CLAIMING THEY WERE "FAKE NEWS" AND THEREFORE HAD INAPPROPRIATE CONTENT:

    The following list was compiled by Health Freedom Idaho

    Health Freedom Idaho started 7 years ago, warning people Facebook was going to do this. This list was possible because Health Freedom Idaho had contact with the following Facebook sites, and they notified Health Freedom Idaho that they had been deleted. Absent this, it would never have been known, and this list is also, as a result, not complete because not everyone knew they could report they had been deleted here. Groups Deleted by Facebook as "Fake"
    • Natural Cures Not Medicine (2.3M followers) - Deleted on June 11th, 2018.
    • I Want to Be 100% Organic (700K followers) - Deleted on June 13th, 2018.
    • Collectively Conscious (915K followers) – Deleted on June 13th, 2018.
    • Viral Alternative News (500K followers) - Deleted on June 13th, 2018.
    • Organic Health (230K followers) - Deleted on June 13th, 2018.
    • Natural Cures From Food (120K followers) - Deleted on June 13th, 2018.
    • Heart Centered Rebalancing (3.9M followers) -
    • Living Traditionally (570K followers) - Unpublished on June 5th, 2018.
    • Organic Wellness (600K followers) - Unpublished on June 5th, 2018.
    • Chocolate Socrates (608K followers) - Deleted on June 13th, 2018.
    • Meditation Masters - Deleted in early June, 2018
    • Global Freedom Movement (27K followers) - Deleted on June 19th, 2018.
    • Health & Alternative Medicine (550K followers) - Deleted on June 13th, 2018.
    • Pure Nature (1.7M followers) - Deleted on June 3rd, 2018.
    • Nature Gallery (654K followers) - Deleted on June 3rd, 2018.
    • Mesmerizing Nature (912K followers) - Deleted on June 3rd, 2018.
    • Nature’s Touch (150K followers) - Deleted on June 3rd, 2018.
    • Healthy Life Box (1.8M followers) - Deleted on June 13th, 2018.
    • Healthy Food House (3.4M followers) -
    • Health Awareness (2.5M followers) -
    • Healthy Life And Food (350K followers) - Deleted on May 23rd, 2018.
    • Check These Things (80K followers) - Deleted on June 13th, 2018.
    • Health Care Above All (90K followers) - Deleted on June 13th, 2018.
    • Health and Healthy Living (450K followers) -
    • Health & Alternative Medicine (550K followers) - Deleted on June 13th, 2018.
    • Healthy Living Motivation (644K followers) - Deleted on June 13th, 2018.
    • Alternative Health Universe (420K followers) - Deleted on June 13th, 2018.
    • Natural Medicine Corner (411K followers) - Deleted on June 13th, 2018.
    • Organic Health Team (490K followers) - Deleted on June 13th, 2018.
    • Global Health Care (130K followers) - Deleted on June 13th, 2018.
    • Healthy Alternative Medicine (140K followers) - Deleted on June 13th, 2018.
    • Natural Healthy Team (190K followers) - Deleted on June 13th, 2018.
    • Organic Food Medicine (30K followers) - Deleted on June 13th, 2018.
    • Love, Health and Happiness (10K followers) - Deleted on June 13th, 2018.
    • Healthy Organic Life (25K followers) - Deleted on June 13th, 2018.
    • Healthy Lifestyle (55K followers) - Deleted on June 13th, 2018.
    • Guardian of Health (160K followers) - Deleted on June 13th, 2018.
    • Daily Health Keeper (190K followers) - Deleted on June 13th, 2018.
    • Health & Love Page (720K followers) - Deleted on June 5th, 2018.
    • Diabetes Health Page (180K followers) - Deleted on June 13th, 2018.
    • The Beauty of Power (170K followers) - Deleted on June 13th, 2018.
    • Nutrition Facts and Analysys (170K followers) - Deleted on June 13th, 2018.
    • Deeper Perspectives (32K followers) - Deleted on June 13th, 2018.
    • My Own Little World (1.5m) - Deleted on June 21, 2018
    • Brighten Your Soul (100k plus) - Deleted on June 21, 2018
    • Essence OF Spirit ( 12k) - Deleted on June 21, 2018
    • We really like animals (544k) - Deleted on June 21, 2018
    • Nature's Majesty (191k) - Deleted on June 21, 2018
    • Nature Magic (33k) - Deleted on June 21, 2018

    Jim's comment:
    If Facebook is going to behave like this, only a fool would bother with an account. Once again, Health Freedom Idaho, which compiled this list is HERE, so you can keep an eye on this list, or help build it by letting them know something that vanished is not listed.

    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  28. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (1st July 2018), Billy (1st July 2018), BMJ (1st July 2018), Foxie Loxie (1st July 2018), KiwiElf (1st July 2018), Michelle Marie (1st July 2018), Sophocles (1st July 2018), uzn (1st July 2018)

  29. Link to Post #175
    United States Avalon Member Valerie Villars's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th November 2017
    Age
    57
    Posts
    2,718
    Thanks
    27,917
    Thanked 18,122 times in 2,676 posts

    Default Re: The Problems with Facebook

    I have (had) an account that I used to out a rapist and then as a way to log in and check in on other people. I just deleted it, but not before I read an article about the difference between deactivating and permanently deleting the account.

    The article talked about how serious it was to delete an account and how you might not have access for weeks, etc. if you decided to join again. It's amazing the language they used to try and dissuade me from doing so.

    It reminded me of the scary tactics creditors and the IRS use. They try to corral you by using fear.
    "The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what we share with someone when we are uncool." From the movie "Almost Famous""l "Let yourself stand cool and composed before a million universes." Walt Whitman

  30. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Valerie Villars For This Post:

    BMJ (8th July 2018), Dennis Leahy (29th September 2018), Foxie Loxie (1st July 2018), Hervé (1st July 2018), KiwiElf (1st July 2018), Michelle Marie (2nd July 2018)

  31. Link to Post #176
    United States Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Age
    71
    Posts
    27,723
    Thanks
    28,846
    Thanked 129,170 times in 20,634 posts

    Default Re: The Problems with Facebook

    Quote Posted by Valerie Villars (here)
    It reminded me of the scary tactics creditors and the IRS use. They try to corral you by using fear.
    So ... does that imply that there is a way to delete my IRS account?

    I could have used such a way, back when I was a salaried man .

  32. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Paul For This Post:

    BMJ (8th July 2018), Dennis Leahy (29th September 2018), Foxie Loxie (1st July 2018), KiwiElf (1st July 2018), Michelle Marie (2nd July 2018), Valerie Villars (1st July 2018)

  33. Link to Post #177
    United States Avalon Member Valerie Villars's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th November 2017
    Age
    57
    Posts
    2,718
    Thanks
    27,917
    Thanked 18,122 times in 2,676 posts

    Default Re: The Problems with Facebook

    Yeah, me too. Back when I was a salaried woman. Now, it's all taken care of because "when you got nothing, you've got nothin left to lose."

    I have thought of every which way but Sunday to delete my IRS account. Now I just laugh because I have no way of paying them. And nothing they can seize. It's grand to be free.
    "The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what we share with someone when we are uncool." From the movie "Almost Famous""l "Let yourself stand cool and composed before a million universes." Walt Whitman

  34. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Valerie Villars For This Post:

    BMJ (8th July 2018), Dennis Leahy (29th September 2018), Foxie Loxie (1st July 2018), KiwiElf (1st July 2018), Michelle Marie (2nd July 2018), onawah (5th July 2018), Paul (1st July 2018)

  35. Link to Post #178
    United States Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Age
    71
    Posts
    27,723
    Thanks
    28,846
    Thanked 129,170 times in 20,634 posts

    Default Re: The Problems with Facebook

    Quote Posted by ramus (here)
    One potential factor for the quick jump in major depression rates among teens and kids is increased screen time.
    How about vaccines, drugs (including prescribed anti-depressants), toxins in our food and water, collapsed opportunities for good work, depressing Common Core academic studies, mass propaganda (including Facebook, to return to this thread's topic), ...?

  36. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Paul For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (31st August 2018), BMJ (8th July 2018), Foxie Loxie (1st July 2018), KiwiElf (1st July 2018), Michelle Marie (2nd July 2018), Omni (5th July 2018), Valerie Villars (2nd July 2018)

  37. Link to Post #179
    United States Avalon Member Michelle Marie's Avatar
    Join Date
    5th June 2011
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    2,630
    Thanks
    27,304
    Thanked 16,969 times in 2,584 posts

    Default Re: The Problems with Facebook

    ZeroHedge
    7/5/18

    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-...ce-hate-speech

    Facebook flags the Declaration of Independence as Hate Speech

    Click image for larger version

Name:	image.jpg
Views:	26
Size:	231.9 KB
ID:	38442

    MM
    Last edited by Michelle Marie; 5th July 2018 at 17:38.
    ~*~ "The best way to predict the future is to create it." - Peter Drucker ~*~ “To laugh often and much; to win the respect of intelligent people and the affection of children...to leave the world a better place...to know even one life has breathed easier because you have lived. This is to have succeeded.” -Ralph Waldo Emerson ~*~ "Creative minds always have been known to survive any kind of bad training." - Anna Freud ~*~

  38. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Michelle Marie For This Post:

    Baby Steps (5th July 2018), Bill Ryan (31st August 2018), BMJ (8th July 2018), Foxie Loxie (5th July 2018), Omni (5th July 2018), Star Mariner (5th July 2018)

  39. Link to Post #180
    United States Avalon Member Foxie Loxie's Avatar
    Join Date
    20th September 2015
    Location
    Central NY
    Age
    75
    Posts
    3,079
    Thanks
    67,683
    Thanked 17,336 times in 2,953 posts

    Default Re: The Problems with Facebook

    Whaaaaat?!

  40. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Foxie Loxie For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (31st August 2018), BMJ (8th July 2018)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 9 of 12 FirstFirst 1 9 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts