So, everyone is now upset about the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica "data breach" "scandal". They shouldn't be. I put quotes around "data breach" and "scandal" because it was not a data breach and it was not really even a scandal. To the contrary, this is exactly how Facebook is supposed to work. Facebook doesn't charge you anything and in return for the services that they provide you give them your data and they then make money off your data - otherwise known as "your life". I've stated many times before that Facebook, Twitter, Google, etc., are not creating net social good. Not even close. Zuckerberg can say as many times as he wants that he is just trying to connect the world and make it a better place. I've never believed that has ever been his leading purpose. If so, he would not have created the privacy-destroying monster that Facebook is. And, even if his goal was not initially to suck up and maximally monetize everyone's data, that is what the result has been. And, the main results are the loss of privacy, the risk to democracy and the rise of extreme consumerism.
The US government seems incapable of putting teeth into any sort of regulations that would turn the tide on this. So, the only solution is a grass roots one. And, the only grass roots solution is to dramatically reduce or even cease using nearly all forms of social media. At a minimum, quit giving away all of your data. Quit "liking" things. Quit posting your photos with your accounts. Quit posting where you are and when you are there. Quit filling out surveys. Quit following others. Quit reading news feeds on social media (got to an actual news site). Quit signing onto other sites through social media (or Google). And, turn off all the push notifications, badges, etc. When you do that, you become less addicted to the social media, apps, etc. because you are not suggested to check it every 5 minutes. Once an hour for any of that is way more than sufficient for nearly everything that is important to you. At a minimum, why are people giving away very valuable information for free? I'd rather have to give away no information and pay a subscription for the usage of social media that did not track, use or sell my data. There are some search engines like Duck Duck Go, but not enough people use it. Someone needs to also create social media platforms with the same data privacy policies. Until then, stop giving away your data. Maybe just take a break from social media for a few months and see how much better your life is.
The US government seems incapable of putting teeth into any sort of regulations that would turn the tide on this. So, the only solution is a grass roots one. And, the only grass roots solution is to dramatically reduce or even cease using nearly all forms of social media. At a minimum, quit giving away all of your data. Quit "liking" things. Quit posting your photos with your accounts. Quit posting where you are and when you are there. Quit filling out surveys. Quit following others. Quit reading news feeds on social media (got to an actual news site). Quit signing onto other sites through social media (or Google). And, turn off all the push notifications, badges, etc. When you do that, you become less addicted to the social media, apps, etc. because you are not suggested to check it every 5 minutes. Once an hour for any of that is way more than sufficient for nearly everything that is important to you. At a minimum, why are people giving away very valuable information for free? I'd rather have to give away no information and pay a subscription for the usage of social media that did not track, use or sell my data. There are some search engines like Duck Duck Go, but not enough people use it. Someone needs to also create social media platforms with the same data privacy policies. Until then, stop giving away your data. Maybe just take a break from social media for a few months and see how much better your life is.
I found myself enjoying your take on the social media business model and horrified at your solution, " ... all this could be addressed through smarter and more aggressive policy and regulation."
ReplyDeleteI'm gonna hug my Milton Friedman doll extra tight tonight, cause when a once promising semi-libertarian can write that sentence... so to be clear, you're only advocating for the "smarter policies."
I deactivated my Facebook back in Aug 2017. I took Twitter off my phone in December. I try to 'grey-out' my phone's colors during the day, etc. I encourage my adult children to do the same. In short, when older news junkies like me start just saying no, there is reason to think that the marketplace will eventually do to the Facebooks of the world what soon to be corrupted legislators/regulators would never do.
Welcome back, but more about what's happened to the Michigan kid in future blog posts please.
So, you are saying that policy and regulation should not be applied to the social media companies in the same way they are to utilities or other natural monopolies? Treating natural monopolies different that other free-market businesses is standard economic orthodoxy - and for good reasons. I still count my views as Libertarian, but the government is not the only entity that can threaten our liberty. When a private actor is more threatening than the government, we need to be thinking of approaches that protect individual liberty from those other actors. In fact, Libertarian thought generally argues that the main legitimate purpose of government is to act protect the liberty of individual citizens from others. The Libertarian philosophy does not promote anarchy. So, government regulation of monopolistic actors who limit the liberty of individual citizens fits well within the core philosophy of Libertarianism.
ReplyDelete