Trust Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg? Not even a little bit. He has never done a thing that leads one to think he has any motive but his own profit. I use FB sparingly, to keep up with extended family, never fill out a survey or click on something I don't recognize.
What's so irritating is not that he allows data to be used, anyone on the Internet ought to know that. What is irritating is Zuckerberg's arrogance in barely pretending to care, to ignore, then downplay, then ignore again then issue a carefully worded legalese non-apology.
When you serve millions of users the least you can do is pretend to care. He's in charge, he can do better, much better.
5
Truth be told this is Zuckerberg's in to slam Trump. Zuckerberg is using the fake media to say he is sorry for the security holes in FB to fe FRENZY that Trump was elected unfairly by RUSSIAN meddling. The left will stop at nothing to embed their ideals.
1
Social media giveth, and social media taketh away. And away. And away.
Go on a social media diet, cut the bloated hogs out of your life. On the ones you must stay connected with, Double down on those privacy settings. Think critically about every single thing you say and share. Your privacy is worth more to you than it is to them.
1
Anyone...is LinkedIn equally exploitable?
1
Quit Facebook! tell your "friendS" that as of a week from now, you will not see their posts. Think of the benefits.
1. You will save a lot of time, which you can spend reading this newspaper.
2. You will not have to read posts modeled after the first Facebook post. It was discovered by my brother after years of painstaking research.
"This morning (we living lately in the garret,) I rose, put on my suit with great skirts. Went to Mr. Gunning's chapel at Exeter House, where he made a very good sermon. ...
Dined at home in the garret, where my wife dressed the remains of a turkey, and in the doing of it she burned hand."
SAMUEL PEPYS, January 1, 1660
3. Your real friends might send you emails with news you are actually interested in.
If you are lucky, they will phone you.
If you are really lucky, they will get together with you in person.
4
It would seem another thing Facebook needs to do is sue the bejesus out of Kogan and Cambridge. Bankrupting
The investors would be step towards accountability. Fraud prosecution should also be considered. If personal data were tested as stolen property, which it is, future potential offenders might think twice
6
Deactivated my account pending a full deletion if security continues to be half assed. No excuse for helping this poor excuse of a potus become one.
3
Facebook and other social media (like Twitter) occupy an important part of many peoples’ lives today. But that power comes at a price. We saw that during the 2016 Elections.
Mark Zuckerberg must step up and take full responsibility for the fiasco involving Cambridge Analytica. He can no longer act as if he were somehow innocent of the powerful technological forces that he has helped unleash upon our society.
With Great Power Comes Great Responsibilty.
1
Time to regulate all these social media outlets. Enough game playing. Cost is too high for our democracy to ignore the need to regulate.
1
And I wonder whether Mr. Zuckerberg will be losing any sleep over Facebook’s latest effort to addict more people to this platform : Messenger Kids—a newly introduced app targeting children as young as 6 years of age!?! Facebook couldn’t even keep 50 million users data safe. Is this what our children need?
Great that he regrets past mistakes. What about starting to do the right thing today?
Shame on him and his board for even considering this contrary to appeals and advice on childhood development from pediatricians and child development experts.
8
Who does Zuckerberg think he is talking to? He is totally desinterested in providing the world with a free communication platform! All he is interested in is seeing his billions multiply and those of his shareholders too. The users are only the means to this end. The fact that they are too blinkered to realise that is Facebook's luck and the genius of its marketing and not of its social conscience!
None of what has happened was necessary as Facebook has enough money to employ the best IT and AI technicians in the world and plenty of them too. But that might reduce the profit margins and that is what matters to them.
I find it horrendous that this guy even dares to use the word 'trust' in relation to Facebook and its users. It has been clear from his early beginnings that he cannot be trusted why should that have changed?
3
This is a major breach of trust and Mark Zuckerberg should paying people for the damage he has caused both during the 2016 elections and Cambridge Analytica.
#paymeformydata
2
Facebook, in 2011 by way of a Federal consent decree, agreed to tighten up security. Clearly FB did not. Granting these greedy youngsters who have no concept of ethical behavior any more time to meet their legal obligations from 2011 is beyond stupid.
FB and other social media platforms that skate past their ethical responsibility to our society by way of placing 'shareholder value and executive pay above preserving and growing our republic constitute a danger to our Country that is far greater than importation of 7% of our steel from China.
IF Trump-Pence-GOP were truly interesting in protecting the country they have sworn oath to protect, they would legislate regulations and put in place ample personnel to enforce these regulations. For starters, remove the CEOs and COOs of the social media companies and on each board of directors have 2 representatives, with 1 vote each, from the Federal government (1 Democrat & 1 GOP).
Social media must understand their duty to the society that grants them their ability to make profit. Society must have some vote in how these mega companies are managed. We are all in this boat together and must share in guiding it through changing times.
This must be not be social media, but some FB in the socialist media of the workers paradise you are speaking of. NO private corporations in the US have official government on their boards. It was essentially an inherently adversarial relationship, until Citizens United, and the Trumpocalypse. Please don’t give the libertarians more fodder.
Social and governmental pressure are most often successful when they work from outside the corporation with moral authority, consumer unity and a sense of fairness.
Sounds like 24 hour news cycle.
1
Mark cares now as they are losing users. He would not care otherwise it seems. Too late Mark - won’t get fooled again.
So judging by the comments here, people are ok with China stealing our intellectual property, our patents, our technology, and restricting via a thousand methods our access to the Chinese market.
Anti-Trump derangement has no bounds.
3
A quick skim of the comments showed two others that mentioned trump. What's the derangement?
1
It is indeed a trust issue. In my case, I just do not trust facebook, so I deactivated and deleted my account 9 years ago.
Back then, the likes of FarmVille and other insidious games, apps, quizzes and what have you are just starting to infest facebook. These annoying stuff isn't the reason that I quit though. I was still in advertising then and have a partial view on how the internet marketing sausage is made. Oh boy, if you could only see how so-called strategies are formulated so we can sell you something while we sell you too. Very different from the presentation slides that have "building communities" and "meaningful experiences" on them.
The day I got out of the biz, I quit facebook and deleted my account. It was easy back then, all that's needed is the resolve not to log in for 90 days after the request then bye-bye facebook. I read from the The Guardian the other day that nowadays, facebook will ask for your driver's license or passport info page before your request for deletion could be processed. Also quit WhatsApp and InstaGram the day Mark Z bought them.
Quitting is easy. Tell your friends how to reach you. Via text, email, phone call and oh yes, the occasional dinner out. You know face to face and really talking like before. Have an email dedicated for logging in at websites like the NYT. And the photos? Take only those that are worthy to be immortalized and shared. You'll find out you are more focused on your meal, travel, conversation, friendships.
Like?
5
"“Whenever there’s an issue where someone’s data gets passed to someone who the rules of the system shouldn’t have allowed it to, that’s rightfully a big issue and deserves to be a big uproar,” Mark Zuckerberg"
...Rare Roar from an ominously silent Mark! In stead of strategies and diplomacy, Facebook should face the issues head on and save humanity--even if it costs them "some" money!
( Incidentally, is this the right time for Stanford, Berkley..economists and other related groups to "think-tank" on how to distribute this new-found algorithmic wealth more evenly? )
Seems to steer to conversation to Kogan a lot - obviously Kogan plays a major role in this, but Facebook should take responsibility for their failings. I’m not overly convinced he still really understands what Facebook is evolving into.
I’m currently mulling over deleting my profile on there any day now - it’s just taking the plunge and doing it that’s the hard part, and hoping that I’ll still maintain those friendships away from the ease of a digital platform (I never liked talking on the phone). But I want to leave it, it’s no longer worth it and if my data is being used to craft models to target strategic propaganda and lies for political campaigns I certainly don’t agree with then why stay, right?
5
Well, my primary thought about all this is that Facebook users should begin a class action suit against Facebook. The fine print says we submit to arbitration and limits our right to sue, you say? I'm taking a page from Stormy Daniels and thinking that anything anyone agreed to on Facebook's page is invalidated by their subsequent actions.
7
Zuckerberg's response is weak. His excuses imply that Facebook was also a victim in this; that the evil Cambridge Analytica duped the naive and well-intentioned Facebook folks into turning over data and then lying to FBwhen asked to delete it. This ignores the fact that FB had it's own employees working in the same room with Cambridge Analytica employees to ensure that CA got easy access to all they wanted. How much did FB earn from this deal? Zuckerberg, unsurprisingly, doesn't address that question.
11
MZ is just another CEO that doesn't know right from wrong! Just like our elected politicians!
1
You are correct, Mark. It IS a trust issue.
In the past, Facebook has merely annoyed and aggravated me. Changes galore -- often unannounced -- so it was near impossible to be sure that private information stayed private.
So, I kept my account; buttoned it up as best I could; refused to use Facebook to access any other websites or apps; and looked at Facebook only when a friend or family member would ask, "Did you see ... ?" Advertisers, that means I did not look at any of your ads.
I don't think my Facebook information was sold or used to disseminate fake news and misinformation, but how would I know? Facebook should be made to:
(1) send a certified letter to each one of the 50 million Facebook users whose information was sold informing them of such;
(2) enclose a Facebook check for the amount FB was paid for that individual's information; and
(3) provide each person whose information was sold and/or compromised with 5 years of insurance against identity theft.
14
4) Figure out a way to make the election happen all over again, so that American voters can actually participate in their democracy, without Faceook-enabled trolls, i.d.-selling, ad-targeting, etc.
2
SJHS, if you joined Facebook, you have more information stored than you could possibly realize, regardless of any precautions you may have established.
https://gizmodo.com/how-facebook-figures-out-everyone-youve-ever-met-181...
This is just plain scary.
I don't understand what personal data was used from Facebook and the potential harm. Perhaps you can be more explicit, otherwise it sounds like much ado about nothing.
1
People: you cannot trust Mark Zuckerberg with your life. Not that he's not a perfectly fine young man with perfectly decent intentions; it's that the new tech generation is entirely different from previous generations in their concept and understanding of trust, security, commitment, and confidentiality. All those people being hired like crazy by Facebook, Google, Snap etc are not all engineers -- they're MBAs who spend all day developing new "products" that ostensibly give users new services but in reality are creative ways to harvest, analyze and sell user data. That is their business model. It's crazy that people are just realizing this now. You see Zuckerberg up there with his sincere face and his earnest T-shirt, pleading for -- I'm not sure what exactly -- but just as I wouldn't give a 12-year-old my wallet and say "go ahead do anything you want," I would never trust the Zuckerberg generation with anything of importance to me. You shouldn't either.
8
Why did Facebook ignore its earlier agreement with the FCC? That it did suggests deliberate mischief.
1
Once trust is breached by a big a business or service, free or not, it’s a long, long slog to get it back.
I’m out.
5
Mr Zuckerberg is evidently very proficient at coding and likely at Rubik's cubes too. But the amicable-enough oaf is entirely out of his depth when it comes to the societal and political impact of his business. He, Sandberg and cohorts manage to be all at once untrustworthy and naive, hyperefficient and bumblingly feckless.
Let lawmakers and regulators (US and foreign) step in, urgently and decisively.
8
People are naive by tweeting to delete fb.
Do you think ANY of the social media networks are different?
They just don't have a public scandal on their heels (yet). Just cut your posts + likes + zip up. This is a public sphere - not a private one. (But I love getting all those birthday wishes...)
24
Some--me, specifically--might regard your comment as whataboutism. Being wrong about Twitter doesn't make being right about Facebook wrong.
You are right to be wary of all social media, but even joining with limited use carries risk, both to the individual and the overall user base. I would argue that using any of this stuff (NYT comments section included) implies at least a little naivete.
Apologies if that comes off as being rude.
While not wanting to belabor myself I must insist...this is not a "trust" issue....it is a contract issue. It is a surety issue. And a "responsibility" issue.
Unless Mr. Zuckerberg want's to trade places with Uber in Arizona.
3
Talk's cheap, Mark. You should have MADE SURE that this kind of thing could never happen. Instead, you wiffed big-time! MZ is nothing more than one more alibi jerk willing to rip off the minions in pursuit of those few extra billions he sincerely believes Facebook should be worth.
3
Zuckerberg hedged his answers to too many questions to be trusted.
Facebook originally was created by Zuckerberg to get revenge on the college girlfriend who dumped him. At that time he couldn't foresee Facebook's potential to do good and harm. And then when he realized how much money he could make by selling users' personal data, he didn't have either the mental capacity or moral integrity to protect his users (read as: products).
I'm so glad I deleted my FB account 10 years ago.
8
So when the dust settles from this breach Mr. Zuckerberg STILL will not say that Cambridge Analytica will not have a business relationship with Facebook. After all this he still leaves the door open to Cambridge Analytica. Not Acceptable.
11
There's a saying about Facebook and other similar social media products: they don't charge you for use, because you are the product. Facebook's financial model is based on selling information about their users. This is hardly new. However, there are other social networks that are built with privacy in mind. One of these is a social network that I use, nderground (nderground.net). nderground was built from the start with privacy in mind. Unlike Facebook, I can use an alias, so nderground cannot sell my data, even if they wanted to. Also, on nderground, only my immediate group sees my posts and my photographs. There is no "friend-of-friend" leakage of information. I get informed when my friends post something new, but there's no annoying news feed (and no fake news planted by Russian). If you leave Facebook, but still want to share your life with your friends and family, there are alternatives (they're just not was widely known as Facebook).
4
At this point anyone who doesn't desert FarceBook is an addict who needs a 12 step program.
4
Another greedy corporate CEO who cares more about making money than being a patriot for the USA which has provided him with such opportunities and infrastructure. No, Mark, we do not trust you. You sold us out. Shame on you.
6
"One of our biggest responsibilities is to protect data."
The Facebook business model is to sell your data. Its fundamental hypocrisy is to imply that you can control the use of your data by obtaining your consent under opaque forms that obscure the breadth of allowed access to and sales of your data. Facebook will not make meaningful changes. The solution is to close down your account.
7
My friends who use Facebook are sure they weren't harmed by anything Facebook has done or let happen. THEY weren't fooled by any false information being shared and spammed. Sure, keep thinking that, and I'll continue to caution you about putting information about your life and family on Facebook while the only thing protecting it is the facade that only those who "friend" you can get to your posts or spam your account. From the very initiation of this platform, Zuckerberg was willing to put ethics, privacy, and potential abuse aside to make a lot of money. Proceed with caution if you're using this platform.
4
I believe that people who leave Facebook are entitled to some proof that their personal information will not be retained and exploited.
8
https://gizmodo.com/how-facebook-figures-out-everyone-youve-ever-met-181...
Your "shadow profile" stays when you leave.
Facebook, on one hand, is a wonderful idea and tool for keeping in touch with friends over the years and distances. On the other hand, as was recently revealed for all, your privacy is completely surrendered. I would no longer trust an entity that pulls in billions from membership numbers from people like me. They will (and have until caught) sell us out if it means profit. I ended my account 2 weeks ago. I DO NOT intend to return.
4
The only way to punish Facebook is to stop using it.
Our government will do nothing to regulate it
By the way, I understand the utility of FB but I have never used it and never will.
9
Or we could all just stop using Facebook. That's a simple solution too.
14
Nothing will be done. Mark and Sheryl will continue to jump from crisis to crisis, refusing to apologize, refusing to tell the truth, refusing to see reality. They are the epitome of the modern American corporation: deny what happened, happened. Cynical is the byword, cynical is every word.
5
Mark Zuckerberg
"Privacy issues have always been incredibly important to people. One of our biggest responsibilities is to protect data."
His opening statement, is patently hollow. Careful reading of the rest show clever hedging of the basic truth. Facebook's biggest responsibilities is not to protect data, but deliver it to the owners of thousands of apps and to their shareholders.
Our less than 'meaningful numbers of people deleting their accounts' are not impressing him as yet. His 'responsibility to rectify' won't kick in until it threatens his bottom line.
9
Facebook's core value, to maximize profit, without consideration or concern for social or environmental impacts, or truth, or especially accountability and responsibility, is fatally flawed and has propelled and advanced the Putin-Trumps-Mercer agenda to undermine Democracy around the world with attacks on the common wealth and on my personal liberty. It is long past time for Good Government to impose reasonable regulations to assure that Facebook's platform isn't used as a megaphone to yell "FiRE!" in a crowded theater.
3
NEVER ruin a Good apology with an explanation or an excuse. He has learned nothing.
done.
8
This is the clearest admission yet that Cambridge Analytica illegally falsified documents to Facebook so it and the Trump campaign could continue to use its illegally obtained Facebook data in 2016. The Russians and the Trump campaign were using many of the same exact tactics and likely using the same data.
4
Hmmm...sorry but this isn't believable. It doesn't make any sense to this non-tech savvy person when you express worries about user privacy at the same time you are walking to the door the man responsible for blowing the whistle on data privacy.
Why don't you re-huddle with Sheryl and float another trial balloon on us.
5
We've decided the profit trumps (haha) all. Facebook did this to make money. They will do it again.
2
Wow, Mark Zuckerberg feels this is a major trust issue and he is sorry. I guess that fixed everything. Thank you Mark.
1
Precipitous falls from grace seem to be the daily fare lately. One day I'm reading it's a movie lion like Harvey Weinstein, the next day I'm reading there is no mercy for the man and his venerated company goes bust. Today Mark Zuckerberg's name takes his place ignoble place on the front page and who knows the fate of his company. As an old white male who both loathes and eschews technology as much as humanely possible, contrary to the prevailing attitude of condemning others almost as a God-given right, I vow to forgive Mark Zuckerberg and tolerate his annoying Facebook profile updates from people I didn't even know I knew continue to fill up my email inbox and not abandon it. Those at #MeToo can decide for themselves what path they want to take.
1
Don’t think anyone outside the US and the U.K. is going to feel any outrage, life will go on for the rest of the world, addicted to Facebook!
Now I understand why I've saved my e-mail from Facebook confirming my account has been deleted.
It's dated May 12, 2013 which is coming up on five years ago.
Time flies.
1
Nearly two years after the 'sharing' with Cambridge event, and denials or dismissals as unimportant, we get "This is a major trust issue".
Really?
Zuckerberg is REALLY going to take action this time. He really cares! NO, REALLY, he REALLY cares this time.
Any sentient being knows how this is going to go.
10
He looked very nervous on CNN. Good to see a zero point zero zero one percenter squirm, though it may be the only satisfaction the rest of us can hope for.
8
Zuckerberg: ...having it be free and have a business model that is ad-supported ends up being really important and aligned.
Old Silicon Valley adage: When the product is free, you're the product.
5
It was a "major trust issue" when Obama did essentially the same thing in 2012.
2
False equivalence. The Obama campaign didn’t violate the contract. Trump and Cambridge did.
7
They may not have technically violates the FB contract but the violated the privacy of every friend of a person who signed up with Obama. Just as bad.
2
@ASD32
Yeah...sorry you are biased but this activity by Obama's team doesn't seem legit at all:
The former Obama director of integration and media analytics stated that, during the 2012 campaign, Facebook allowed the Obama team to “suck out the whole social graph”; Facebook “was surprised we were able to suck out the whole social graph, but they didn’t stop us once they realized that was what we were doing.” She added, “They came to [the] office in the days following election recruiting & were very candid that they allowed us to do things they wouldn’t have allowed someone else to do because they were on our side.”
http://thehill.com/opinion/technology/379245-whats-genius-for-obama-is-s...
2
Tom>Zuck. We should never have turned our backs on Myspace. This is what we get for our betrayal and sin.
Tom was our friend!
In the words of a Parkland student, "I call BS."
This interview was self serving to write the least: full of obfuscation, deflection and false piety. Facebook first obligation is to make money for its shareholders. Its users are not community rather they are suckers to be exploited. For a "free service," users are manipulated, and subject to a stream of advertisements enabled by facebook selling data. Users unwittingly drag non-users, who are in their contact list into Facebook's universe.
Sure Zuckerberg is concerned about leaks which are data for which is company has not been compensated. Perhaps he is concerned about the corrosive effect of his company on democracy, to which he as taken a cavalier attitude for monthst but he is more concerned about his bottom line than about the privacy of Facebook's "community."
Signing up for any social medium is giving away far more than one gets in return. If social media followed European Union standards for privacy, they would endanger their US profits. It is up to the US users to safeguard their privacy by opting out of all the incursion into their personal lives.
9
I am not on Facebook.
Problem solved.
4
I thought the same, except it's not solved. Here's the insidious thing: If any of your acquaintances are and have granted FarceBook access to their contacts list, your information (name, phone, address, email) has been Zucked.
Very informative video in the NYT about that today. I had no idea and am in the process of finding out how to block any FarceBook URL. If that's even possible.
2
B, did not know. Thanks.
I prefer social-networkwise not to exist.
1
Suppose you are in group therapy, or an AA meeting, where normally the participants and group leader are under a legal or moral obligation of discretion. Or, you are a student in school, a patient in a hospital. There are laws requiring privacy and consequences for those who break those laws. Now, Facebook is very like group therapy or a school without that obligation of discretion. People disclose intimate details of their lives without much thought of the consequences if publicized. Perhaps FB's clients/customers should be more discrete. Perhaps FB should take its responsibilities more seriously.
How about a law that says everyone is entitled to a yearly report listing what information FB has on them and sells for profit, just like the credit reporting companies must do. FB undoubtedly has a dossier on me, even though I'm not a member and don't use it.
Unfortunately we shouldn't hold our breaths waiting for that law--a GOP controlled Congress would never pass it, and a Democratic Party controlled Congress might not, either.
1
It shouldn't even be a question if there are other Cambridge Analyticas or Kogans out there - the assumption has to be that there are, and that their methods will become more opaque.
Further, it's not a major trust issue and shouldn't be framed like an impending break up. Facebook was negligent. They didn't proactively audit CA following the breach, and let years go by and their service be manipulated with fake news in the meantime. This reality isn't going to go away anytime soon, certainly not in a time frame defined by rebuilding trust.
6
Delete your Facebook account today.
Teach Mark Zuckerberg the ethics and patriotism he refuses to learn.
35
Mr. Zuckerberg does an awful lot of talking without, however, saying much. It sounds as if he has no concept of the amazing amount of damage his out-of-control social media site has wreaked on elections worldwide.
The fact that Cambridge Analytica wants to continue to do business with FB data was astounding to me. Has this man--more of an adolescent still in a man's body--ever had a course in public relations or business ethics?
Like many, I'm planning soon to drop my account, which I rarely use these anyway. The last thing I want to do is expose my personal information to be used by the likes of Nix or another Steve Bannon.
Mr. Zuckerberg created something that started out as a way for people to be "in community" as he keeps repeating. Along the way, I believe greed got the better of him and now that FB is international, there are all sorts of opportunities for serious mayhem. FB has become a monster at this point.
He is not convincing, and neither is his top employee, Cheryl Sandberg. Until they own up to their role--not minding the store on fake news stories, and allowing "professors" to lie to them about how they plan to use their data--they will never ever fix the problem.
23
Facebook, Google, Twitter and so many and online stores are culpable in the use and abuse our personal data and that needs to change.
At the same time however, we share responsibility in our failure to read terms and conditions and by indiscriminately sharing our personal information and friend lists so we can quickly gain access to content and the "latest and greatest" new apps.
Facebook is an easy target but it's our fault too.
1
We need a way to point out a potential bot.
1
people are sheep. they're followers. you'll do whatever the person you look up tells you to do whether that person is a Kardashian, your friend from synagogue or church or your CPA or your lawyer, etc. You enabled this and now you're blaming him for making money off of his business.
1
Bingo!
I have never used Facebook and certainly never will after this debacle.
I think it has done far more harm than good and would love for it to whither away to the point of cultural irrelevance.
3
See United airlines response to drawing a guy off the plane. Zack's lawyers know the playbook. Unfortunately the users can't hire the same legal team. All he cares about........wait for it...........is money and being the king of the internet.
Well sorry boy wonder what we really wonder is how you duped all those people into giving you their info.........
And then stealing it from others, terrific business model similar to the NCAA's.
3
I deactivated my account or at least tried to. They don’t make it easy. In addition to the major security issues I just found it to be a huge time waster. The day I dumped Facebook I picked up a book - The Monk of Mohka - and read it in its entirety over the next 3 days! Excellent book by the way.
5
This man essentially gave the world Donald Trump ... how does he sleep at night?
4
There is still no "I am sorry" in any of this. Just more blah-blah-blah about what he should have done from the beginning and he's had since that dreadful day of November 8, 2016 to address the Russian hacking.
5
Facebook asks for our birthdays, where we live, where we work, what degrees we hold from where, what we like, who we like, how we spend our time. Golly, I never would have guessed that this information could have been collected and fallen into the hands of nefarious characters. I probably never guessed that because I'm too busy trying deal with the fallout of my personal data being stolen from Equifax, Home Depot, and Target.
32
Zuckerberg seems sincere, and there's an inclination to give him the benefit of the doubt. The problem is that the things he is talking about doing to protect user's data fundamentally contradict Facebook's business model. Nowhere does he discuss this business model, the means by which Facebook generates its profits and how he plans to change this in order to protect user's data. If there are no changes to the business model it will be impossible for Facebook to protect user's data in the ways he's describing. As long as the business model is to generate revenue based on sales of highly targeted advertising, Facebook MUST make user data widely available at a granular level. Any other approach devalues the data and reduces advertisers to the equivalent of running generic ads in the NYTimes.
This is what makes it so hard to take Zuckerberg at his word. Just as this is not a security issue, it's also not a trust issue --- it's a business model issue. Demanding that developers sign a contract promising not to do bad things with the data is inadequate unless there's also an audit and enforcement arm at Facebook, which is absurd. Kogan and CA made such a promise, and it went out the window as soon as the first contract was signed, and Facebook was clueless.
Again, if Zuckerberg is focused on trust and security as the solution, instead of changes to the business model, this problem will persist.
1
What about "sorry"????
7
Are you really surprised by Zuckerberg's business model and then denial of any responsibility? Read the first few paragraphs of the History of Facebook page on Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Facebook and the trajectory of the enterprise is plain to see: mean-spiritedness, arrogance, and a willingness to take anything from anybody to further his own ends.
1
From this interview, I do not think Mr, Zuckerberg will change Facebook's business model. He and his staff will always be reacting to those desiring to use Facebook data for nefarious purposes. As long as he holds vast amounts of sensitive and personal data, there will be an unceasing barrage of people trying to steal it. Some will be successful. How can we continue to place our trust in this model even with "some" regulation?
1
A full transcript would have been more useful.
One of the bits left out was Mr. Zuckerberg's response that "It's really hard for me to have a full assessment" of whether Facebook had an impact on the results of the 2016 election.
I wonder if that's the same line of argument Facebook's advertising people use when selling corporations and politicians access to the network and your profile data.
Nothing Mr. Zuckerberg says should make us forget that he is dissembling by referring to Facebook as a "community," which it most certainly is not. Facebook is a machine for turning you into profit, with Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg being the most shameless of the beneficiaries.
15
At 33, Zuckerberg seems to be learning, a bit, about “responsibility” and the limits of technology and automation.
“There’s certainly a lot that A.I. can do, we can train classifiers to identify content, but most of what we do is identify things that people should look at.”
People (not tech) - the heart of any sound communication enterprise.
Zuckerberg helped Trump get elected so he could better line his pockets through tax cuts. Don't believe any of his hype. And, he would do it again in a heartbeat.
4
You would think that people would start caring about their data when you showed how much data they have on you and how much they are selling it for to advertisers, but they don't.
Maybe this time it will be different since it might be affecting elections all around the world, maybe people will care about their data now. At least I hope so.
Facebook knows you better than anyone you have ever met and they are giving your information up for grabs. Try to think about that when you like posts, pages or when you willingly add your political/religious views on your profile.
We have made a mistake when we established that web services should be free and paid off on advertisement back in the 90s. I think this mentality has been changing with subscription services like Spotify, Netflix. Maybe one day people will think that it is ok to pay for e-mail and social media and then we will not have these problems anymore.
4
Trust? That's adorable.
Mr. Zuckerberg could start issuing payments to users for their published data, retroactive and future alike, which he has made an obscene profit off of in the name of "sharing." That would certainly demonstrate a nominal level of contrition.
17
Nothing Zuckerberg can do or say will erase the fact that there will always remain a conflict of interest that will require airtight regulation. As long as social media have the capacity to record and accumulate personal information, there will always be the temptation to monetize it. Furthermore, the tech employees and management of social media firms will always know more than the regulators about ways to circumvent the regulations. Anyone who uses social media does so at their own, and possibly others’ risk.
29
His words mean nothing. He’s no different than a casino boss. Hopefully this makes people wake up to the fact that they have shared their most personal information with private companies who—shockingly!—don’t have their best interest in mind. Let the backlash begin.
43
This is nothing but a Times puff piece. Very disappointed in how soft the Times is on too many of these actors. They hammered Hillary Clinton mercilessly for every word and deed, but Zuckerberg gets this sweet little interview. Advertising dollars at work?