• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Anyone watching the Zuckerberg Senate interview?

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
894
126
But does Facebook really qualify for that? I'd argue that Internet access does (as 'the internet' is pretty diffuse as-is), but Facebook is just a service that some people use, and others don't. This isn't like the water company or electricity or something. Should Netflix be made a utility, because it's grown 'beyond a product'? Just because people don't like their business model doesn't mean you hand over the company to the Government or something, you just don't use the product anymore.
Of course it does not, but that is what you are seeing. People want to use something from a company, but not deal with that company. You watch, if this keeps up, you are going to see people say that FB should be allowing other companies to run on their platform so they can choose something other than FB. It will be stupid, but, that argument is likely coming.

A great example of this is when M$ has to install other browsers on Windows instead of just allowing them to go install another one.
 

pauldun170

Diamond Member
Sep 26, 2011
7,358
2,650
136
Mark Zuckerberg emerged unscathed from Tuesday's Senate committee hearing, and he did so in large part because most of the senators who asked him questions had no clue how Facebook worked, what the solutions to its problems are, or even what they were trying to achieve by calling its CEO to testify, other than getting some good soundbites in.
Bout sum it up?
 
  • Like
Reactions: [DHT]Osiris

[DHT]Osiris

Diamond Member
Dec 15, 2015
8,112
3,987
146
Of course it does not, but that is what you are seeing. People want to use something from a company, but not deal with that company. You watch, if this keeps up, you are going to see people say that FB should be allowing other companies to run on their platform so they can choose something other than FB. It will be stupid, but, that argument is likely coming.

A great example of this is when M$ has to install other browsers on Windows instead of just allowing them to go install another one.
And the MS thing was equally retarded. I was appalled that they were required by a government to install a competitor's software on their platform, that was extreme overreach, as would a mandate to let other companies use FB's software/platform to compete against them.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
894
126
Considering the magnitude of the problem, and how long we've let it fester, we probably need something on that scale to tear control of our information back away from companies. I honestly could care less if 90% of digital advertising/data collating companies crash an burn as a result, considering the damage they've done to the Internet, and, apparently, our democratic process.
Well, then expect a lot of people to not have access to these things because they will have to be paid goods rather than "free" goods. Right now the reason so many of these things are "free" is because they get your data and either sell it, or use it for ads. You start limiting the ability of people to get out their data, you limit profits and you either get less companies, or less access.

The problem is a fundamental lack of understanding of the digital world. Everywhere you go, everything you say, everything you do online is tracked. This can be used for good, or bad, but its not likely to be either or.
 

IJTSSG

Golden Member
Aug 12, 2014
1,084
256
136
Considering the magnitude of the problem, and how long we've let it fester, we probably need something on that scale to tear control of our information back away from companies. I honestly could care less if 90% of digital advertising/data collating companies crash an burn as a result, considering the damage they've done to the Internet, and, apparently, our democratic process.
I think a pretty significant event probably needs to occur before we get meaningful infosec and/or privacy regs in the US. Enron obviously drove SOX and I was half hoping that Equifax might drive some regulations but it got pushed aside pretty quickly.
 

[DHT]Osiris

Diamond Member
Dec 15, 2015
8,112
3,987
146
Well, then expect a lot of people to not have access to these things because they will have to be paid goods rather than "free" goods. Right now the reason so many of these things are "free" is because they get your data and either sell it, or use it for ads. You start limiting the ability of people to get out their data, you limit profits and you either get less companies, or less access.

The problem is a fundamental lack of understanding of the digital world. Everywhere you go, everything you say, everything you do online is tracked. This can be used for good, or bad, but its not likely to be either or.
Then there needs to be a clear understanding with people that if it's free, you're probably a product rather than a user. I mean, I thought this had been obvious for years, ever since people stopped running servers out of the goodness of their heart.. but apparently some folks still think that FB is run by some benevolent superadmin and free shit be normal.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
894
126
And the MS thing was equally retarded. I was appalled that they were required by a government to install a competitor's software on their platform, that was extreme overreach, as would a mandate to let other companies use FB's software/platform to compete against them.
Just watch. If it keeps up that is where we are going. "FB is being anti competitive and is too big and too insecure and is too important to let M.Z. run it for profit".
 

[DHT]Osiris

Diamond Member
Dec 15, 2015
8,112
3,987
146
I think a pretty significant event probably needs to occur before we get meaningful infosec and/or privacy regs in the US. Enron obviously drove SOX and I was half hoping that Equifax might drive some regulations but it got pushed aside pretty quickly.
You mean like a foreign government colluding with a data collating company to undermine a democratic election? That kind of significant event?
 

pmv

Diamond Member
May 30, 2008
7,443
2,651
136
The problem is a fundamental lack of understanding of the digital world. Everywhere you go, everything you say, everything you do online is tracked. This can be used for good, or bad, but its not likely to be either or.
It's also new, though. Especially considering how much of our interaction, and lives, are now conducted online. It's leading to a total-surveillance-state of a sort that the Stasi could scarcely have imagined. _If_ anyone could be bothered (and that's a big _if_ considering how massively unimportant most of us are!) anyone with sufficient power could learn almost everything about us and our day-to-day activities. That seems an unprecedented situation (or perhaps my historical memory doesn't go back far enough?). I don't think one can be blamed for finding that unnerving.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
894
126
Then there needs to be a clear understanding with people that if it's free, you're probably a product rather than a user. I mean, I thought this had been obvious for years, ever since people stopped running servers out of the goodness of their heart.. but apparently some folks still think that FB is run by some benevolent superadmin and free shit be normal.
Its a false sense of anonymity. You never gave out your name, you never said who you were or what you looked like, so how could anyone know it was you. For the most part, that is true except for companies.

This is why its annoying when people say that the government and companies tracking you is tin-foil shit. Its not. Everything you do is stored somewhere and someone has access to it.
 

[DHT]Osiris

Diamond Member
Dec 15, 2015
8,112
3,987
146
Its a false sense of anonymity. You never gave out your name, you never said who you were or what you looked like, so how could anyone know it was you. For the most part, that is true except for companies.

This is why its annoying when people say that the government and companies tracking you is tin-foil shit. Its not. Everything you do is stored somewhere and someone has access to it.
Yeah, that's another thing people need to wise up on. We're well past the point of being able to figure out who someone is online. If random redditors can dox folks within a day, you better believe an advanced AI-based computer system can figure out who most of the 300m Americans are without breaking a sweat, regardless of what handle/page you're on.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
894
126
It's also new, though. Especially considering how much of our interaction, and lives, are now conducted online. It's leading to a total-surveillance-state of a sort that the Stasi could scarcely have imagined. _If_ anyone could be bothered (and that's a big _if_ considering how massively unimportant most of us are!) anyone with sufficient power could learn almost everything about us and our day-to-day activities. That seems an unprecedented situation (or perhaps my historical memory doesn't go back far enough?). I don't think one can be blamed for finding that unnerving.
Hey now, there are some Mods here that are going to throw Tin-Foil at you because that is crazy talk. Nobody is spying on you because nobody cares about you. Well except hackers that want your data, and break into servers that have the data that they are totally not keeping.

For a long time it was infeasible to track a single person to the level they can now digitally, never mind multiple. As I said before, it used to be that if you did not give out your information directly, nobody would know who you were. Now, you give out your information by your IP and cookies. They then marry that up with other places you have been and they can know just about anything.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
894
126
Yeah, that's another thing people need to wise up on. We're well past the point of being able to figure out who someone is online. If random redditors can dox folks within a day, you better believe an advanced AI-based computer system can figure out who most of the 300m Americans are without breaking a sweat, regardless of what handle/page you're on.
I called out someone on this forum a few months back about being a Russian agent. He suddenly disappeared shortly after, and then out of nowhere I got a letter in the mail from a bank about a new account under a name of a Russian Movie actor. Turns out this Russian company opened up multiple bank accounts and was moving money in. Lucky for me I caught this 1 week after they opened this business under my home address and I contacted the state about it and they dissolved the company. All the bank accounts look to have been closed and money moved.

I can't prove it was this person that did it, but the fact that so many Russian things line up seems more than a coincidence.

This person came back recently when some issues came up in Syria again and I once again called him out and he has gone again.
 

[DHT]Osiris

Diamond Member
Dec 15, 2015
8,112
3,987
146
I called out someone on this forum a few months back about being a Russian agent. He suddenly disappeared shortly after, and then out of nowhere I got a letter in the mail from a bank about a new account under a name of a Russian Movie actor. Turns out this Russian company opened up multiple bank accounts and was moving money in. Lucky for me I caught this 1 week after they opened this business under my home address and I contacted the state about it and they dissolved the company. All the bank accounts look to have been closed and money moved.

I can't prove it was this person that did it, but the fact that so many Russian things line up seems more than a coincidence.

This person came back recently when some issues came up in Syria again and I once again called him out and he has gone again.
I'm not one to believe conspiracy theories, but if an opsec operative told me 'yeah, we were tracking that guy, this all happened' it wouldn't terribly surprise me.
 

pmv

Diamond Member
May 30, 2008
7,443
2,651
136
For a long time it was infeasible to track a single person to the level they can now digitally, never mind multiple. As I said before, it used to be that if you did not give out your information directly, nobody would know who you were. Now, you give out your information by your IP and cookies. They then marry that up with other places you have been and they can know just about anything.
I did find it disconcerting when Google turned out to be tracking my YouTube viewing, even though I didn't have a YouTube account, simply by noting my IP address. I'm still not clear on whether they then cross-reference that to the IP address used when I use other Google services, effectively tracking me as individual. Being tracked when you knowingly log into an account is one thing, but that IP-tracking seemed downright creepy (and it's when I stopped using Google search).

It all seems a bit hopeless though. I don't use Facebook (took a dislike to it from the start, for some reason), but I have significant amounts of personal emails archived in web-based email accounts, for example. It really does seem like a whole new era we are in, with the level of tracking that is theoretically possible if anyone ever has the motivation to do it. Future dictators (and future historians, come to think of it) are going to have unprecedented amounts of power to spy on the lives of others.

On top of that is the shift to everything being provided as a subscription 'service' rather than as stand-alone products. That seems to involve a shift in power from the consumer to whoever is selling whatever it is. Second-hand markets in all sorts of things are starting to disappear.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
894
126
I did find it disconcerting when Google turned out to be tracking my YouTube viewing, even though I didn't have a YouTube account, simply by noting my IP address. I'm still not clear on whether they then cross-reference that to the IP address used when I use other Google services, effectively tracking me as individual. Being tracked when you knowingly log into an account is one thing, but that IP-tracking seemed downright creepy (and it's when I stopped using Google search).

It all seems a bit hopeless though. I don't use Facebook (took a dislike to it from the start, for some reason), but I have significant amounts of personal emails archived in web-based email accounts, for example. It really does seem like a whole new era we are in, with the level of tracking that is theoretically possible if anyone ever has the motivation to do it. Future dictators (and future historians, come to think of it) are going to have unprecedented amounts of power to spy on the lives of others.

On top of that is the shift to everything being provided as a subscription 'service' rather than as stand-alone products. That seems to involve a shift in power from the consumer to whoever is selling whatever it is. Second-hand markets in all sorts of things are starting to disappear.
I'm 99% sure google is using every one of it's products to link everything you do together. Android phone has a google account and GPS. Chrome has its ip address and if you are in the same location it can link that.

My phone figured out my work and home address in about 1 week, and started giving me morning and evening notifications about traffic. It keeps a history of of everywhere I have been with "timelines". It knows who I call, texts I send. Google is now working with the CDC to help them predict outbreaks. Everything you say, and do online is tracked.

This is why its so annoying when people say this is all tin foil shit.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY