With the growing confidence of a colonial power in a long established remote country, Mark Zuckerberg discovered the concept of privacy today.
In a balloon flight of 3,225 words – a roughly average number of words for the terminally verbose Facebook founder – Zuckerberg informed his miserably loyal 2.3 billion plus subjects that his company happened on a concept known as privacy, and sees a opportunity. But can Facebook reshape his 15th anniversary as a spy of all things privately with a single, drastic, subordinate cover of his copycat visionary technician and technocolate with dark pattern?
Fuck no, of course it can not.
In articulating his vision, worth all 3,225 words, Zuckerberg did not simply own the fact that his company somehow created the modern concept of social media as a money press machine that derives our deepest thoughts, desires and connections. The whole is a self-parody so on the nose it is almost boring. And it is a breaker, because "A privacy-oriented vision for social networks" could be a convincing explanation (let us be at ease!) Of almost every company that is not Facebook.
"I believe there is a possibility to set a new standard for private communication platforms – where content automatically expires or is archived in the course of time," wrote Zuckerberg, who thought of privacy for the third time. "… This philosophy can be extended to all private content."
Unfortunately, no company can build anything interesting in social media space, because Facebook's established and aggressive stance towards competitors means the game is over before the game starts. If the big blue acquirer does not record, it is killed.
It is a coincidence that the sudden interest of Facebook in privacy is due to the fact that the company is confronted with an ever-rising tide of public repercussions and heavy breathing of thirsty regulators in Congress. Grafted by saddling all the advertising budgets that wander around the wreck of a social social web with a lot of money, Facebook realizes that it is probably time to chart a different path forward. Fortunately, it picked up a number of brands that hate people less on the way.
With the management of Facebook from WhatsApp for all it's worth, Zuckerberg was deliberately working to base his new centralized, yet decided future for Facebook on the model of the encrypted messaging app, a platform that is at odds with the broad mission of Facebook that the founders walked away with disgust after they redeemed their checks.
In recent years the company has realized that it is easier to just let someone else innovate, build a product and attract users than to do something very interesting. Facebook's contemporary role in the technical landscape is to either build a functional facsimile of it, or buy that innovation and keep that innovation at bay from the core brand of Facebook, so that users can become complacent (users are very good at this) .
It is different with privacy. Privacy is about philosophy. It is about how you deal with things from the beginning. Facebook effectively stole a whole lot of shit over a long period of time, relying on deliberate scrambling, legal muscle mass and user ignorance to suppress the robbery. Now the company is trying to get out of the store with all that contraband that has been stuffed under the shirt before the guard slips back. Unfortunately for Facebook, the hands are stained with a decade and a half data squeezed out from a now cumulative 2.3 billion users.
Those are a lot of exploded fucking ink tags.
This is a company that can hardly give us a clear answer about what happens when someone wants his data to be removed. One that has waited fifteen years to introduce something that allows users to erase traces of their history, except by most accounts that tool will not even erase those records from its servers.
I just leave these links here.
WhatsApp and encryption are still good
But what about WhatsApp, you (Facebook PR) may, mawkishly, gasp for breath. What about it?? WhatsApp is & # 39; the world's largest encrypted messaging platform – and that's great. More encryption is good, regardless of who owns the wiring. Even Facebook!
Facebook has not killed WhatsApp or paralyzed its encryption and that has been good. Yet we owe Facebook nothing, and certainly not our belief that the patron saint of personal data mining does something good for reasons that go beyond just buying goodwill or getting caught in the act.
By declaring that "people increasingly want to connect in the digital equivalent of the living room", Zuckerberg does not notice any irony in the idea that people may not want more privacy. within Facebook – they want more privacy because Facebook. Namely because the company has so thoroughly destroyed the concept of user privacy before it was apparently about to transform itself into a "privacy-oriented messaging and social networking platform" and to fill users with the WhatsApp-branded life rafts.
For example, Zuckerberg stumbles from his big boat, a terrible blue flag limp on a Breezeless coast. This is all of ushe murmurs, gesturing to everything.