Please God, don’t buy the incoming Amazon house robot!

From CNBC here:

Amazon needs to get into our homes because it needs more information about its customers that it can’t get elsewhere.

“Amazon needs more data to better serve its customers by offering the best Prime products and services exactly when they need them,” Patrick Moorhead, president and founder of Moor Insights & Strategy told CNBC. “It doesn’t get search or mobile data like Google or social data like Facebook, so it needs to get it a different way. Amazon with Alexa has risen above search and social. Amazon likely could create a home robot, but I think that’s secondary to selling everything you need whenever you need it.”

Amazon is not serving its customers, Amazon is selling shit to people.  There is a difference.

Making a home robot to get inside of Americans’ homes to gather data about their customers and sell them more shit may be a sci fi movie and some people may think that’s awesome, but I theorize that those people are not served by the Amazon home robot.


Epic scumbag Facebook behavior!

From Slate here:

Zuckerberg went further, suggesting that Facebook users did in fact consent to having their data scraped by third parties anytime their friends signed up for an app. “We explained, and they consented to it working that way,” Zuckerberg said. He later added, “We made it clear this is how it worked. When people signed up for Facebook, they signed up for that as well.”

This is breathtaking and I don’t use that word lightly.

So you can have up to 5000 friends on Facebook and any one of them can give your data away by signing up for an app?

That’s fucking sneaky as fuck and they should have to pay a big ass fine for that bullshit.

NYT’s Andrew Ross Sorkin fondles Zuck’s balls/status quo

Headline from the New York Times:

Our Privacy has Eroded and We’re Okay With That

The trade-off we make for free online content, social sharing and convenience is the willful relinquishing of our privacy. It’s part of the deal, our DealBook columnist writes.

Sorkin is making a huge assumption that if people are still using social media then they’re happy with the way it’s set up.

He’s not considering the possibility that people don’t like the way social media/surveillance is set up and they use it despite their dislike.

I find the broadcasting of this headline to be more of a philosophical statement than anything news related.  And it doesn’t seem to be a coincidence that it’s out in the world the same day Boy WonderZuck is heading up to Capital Hill for a theater show.


Ooopsie, the GooglePimpTube dips in the big cauldron of data crack!

From the Guardian here:

A coalition of 23 child advocacy, consumer and privacy groups have filed a complaint with the US Federal Trade Commission alleging that Google is violating child protection laws by collecting personal data of and advertising to those aged under 13.

How can Zuck monetize a poor person? You sell his data to manipulate his/her vote!!

From CNBC here:

On Monday, Zuckerberg responded in an “Ezra Klein Show” podcast, saying that “if you want to build a service that helps connect everyone in the world, then there are a lot of people who can’t afford to pay.”

You can’t sell a poor person much but they do have a vote that comes to them for free.  And Zuck is de facto admitting there’s good money in selling voter data to political campaigns.

Facebook had employees embedded with the Trump campaign helping them to craft their digital advertising.  I’m sure Hillary would have done the same if she had been able to run a more effective campaign.

Personally I thought Zuckerberg would do a better job defending his company in this latest scandal but he and Lady Facebook have performed like shit.  He can’t even land a good punch on Tim Cook who is beating the stuffing out of his data pimping.


Zuckerberg’s arrogance will be his downfall!

From the Guardian here:

The MP said: “I think, given the extraordinary evidence we’ve heard so far today, it is absolutely astonishing that Mark Zuckerberg is not prepared to submit himself to questioning in front of a parliamentary or congressional hearing, given these are questions of fundamental importance and concern to his users, as well as to this inquiry.

“I would certainly urge him to think again if he has any care for people that use his company’s services.”

This MP’s mistake is thinking Zuckerberg is more interested in his users than he is in his fortune.  At this point Zuckerberg could quite possibly face steep fines for violations of federal privacy laws and I’m sure his lawyers have advised him not to show up.

However, this could be a huge mistake as the government in the UK might be more willing to slap some awful ass regulation on Facebook due to King Zuck’s unwillingness to show his pie hole.

I’m really enjoying Zuckerberg taking his lumps in public and I hope he falls hard.