Slashdot Mirror
Facebook Monitoring Your Reactions To Serve You Ads, Warn Belgian Police (independent.co.uk)
An anonymous reader writes: Belgian police have asked citizens to shun Facebook's "Reactions" buttons to protect their privacy. In February, five new "Reaction" buttons were added next to the "Like" button to allow people to display responses such as sad, wow, angry, love and haha. According to reports, police said Facebook is able to use the tool to tell when people are likely to be in a good mood -- and then decide when is the best time to show them ads. "The icons help not only express your feelings, they also help Facebook assess the effectiveness of the ads on your profile," a post on Belgian's official police website read.The Independent reports: "By limiting the number of icons to six, Facebook is counting on you to express your thoughts more easily so that the algorithms that run in the background are more effective," the post continues. "By mouse clicks you can let them know what makes you happy. "So that will help Facebook find the perfect location, on your profile, allowing it to display content that will arouse your curiosity but also to choose the time you present it. If it appears that you are in a good mood, it can deduce that you are more receptive and able to sell spaces explaining advertisers that they will have more chance to see you react."
To spy on us together.
In fact, I wonder why they limit internet in jail, they could spy on their prisoners just that much more effectively.
It doesn't get any less news than this.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
I see Captain Obvious is in charge of the Belgian police.
Everything Facebook does is to support its ad-based revenue model. "More options for users" is not the same as "more options for the customer", since the users with profiles are not the customer, the ad agencies are.
Why wouldn't any "social media" platform do exactly this? Is this news to anyone?
Seriously, the solution to being annoyed by Facebook is... DON'T USE FACEBOOK!
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
"Free" service? No, sucking on you and making a buck on it, that what it boils down to.
When they came out, I studied their terms of use, did not like it at all, skipped it and never looked back.
Every now and then, there are news about this service that this is not right, that is fishy etc., so why bother at all?
The essence of this is rotten, anyone else may enjoy it, not my game, got nicer things to do.....
There's ads on Facebook? Where?
I was happy, why did you show me ads and made me angry?
Oh wait, I've an adblock, I can stay happy.
What happens is every time I'm shown an ad I hate the next dozens posts I see? Will facebook stop showing me ads?
"Grab them by the pussy" -- President of the United States of America
Do you seriously not understand how to parse headlines, or do you just think that you're more clever than you really are?
Do you seriously think that hiding behind AC and throwing insults at others makes you appear clever?
The headline would be unambiguous if written "Facebook Monitors Your Reaction To Serve You Ads, Belgian Police Warns". English as she is spoken, and all that.
You just gotta love this: when the police does nothing more useful than stuff their face with donuts and coffee, people complain - and rightfully so. When they do something useful, like warning people about the evils of Facebook, people still get pissed off.
Come on dude, give the fuzz a break and encourage them to do this more often.
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
It's not the NSA, it's the CIA.
Do you seriously not understand how to parse headlines, or do you just think that you're more clever than you really are?
I interpreted the headline exactly as GP did, because it's a very common way to construct headlines. X does Y [in order] to Z1, [implied "and also to"] Z2.
Thus (in a more perfect world): "Microsoft discontinues forced Windows 10 upgrade program to stem rising tide of consumer fury, avoid $9 billion in fines."
Here, simply reordering or adding an "s" to "warn" would've cleared up the confusion. It made it look like Facebook was doing this to serve you ads and warn Belgian police. Which, honestly, is why I clicked on TFH in the first place, because it sounded odd as hell.
Nothing posted to
Nope, get off their asses, get off Facebook and go catch thieves, murders, rapists, kidnappers, business criminals, etc.
Haven't you people got the message yet? Go back to email lists or (gasp!) telephone calls to stay in touch with people. After you exclude the fake online-only friends, most people will be down to about a dozen anyway, easy enough to manage.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
I dont think he wants to constipate DNS lookups with a 100+mb host file APK.
Even if cached 100% in RAM, it takes non-trivial amounts of time to parse enormous lists, and it is seriously bad policy to have to parse an enormous list on each and every lookup.
That's why DNS is designed the way it is, so that smaller lists are parsed on lookups.
Not to mention the baked in improvements in managing deployment, given dns's centralized nature vs managing gods knows how many instances of a corpulent hosts file.
I know you will suffer a brain aneurism and die if you ever realize how futile your trolling er... hmm.. "evangelism" is, but just a slight clue wont be so fatal, will it?
I do not fear ads. Even without adblocker. Let them tailor the ads.
I fear their control over me and me losing control. ... and people will read it less. Emphasise it and more people will click, read and notice.
First just the usability. I fear, that they optimize my timeline and stuff so i miss things, which i wanted to see (because i want to see what i subscribed for, not what facebook thinks which is relevant to me)
Seconds, the control. Serve me more of the one side, less of the other one. You may be able to manipulate me that way. Hide stuff, make it harder to find
Optimizing ads is a business model i could accept. Even using my content and feeding it into the systems of the advertisers would be okay in a perfect world, where i can be sure it is never used out of scope. There would be no problem with data collections, even ones which are never deleted, if it would be clear, that they never leak, get abused or change scope. An advertiser with a whole dossier about me would be no danger, if i could be sure he won't cooperate with the next facebook to lead me to the "correct" political articles.
But in the real world, data is collected, then it's minded and used for whatever idea somebody has. It's sold and bought and the ToS said they are allowed to do so. The new startup buys it as soon as it has enough money and they know you even before you sign up. And they use it to make you sign up, not just to tailor ads to you. They use it to sell you things (you would not have bought otherwise) or make you pay in other ways. ... you do not know.
And finally there are political actors, which make companies use the data in their sense. If it's just telling them which policial claim will get them popularity or if it's serving you the correct content to form your opinion
I often honestly forget Facebook even has ads. Gg uBlock Origin.
"He looked at a Jennifer Lawrence picture for 2 1/2 minutes. Serve up a pizza ad!"
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Click on a random reaction button for every post you see. (Or alternatively, click on the same reaction button for everything.)
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Really? This is news? For nerds?
"lt;dr" is the correct response to most of my posts.
Since when was it a good idea to limit the customer's expression of moods to 6? Or indeed any number?
I get that many services limit post response buttons (Like most prominently). And I'm well aware that querying such responses is made much easier when the responses are constrained. However I've never considered a Like button a mood indicator. And when it's cast as a mood indicator, it just seems like a terrible idea to limit the user to some set number that makes data analysis easier. You either alienate and drive people who are unhappy with the choices offered. Or you push them to make a selection that's off in some way. Or they become lurkers.
Is that the height of customer profiling technology? Is that customer service?
They're limited for multiple reasons.
Primarily, it simplifies categorisation and logging and reporting, etc.
Also, the more choices you give a user the worse, generally speaking. People don't like making choices, or prefer simpler choices.
6 is plenty to start with in any event - prove the system works before overcomplicating it. They can always revise it at any time (already have, and will again).
I'm actually surprised they went to 6 so quickly, but, from what I recall, they did a lot of testing before rolling it out publically worldwide.
"lt;dr" is the correct response to most of my posts.