Facebook's CEO Promotes "Group Living Rooms": What's Zuckerberg Really After?

-edited

Zuckerberg is promoting private rooms. What's the real reason?

Touting Facebook's new social network redesign, Mark Zuckerberg talked up digital ‘living rooms’ where people can have more revealing, intimate conversations.

MarketWatch writer Quentin Fottrell is more than a bit suspicious, and so am I. Please consider Facebook wants you to have more meaningful conversations, but that means giving up more valuable data.

Standing in front of a giant screen with the words, “The future is private,” Zuckerberg said. However, privacy advocates and communications experts are skeptical about the site’s redesign. While they agree that it’s in Facebook’s best interests to improve privacy, they also say that users won’t be distracted by Facebook’s logo and see the platform as more integrated into their desktop, while online groups will encourage them to reveal even more personal beliefs and details from their lives.

“There’s something more at work here,” says Adam Levin, founder of Scottsdale, Ariz.-based CyberScout, a global data and identity protection company. “By creating groups we will be doing Facebook’s work for it. The more people who come together to talk about their interests — whether they’re political, financial or religious — the more data Facebook can collect. There’s nothing more delicious for Facebook than having people come into groups and talk.”

Digital Living Room

Digital Living Room Cameras

People may be more likely to reveal illnesses, mental-health issues or even quirky or embarrassing hobbies, she said. This could be anything from men who like Mattel Barbie dolls and My Little Pony to Donald Trump supporters living in liberal enclaves that would be otherwise reluctant to share their political views, Kovacs North said. “Anything you think is private is public, and anything you think is temporary is permanent. Facebook aggregates data for advertisers, but other people can simply take a screenshot,” she added.

Zuckerberg disagrees of course.

I have little use for Facebook. I was very concerned about privacy issues long before Facebook privacy issues became the talk of the town, and rightly so.

It's All About You

As long as you are comfortable sharing your personal data with advertisers, whether or not Zuckerberg proclaims he won't, then who am I to disagree?

Otherwise Adam Levin hits the nail on the head:

We’re about to enter the most hotly contested presidential election in modern history. Imagine the data Facebook can acquire from group chats. They give Facebook an opportunity to virtually eavesdrop. Mark Zuckerberg wants you to think that it’s all about you. And it is. But not exactly in the way that you think.”

Mike "Mish" Shedlock

Comments (18)
No. 1-12
stillCJ
stillCJ

Editor

The quote at the end from Levin sums it up perfectly.

JonSellers
JonSellers

"There’s nothing more delicious for Facebook than having people come into groups and talk.”

There is some great documentation about how people self-select discussion forums that reinforce their own beliefs. I'm more interested in how the government can inject information into conversations to move those beliefs.

For example, a group may strongly support President Trump. Maybe the NSA can place stories on websites that people visit that, while not necessarily disparaging the President, but just provide arguments as to why he might not be effective. Maybe produce just enough doubt that folks don't show up to vote. You only have to sway about 5% of the voting electorate to determine elections.

RonJ
RonJ

Come into my den, said the spider to the fly.

RonJ
RonJ

Standing in front of a giant screen with the words, “The future is private,” Zuckerberg said.

It is, as long as you are not in the presence of a digital spy device, such as Facebook. Zuckerberg is being Orwellian in his propaganda, or is it Goebbels?

gdpetti
gdpetti

It's all about getting the herd to censor themselves.. free will slavery... no one is forcing people into this pen called social media.... especially the govt ones, the FAANGs etc... they just know how to make themselves look sexy... typical advertising... typically used everywhere until force is needed.

ksdude
ksdude

Little Hitler is at it again.

Blacklisted
Blacklisted

The end goal is to track and find money for an increasingly broke govt. People are always quick to say, "why should I care, I have nothing to hide". The answer is capital cares that govt is looking under every carpet and couch cushion for lose change. FATCA was the start, which forced every foreign bank to rat out US account holders. Money that is needed for growth will continue to get off the grid and park in unproductive assets the more govt comes looking.

thimk
thimk

clients would pay big bucks to "listen in ". maybe even bid on the listening time . I really think Zuckerberg is pushing the envelope on this one .

Stuki
Stuki

Facebook may be at the extreme end of voluntarily submitted to surveilance initiatives, but it's only going in one direction for them all. And it's not the right one.

Knowledge about others is power. The more knowledge the ruling castes have about the rest, the more, and cheaper, they can get away with oppressing them. For the rulers' own benefit. Which guarantees that no "solution" to this will ever emanate from the ruling castes themselves.

Instead, the solutions will come from the far, far other side. Those with the most to lose, as opposed to gain, by surveillance: The jihadists, drug and kiddieporn peddlers, tax evaders, terrorists and random dudes out to whack the Prez for fame and kicks.

Of course, those guys will, rightly or wrongly but utterly irrelevantly, be labelled "baaaad" by those who benefits from the surveillance. Duh! And as long as the captive dupes the rulers surveil and prey on fall for that scam, they'll continue to be spied on, surveiled on and preyed on to ever increasing extents. Until they have nothing left of neither privacy nor anything else.

But then, even the rulers will have not much left, either, since all they live off is what they can collect by their surveillance facilitated preying. Sooner or later, all leeches do run out of other people's money, after all. Then, the "baaaad" ones, the terrorists and other misfits with the brains to not fall for the nonsense, wins. And, as winners, they'll then be the good guys. Which is, honestly, an improvement over the current state of things. But still a distant second to the captive dupes figuring out surveillance, and everyone who claims they "need to be able to," have absolutely no redeeming value whatsoever, without having to have some jihadi's sword over their neck before they figure it out.

msurkan
msurkan

If Facebook provides a service some people enjoy then why does it matter if those people are willing to share extensive details about their lives and preferences with Facebook to sell to advertisers? What’s the individual harm taking place? It’s not like bank accounts are being hacked or identify theft is taking place. All these complaints about Facebook sound a lot like paternalistic condescension. The “smart” people think the sniveling masses are too dumb to realize they are being manipulated to vote for idiots.

Six000mileyear
Six000mileyear

Facebook should change its ticker symbol to ORWL.

TheCaptain
TheCaptain

Someone should smash his face in. Oops, did that come out? It was meant to be a private thought. DRATS.