At the end of the day, all these people gave up is their jobs with Google. They're not going to stop the ball rolling with this act. There's plenty of people with less-than-perfect moral compass that'll fill those shoes.
Commendable, but I think it'd been much braver to keep your job and fight against this from the inside. Quitting is just quitting.
It's mail fraud, and the federal government's law enforcement arm frowns mightily on this. This guy will be getting his very own concrete bedroom for a very very long time if convicted.
Pretty fascinating that evolution takes the same path, biological or mechanical, when presented with the same challenge situation. Super fascinating. Makes you wonder about mammals, if a computer is evolving the same mechanisms as real-world life did.
Large companies have been using computers for basic phone tasks for a while, if there is a stigma isn't doesn't matter because you have no choice
Completely different. I'm assuming you're speaking of voicemail in all it's incarnations. Totally different. You are calling a robot. And you know you are, and who you're calling. When a robot calls you, at the moment, it's almost always telemarketers, scammers, or surveyors. And most people don't want to talk to those kinds of robots. To the point, as soon as they conclude it's a robot, they hang-up.
In my case, I even hang-up on robots I solicit calls from. Like my pharmacy, they have an automated system that calls when scripts are ready, and as soon as I realize it's them, I just hang up and proceed to the pharmacy. Nothing further I need to know beyond it's ready.
FBI Director Christopher Wray has suggested that devices could be designed to allow investigators to access them, though he insists the bureau is not looking for a "back door."
This guy clearly has no idea what a back door is, cuz he wants one, but then he doesn't, in the same sentence.
And we're entrusting these guys with sensitive national security secrets and such? Ouch.
And knowing Congress, they'll find a way to mess this up.
I believe that all production environment calls (essentially, calls not being made for internal test purposes) from Google's Duplex system should be required by Google to include an initial verbal warning to the called party that they have been called by an automated system, not by a human being -- the exact wording of that announcement to be determined.
OK First this right here is a major hurdle. If you make this thing warn people it's a robocall, most folks will just hang up immediately, thinking it's yet another sales pitch, or free cruise, or health insurance, gawd there's so many now. So this is DOA if it's gotta announce it's automated.
But as a side note, it's going to be amusing when our 'AI's start calling each other to whatever, communicating in simulated english or whatever spoken language the systems in question are trained on.
Obviously the real solution is for your hair stylist and favorite restaurant have some non-verbal mechanism for arranging appointments or reservations or whatever. Obviously every one and every company and every little this and that can't have their own App for achieving this, which is what some larger companies are doing to migrate 'ordering stuff' from humans talking to humans to humans just fondling their portable personal computer.
I'm imagine whomever cobbles such a system together and convinces a large segment of the population to use it is going to be rich. But this Duplex thing? DOA. The stigma surrounding robocalls is all bad, and all deserved I'm afraid.
Obviously, a "gas chamber". That term has some baggage.
Well, they don't call the room they do lethal injected in the "Poison by injection room." I think it's just the execution room, and that can still apply here, and hopefully it's good enough to soothe your sensibilities.
because web games are universally terrible anyway.
Pretty much this. Web games are essentially digital drugs. They're addictive by design and their entire goal is to try to get you frustrated enough to pay up for boosters and items. Nothing of value was lost.
Google is deciding which businesses are valid and which are not? Wow. Queue evil overlord music already?
You know I could almost say "Sure why not." but then I remembered this is the same company probably serving malware over their networks because they're not vetting very well.
Then I noticed a post in this same discussion about the target market for bondsmen services isn't likely using the internet regularly, if at all. So, Google takes a moral stance on bullshit when it doesn't even matter cuz bondsmen don't advertise on Google? Why?
Is this some ploy to win 'feel good' points? Cuz for me, it's just the opposite, all I feel is creeped out.
It seems like this is an issue with a simple fix......
Intriguing idea, but it only addresses one issue in a rats-nest of issues. The issue of pay for part-timers, they are paid less than full time employees in general. There's retirement benefits, insurance benefits, hours of work given to the employee, paid sick and vacation time, etc.
The issue is, the average John and Jane Doe can't find a job they can survive on. I mean, paying the bills, putting food on the table. No one is offering jobs in low-skilled fields that anyone can actually live decently on. And don't even say 'get some skills,' SOMEONE has to do those low skilled jobs. They don't do themselves. Just band-aid'ing one issue isn't going to fix the overall problem.
Even with that band-aid, there is still absolutely no incentive for an employer to retain full-time employees. It would put such a company at an economic disadvantage to their competitors using part-timers exclusively. Who's gunna do that? I'm not. Are you? See the problem? If there's no incentive, it's not gunna happen. There's incentive to NOT hire fulltime, and what are we seeing? No fulltime positions.
And heaven forbid you have a personal emergency, and need time off. You'll just be let go in favor of the guy who will be available, at least until he has his emergency and is let go. There's no job security in a part-time job. And people are forced into existing in this security-less situation where they can lose their job for no reason at all. They are forced into less than optimal employment arrangements, cuz that's all they can get. The problem feeds right back into itself, treat people like shit, tell them you got 53209482 more applicants itching to take your job, so deal with it or take a hike. People do the only thing they can do, deal with it, even if it's really unfair and demeaning. Employers win, cuz they got piles of applications from desperate people willing to take the shitty employment.
Our society (Americans) has concluded low-skilled jobs are not as 'real' as high-skilled jobs, and we've collectively decided to screw everyone working low-skill jobs like they're second-rate citizens. Someone has to do those jobs and it's pretty fucked up that our society has demeaned them in this way.
It seems to me, a majority of technology companies seem to not be learning. We've been here, before. More than once. And it's not exactly news that you never store a plain-text password anywhere, ever.
I mean what the hell are they teaching in computer science courses now? This should not be happening, so frequently. An occasional lazy outlier perhaps, but big tech firms like Twitter? No excuse. They should be fined by some government entity, obviously just the bad publicity isn't enough to get companies to do the right thing, perhaps some fines will right the ship of irresponsible handling of user data.
Maybe the entire architecture paradigm needs a start-from-scratch perspective?
We've been doctoring and hacking the PC architecture for what, 30 years now? Under the hood, everything still basically laid out the same as it was with the first 286 and 386 machines. Not much has changed. Maybe it's time to redo everything?
Everyone should think about this every time the Trump administration 'rolls back' some rule or regulation.
Someone got hurt, was poisoned, sold a shoddy product, swindled, defrauded, or otherwise injured by some one else, and in the course of remedying the situation, a rule or regulation was enacted to prevent another person from being injured in the same way by the same negligence or willful act that caused that injury.
At the time the rule or regulation was enacted, it seemed like a good idea. Just remember that, at the time, it seemed like a good idea. And someone or many someone were probably hurt that gave rise to the rule or regulation.
Trump's election to POTUS has to be the mark of the golden age for lawyers. Sooooo many lawsuits from every direction, aimed at so many facets of Trump's administration. Wow.
Law school graduates definitely having no problem finding work, I imagine.
Just as a point of reference, as a general rule of thumb, most lawsuits filed in court, are vetted extensively before hand and are not even considered for presentation to a court unless the plaintiff has a fairly high confidence they will prevail.
As another interesting tidbit, these lawsuits are being paid for by taxpayer money, on both sides. And the judges too, taxpayer funded. In fact the entire spectacle is taxpayer funded, down to every cup of coffee and yellow legal pad. Maybe you should talk to your representative about this?
The basic crux of the problem here is part-time employment. It's been abused and misused to an extreme that is just unimaginable.
What used to be a rare sight, a fluke, a unicorn in the overall job market, the part-time job. The paper-boy route for the aspiring teenager. Or the babysitting gig for the stay-at-home mom.
Someone took this and ran into hell with in it and dragged us all along for a painful experience that we're currently living through. Part-time was never supposed to be a career choice. It was never supposed to be the only thing you could find. It was a stop-gap, a place for the teenager or young adult. Now it's become THE JOB MARKET. Fulltime employment is hard to come by now.
Why? Well, because part-time employees are cheaper. You don't have to pay benefits, or retirement plans for part-time employees. It's supposed to be a temporary job after all, not your career. But now, it is. The part-time job has metamorphosed into the mechanism by which the employer is abusing the employee. When they realized the gold-mine of cheap labor they had with the part-time employee, they did any good business person would do. They got rid of the expensive full-time employees and just hired a few more part-timers to fill the gaps.
Now employers are taking it a step further. Our employees, they're not employees at all. At least on paper. We pay them as contractors and as such, we're not subject to ANY employer/employee rules at all. Even cheaper. Nice. Another win for the top. Yay?
The race to the bottom is making no winners except for those at the very top. And you jerkoffs who come in here and scream personal rights about part-time or 'gig employment', you can just go take a flying leap. Your kind landed us in this awful situation, and I don't think you have any right to say anything anymore. The part-time job needs to be restored to a temporary thing, not the new normal. An awful lot of people died, spent time in jails, or detention camps, to win the rights we have as employees and I think it's pretty fucking selfish for some of our population to sell that out for their own selfish reasons.
One could easily twist all that logic right back atcha, bro.
One could say, you are forcing everyone into this kind of job market where no one pays a living wage, not even for full time employment. We are in fact, required, by your thinking, to hold several 'little jobs', juggle their schedules within the confines of our own lives, so your wife can take up part-time babysitting at a wage no one could survive on?
You see what's happening, your personal freedom claim is affecting everyone around you. When you force the bar to go this low, no one is winning here, we're all getting shorted at the end of the day. Why pay anyone a living wage if no incentive for me to do so? I'll just call you an independent contractor and pay you way under minimum wage with no benefits or pension for long service to your business. I mean, do you think all that stuff came out of people who were happy with how things were going? Read some history bro, workers got sick of your mentality and revolted, employers had to change their ways to get ANY labor after that.
But they're been eroding away unions for decades now, and brainwashing the likes of you into thinking all these rules are infringing on their personal freedom to fuck people over. Learn some history before you post again.
I see the left as that homeless guy who'd give you his very last dollar if he thought it'd improve your day.
I see the right as the people who'd come to this homeless guy and sell him something he doesn't need, to get that last dollar, as if it were the last one on earth.
Most folks on the right are self-starters, independent, etc, not without compassion or morals. But they're DRIVEN by these factors. They earned every dollar that they have and are mighty protective of what they have. They earned it, they shouldn't be required to share ANY. They're more likely to teach someone how to do something before they'd give that someone -anything- of value. Self-reliance is a pillar of this mindset. If you can't make it on your own, well, like when a hatchling bird leaves the nest, fly or not, you're on your own. Sink or swim, and all that.
Most folks on the left are self-starters, independent, etc, not without compassion or morals, but they're DRIVEN by these factors. They make enough money to get by, and beyond that, they probably give excess money to those who need it and/or volunteer their excess time to worthy causes. And you know, some days, it just doesn't all go right and they're not afraid to ask a stranger for a hand up. Herd mentality and health seems is a pillar of the left. We're all in this together. Sometimes the herd health overrides personal health and considerations, the left understands this, or at least appears to.
Somewhere between these two extremes is the majority of Americans.
AI isn't going to solve this problem. Not even close. For as long as automated systems of any kind have existed, we humans have figured out how to game such systems into doing things they're not supposed to do. Depending on an AI to filter your advertisers sounds like folly AT BEST. You need real people, who can read between the lines and see the bullshit where it is. It's just too easy and will remain easy, to manipulate automated systems into an undesired result.
Seriously, how hard is it for Facebook to maintain a proper marketing team that interacts (with humans!) with advertisers, learning who they are, what they're trying to achieve, etc. The race for the bottom is not making any winners, except for those at the very top. Stop it. Pay some people to handle this stuff, humans are better than any AI, always will be.
Sounds like Facebook is expecting everyone else to do their job of filtering bad actors from the advertisement stream.
That's pretty screwed up. Shouldn't that be Facebook's job, to vet the people buying advertisement on their platform?
Then I realized, if they vet their advertisers, they'd probably have to reject a majority of advertisement dollars cuz they actually bothered to look and can't claim ignorance like they've come to enjoy doing. Broken. Very broken.
While I'm usually of the camp that says leave people alone, if their site is retarded and broken, people will eventually learn that and stop using the site, this is such a scourge on the world, making it so insanely easy for anyone with a few bucks to spread mountains of misinformation.. yeah, something has to be done, this cannot be allowed. Social responsibility > Site freedom.
The really sad part of this all, is that social responsibility seems to be requiring laws and regulations to get these types of companies to be responsible. I mean, shouldn't that be like.. second nature? Don't be 100% a dick?
It's SMS. PITA to encrypt, both parties need to do so the same way.
Just because it's hard, doesn't mean it shouldn't be done. I've heard this excuse on other platforms as well in regards to securing messaging subsystems against third party eavesdropping.
Considering the hot-button topic end-to-end encrypted communications are becoming, and the lackluster deployment of such proven technologies to secure this stuff, there is simply no excuse for doing this without encryption. Someone is getting paid to not implement it right.
And frankly, if it's not right, it's not even worth wasting MY time using it. Back to the design board for all dem engineers, come back when you've solved it.
The measure underscores "the requirement for clear and plain language when explaining consent,"
Won't help. You could put a copy of Game of Thrones novels in those end-user license agreements and people still would not read them. No one reads that stuff. It's not going to matter if it's comprehensible to the layman or not.
Obviously, we need something entirely different to fill this void. It's obviously a problem, but how do you re-train the enitre population to start reading that stuff? Tall order there. Good luck!
Slashdot Mirror
At the end of the day, all these people gave up is their jobs with Google. They're not going to stop the ball rolling with this act. There's plenty of people with less-than-perfect moral compass that'll fill those shoes.
Commendable, but I think it'd been much braver to keep your job and fight against this from the inside. Quitting is just quitting.
It's mail fraud, and the federal government's law enforcement arm frowns mightily on this. This guy will be getting his very own concrete bedroom for a very very long time if convicted.
Pretty fascinating that evolution takes the same path, biological or mechanical, when presented with the same challenge situation. Super fascinating. Makes you wonder about mammals, if a computer is evolving the same mechanisms as real-world life did.
Large companies have been using computers for basic phone tasks for a while, if there is a stigma isn't doesn't matter because you have no choice
Completely different. I'm assuming you're speaking of voicemail in all it's incarnations. Totally different. You are calling a robot. And you know you are, and who you're calling. When a robot calls you, at the moment, it's almost always telemarketers, scammers, or surveyors. And most people don't want to talk to those kinds of robots. To the point, as soon as they conclude it's a robot, they hang-up.
In my case, I even hang-up on robots I solicit calls from. Like my pharmacy, they have an automated system that calls when scripts are ready, and as soon as I realize it's them, I just hang up and proceed to the pharmacy. Nothing further I need to know beyond it's ready.
FBI Director Christopher Wray has suggested that devices could be designed to allow investigators to access them, though he insists the bureau is not looking for a "back door."
This guy clearly has no idea what a back door is, cuz he wants one, but then he doesn't, in the same sentence.
And we're entrusting these guys with sensitive national security secrets and such? Ouch.
And knowing Congress, they'll find a way to mess this up.
I believe that all production environment calls (essentially, calls not being made for internal test purposes) from Google's Duplex system should be required by Google to include an initial verbal warning to the called party that they have been called by an automated system, not by a human being -- the exact wording of that announcement to be determined.
OK First this right here is a major hurdle. If you make this thing warn people it's a robocall, most folks will just hang up immediately, thinking it's yet another sales pitch, or free cruise, or health insurance, gawd there's so many now. So this is DOA if it's gotta announce it's automated.
But as a side note, it's going to be amusing when our 'AI's start calling each other to whatever, communicating in simulated english or whatever spoken language the systems in question are trained on.
Obviously the real solution is for your hair stylist and favorite restaurant have some non-verbal mechanism for arranging appointments or reservations or whatever. Obviously every one and every company and every little this and that can't have their own App for achieving this, which is what some larger companies are doing to migrate 'ordering stuff' from humans talking to humans to humans just fondling their portable personal computer.
I'm imagine whomever cobbles such a system together and convinces a large segment of the population to use it is going to be rich. But this Duplex thing? DOA. The stigma surrounding robocalls is all bad, and all deserved I'm afraid.
Obviously, a "gas chamber". That term has some baggage.
Well, they don't call the room they do lethal injected in the "Poison by injection room." I think it's just the execution room, and that can still apply here, and hopefully it's good enough to soothe your sensibilities.
because web games are universally terrible anyway.
Pretty much this. Web games are essentially digital drugs. They're addictive by design and their entire goal is to try to get you frustrated enough to pay up for boosters and items. Nothing of value was lost.
Google is deciding which businesses are valid and which are not? Wow. Queue evil overlord music already?
You know I could almost say "Sure why not." but then I remembered this is the same company probably serving malware over their networks because they're not vetting very well.
Then I noticed a post in this same discussion about the target market for bondsmen services isn't likely using the internet regularly, if at all. So, Google takes a moral stance on bullshit when it doesn't even matter cuz bondsmen don't advertise on Google? Why?
Is this some ploy to win 'feel good' points? Cuz for me, it's just the opposite, all I feel is creeped out.
And we're back here again, pointing out why Turnkey solutions for internet connected servers is BAD NEWS!
They wanna send these things into space? Screw that, we need those HERE on planet Earth. Mass produce those babies!
Clean energy for all, in a compact ruggized enclosure? I mean if someone takes it apart and dies from radiation, well that's on them.
It seems like this is an issue with a simple fix......
Intriguing idea, but it only addresses one issue in a rats-nest of issues. The issue of pay for part-timers, they are paid less than full time employees in general. There's retirement benefits, insurance benefits, hours of work given to the employee, paid sick and vacation time, etc.
The issue is, the average John and Jane Doe can't find a job they can survive on. I mean, paying the bills, putting food on the table. No one is offering jobs in low-skilled fields that anyone can actually live decently on. And don't even say 'get some skills,' SOMEONE has to do those low skilled jobs. They don't do themselves. Just band-aid'ing one issue isn't going to fix the overall problem.
Even with that band-aid, there is still absolutely no incentive for an employer to retain full-time employees. It would put such a company at an economic disadvantage to their competitors using part-timers exclusively. Who's gunna do that? I'm not. Are you? See the problem? If there's no incentive, it's not gunna happen. There's incentive to NOT hire fulltime, and what are we seeing? No fulltime positions.
And heaven forbid you have a personal emergency, and need time off. You'll just be let go in favor of the guy who will be available, at least until he has his emergency and is let go. There's no job security in a part-time job. And people are forced into existing in this security-less situation where they can lose their job for no reason at all. They are forced into less than optimal employment arrangements, cuz that's all they can get. The problem feeds right back into itself, treat people like shit, tell them you got 53209482 more applicants itching to take your job, so deal with it or take a hike. People do the only thing they can do, deal with it, even if it's really unfair and demeaning. Employers win, cuz they got piles of applications from desperate people willing to take the shitty employment.
Our society (Americans) has concluded low-skilled jobs are not as 'real' as high-skilled jobs, and we've collectively decided to screw everyone working low-skill jobs like they're second-rate citizens. Someone has to do those jobs and it's pretty fucked up that our society has demeaned them in this way.
It seems to me, a majority of technology companies seem to not be learning. We've been here, before. More than once. And it's not exactly news that you never store a plain-text password anywhere, ever.
I mean what the hell are they teaching in computer science courses now? This should not be happening, so frequently. An occasional lazy outlier perhaps, but big tech firms like Twitter? No excuse. They should be fined by some government entity, obviously just the bad publicity isn't enough to get companies to do the right thing, perhaps some fines will right the ship of irresponsible handling of user data.
Maybe the entire architecture paradigm needs a start-from-scratch perspective?
We've been doctoring and hacking the PC architecture for what, 30 years now? Under the hood, everything still basically laid out the same as it was with the first 286 and 386 machines. Not much has changed. Maybe it's time to redo everything?
Everyone should think about this every time the Trump administration 'rolls back' some rule or regulation.
Someone got hurt, was poisoned, sold a shoddy product, swindled, defrauded, or otherwise injured by some one else, and in the course of remedying the situation, a rule or regulation was enacted to prevent another person from being injured in the same way by the same negligence or willful act that caused that injury.
At the time the rule or regulation was enacted, it seemed like a good idea. Just remember that, at the time, it seemed like a good idea. And someone or many someone were probably hurt that gave rise to the rule or regulation.
Trump's election to POTUS has to be the mark of the golden age for lawyers. Sooooo many lawsuits from every direction, aimed at so many facets of Trump's administration. Wow.
Law school graduates definitely having no problem finding work, I imagine.
Just as a point of reference, as a general rule of thumb, most lawsuits filed in court, are vetted extensively before hand and are not even considered for presentation to a court unless the plaintiff has a fairly high confidence they will prevail.
As another interesting tidbit, these lawsuits are being paid for by taxpayer money, on both sides. And the judges too, taxpayer funded. In fact the entire spectacle is taxpayer funded, down to every cup of coffee and yellow legal pad. Maybe you should talk to your representative about this?
The basic crux of the problem here is part-time employment. It's been abused and misused to an extreme that is just unimaginable.
What used to be a rare sight, a fluke, a unicorn in the overall job market, the part-time job. The paper-boy route for the aspiring teenager. Or the babysitting gig for the stay-at-home mom.
Someone took this and ran into hell with in it and dragged us all along for a painful experience that we're currently living through. Part-time was never supposed to be a career choice. It was never supposed to be the only thing you could find. It was a stop-gap, a place for the teenager or young adult. Now it's become THE JOB MARKET. Fulltime employment is hard to come by now.
Why? Well, because part-time employees are cheaper. You don't have to pay benefits, or retirement plans for part-time employees. It's supposed to be a temporary job after all, not your career. But now, it is. The part-time job has metamorphosed into the mechanism by which the employer is abusing the employee. When they realized the gold-mine of cheap labor they had with the part-time employee, they did any good business person would do. They got rid of the expensive full-time employees and just hired a few more part-timers to fill the gaps.
Now employers are taking it a step further. Our employees, they're not employees at all. At least on paper. We pay them as contractors and as such, we're not subject to ANY employer/employee rules at all. Even cheaper. Nice. Another win for the top. Yay?
The race to the bottom is making no winners except for those at the very top. And you jerkoffs who come in here and scream personal rights about part-time or 'gig employment', you can just go take a flying leap. Your kind landed us in this awful situation, and I don't think you have any right to say anything anymore. The part-time job needs to be restored to a temporary thing, not the new normal. An awful lot of people died, spent time in jails, or detention camps, to win the rights we have as employees and I think it's pretty fucking selfish for some of our population to sell that out for their own selfish reasons.
One could easily twist all that logic right back atcha, bro.
One could say, you are forcing everyone into this kind of job market where no one pays a living wage, not even for full time employment. We are in fact, required, by your thinking, to hold several 'little jobs', juggle their schedules within the confines of our own lives, so your wife can take up part-time babysitting at a wage no one could survive on?
You see what's happening, your personal freedom claim is affecting everyone around you. When you force the bar to go this low, no one is winning here, we're all getting shorted at the end of the day. Why pay anyone a living wage if no incentive for me to do so? I'll just call you an independent contractor and pay you way under minimum wage with no benefits or pension for long service to your business. I mean, do you think all that stuff came out of people who were happy with how things were going? Read some history bro, workers got sick of your mentality and revolted, employers had to change their ways to get ANY labor after that.
But they're been eroding away unions for decades now, and brainwashing the likes of you into thinking all these rules are infringing on their personal freedom to fuck people over. Learn some history before you post again.
I see the left as that homeless guy who'd give you his very last dollar if he thought it'd improve your day.
I see the right as the people who'd come to this homeless guy and sell him something he doesn't need, to get that last dollar, as if it were the last one on earth.
Most folks on the right are self-starters, independent, etc, not without compassion or morals. But they're DRIVEN by these factors. They earned every dollar that they have and are mighty protective of what they have. They earned it, they shouldn't be required to share ANY. They're more likely to teach someone how to do something before they'd give that someone -anything- of value. Self-reliance is a pillar of this mindset. If you can't make it on your own, well, like when a hatchling bird leaves the nest, fly or not, you're on your own. Sink or swim, and all that.
Most folks on the left are self-starters, independent, etc, not without compassion or morals, but they're DRIVEN by these factors. They make enough money to get by, and beyond that, they probably give excess money to those who need it and/or volunteer their excess time to worthy causes. And you know, some days, it just doesn't all go right and they're not afraid to ask a stranger for a hand up. Herd mentality and health seems is a pillar of the left. We're all in this together. Sometimes the herd health overrides personal health and considerations, the left understands this, or at least appears to.
Somewhere between these two extremes is the majority of Americans.
AI isn't going to solve this problem. Not even close. For as long as automated systems of any kind have existed, we humans have figured out how to game such systems into doing things they're not supposed to do. Depending on an AI to filter your advertisers sounds like folly AT BEST. You need real people, who can read between the lines and see the bullshit where it is. It's just too easy and will remain easy, to manipulate automated systems into an undesired result.
Seriously, how hard is it for Facebook to maintain a proper marketing team that interacts (with humans!) with advertisers, learning who they are, what they're trying to achieve, etc. The race for the bottom is not making any winners, except for those at the very top. Stop it. Pay some people to handle this stuff, humans are better than any AI, always will be.
Sounds like Facebook is expecting everyone else to do their job of filtering bad actors from the advertisement stream.
That's pretty screwed up. Shouldn't that be Facebook's job, to vet the people buying advertisement on their platform?
Then I realized, if they vet their advertisers, they'd probably have to reject a majority of advertisement dollars cuz they actually bothered to look and can't claim ignorance like they've come to enjoy doing. Broken. Very broken.
While I'm usually of the camp that says leave people alone, if their site is retarded and broken, people will eventually learn that and stop using the site, this is such a scourge on the world, making it so insanely easy for anyone with a few bucks to spread mountains of misinformation.. yeah, something has to be done, this cannot be allowed. Social responsibility > Site freedom.
The really sad part of this all, is that social responsibility seems to be requiring laws and regulations to get these types of companies to be responsible. I mean, shouldn't that be like.. second nature? Don't be 100% a dick?
It's SMS. PITA to encrypt, both parties need to do so the same way.
Just because it's hard, doesn't mean it shouldn't be done. I've heard this excuse on other platforms as well in regards to securing messaging subsystems against third party eavesdropping.
Considering the hot-button topic end-to-end encrypted communications are becoming, and the lackluster deployment of such proven technologies to secure this stuff, there is simply no excuse for doing this without encryption. Someone is getting paid to not implement it right.
And frankly, if it's not right, it's not even worth wasting MY time using it. Back to the design board for all dem engineers, come back when you've solved it.
I suppose you could do like some of the game copy protections of old used to do.
"Please enter the 4th word on the 6th paragraph to agree."
Probably still won't help.
The measure underscores "the requirement for clear and plain language when explaining consent,"
Won't help. You could put a copy of Game of Thrones novels in those end-user license agreements and people still would not read them. No one reads that stuff. It's not going to matter if it's comprehensible to the layman or not.
Obviously, we need something entirely different to fill this void. It's obviously a problem, but how do you re-train the enitre population to start reading that stuff? Tall order there. Good luck!
Lawful or not, I am going to employ the most aggressive ad-blocking setup I can get my hands on. Try and stop me.