Customize

Facebook and freedom of thought

Discussion in 'Freedom of Expression' started by Cyber Null, Aug 24, 2011.

  1. Cyber Null Member

    My friend recently had a Facebook profile and there was some discussion about bodybuilding subject. However, several kids alerted Facebook that he said something badly (while only thing that he did was saying his opinion about subject). And facebook banned his account. So is it right to be banned just ebcause you sayed your opinion and it was different then others?
  2. Facebook is a complicated situation. It is what is known as a "Gated Community," almost a Private Club. With Gated Communities and Private Clubs, it is not unusual for the Social Contract to be put away. Values like free expression of opinion, democracy, freedom of information, may sometimes no longer apply.

    Of course, with Facebook, there is a one-way freedom of information practise. That practice is one of a free flow of user's information to be used commercially by the FB administration & owners.

    I know that FB is useful to many different kinds of people, families separated by distance, some kinds of social activism and the price that is paid for losing control of their information is something that they are willing to pay.

    I'm not willing to pay that kind of price so FB is of no use or value to me. I am sorry that your friend had his account banned, but that is just another example of "the way of facebook." There is Facebook's way, or the highway. We do it their way, or not at all, on their site. Fair enough, it's their site and I have no use for it.
    • Like Like x 8
  3. Cyber Null Member

    Good answer. :)
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Anonymous Member

    *Cough* *Cough* #OpFacebook *Cough*
  5. Saul Goodman Member

    Also, FB is now using face recognition software, so I would avoid putting photos up, and certainly do not tag them.
    • Like Like x 2
  6. Anonymous Member

    The account was probably banned because of something other than just an opinion. Reading the Facebook TOS will probably help. Good luck to you and your friend with your Facebook woes.
  7. venimus Member

    Is Anonymous really going to shut down facebook?
  8. Anonymous Member

    For the record, there's no such thing as "freedom of thought."
  9. Anon Gin Member

    A taste of history repeating...
  10. James Spader Member

    No.
  11. Sonichu Moderator

    Anonymous has no need tof shut down Facebook.... why would we bother?
  12. Anonymous Member

    ...If I see this stupid question again, I will seriously get incendiary lemons and burn this motherfucking forum down.
  13. James Spader Member

  14. Sonichu Moderator

    Check with Aperture Science. Last I heard they were developing an incendiary Lemon launcher.
    • Like Like x 2
  15. ItchyScratchy Member

    They only allow experienced testers near those things. I don't think any one on this forum would be qualified.
  16. Tangerine Member

    This thread is starting to get real citrus all of a sudden.

    burning_lemon_by_twistedinside-d3fnula.jpg
  17. The problem with facebook, for me, given that of what you say and those rumours about Conservative social control forces taking control of FB. corp. is that unfortunately I feel it like a trap, but actualy I dont have a way to not falling in it. Because the people to whom I want more than to others to communicate my polithical and ethical positions is there. That´s because Facebook is the place where the people I love is actualy readign what I think. In ciberworld terms Facebook is actualy, and unfortunately, the place were the people "is" in internet. I want to talk personaly to my people i´ve to go there , there is were they are. It´s like a drug, in the sense that I know doing politics at FB is bad for my health , but I cannot stop doing it, because it´s a need for me doing politics within my most close social circle.

    The only solution I see, is caching them (Facebook owners) doing wat all we smell they are doing, seling info to social control forces, and unveil that situation, make it known with demostrative proves that they do that to the people I love. So my people moves to another place. But that is so hard, because, it´s is dificult that that other place, a clean FB like site, would exist, becose cost of mantaining a place for so many people can be so hard, that´s difcult that noone could runnit without hidden and obscure commercial, or even worst, social control goals.

    It´s a hell of an issue.
  18. adhocrat Member

    wat?

    And parenthetically, I hear that Tom Jefferson spelled the same word two different ways in the same sentence and Shakespeare spelled his name a dozen different ways. :D
    • Like Like x 1

  19. Sorry for my awfull English, spelling, it ´s even worst than my spelling in spanish, my mother tongue...
  20. Anonymous Member

  21. The answer is Yes, of course. It´s a panoptican, it´s constructed exactly as Prissions were constructed in the Modern era.

    "Building on Foucault, contemporary social critics often assert that technology has allowed for the deployment of panoptic structures invisibly throughout society. Surveillance by closed-circuit television(CCTV) cameras in public spaces is an example of a technology that brings the gaze of a superior into the daily lives of the populace. Furthermore, a number of cities in the United Kingdom, including Middlesbrough, Bristol, Brighton and London have recently added loudspeakers to a number of their existing CCTV cameras. They can transmit the voice of a camera supervisor to issue audible messages to the public.[13][14] Similarly, critical analyses of internet practice have suggested that the internet allows for a panopticon form of observation.[15] ISPs are able to track users' activities, while user-generated content means that daily social activity may be recorded and broadcast online.[16]"

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panopticon#The_panopticon_as_metaphor
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Foucault

    By the way, I´m going to share the link you posted on Facebook, so my friend know (You see, it´s like a drug, i told you in my first post in this thread)

    M. Foucault, the panocticum surveilance concept developer, is one of my favorite filosophers..
  22. Anonymous Member

  23. I´ts clear to me... I´ve readed that info you pasted about FB Executives, but did´nt found it on Google before at the discussion (I see it´s point 6 of your previous link), I found onion instead. Nobody can think that those shity commercials pay the huge farms that mantain FB operative.

    Clearly FB owners are more interested in trends than on individuals, but on certain special cases can focus on them. Also, they can control, as it´s a virical info spreading system, the difusion of posts (for example, censoring the difusion on the general wall of the posts with word Anonymous). I posted the tree anonymous videos specificaly targeted for Spanish audience on FB and did not get any answer. I cannot asure, but it´s an intuition, maybe paranoic.

    But recalling my initial point. The same as the answer to the privacy issue of having CCV Cameras on the streets cannot be not going out to the streets and staying at home, the same happends with Facebook. There is a lot of people I want to communicate with (political ideas) that don´t have Tweeter. So what do i do? Not using it is not an answer. For example. Communicating that FB is a pannopticum, must be done on Facebook, because FB users are the political target of that message. The people that does not use FB, because, they already suscpect, do not need to recive that message. Are my friends on FB to whom I need to tell.

    DoS is not the answer, not just because appart of being illegal, i do not suport illegal behaviours, or thechnical tactical issues and countermeasures, but from an strategic point of view: If we are true about FB & CIA, conspiranoia; An attack on FB would generate an Scalade, a war, that could threaten Net Neutrality.

    The Wikyleaks strategy can be more effective on them. Unveil the truth.

    Also we could ask, I´m just dreaming, after people did get scared, Richard Stallman and the Electronic Frontier Foundation people, to run a Secure Facebook for us. ( https://www.eff.org/ ) If they run GNU, and did build Freenet, they may have the resources and interest, to build a neutral, public social network, with secure procedures.

    The issue is important, because I guess Facebook is the system with most registered users on Earth.
  24. Horus Member

    Sure, haven't you read 1984 by Orwell? :p
  25. Hianc Member

    Is there any way to delete an account completely? Since somebody can recover his/her account anytime, all the info is saved and not deleted. So nobody can actually delete an account, just "vanish" it. Since somebody gives information out, there is no way to take it back! The whole system is wrong.
  26. Dragononymous Member

    Don't create a monster you can't kill
  27. FB gives the impression that an account is deleted completely, after certain periods of time have passed and certain actions taken. However, I doubt that very much.

    The craven enterprise is entirely self-interested and like scientology, maintains statistics about itself based on information that is no longer relevant.

    Personally, I regard FB as the worst implementation of Web 2.0 ever.
    • Like Like x 2
  28. Hianc Member

    What happens if somebody uses a made up name?
  29. It is my understanding, that pseudonyms and anonymity are prohibited at FB. If such names are found, the are removed, AFAIK.
  30. Hianc Member

    So no Facebook at all or just politics out of Facebook?
  31. Wat?
  32. Hianc Member

    I believe, that if you are a regular user nobody has reason to use your personal info. If somebody runs a political page for example, he/she might be in some kind of danger. What is right? No politics on Facebook or no using Facebook at all?
  33. IMHO, that is a personal choice. If someone finds that FB works for them, they use it. If not, they don't.

    I know of people who used the platform for political ends, but they lost their account for that transgression. I think of FB as the polar opposite of 4Chan. 4Chan is interesting. FB isn't.
    • Like Like x 2
  34. Zoom Member

    Nothing has happened to me yet. It helps if you only use ONE account and provide no evidence that you aren't who you post as.
    • Like Like x 1
  35. James Spader Member

    ^ There're hundreds of millions of people on FB, if you don't call attention to yourself then you should be alright.
    • Like Like x 1
  36. A lot of people on here seem upset because FB doesn't delete accounts. But this very website doesn't seem to have a way to delete an account. When I read someone's post about how they could delete their account and they just got browbeat and some of the advice offered was to simply not post anymore. So it seems pretty hypocritical to me. Just saying
  37. telomere Member

    Oh, absolutely.
    Would you like some broccoli with your hypocritical?
  38. Anonymous Member

    Randi Zuckerberg is a cunt.

    "I think anonymity on the Internet has to go away," Facebook marketing director Randi Zuckerberg said during a panel discussion on social media. "People behave a lot better when they have their real names down. ... I think people hide behind anonymity and they feel like they can say whatever they want behind closed doors." Facebook requires members to use their real names and email addresses when joining the social network.
  39. Anonymous Member


    Yep. As it should be.
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors

Close

Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins