Faceberk Down.

Cobra said:
All we know about "you" are the details you used to join up.
*IF* we can be bothered read them.
Which may or may not be a genuine profile, we don't care TBH, as long as you obey the site rules, you could be a purple people eater
for all we know or care..
BUT rest assured, we will never use your details, give them or sell them to any other party.
Click to expand...
.... I don't care how TP use my details. You know quite a bit about me anyway. But I understand how paranoaically private many people are about their 'details'. If a Facebook member applies to join one of my groups there and they don't have any information about themselves on their Profile page so I can check if their interest is genuine, then they are denied membership and some may even get Blocked. Oooh, such power!!! :ROFLMAO:
 
sphexx said:
...
I haven’t given any info to FB but judging from their “people you may know” suggestions others have :(.
Click to expand...
I can't imagine what algorithm FB use to generate those "People You May Know" suggestions, but it is invariably hugely wide of the mark. I get so many young female pouters suggested as people I may know, I'm beginning to think I either have a spoof account or am leading a double life that I am unaware of.
 
lindsay said:
I can't imagine what algorithm FB use to generate those "People You May Know" suggestions, but it is invariably hugely wide of the mark. I get so many young female pouters suggested as people I may know, I'm beginning to think I either have a spoof account or am leading a double life that I am unaware of.
Click to expand...
Most of the ones I get are mutual friends.
 
lindsay said:
I can't imagine what algorithm FB use to generate those "People You May Know"
Click to expand...
I get lots of random ones. Some I do know ( why do you think they are not on my friends lists FB? :D )
Some I don't know at all.
Some I know are friends of friends, but no one I know personally and have never interacted with them.
 
lindsay said:
I can't imagine what algorithm FB use to generate those "People You May Know" suggestions, but it is invariably hugely wide of the mark. I get so many young female pouters suggested as people I may know, I'm beginning to think I either have a spoof account or am leading a double life that I am unaware of.
Click to expand...
.... That's because the algorithm picks up which pages you visit. But don't worry about it, it's natural for hetereosexual males to have a gander and nothing to be ashamed of. And it doesn't matter how old you are, it's only your body which has aged.
 
Cobra said:
I get lots of random ones. Some I do know ( why do you think they are not on my friends lists FB? :D )
Some I don't know at all.
Some I know are friends of friends, but no one I know personally and have never interacted with them.
Click to expand...
.... You'll find that those people you don't know either personally or online are suggested because you share common interests. Besides, no-one is forced to connect with any of those people - It's merely a suggestion aimed to increase networking and sharing for your mutual benefit.
 
RedRobin said:
.... You'll find that those people you don't know either personally or online are suggested because you share common interests. Besides, no-one is forced to connect with any of those people - It's merely a suggestion aimed to increase networking and sharing for your mutual benefit.
Click to expand...
Er, no.

it is designed to get your endorphins going so you stay.
 
Know it’s sensible to take reasonable precautions with personal information online - but I remember the days when I’d give complete strangers bits of paper with my bank sort code, account number and signature on them when I was paying for stuff. I’d even give them my card with the special number on it that they’d write down to make sure the bank took the money from my account and I couldn’t stop them from paying it out!! :)
 
Despite Robin's inferences about the websites I visit, I think it may have more to do with some odd people following my Instagram account. Probably fake accounts, too.
 
This not FB but email spam that I’ve been getting for 2 years which at first I thought might be a genuine mistake in address because “Diana” originally addressed me as “David Pacitti” and since alway begins “Dear David”. However it eventually became bonkers and it transpired “she” signs off as a “Clairvoyant Medium” — so not a very good one. :LOL:

They start off like this:

Dear David,
If you are the person I'm looking for, please read the following carefully...
A spiritual entity very close to you revealed your urgent need for money and the problems you are having to find the money you need to solve a problem.

Obviously I’ve never clicked on them. I suppose it may catch people whose name is David and they probably send zillions with different names.
 
lindsay said:
Despite Robin's inferences about the websites I visit, I think it may have more to do with some odd people following my Instagram account. Probably fake accounts, too.
Click to expand...
.... Hopefully you realise that I was joking with my inferences about you personally but in spite of what Facebook expert Pound Coin claims, it is mostly based on pages you visit and/or your existing Fwends.

Instagram suggests you connect with others far more than Facebook does. And sometimes it can be useful - It's always best to keep an open mind, I say. I have had quite a few print sales via 'strangers' contacting me via Instagram.
 
Dale. said:
I get lots of Milfs, no idea why.

:ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...
It’s because they think you’re a 10 (Movie reference ;) ) which you very nearly are … Page 10 that is :).
 
RedRobin said:
but in spite of what Facebook expert Pound Coin claims, it is mostly based on pages you visit and/or your existing Fwends.
Click to expand...
Sorry? You claim I am a Facebook expert, yet clearly you know how Facebook algorithms work. Wow.
 
Pound Coin said:
Sorry? You claim I am a Facebook expert, yet clearly you know how Facebook algorithms work. Wow.
Click to expand...
.... I know enough about how algorithms are initiated and set up from my full time work with Adobe for 4 years on software development, to be able to recognise that when Facebook (but more so in Instagram) recognises certain of a user's actions it automatically initiates particular responses. So in the context of a FB/IG user's online actions the algorithms are programmed/scripted in software code to respond in a particular way such as offering suggestions - For example, other people or groups you may be interested in connecting with for your mutual benefit. You don't have to be a brain surgeon to reverse engineer from the manifested result and consequently understand what the algorithm initiates even without knowing the actual written code. The actions are demonstrated by millions of instances for all to see.

Networking suggestions in principle is a good thing but needs modifying or additional overseeing by humans in order to improve the model to satisfy Facebook's valid critics, especially in the current climate of discontent.
 
Last edited:
RedRobin said:
.... I know enough about how algorithms are initiated and set up from my full time work with Adobe for 4 years on software development, to be able to recognise that when Facebook (but more so in Instagram) recognises certain of a user's actions it automatically initiates particular responses. So in the context of a FB/IG user's online actions the algorithms are programmed/scripted in software code to respond in a particular way such as offering suggestions - For example, other people or groups you may be interested in connecting with for your mutual benefit. You don't have to be a brain surgeon to reverse engineer from the manifested result and consequently understand what the algorithm initiates even without knowing the actual written code. The actions are demonstrated by millions of instances for all to see.

Networking suggestions in principle is a good thing but needs modifying or additional overseeing by humans in order to improve the model to satisfy Facebook's valid critics, especially in the current climate of discontent.
Click to expand...

Ah. Adobe.

'nuf said.
 
Pound Coin said:
Ah. Adobe.

'nuf said.
Click to expand...
.... Oh dear, not another large corporation you disapprove of.

You would feel less bitter if you could separate in your mind a company's actual products from their marketing activities and sales figures. Adobe is a very good example - There is nothing sinister about their Creative Suite software products and your judgement of them as creative software tools should not be coloured by a dislike of either their subscription model (I don't subscribe btw) or the level of financial profits they make.

However, if some 'moral' reason you have stops you using any of a company's products, no matter how good those products may be, then that's your free choice of course. I bet you wouldn't buy Nike trainers. Do you use any Apple products?

It's a pity you couldn't get your mind past the word "Adobe" and so better understand the Facebook algorithm subject being discussed.
 
Last edited:
If you don't subscribe then you don't use.

What are you using for up to date image processing?

(I know this is off-topic, but RR used Adobe as a reason why he knows what Facebook are doing)
 
Last edited:
I watched the Panorama program tonight about Facebook and it's algorithms. The piece I found most interesting was when they set up a profile in which a fake person's account was set to 'only me' and his interests were set to 'conspiracy theories' and almost without doing a thing, the fake persona started to receive invitations to join various anti-this or anti-that groups proving that Facebook itself was promoting material designed to entice 'him' to stay. They also mentioned that each year, each person's activity contributes $31 to Zuckerberg's coffers through advertising and since 2.5 billion people use FB on a regular basis, that's a hell of a lot of dollars. Oddly though, I must have got tuned out as while I was on Facebook I hardly ever remember seeing any adverts.

As John Wannamaker was reported as saying: "Half the money I spend on advertising is wasted; the trouble is, I don't know which half." John, the bit you would have spend on Facebook had it existed in those days perhaps?
 
^ it isn't adverts that make the money, so that is why you don't see them.
 
RedRobin said:
.... Oh dear, not another large corporation you disapprove of.

You would feel less bitter if you could separate in your mind a company's actual products from their marketing activities and sales figures. Adobe is a very good example - There is nothing sinister about their Creative Suite software products and your judgement of them as creative software tools should not be coloured by a dislike of either their subscription model (I don't subscribe btw) or the level of financial profits they make.

However, if some 'moral' reason you have stops you using any of a company's products, no matter how good those products may be, then that's your free choice of course. I bet you wouldn't buy Nike trainers. Do you use any Apple products?

It's a pity you couldn't get your mind past the word "Adobe" and so better understand the Facebook algorithm subject being discussed.
Click to expand...
Cheer up Robin, I loved Adobe Pagemaker (though Aldus really) but when we had to use Flash Player I hated them because every update you had to go through some rigmarole to update and then they’d try to sneak some rubbish extra app in :).
 
Pound Coin said:
If you don't subscribe then you don't use.

What are you using for up to date image processing?

(I know this is off-topic, but RR used Adobe as a reason why he knows what Facebook are doing)
Click to expand...
.... I do use Adobe CS - But I haven't had to pay. I use InDesign mostly which is what I worked on.

For image processing I use Capture One (I was offered Lightroom for free by Adobe when it was launched but didn't take it) and I also use ON1 2022 within the same Round-Robin workflow. I only shoot RAW.

I only used Adobe as an example of why I know how algorithms are set up. The algorithms used by Adobe and Facebook are obviously written with different instructions from each other but their architecture is the same.
 
Last edited:
RedRobin said:
.... I do use Adobe CS - But I haven't had to pay. I use InDesign mostly which is what I worked on.

For image processing I use Capture One (I was offered Lightroom for free by Adobe when it was launched but didn't take it) and I also use ON1 2022 within the same Round-Robin workflow. I only shoot RAW.

I only used Adobe as an example of why I know how algorithms are set up. The algorithms used by Adobe and Facebook are obviously written with different instructions from each other but their architecture is the same.
Click to expand...
So you do not use current Adobe software.

CS, I think is over 10 years old.

Edit... Ah yes. "The first version of Adobe Creative Suite was released in September 2003"

Extraordinary. Algorithms from at least 18 years ago being used to explain Social Media gouging. You could make it up, but you'd need a great imagination.
 
Exactly.
I have a friend, a former colleague as Software Dev Manager who has subsequently gone on to great things in the word of big data and data mining ("data insights" I believe it's called) who is now something in FB. The combination of that and our shared interest in AI leads me to understand quite well, in reality, how the social media networking software expands itself, much like Robin has explained. I guess my take on it from a personal perspective is that I still have a degree of control - whatever FB etc may be using my data for, I don't believe it is effective in my case as I don't accept friend recommendations and only join FB groups I intend to find and join, and I regularly cull both groups and "friends". I do very little on Instagram but I see it's very obvious commercial utility and hope eventually to get some benefit from it like Robin. I can however see how these tools can be abused by those less morally and criminally constrained, to the cost of the less literate and worldly-wise users.
 
Last edited:
Well, that’s interesting, thanks LCPete and Lindsay. Sounds like I was off-beam with my comment!
 
Pound Coin said:
Ah yes. "The first version of Adobe Creative Suite was released in September 2003"

Extraordinary. Algorithms from at least 18 years ago being used to explain Social Media gouging. You could make it up, but you'd need a great imagination.
Click to expand...
.... The architecture/structure/principle of how algorithms function has not changed. It's the actual instructions themselves which have changed according to their application. They have also branched out into AI (Artificial Intelligence). These instructions are written in code language scripted by humans. Facebook's human controllers are quite rightly being currently pressurised to modify and revise their algorithms in the context of social media and its influences.

I think you must have missed my last paragraph in my Reply #387 which read :
RedRobin said:
I only used Adobe as an example of why I know how algorithms are set up. The algorithms used by Adobe and Facebook are obviously written with different instructions from each other but their architecture is the same.
Click to expand...

Pound Coin said:
Well, that’s interesting, thanks LCPete and Lindsay. Sounds like I was off-beam with my comment!
Click to expand...
.... Indeed you were off-beam in spite of my clear explanations about how algorithms work. But I thank you for now acknowledging it.

'nuf said :)

Page 11?
 
For a bit of perspective.

With 340 million people using Facebook’s various social media platforms, India is the company’s largest market. And Facebook’s problems on the subcontinent present an amplified version of the issues it has faced throughout the world, made worse by a lack of resources and a lack of expertise in India’s 22 officially recognized languages.

Facebook did not have enough resources in India and was unable to grapple with the problems it had introduced there, including anti-Muslim posts, according to its documents. Eighty-seven percent of the company’s global budget for time spent on classifying misinformation is earmarked for the United States, while only 13 percent is set aside for the rest of the world — even though North American users make up only 10 percent of the social network’s daily active users, according to one document describing Facebook’s allocation of resources.

On Feb. 4, 2019, a Facebook researcher created a new user account to see what it was like to experience the social media site as a person living in Kerala, India.
For the next three weeks, the account operated by a simple rule: Follow all the recommendations generated by Facebook’s algorithms to join groups, watch videos and explore new pages on the site.
The result was an inundation of hate speech, misinformation and celebrations of violence, which were documented in an internal Facebook report published later that month.

“Following this test user’s News Feed, I’ve seen more images of dead people in the past three weeks than I’ve seen in my entire life total,” the Facebook researcher wrote.

my bold

www.nytimes.com

In India, Facebook Grapples With an Amplified Version of Its Problems

Internal documents show a struggle with misinformation, hate speech and celebrations of violence in the country, the company’s biggest market.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com
 
sphexx said:
For a bit of perspective.

With 340 million people using Facebook’s various social media platforms, India is the company’s largest market. And Facebook’s problems on the subcontinent present an amplified version of the issues it has faced throughout the world, made worse by a lack of resources and a lack of expertise in India’s 22 officially recognized languages.

Facebook did not have enough resources in India and was unable to grapple with the problems it had introduced there, including anti-Muslim posts, according to its documents. Eighty-seven percent of the company’s global budget for time spent on classifying misinformation is earmarked for the United States, while only 13 percent is set aside for the rest of the world — even though North American users make up only 10 percent of the social network’s daily active users, according to one document describing Facebook’s allocation of resources.

On Feb. 4, 2019, a Facebook researcher created a new user account to see what it was like to experience the social media site as a person living in Kerala, India.
For the next three weeks, the account operated by a simple rule: Follow all the recommendations generated by Facebook’s algorithms to join groups, watch videos and explore new pages on the site.
The result was an inundation of hate speech, misinformation and celebrations of violence, which were documented in an internal Facebook report published later that month.

“Following this test user’s News Feed, I’ve seen more images of dead people in the past three weeks than I’ve seen in my entire life total,” the Facebook researcher wrote.

my bold

www.nytimes.com

In India, Facebook Grapples With an Amplified Version of Its Problems

Internal documents show a struggle with misinformation, hate speech and celebrations of violence in the country, the company’s biggest market.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com
Click to expand...
.... A good post Richard! A refreshingly objective assessment by an internal Facebook researcher.
 
Thoughtful piece from Tech Newsletter of the NYT:

Something that has pleasantly surprised me from the reporting on the documents collected by Frances Haugen, the former Facebook product manager, is how much thought and care Facebook employees seemed to have devoted to assessing the company’s apps and the ways they shape what people do and how communities and societies behave. Facebook, show us this side of yourself.

Casey Newton, a technology writer, made this case last month: “What if Facebook routinely published its findings and allowed its data to be audited? What if the company made it dramatically easier for qualified researchers to study the platform independently?”

And what if other companies in technology did the same?

Imagine if Facebook had explained out loud the ways that it wrestled with restricting posts with false information about fraud after the 2020 U.S. presidential election and whether that risked silencing legitimate political discussions.

What if Facebook had shared with the public its private assessments of the ways that features to easily share lots of posts amplified hateful or bullying posts?

Imagine if Facebook employees involved in major product design changes could — like the U.S. Supreme Court justices — write dissenting opinions explaining their disagreements to the public.

I know that some, or all, of that sounds like a fantasy. Organizations have legitimate reasons to keep secrets, including to protect their employees and customers.

But Facebook is not an ordinary organization. It’s among a tiny number of corporations whose products help shape how humans behave and what we believe.

www.nytimes.com

Facebook, Show Us the Mess

Candid looks at the inner workings of influential tech companies shouldn’t be so rare.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com
 
I thought this thread had exhausted itself. I came across another depressing story re FB and Instagram. and didn't post it.

How about this ?

Facebook is planning to change its company name next week to reflect its focus on building the metaverse, according to a source with direct knowledge of the matter.

www.theverge.com

Facebook is planning to rebrand with a new name

The tech giant wants to be known for more than social media’s ills.
www.theverge.com www.theverge.com

For those, like me, who don't know what this metaverse is about https://www.forbes.com/sites/cathyh...-coming--its-a-very-big-deal/?sh=4bb323b3440f

The one I didn't post. BBC Panorama set up a fake social media profile to investigate online misogamy on Facebook and Instagram. Researchers posing as a man with signs of hostility to women set up a false accounts. After a week the top recommended pages to follow, both on Facebook and Instagram were almost all hostile to women. The recommended material included disturbing memes about sex acts and content condoning rape, violence and harassment.

A second whistleblower has come forward. https://www.theverge.com/2021/10/22/22741024/facebook-new-whistleblower-allegations-sec
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Sky
Cobra said:
In the year 2525 ♪♪♪
maybe closer than we thought.
Click to expand...


That was good..scary..lol. I don't usually watch the adverts before a Youtube..clip and click on 'Skip Advert' but it was about holidays in Germany. Wonderful scenery.

By the way..talking about the future, last night I watched the first of five episodes of a documentry by Prof Brian Cox called 'Universe' .He said there are 200 trillion galaxies and billions and billions of stars. There has to be meaningful life, not just bacteria, elsewhere ,surely ? Scientists calculate that the Universe will end ..quietly.. in 10 trillion years. and red dwarf stars will be the last as they 'slow burn'. I'm not sure if that's long enough for Spurs to win any silverware, though... :(.............:D

Universe..https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p09ybpb8/universe-series-1-1-the-sun-god-star
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top