Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg gave a presentation on data privacy at the company’s annual developer conference 2018.
Facebook believes your data has a specific dollar value, although the company says it has never sold your personal information directly.
Documents published by the British Parliament on Wednesday seem to reveal this, which has blurred Facebook’s often claimed use of user data to sell ads.
Facebook responded to a statement reiterating that it has never sold user data access. Privacy experts don’t think so.
“Facebook sees advertisers and developers as customers, not users,” said Fatemeh Khatibloo, an analyst at Forrester who focuses on user privacy. “User privacy and transparency always give way to platform profitability.”
Here’s another reason for you to remember that your privacy is not a top priority for tech companies. Instead, profits come first. This should not be a surprise for anyone. It has been staring at our faces for a long time.
Forget the fact that Facebook had experienced a catastrophic privacy crisis earlier this year, when there were reports that 87 million Facebook users’ data fell into the hands of political consulting firm Cambridge Analytica. For nearly 20 years, top tech executives have told us that privacy is dead.
It’s been nearly nine years since Eric Schmidt, Google’s then CEO, made it clear that tech companies won’t be ashamed of data collection and monetization, saying, “If you have something you don’t want anyone You know, maybe you shouldn’t do that. “Scott McNealy, then CEO of Sun Microsystems, told reporters:” Anyway, you don’t have privacy. “
So how much is your data worth? An email from Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg in October 2012 showed that Facebook’s annual fee is about 10 cents. In this memo, Zuckerberg came up with the idea of calculating 10 cents of user data value per user per year. The idea is that application developers can get user data-and their friends’ data-by buying other Facebook products. According to this email, Zuckerberg is also willing to charge them directly.
Zuckerberg wrote: “If the income we get from it doesn’t add up to what you owe us, then you pay us directly.” In response to questions about Zuckerberg’s email, Facebook asked on Wednesday CNET issued a statement saying Facebook had never used Zuckerberg’s plan.
The statement reads: “We ultimately decided to adopt a model where developers do not need to buy ads to access the api, and we continue to provide the developer platform for free.” The company also said that these emails are being used with application developer Six4Three Part of the proceeding was “picked out”.
Eric Schmidt and Vic Gundotra at the 2010 Google Developers Conference. Schmidt said in 2009 that Internet users should not do what they want to keep secret.
Lorrie Faith Cranor, director of the Available Privacy and Security Lab at CyLab at Carnegie Mellon University, said that although this was just an email, and Facebook said it did not implement Zuckerberg. Idea, but the results are obvious.
“The message clearly does not express any privacy or protect the value of the user,” said Cranow, who was the CTO of the Federal Trade Commission in 2016. “This shows that data is an asset of the business , We don’t want to leak it out. “
Cranow said that Facebook’s privacy protections are still under review, but it is not the only company that uses personal data for transactions, which makes it difficult for users to understand.
“I think most of us don’t know who has access to our data and how we will use it,” Krannor said. “Even if you work hard, it’s hard to know.”
Facebook is just a very compelling example of this problem. It claims not to sell users based on a narrow interpretation of the word “sell,” said Arvind Narayanan, a computer science professor at Princeton University who specializes in privacy issues. But it makes users feel What’s confusing and disturbing is what happens to data that feels very personal.
Narayanan said: “This business model continues to drive the company towards highly monitored.”
Solemnly declare: The copyright of this article belongs to the original author. The reprinted article is only for the purpose of disseminating more information. If the author’s information is marked incorrectly, please contact us as soon as possible to modify or delete it. Thank you.