Can MR just add these articles to a running “Surprised?” series?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Instagram Accused of Illegally Harvesting Biometric Data
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Still, if half of Illinois is affected, that’s a $30B fine. Still peanuts in my opinion, but that might be enough to at least earn a passing mention in the boardroom.
Yes, people should reconsider using Facebook and make a decision for themselves in that regard, but no it is not “on them.” If a person is abused by a family member 20 times you don’t change who is at fault for the abuse on the 21st incident. Would it be wise to separate yourself from the situation? Of course. But it’s still not “on them.”
Part of the problem with enforcing this is that I imagine most people think there’s a big database of names and data sitting somewhere. The bigger problem is in the machine learning networks that have all this information jumbled up in a form that’s not easily indexed.
It‘s the equivalent of counting victims of a conman by having to go through a database of drivers license photos and asking the conman himself “Do you recognize this person?” for each one.
It‘s the equivalent of counting victims of a conman by having to go through a database of drivers license photos and asking the conman himself “Do you recognize this person?” for each one.
Anything made or owned by facebook should be considered spyware.
At a certain point if you still trust Facebook after this many breaches of confidence, yes it is on you. If you can escape thew situation, and you have not multiple times, yes it is on you. Your analogy is a false equivalence; you usually can't escape abuse from family as easily as quitting Facebook.
I keep telling people not to use WhatsApp but people just see the free pic msg an calls its like banging my head against the wall
they are, very slowly and quietly implementing all the features of a social network using your iCloud account as the ID without explicitly calling it a social network.
iMessage: a while back they rolled out Messages for Business, iOS 13 added user avatars, iOS14 will bring @ notifications in group messages
iCloud Photo Sharing: with private, on device face recognition
Login with Apple: on websites and apps
calendar: share events with others
Non-users must assume there is a fully developed account for them derived from info harvested from accounts of friends and family. It’s just waiting for you to activate it.
While I agree the analogy over-reached, the main point still holds: blame the perpetrator, not the victim.
There's nothing illegal about being stupid, naive, or even willfully ignorant. If we start ignoring criminal behavior because the victims didn't try hard enough to avoid exploitation, then we're incentivizing deceptive behavior.
And I'm still not convinced the only victims here are active account holders.
The ease of escape is irrelevant unless you wish to quantify exactly what level is considered fair (you’re the one drawing a distinction so it’s up to you to tell us where that line is). I’m of the mindset that blaming a victim is of poor taste, counter productive, and just plain wrong. Not to mention you’re making an assumption that every victim of this action has the same Facebook history. Are people who just signed up forgiven by you for being victims? Or does one need to be a Facebook user for a certain length of time before the blame changes hand? Define the boundaries of your argument at the very least.
But it's TikTok the U.S. wants to ban even though U.S. intelligence agencies don't see TikTok to be a threat
Is TikTok More of a Parenting Problem Than a Security Threat? (Published 2020)
Even as the White House moves against the Chinese social media app, the intelligence agencies do not see it as a major issue along the lines of Huawei.
and Facebook, who has harmed American democracy, is allowed to continue being bad.
Facebook is 'the biggest threat' to US democracy, Cambridge Analytica whistleblower says
"It was only two weeks ago that Mark Zuckerberg decided that Facebook is not going to censor politicians that are spreading disinformation," Cambridge Analytica whistleblower Brittany Kaiser says.
Yep. Facebook have acknowledged that they gather data on people who do not have accounts. Closing your account doesn't mean that they aren't continuing to gather data on you, it just means you aren't personally giving them data. Same for if you've never had an account.
And there is only one web browser which ensures Facebook gathers no data on you: Firefox with its 'Containers'.
Another way to ensure Facebook gathers no data on you is to not reward them by using Facebook products.
How does this help someone without an account? Does my using a containerized browser prevent them from pulling data from my friends pictures? Don’t they also pull data from non-Facebook products?
Not using their products unfortunately is not enough. Practically every site you visit nowadays uses facebook tracking.
No matter how egregious Facebook gets, many here will continue using their apps and rationalizing their use. Think of it as the battered wife syndrome for software users.
Non-Users should download the free app “Lockdown,” which will block Facebook and Google tracking, along with adds and other nefarious nuisances.
Closing your FB account while using Instagram is like putting a band-aid on femoral laceration.
Facebook is evil and it is run by Dr. Evil.
For many people, social media is the opioid of internet addiction. They have to constantly feed their eyes and mind with a lot of useless drivel that gives them the dopamine high they crave.
If you use Facebook or Instagram, consider yourself owned by them, regardless of what the biometric data may show after the fact.