9 comments

[ 4.0 ms ] story [ 43.1 ms ] thread
I'm no fan of Facebook, but the whole premise of this article is baloney. Repressive regimes are going to do what they do regardless of Facebook's actions. I don't see the connection between Facebook trying to filter out kiddie porn before it hits their servers, and how it might affect government decision making.
I find this article to be unnecessarily critical of Facebook. Facebook has not introduced any hitherto unknown strategy for surveillance by refusing to introduce server level encryption "backdoors". On-device surveillance apps are already a known vector.

FTA: """ Putting this all together, whether governments turn to Facebook to outsource their domestic and global surveillance needs or whether they merely use Facebook’s model as a blueprint for their own on-device surveillance programs, Facebook is rapidly leading us towards a world in which privacy will be nothing more than a faint memory of a quaint bygone era. """ Yeah, no shit - this has already happened. I don't understand why this article is written like a hit-piece against FB.

1/10 would not share.

Total bollocks. If facebook really does what they say they ll do then that is really great! Centralized censorship is a nuclear weapon in the hands of oppressive centralized goverments. Bring more of this please
Do people here actually still take Forbes content seriously?
I don’t know, but their clickbaity headline writing isn’t doing their credibility any favors in my book.
A reminder to you all that the flag button still works, and that if as many people who are complaining about this article were to hit it, it would be off the front page right now.
Yeah, why track users server-side when you can have them wear a wiretap already?

Mobile phones are the perfect surveillance tools and Facebook finally offers a neat implementation people will willingly install.

Who needs backdoors when people are inviting spies through the front door?

(comment deleted)