Gee I wish they had just left Facebook as a way to share photos and updates with friends and family, instead of turning it into a viral content clusterfuck to capture the youth audience. It didn’t even work.
this post was submitted on 16 Dec 2024
326 points (95.8% liked)
Technology
59963 readers
3471 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Marketplace function is their future IMHO
Teens are on Facebook?
How else you gonna cyber bully the transfer student
No teens on blue sky, nice
Gyna
it's why politicians want to ban it
They’ve been trying to ban it for awhile now, so no. They want to ban it because they can’t directly control the companies that own those platforms overseas whereas Facebook, IG, etc. are very much able to be controlled if necessary by those in power
Proper analysis.
People really underestimate the state corpo connections when looking at their own regime and domestic corpos. Since these are "our" guys
Isn't whatsapp another data mining app for Facebook?
Yes, although to nowhere near the same extent as Facebook and Instagram.
The chats are E2EE using Signal's encryption protocol, so very good.
But they will certainly mine everything else they can get. They may not know what you're saying, but they do know who you're talking to, when you're doing it, your contacts, your profile pic, how often you send images, etc. any web links with tracking info embedded in the URL will likely be tracked too, once you open them.
E2EE doesn't mean that the developer/company can't be a member of the "ends" in "End-to-end encryption". WhatsApp is closed-source, so nobody can really confirm which E2EE algorithm is at play. However, considering that the E2EE is the implementation of a known E2EE algorithm, such algorithms often support more than two keys (hence, more than two people), so, a third-key from Charlie can be part of the conversation, unbeknownst to Alice and Bob. If Meta would inject their own key inside every WhatsApp conversation, they could effectively read things.
For example: GPG/PGP support multiple public keys, so the same encrypted message can be decrypted by any private keys belonging to those public keys. Alice can send a message to both Bob, Charlie and Douglas, collectively specifying their public keys at the moment of the encryption. Then, the exact same payload would be sent to them, and they would use their own private keys to decrypt the message.
So, let's suppose that a closed-source messaging app company/developer had their own pair of public and private keys, and they public key is injected in every conversation made through their app. They'd also obfuscate it from the UI so the UI won't show the hardcoded "third-party". This way they could easily read every single message being exchanged through their app. It's like TSA with a "master key" that can open everyone's travelling bags, no matter where you bought the travelling bag.
Even Signal may have this. Yeah, libsignal is "open-source", but the app isn't. What if their app had some hardcoded public key from Signal team? The only trustworthy E2EE is encoding it yourself using OpenPGP and similar. And if one is more privacy-worried than me, there are projects such as the "Tinfoil Chat" which is almost-immune to eavesdropping, involving optocoupled (hence, airgapped) circuitry, separate machines for networking, decryption and encryption, Onion-routing, and so on.
In summary: nobody should trust out-of-the-box E2EE, especially those hidden within a closed-source app.
This still baffles me. What's Facebook's end game here? They are built on data collection and spying, but they own an app that is E2EE.
If you go only by the metadata, they know all your friends, their phone numbers, your location history, when do you chat, with whom, how often and how long. And I'm fairly sure they index conversation in some form.
Just location history can paint a decent picture of what you do, where do you go, what do you like, which friends are nearby, etc... and all of that was implemented like 15+ years ago, imagine what they can do today with AI. It's fair to say FB knows more about you then you do (FB, IG, Wapp...). And to be blunt, it could probably determine what ppls shit smells like, judging by all the pictures of a meal they post on IG.
The metadata. The message content is E2E, but the data about the content isn’t necessarily e2e.
Good point. Figuring out who is talking to who is valuable info for them too.
Meta data is more valuable than whatever is being discussed most of the time
Honestly, I think they just saw that Whatsapp was becoming the standard chat app for basically all of the world outside of the US and China, and just didn't want anybody else to have it.
Additionally, metadata is better than no data, I guess.
Meta data is prolly more valuable at scale...
Most of are really generic so any single normie data package has but so much value. Middling income with middle hobbies etc
However, having data on 330 million pedons along with each ones connections, thats power.
Yes
This is news? The article’s own graph puts this about 6 years ago
My family has a signal group. I started it two years ago.
Almost no one pays any attention to it, unless they accidentally open the app once a month, but they're all still there and can be spoken to.
I put a PSA out a month ago that I'll no longer respond on Facebook Messenger or SMS after the turn of the year. Tough shit. There was some groaning but, if there's no other way, either use Signal or invest in a Pigeon coop and get training.
load more comments
(3 replies)
I think teens abandoned Facebook like 10 years ago
Teens stopped using Facebook in 2015.
Surely longer ago than that? Facebook hasn't been cool for probably over 15 years
Has FB been cool since they got rid of signups limited by .edu email addresses?
You had a good year or two after that and then it went to shit.
That was basically the end. When it was only friends and the feed sorted by "new,", it was super fun. When my aunts started joining it became much less fun.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
Because Whatsapp is totally not owned by FB.
It’s not about why owns it. It’s about where young people can be without getting bothered by their parents and other old people.
I'm 41.....you telling me the kids today don't think of me as the greatest person who ever existed??? Pssshhh that's malarkey! I won't hear of it! EVERYONE thinks I'm the greatest person who ever existed! My lexicon includes words like "malarkey" and "lexicon"! Kids think that's cool right???
I'm 39 so I am slightly more rizz than you. I maintain my levels of brat by regularly updating my skibidi vocab.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
I guess I'll never know what the kids are saying ever again because there's no way I'm installing either of those apps.
Where there any teens on Twitter? Last I was there it was full of angry middle-age men.
The Internet- where men are men...
Men? Wait, yall aren't dogs using the internet while the humans are away at work?
Yall are dogs to right?
load more comments
(2 replies)
It's pretty clear. Facebook is now full of crap created by artificial intelligence (and not only).
463k people actually liked that photo?
load more comments
(1 replies)
That is a weird way of describing it. Teens aren't "abandoning" FB & X; they never signed up to begin with. And why would that? They are platforms built for and filled with millennials+.
A decade ago is when teens stopped using Facebook, unless they're counting Instagram in those metrics?
load more comments
(2 replies)
view more: next ›