Skip to main content

Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook Testifies

Mark Zuckerberg, on testifying before congress. Zuckerberg is the CEO of Facebook, now under review by congress for possible charges of invasion of privacy and selling of information to non Facebook agencies.  One could call this approved internal hacking. Basic conclusions.

1.       If he stumbles before the lights, he will not be the first.
2.       He will make platitudes to personal rights, as programmed by his personal handlers.
3.       He may state our users agreed to the surrender of their information, never understanding some of it is fundamentally in error.
4.       The poor lad really does not appreaciate right from wrong.  For him, it is purely operational. Typical coder thinking.
5.       He may state in post-testimony interviews, he was not understood.

How to question Zuckerberg.

1.       Ask him what is the word-length of the user agreement their users accept.
2.       Ask him how many actually read the agreement – or simply click on the agreement acceptance button.
3.       Ask him what proportions of Facebook revenues come from advertising vs. data mining.
4.       Ask him how many agencies have contracts to mine Facebook data? How many are commercial? How many are political?  How many are government? How many are academic? How many you just don’t know?
5.       Ask him the purpose of each? Ask him to be specific.
6.       Ask him if any of the agencies send specific information to users in each category. Give examples.

 There are many more, but what is important is to be specific with Mark.  He will hardly understand other questions.  He is surely not equipped to answer other question types.  Mark went from coder to billionaire business mogul overnight.  
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Please Comment.

Popular posts from this blog

Accepting Fake Information

Every day, we are all bombarded with information, especially on news channels.  One group claims it's false; another calls it the truth. How can we know when to accept it or alternatively how can we know it's false? There are several factors which influence acceptance of fake or false information. Here are the big four.  Some just don’t have the knowledge to discern fact/truth from fiction/fact/false*. Some fake information is cleverly disguised and simply appears to be correct. Some fake information is accepted because the person wants to believe it. Some fake information is accepted because there is no other information to the contrary. However, the acceptance of  information  of any kind become a kind of  truth , and this is a well studied topic. In the link below is an essay on “The Truth About Truth.” This shows simply that what is your point of view, different types of information are generally accepted, fake or not.   https://www.linkedin.com/posts/g-donald-allen-420b03
Post a Comment
Read more

Your Brain Within Your Brain

  Your Bicameral Brain by Don Allen Have you ever gone to another room to get something, but when you got there you forgot what you were after? Have you ever experienced a flash of insight, but when you went to look it up online, you couldn’t even remember the keyword? You think you forgot it completely. How can it happen so fast? You worry your memory is failing. Are you merely absent-minded? You try to be amused. But maybe you didn’t forget.   Just maybe that flash of insight, clear and present for an instant, was never given in the verbal form, but another type of intelligence you possess, that you use, and that communicates only to you. We are trained to live in a verbal world, where words matter most. Aside from emotions, we are unable to conjure up other, nonverbal, forms of intelligence we primitively, pre-verbally, possess but don’t know how to use. Alas, we live in a world of words, stewing in the alphabet, sleeping under pages of paragraphs, almost ignoring one of
Post a Comment
Read more

Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious?

  Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious? I truly like the study of consciousness, though it is safe to say no one really knows what it is. Some philosophers has avoided the problem by claiming consciousness simply doesn’t exist. It's the ultimate escape clause. However, the "therefore, it does not exist" argument also applies to "truth", "God", and even "reality" all quite beyond a consensus description for at least three millennia. For each issue or problem defying description or understanding, simply escape the problem by claiming it doesn’t exist. Problem solved or problem avoided? Alternately, as Daniel Dennett explains consciousness as an account of the various calculations occurring in the brain at close to the same time. However, he goes on to say that consciousness is so insignificant, especially compared to our exalted notions of it, that it might as well not exist [1] . Oh, well. Getting back to consciousness, most of us have view
Post a Comment
Read more