SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for TheMightyBuzzard
A California man is suing Facebook for allegedly scanning the content of private messages sent between users of the site.
The suit alleges that Facebook scans the messages in search of hyperlinks sent between users. "If there is a link to a web page contained in that message, Facebook treats it as a 'like' of the page, and increases the page's 'like,' counter by one," the suit contends. The site tracks when users "like" pages in order to compile individual profiles that allow third parties to send targeted advertisements.
Source: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/facebook-sued-for-scanning-private-user-messages/article/2591806
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Facebook Sued for Scanning Private User Messages
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 38 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
The mosquito is the state bird of New Jersey.
-- Andy Warhol
(Score: 3, Insightful) by TheRaven on Tuesday May 24 2016, @11:06AM
sudo mod me up
(Score: 3, Insightful) by AndyTheAbsurd on Tuesday May 24 2016, @11:10AM
While I want to agree with you about losing the suit being bad for Facebook, the fact that it's the de facto internet communication mechanism for a very large percentage of the population these days means that even losing badly is unlikely to have much of an effect. (Not that I wouldn't love to see people move on from Facebook.)
Please note my username before responding. You may have been trolled.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anal Pumpernickel on Tuesday May 24 2016, @10:58PM
Even if people moved on from Facebook, what good would it do? Most people have demonstrated that they are unprincipled enough to allow scumbag companies like Facebook to ruthlessly monetize so much of their private information, and even more than that, these Facebook-using suckers have shown that they are also willing to surrender other people's information (such as pictures of them, which are then subject to Facebook's facial recognition algorithms) to Facebook. They do this in exchange for petty benefits. So, even if people move on from Facebook, if another service that violates people's privacy and offers convenience comes along, these same people will flock to it. People without principles are easy to bribe and use, and to make matters worse, a grand majority of Facebook users are outright unintelligent.
There will always be an opportunity for companies to make use of unintelligent suckers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 25 2016, @12:23AM
There will always be an opportunity for companies to make use of unintelligent suckers.
Perhaps this is a little off-topic, but certainly fits into the general subject of online privacy.
Absolutely. And a new trend (at least new to me) is corporations forcing you to sign up for their "rewards" program in order to use the features of their websites. Of course, in order to join such programs, you must agree to allow your personal details to be used by the corporations to market all sorts of useless crap to you and quite possibly to be sold to third parties as well.
This has happened to me twice in one week now. The first was Spirit Airlines [spirit.com] which wouldn't allow me to select seats or check bags on their website unless I joined their "rewards" program. If I chose not do so, any activities on my reservations would incur additional $50 per activity charges.
The next was Mariott Corporation [marriott.com] which wouldn't allow me to complete a reservation on their website unless I joined their "rewards" program. Their privacy and data use policies were at least 25-30 pages of fine print. Fortunately, they didn't insist on charging me an extra $50 to speak to a telephone reservation agent.
This is quite troubling. Those who are oblivious to the privacy issues just put up with this crap, and if you actually care about your privacy, you lose the convenience of doing business online. Sigh.
I'm not really sure why so many people put up with this sort of behavior. Perhaps they don't know any better or just don't care.
And for my part, Facebook just doesn't offer enough value to me to give them my personal data and the right to rifle through my life in order to sell ads for stuff I don't want.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Wednesday May 25 2016, @04:18AM
>I'm not really sure why so many people put up with this sort of behavior. Perhaps they don't know any better or just don't care.
Why did you? If you want the service, you must accept the abuse. Because, individually, you don't wield enough power to make a difference.
That is why we need laws specifically protecting privacy in ways that can't be easily signed away, because only by acting collectively do we wield enough power to bring wealthy corporations to heel.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 25 2016, @05:18PM
Why did you? If you want the service, you must accept the abuse. Because, individually, you don't wield enough power to make a difference.
Same AC here.
Why? WRT Spirit, I'd already purchased a non-refundable ticket before I knew what a wretched hive of scum and villany they were. As for Mariott, I'm staying there because a half-dozen members of my family are doing so as well.
I gave Spirit as much false information as I could and bit the bullet, as they say.
With Mariott, I used the telephone to make my reservation, avoiding the necessity to sign up for their "rewards" program.
You're right that I, personally, don't have enough clout to make these scumbags change their policies.
Had I known what I know now about Spirit Airlines, I never would have purchased a ticket from them in the first place. You live and learn.
As for Mariott, I've stayed in their hotels many times without any of this crap. Interestingly, the reservation agent I dealt with said that he'd only recently started hearing complaints about this. Perhaps if enough people complain, they'll make some changes.
At the same time, I will most certainly vote with my wallet. Spirit Airlines will *never* get another nickel from me. Mariott will most likely not either.
That is why we need laws specifically protecting privacy in ways that can't be easily signed away, because only by acting collectively do we wield enough power to bring wealthy corporations to heel.
Collective political action is unlikely to make any difference whatever, as the last twenty years or so of legislation and judicial decisions have clearly shown.
Which is why I bothered to post my original comment. If others read it and decide not to patronize these greedy fucks, that punishes them. Probably not enough to force them to make any changes, but if even one person decides not to use the services of these corporations, I'll consider it a win.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Lester on Tuesday May 24 2016, @03:25PM
No, there won't be any legal consequences. Nevertheless such corporations are more afraid of bad publicity than of courts. So, it's not that bad movement.
I would like to see in facebook, google, etc a title in the top (font size 24px) saying:
"We analyze everything (interests, friends, webs visited...) to learn everything about you for advertising and, later, we sell everything we know about you (more than you know about your self) to other companies"
It would be real fair play with consumer. Not burying that fact in a 800 pages "privacy policy" document.
(Score: 1) by tractatus_techno_philosophicus on Tuesday May 24 2016, @08:42PM
I second that motion. As every pack of cigarettes (here in the United States) requires the surgeon general's warning, it'd be nice to see something similar on massive, data-gathering websites. If mental health and physical health are completely intertwined (and that seems incontestable at this point), why not take digital health into consideration? It would be hard to argue that it isn't just as intertwined with every other facet of most people's being in 2016.
No moral system can rest solely on authority. ~A.J. Ayer