HOLY (cow) DID YOU READ THIS FROM WAPO.

[nam78_two]

122. I was alluding to Google/FB's model as data harvesting not identification of seditionists etc

Last edited Sat Jan 23, 2021, 03:15 PM - Edit history (1)

I've come to think of "harvesting data" as gathering information about users and selling it to advertisers, etc. In other words, FB's business model. That's different from the platform being used to commit a felony and then being compelled to identify the felonious poster. If I'm wrong about any of this, somebody please correct me. Anyway, that's why I quit FB long ago.
That is quite correct. But my point was that these actual lunatics would make a case for expanded surveillance. It is clear that legitimate national security related reasons exist for such surveillance. However, it is possible that irresponsible/sleazy industries that are already harvesting data from normal people, eschewing permission altogether, will be emboldened. Now they can say "Hey we are not just selling tacky ads. We are advancing community safety." And I just don't buy it with companies like FB and Google. I am reading this book called Surveillance Capitalism so that theme is running in my head..Aggressive expansion into people's private spaces using bullshit rationales.

Edit: Is identifying a FB poster the same thing as harvesting data? If the poster's intent was criminal, it seems to me that a federal warrant requiring FB to cough up a name or names is (um) warranted.
Oh no-I did not mean that sort of thing. That is not data harvesting. As you point out, if anyone posts sedition plots or threats of physical violence on the net, they should pretty much expect to get on the radar of law enforcement. But I was referring to the aggressive data collection/tracking practices inflicted on random people merely going about their lives. I worry that FB, Google and
other annoying surveillance capitalist firms will expand their powers using this sort of thing.