'What's Facebook?', Elon Musk Asks, As He Deletes SpaceX and Tesla Facebook Pages 237
It is unlikely that Facebook will see a significant drop in its mammoth userbase following the Cambridge Analytica scandal. But on Friday, the #DeleteFacebook campaign, which is seeing an increasingly growing number of people call it quits on the world's largest social network, found its biggest backer: Elon Musk. Responding to WhatsApp co-founder Brian Acton's "#DeleteFacebook" tweet, Musk asked "What's Facebook?" That was the beginning of a tweetstorm, which saw journalists asking Musk why his companies -- SpaceX and Tesla -- maintained their Facebook pages. Shouldn't Musk, they asked, delete them? Musk agreed. As of this writing, the official Facebook pages of SpaceX and Tesla, both of which had more than two million followers, are nowhere to be found. The Facebook page of SolarCity is gone too, if you were wondering.
The move comes months after Musk said Zuckerberg's understanding of AI was limited.
The move comes months after Musk said Zuckerberg's understanding of AI was limited.
Just a Start. (Score:5, Insightful)
Now delete Twitter too.
Re: Just a Start. (Score:2, Insightful)
And also delete Instagram accounts, platform wich same owner than Facebook
Re: (Score:3)
He's talked about that:
Re:Just a Start. (Score:5, Funny)
#DeleteTwitter and #DeleteHashTags
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Just a Start. (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: Just a Start. (Score:5, Funny)
I'm over 6 feet tall, have a bodyfat percentage around 10%, have a decent face, a decent personality, and so on
Ah. You're Bruce Jenner!
Re:Just a Start. (Score:4, Insightful)
You forgot: a great sense of humor and perception.
Re: (Score:2)
The only thing they know about me is a random email address they required for me to have an account here, and a totally fake name that I use for the account, because no way in hell I'm using my real name online.
[later ...]
..meanwhile, I'm over 6 feet tall, have a bodyfat percentage around 10%, have a decent face, a decent personality, and so on.
So what you're saying is nothing you post is real.
Re: (Score:2)
I'll never be jealous of a 4 million uid!
Re: (Score:3)
I only identify this way now after I transitioned. I was born a meat-head jock.
Re: Just a Start. (Score:2, Redundant)
Re: (Score:2)
I eat pizza with Doritos on you insensitive clod!
Re: (Score:2)
Slashdot introduced many social-media like features before there was a such thing as social media and people on the internet often closely associated their real identity with their online identity. The assumption being that the only people who would encounter your online identity would be your nerd pals.
People used to put their home address on their signatures and talk shit on usenet every day for years without any consequences. It's so hard to imagine these days.
Re: (Score:2)
Slashdot is most definitely not a pseudo news site. You apparently do not understand slashdot at all. Slashdot is an exchange of ideas site framed around interesting stories, ideas and questions. Slashdot is about the comments, the exchange of ideas, to trigger no ideas, to explore existing ones of of course to flip ideas on their heads. What happens there in after beyond slashdot with regard to those ideas is up to individual slashdotters but you should not claim of the ideas of others as your own, really
Re: (Score:2)
I cannot self terminate (Score:2)
You must lower me into the steel.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm starting to wonder if Twitter is pushing this, because it's being done as a "Twitter hashtag."
I mean, yes, Facebook is evil, but why delete Facebook specifically NOW? Because they've done anything they haven't done in the past? No, they did the exact same thing for Obama's campaign, and no one batted an eyelash.
But now all of a sudden everyone is talking about "#DeleteFacebook." Not "Delete Facebook," specifically "#DeleteFacebook."
Twitter does the same damned things Facebook does. There are Twitter tra
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
You got to hand it to Elon Musk, though. He has the tech press turning his every word into a front page headline.
It reminds me of the constant Steve Jobs posts we used to see here 10 years ago.
Re: (Score:3)
Let's just hope Tesla won't start removing doors on their cars in 10 years.
Re: (Score:2)
they already started with door handles
Re:Just a Start. (Score:5, Insightful)
#metoo happened because it's such a common experience to be shit on by some other human being and just have to eat it because of the circumstance. So all of these people had been walking around for decades with these little demons waiting to be aired.
This was engineered by the outrage-media industry but really the whole fucking thing was beautiful because not only did a lot of creeps get totally exposed but the whole thing backfired and came back to fuck over so many important media and hollywood types. The same assholes who smugly lectured the rest of America and stirred to pot for power and profit over the smallest of social transgressions when in reality they're the slimest fuckers outside of Washington DC.
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty sure it started in Hollywood in the first place, with the Harvey Weinstein allegations. Although it just continued the recent practice of a bunch of women coming forward at once with allegations, as happened with Trump (among many other politicians, remember Schwarzenegger?), and earlier with Cosby.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Just a Start. (Score:5, Insightful)
Note that you can configure the app and shut off the face recognition if you want.
Re:Just a Start. (Score:5, Informative)
CA violated Facebook rules, and their fired CEO offered to entrap political rivals with secret videotapes and sex workers on the UK Channel 4 TV.
Re: (Score:3)
And note that the attorney general of Massachusetts is opening an investigation into Facebook and CA possible violation of privacy laws.
Re: (Score:2)
Twitter does the same damned things Facebook does. There are Twitter trackers on every page. (Even this one.) They collect user data without consent. They sell it to advertisers. They run facial recognition on every image uploaded. They have "shadow profiles" of non-Twitter users.
So why just Facebook?
I think we all know the real reason.
It's strategery.
Had you started with twitter #DeleteFacebook wouldn't work.
Re:Just a Start. (Score:5, Informative)
I think we all know the real reason.
Yes, Obama was supremely boring. We can all agree about that. It's not just the fact that he won two elections quite decisively, so no one took a close look at the results and at what could have made the difference.
It's the fact that the American public has the attention span of a fruit fly. If Obama had stories that included the use of Ukrainian hookers for political blackmail, nepotism up the wazzoo, Russian money mules like the Mercers trying to influence the elections, and Russian hackers and trolls, you can bet that the American public would have tuned in.
What kind of political intrigue and sex scandals did Obama give us? Really? Can you even remember anything? The Weiner guy. That's about it. That was funny for five minutes, and then that was funny when he did the same thing again and again, but after a certain point, it got boring. Plus, I don't think you can credit Obama for that one.
Re: (Score:3)
Now delete Twitter too.
Twitter's where I get raw, unfiltered messages from my president. That's the only reason I have it installed and the only reason I'm keeping it. I'm a big DJT critic, but I don't know why every American isn't following him on Twitter.
Re: (Score:2)
Twitter's where I get raw, unfiltered messages from my president. That's the only reason I have it installed and the only reason I'm keeping it. I'm a big DJT critic, but I don't know why every American isn't following him on Twitter.
I actually did start following Trump when he got elected. I stopped after a month because all he ever posted was negative stuff and attacks against anyone that was critical of him. Nothing he ever posts is relevant to anything, and most of it is false,
Re: (Score:2)
Irrelevant, often false, but a raw view into the unusual mind of a very powerful man.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I did say "following him on Twitter". I misspoke. I just meant "paying attention to his Tweets". Using the app just saves a step while adding nothing useful.
Re: (Score:2)
Now delete Twitter too.
Elon can't delete Twitter. He's had a neural lace implant that streams his consciousness directly to his Twitter feed.
Without Twitter, he'd die!
Re: (Score:3)
Now delete Twitter too.
Why? Twitter at least gets a message spread fast without the retardedness of Facebook.
Re: (Score:2)
Now delete Twitter too.
Seconded.
Re: (Score:2)
So... after doing #DeleteFacebook we start a Facebook page about deleting Twitter accounts?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And quit littering your language with branding too: "podcast"? I'd rather not celebrate an abusive organization or their products.
Why we can't have nice things (Score:5, Insightful)
Generic Relative/Friend: What Facebook did is horrible! Someone should go to jail. Muh privacy!
You: Hey, I heard about this other social media site with different business model. You want to try it out together to see if we like it better than FB?
Generic Relative/Friend: No! I have no time for that! *Posts more crappy memes on Facebook*
In terms of reputation, if Comcast is the bottom of the barrel, Facebook's rep is now buried 6 ft under the barrel and Generic Relative/Friend cannot even spend 10 minutes to try a competing site.
This is why politicians are absolutely justified in thinking the masses are moronic asses.
Re: (Score:2)
...cannot even spend 10 minutes to try a competing site.
Adoption rate is more important to social media than features. Google+ may be terrific, and I even signed up, but I know very little about it because the people I want to talk with are on FB. The egg predates the chicken, but they continue their cycle.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It isn't real competition if everyone isn't already on it,
So you're saying that for Facebook to have competition, they already need to be Facebook?
Good luck with that.
Re: (Score:2)
Good luck with that."
You can say good luck with that all day it doesn't change the reality. Why would anyone want to use a platform that is entirely about connecting and keeping up with all their infrequently contacted friends and family when none of those people use it? This is a chicken and egg type scenario that is pretty characteristic of monopolies like Facebook and is hardly new. We see the same thing with Micros
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I guess I'm shocked that people are just now coming to the revelation that anything they post on the Internet can be found and used by other people.
If the financial bureaus can't even keep your shit secure, why would a company that literally makes their money by productizing other people's information?
So much undue rage over the most obvious shit.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I still miss comp.os.misc, comp.arch., and sci.space. As late as 1998.
Back when news actually had content. Not spam.
Re: (Score:2)
Bah! WWIV!
Pot, Kettle, Black (Score:2)
This is why politicians are absolutely justified in thinking the masses are moronic asses.
The real problem for democracy is that those same politicians are selected from those same masses.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, a stitch in time
Just about saved me
From going through the same old moves
And this cat is nine
He still suffers
He's going through the same old grooves
But that stone just keeps on rolling
Bringing me some real bad news
Takers get the honey
Givers sing the blues
-- "Too Rolling Stoned" -- Robin Trower
Strat
Summary misspelt social. (Score:2)
> on the world's biggest social^H^H^H^H^H^Hcommercial sellout network,
FTFY.
Facebook (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
...it would become Facebooks property and that was not to my liking...
When I signed up in 2008, their stated position was otherwise. There's a clip from a 2009 interview (CNN I think) where Zuck specifically says that the data is owned by the user, will only be shared with the people the user selects, and will never be sold. I don't know when they made the "fuck users; get money" decision. I'd link to the clip, but I can't hunt for it at work.
Re: (Score:2)
When I signed up in 2008, their stated position was otherwise. There's a clip from a 2009 interview (CNN I think) where Zuck specifically says that the data is owned by the user, will only be shared with the people the user selects, and will never be sold
<voice=Mark Zuckerberg doing a bad Darth Vader impression>
I have altered the agreement. Pray I do not alter it further.
</voice>
Re: (Score:3)
I'm home from work. The 2009 Zuck interview [youtube.com] was with BBC News, not CNN.
Re: (Score:2)
You would be surprised how many companies do this with content you upload to them. If you want to get really large images made up, and the shops (let's say Black's Photography) can't do it in house. They ask you to upload it to their website and it will be done and shipped to the closest location. Upon reading the fine print in website user agreement, they then own that image and can use it however they like.
I don't remember the last time I uploaded an image to any website (social or otherwise) because they
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Terrific - are you stoned, what are you taking?
Alternatives To Facebook? (Score:5, Interesting)
After years of resisting joining Facebook, I caved after publishing my first novel. I figured that it was a potential place to spread the word of my book and I couldn't ignore it. As a method of spreading the word, it's pretty bad, though. If you post something, everyone who follows you won't see it. Not unless you pay Facebook to spread it to more people than the people they deem will see your message. If a group of people follow me, I'd think they should ALL see my message, but apparently Facebook disagrees.
I'd be interested in any alternatives to Facebook that people can recommend. (And, no, "get off all social media" is not a valid alternative.) Are there up and coming social media sites that are viable alternatives to Facebook? Obviously, they might not have the number of users that Facebook has, but if you set the page to be public, it doesn't matter if the person is a subscribed member or not.
At this point, I'm thinking of going back to my blog and maybe using IFTTT to auto-post links on Facebook about my blog posts.
Re: (Score:3)
What do you expect? You joined a site full of people jumping up and down, going 'look at me, look at me!' You somehow expect everybody to 'look at you'?
Re:Alternatives To Facebook? (Score:5, Interesting)
Something weird is definitely going on with facebook likes and post engagements. Veritasium made some observations: https://youtu.be/oVfHeWTKjag [youtu.be]
Bottom line: buying facebook promotions can have a negative impact.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
minds.com
Re: (Score:3)
Mod parent up.
Just checked it out as well as I could. Seems quite good and on the right track.
Re: Alternatives To Facebook? (Score:2)
Just checked it out as well as I could. Seems quite good and on the right track.
My default feed on it is mostly filled with right wing pundits and conspiracy whackjobs. It's basically a far-right Facebook, without the privacy issues.
Re: (Score:2)
If you want to use Facebook for marketing, why not just hire a marketing company? Or pay Facebook to market to its users?
Advertizing is not Free (Score:2)
And, no, "get off all social media" is not a valid alternative.
Yes it is. You are looking for a free way to advertize your book but social media platforms make their money by charging people to advertize. If this is what you are looking for get off social media and pay someone to advertize for you.
Re: (Score:2)
-Email
-The telephone
-Fax
-Chat
-Talking to people IN PERSON
Why? (Score:4, Insightful)
Facebook has been used for market research and political research for years, and people generally viewed this as a positive: finally, campaigns could figure out what people actually wanted and liked. And the TOS make it pretty clear that data can be used for such purposes. All of a sudden this is a problem or a scandal? Why?
Because (Score:2)
Facebook has been used for market research and political research for years, and people generally viewed this as a positive: finally, campaigns could figure out what people actually wanted and liked.
No people don't regard this as a positive. People are indifferent to it the vast majority of the time if they are aware at all. I doubt you would find many people that think "gee Facebook being used for market research is a good thing for me". But it usually doesn't hurt them so they don't worry about it.
All of a sudden this is a problem or a scandal? Why?
Because sometimes it takes the masses a while to realize something is bad. Sometimes it takes a company doing something unsavory at a moment when people are sensitive to it for the problem to get fully
Re: (Score:3)
They certainly used to. How Obama’s Internet Campaign Changed Politics [nytimes.com]
And Barack Obama and the Facebook Election [usnews.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So you are saying that Trump used this data, figured out what people didn't like, and then deliberately made that his platform? How in the world is that a winning strategy?
How does marke
Re: (Score:2)
All of a sudden this is a problem or a scandal? Why?
Sausages. Everybody eats them, nobody wants to know how they're made. It's a "free" service, nobody wants to know why it's free. You think people read the ToS? I think there was a story about someone who made a metric to see how many had scrolled through the EULA in their installer before agreeing to it, it was like 99.9% no. Even if you give people the benefit of the doubt that some may be reinstalls or installs on multiple computers, people don't care at all.
It should not be very difficult to create a dec
Re: (Score:2)
My point is that Obama's 2008 campaign was run by Chris Hughes, a Facebook founder, and his 2012 campaign also made massive use of social media. The digirati and national media had no problem with billionaire money scraping Facebook for Obama. It seems hypocritical to complain when a (largely useless) firm associated with the Trump campaign gets a bit of anonymized data in the face of that history.
Because that stuff about what people like (Score:2)
I'm not opposed to advertising. Advertising can be a positive good. It can make people aware of things they never knew they wanted. But this wasn't advertising. This wasn't about convincing people they wanted Trump. And it certainly wasn't about Trump finding out what people wanted so he could give it to them. These people had long since d
Re: (Score:3)
Of course it is. Facebook is a manipulative, privacy-invading company. However, back when Chris Hughes ran Obama's online campaign, people hailed the use and analysis of social networks as the dawn of a new democracy, yet now that the other side is doing it, all of a sudden the same people are up in arms.
Re: (Score:3)
How much does Russia pay you to drive Americans apart and destroy confidence in the democratic process in the US, Ryanrule?
Re: (Score:2)
I think Facebook is a shitty platform, both technically and socially, and I don't use it. I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy that when Obama did this (led by one of Facebook's co-founders no less), pundits were waxing ecstatic about how wonderful it was, but now all of a sudden it's supposed to be the end of democracy.
People just moving to another Facebook site (Score:5, Informative)
It's the same damn company collecting the same damn data.
Billionaire Cat Fight (Score:2)
Musk doesn't like Zuck, and Zuck returns the favor. Not surprised Musk taking opportunity to dog-pile on the kid when he's down (his version of 'down' anyways).
I've noticed the cattiness between these two for a couple years. They've been chippy in public regarding diverging views on AI. And probably didn't help that SpaceX blew up Facebook's pet-project satellite - which I thought was totally worth the firework but Faceboy not so thrilled about it if I remember correctly.
#DeleteAllSocialMedia (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
This (slashdot) is social media.
Just read at -1, you'll get enough anti-social media for it to all balance out!
tempest in a tea pot (Score:2)
Look Google has a script that goes something like this
(function(i,s,o,g,r,a,m){i['GoogleAnalyticsObject']=r;i[r]=i[r]||function(){
(i[r].q=i[r].q||[]).push(arguments)},i[r].l=1*new Date();a=s.createElement(o),
m=s.getElementsByTagName(o)[0];a.async=1;a.src=g;m.parentNode.insertBefore(a,m)
})(window,document,'script','//www.google-analytics.com/analytics.js','ga');
I put that on the website and both the website and the visitors get tracked. It's
Re: (Score:3)
No just run uMatrix with default settings, which
** Blocks 1st party frames, and
** Blocks 3rd party:
** ** Cookies
** ** Media
** ** Scripts
** ** XHR
** ** Other
I also remove most all of the uMatrix subscription lists, which are mostly redundant with the above settings. Although it will necessitate tweaking to get some sites to work -- mostly enabling CDN's.
A garbage can (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
No News for me (Score:2)
I have my own RSS aggregator for news. However, I primarily use my Facebook account to like companies like SpaceX, Tesla, and other interesting companies I like to find out about new products, watch cool videos they may publish, and sometimes see news they publish I may miss in my RSS feed. So, without this, I'm not less likely to know what SpaceX and Tesla are doing excpept negative news stories now posting how behind Tesla is on Model3 orders. Overall this will be bad for the company in terms of exposure,
Destruction (Score:5, Insightful)
What disturbs me about such deletion is the casual destruction of all the information and entertainment in the posts and comments. I know Facebook is renowned for the ephemeral and lightweight nature of its content, and almost all wouldn't have been worth preserving. But worthwhile stuff and history has also been lost.
I felt the same way when IMDB deleted its fora.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Don't worry, FB will just hide it. They are not the type of company to offer an honest delete option.
You are surely kidding, Elon! (Score:2)
Nothing can be really deleted at Facebook. Those things are forever once posted there!
Stallman was right. (Score:2)
But Mark Zuckerberg was Time magazine's "Person of the Year" [fsf.org]!
Re: (Score:2)
You know who ELSE was Time magazine's 'Person of the Year'??
Obama.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)