Back in the early 2000s, somebody had an idea: collect everyone's data, just like the Communist secret police once did to identify and blackmail their opponents. This time, though, the goal was to collect data and sell it to advertisers for profit.
Future generations might be surprised to learn how willingly today's public supplied the very information that the Communist secret police once had to go to great lengths to extract - sometimes, by having to place microphones in apartment walls, or worse, as was the case in the day. But these days social media platforms like Facebook have been hugely successful in their data collection efforts just by offering a space for their users to post personal thoughts and feelings, and an opportunity for those users to receive "likes" from other users for each post.
While the collection of "likes" may seem like a minor incentive for one to supply an endless stream of personal and confidential - perhaps even damning - information, the anticipation that comes from knowing that the material posted could be "liked" - and seeing it happen in real time - is an incredible driver; it exploits the basest of human behaviors which involve seeking out attention and validation. Studies have actually shown that the human mind may process the reception of "likes" much like it processes an insufflated line of cocaine, with the reward center of the brain activated and a surge of dopamine released. What this means is that millions of people are chemically addicted to posting personal material online in the hopes of receiving "likes":
Facebook, in turn, is sitting on a treasure trove of information; some of this information can be used to predict a Facebook user's consumer habits. For example, as shown in the data above, one might be able to locate users who are likely to purchase oatmeal, bee spray or the latest product to stop frequent urination; the data can be sold to advertisers who focus their campaigns on reaching those who are susceptible to ads for such products. The reception to popular culture items, such as movies, is also apparent from the data in the sample above - and valuable for certain parties to know about.
Furthermore, as we now know, information posted to Facebook is being used to build demographic profiles for political ends. It is also a tool for law enforcement and civil-suit investigators who snoop around, demonstrating that the platform takes care of the "dirty work" that people once did; in this respect, Facebook has eliminated the need for any data collection spy agency like what the Communists had while producing the same result as having exactly that.
Essentially, with Facebook, we have an incentive-driven product that exploits basic drives and gets the public to accept a status quo once synonymous with life under the Communists - mass data collection and total surveillance - all to generate data to be sold on the capitalist market. Basically, we are talking about using elements of one system - self-focused individualism - to create a desired effect and toleration of another - mass data collection and total surveillance - leading to a sort-of-speedballed hybrid to generate money. And, as is often the case with speedballing, the mixing and experimentation has finally gone too far:
Of course, with so many people hooked on its product, Facebook will probably just throw down "new terms and conditions blah blah" that its junkies never read anyway, and life will continue as "normal" - with the population continuing to release the information that is making the company billions. And yet, this all comes from Facebook offering nothing more than a wall to write on (which even used to be called a wall) and a cheap, temporary rush in return. Talk about exploitation of the human condition - and at what cost to society?
Future generations might be surprised to learn how willingly today's public supplied the very information that the Communist secret police once had to go to great lengths to extract - sometimes, by having to place microphones in apartment walls, or worse, as was the case in the day. But these days social media platforms like Facebook have been hugely successful in their data collection efforts just by offering a space for their users to post personal thoughts and feelings, and an opportunity for those users to receive "likes" from other users for each post.
While the collection of "likes" may seem like a minor incentive for one to supply an endless stream of personal and confidential - perhaps even damning - information, the anticipation that comes from knowing that the material posted could be "liked" - and seeing it happen in real time - is an incredible driver; it exploits the basest of human behaviors which involve seeking out attention and validation. Studies have actually shown that the human mind may process the reception of "likes" much like it processes an insufflated line of cocaine, with the reward center of the brain activated and a surge of dopamine released. What this means is that millions of people are chemically addicted to posting personal material online in the hopes of receiving "likes":
Facebook, in turn, is sitting on a treasure trove of information; some of this information can be used to predict a Facebook user's consumer habits. For example, as shown in the data above, one might be able to locate users who are likely to purchase oatmeal, bee spray or the latest product to stop frequent urination; the data can be sold to advertisers who focus their campaigns on reaching those who are susceptible to ads for such products. The reception to popular culture items, such as movies, is also apparent from the data in the sample above - and valuable for certain parties to know about.
Furthermore, as we now know, information posted to Facebook is being used to build demographic profiles for political ends. It is also a tool for law enforcement and civil-suit investigators who snoop around, demonstrating that the platform takes care of the "dirty work" that people once did; in this respect, Facebook has eliminated the need for any data collection spy agency like what the Communists had while producing the same result as having exactly that.
Essentially, with Facebook, we have an incentive-driven product that exploits basic drives and gets the public to accept a status quo once synonymous with life under the Communists - mass data collection and total surveillance - all to generate data to be sold on the capitalist market. Basically, we are talking about using elements of one system - self-focused individualism - to create a desired effect and toleration of another - mass data collection and total surveillance - leading to a sort-of-speedballed hybrid to generate money. And, as is often the case with speedballing, the mixing and experimentation has finally gone too far:
US regulator whacks Facebook with largest-ever $5bn fine over privacy violations", RT
Facebook will pay $5 billion and submit to “government restrictions” on its treatment of users’ private data under the terms of the largest-ever Federal Trade Commission settlement imposed for privacy violations, sources said.
The settlement includes “government restrictions on how Facebook treats user privacy,” Reuters and the Wall Street Journal reported citing sources familiar with the matter, without specifying what those restrictions might be. The FTC only narrowly approved the fine in a vote that came down along party lines. The fine punishes Facebook for allowing as many as 87 million users’ data to fall into the possession of political consulting firm Cambridge Analytica in violation of a 2012 FTC consent decree.
Under that agreement, reached after Facebook had already repeatedly violated user trust by sharing data with advertisers and app developers, the platform pledged to obtain explicit consent before serving up users’ private information to third parties.
Nor was Cambridge Analytica the only violation the FTC uncovered: during the investigation, which began last March, the regulator found over 150 data-sharing partnerships with third-party corporations that saw reams of private data change hands without the knowledge or consent of the user. Even though the fine is larger by a factor of 100 than the next-largest FTC penalty for privacy violation, it’s also less than a tenth of Facebook’s 2018 revenue and a fraction of its $600 billion valuation.
Many of the company’s critics – including the two Democratic commissioners who voted against it – felt it didn’t go far enough, pushing for the agency to actively rein in Facebook’s abuses lest other companies follow its example. Facebook’s legal troubles are far from over, though. Washington DC, New York and other states are suing the company over its numerous privacy lapses, including the data-sharing deals and unauthorized hoarding of users’ email address books, and several members of Congress, including Josh Hawley (R-Missouri) and Mark Warner (D-Virginia), have proposed legislation to rein in Big Tech abuses (source)
Of course, with so many people hooked on its product, Facebook will probably just throw down "new terms and conditions blah blah" that its junkies never read anyway, and life will continue as "normal" - with the population continuing to release the information that is making the company billions. And yet, this all comes from Facebook offering nothing more than a wall to write on (which even used to be called a wall) and a cheap, temporary rush in return. Talk about exploitation of the human condition - and at what cost to society?
