And fake news is more cost effective than a large military force.Who needs an army when fake news alone is enough to incite riots and protests amongst the civilian populace.
It comes with only one watch face: Zuck’s face.FaceWatch, the watch that watches you.
I agree that competition is great. Hard pass on any piece of hardware made my Facebook though as it will surely have microphones to record every conversation. The fact that they plan to sell it at cost tells me that the product is you.People laughing about this don’t understand that this is ultimately a good thing for competition and thus a good thing for us. Super glad you lot aren’t in charge of any major decisions![]()
Well, not like that, but they can gauge interest based on the biometric data. Eg. They can see if there's a heart rate increase whenever you are on a certain Facebook ad. With that, they can gauge your real interest....It will sell your heartbeat to a bunch of pharmaceutical companies to try and sell you pills.
In this particular battle, the posts of the majority have sided with Apple. There are plenty of threads where this is not the case.I mean the Apple Watch also records all kinds of data about you including lots of physical health data. How do you know apple isn’t using it maliciously? Is the code open source? Is it because apple, a trillion dollar corporation said so?
interesting how some nice looking marketing inspires so many people to give up their data just because some pretty slideshows had the word privacy on them. What about the time they got caught sending our Siri recordings to a third party? Or the time they promised iCloud backup encryption but rolled back on that because ???????
Facebook’s gonna be trash as usual but you people are funny as hell thinking there’s that big a difference between all these tech giants. Some just hide it better than others but if you truly think uncle Apple does no wrong then boy do they have you bent
But seriously? Do they actually expect to make money from this? I don’t imagine they make any profit on the Oculus headsets, at least not enough to make back what they spent on Oculus. And I’m sure they haven’t recouped their development costs on the video chat devices, even with the whole pandemic. You know, the sooner the current tech bubble pops, the sooner we won’t have to listen to yet another ecommerce, social media, or software firm try peddling yet more ill-conceived physical hardware that will never be a money maker. Bring on the bubble burst, we’ve got too many malinvestments to clear out!
No there aren’t because they don’t have access to the source code. Go ahead and link one, they will have at best used a network snifferIn this particular battle, the posts of the majority have sided with Apple. There are plenty of threads where this is not the case.
As for Apple’s commitment to privacy and security, no one is taking them strictly at their word. There are plenty of third party reviews that back Apple’s claims.
Your criteria of needing access to source code is unnecessary and unreasonable.No there aren’t because they don’t have access to the source code. Go ahead and link one, they will have at best used a network sniffer
The more I talk about the future, the more you talk about the present. I'm not interested in what everybody is doing right now because it's irrelevant. Things change fast and in surprising directions. If there was an obvious direct line from the present to the future then it wouldn't much of a prediction, would it?I'm confused. You said:
My point is that Facebook is not even close to being one of the world's leading AI providers and I'd put money on betting that they never will be. Again, they are in the top when it comes to personal information data.
And you're inflating Facebook's influence with regards to commerce especially vs companies like Amazon, Alibaba, and Google. Those companies represent the model the majority have chosen because there is at least a modicum of privacy.
If a consumer interacts with a product or service on Facebook, you risk Facebook blabbing to everyone that you liked something you may not want everyone to know you like, because their business model relies too much on manipulating their product, which is the users as tranches, for the purpose of selling access to their customers, advertisers.
Amazon, on the other hand, is not notifying grandma I just bought (for example) Satanic Temple nipple rings. Amazon absolutely wants to influence me as an individual, that that is now to purchase (for example) a Satanic chastity belt.
As for digital, personalized assistants, again, Facebook has no significant presence and with no viable ubiquitous physical products, home or mobile, there is no indication that will change. They know this, hence the watch initiative, but they have a serious negative reputation to overcome in addition to having to go face to face against competitors like Google, Amazon, and Apple. Would Facebook like to pivot to the company you think they'll be in 10 years? Yes. Will they be able to? So far, their still very profitable original business model has hampered them from attracting customers to the products and services they'd need for this to happen.
Due to trust issues, no one wants a Facebook phone, tablet, or their latest failure, their money.