atans1

Posts Tagged ‘Facebook’

Zuckerberg caught with pants down again

In Internet on 22/04/2018 at 5:02 am

After what Zuckerberg said to Congress, Facebook then spun that it could be adopting the new European laws on privacy and everything else as its default protection standard for the rest of the world including the US.

In his answers to Congress over Facebook’s involvement in the scandal, Mark Zuckerberg said that GDPR [new European laws on privacy and everything else]        was “going to be a very positive step for the internet”.

When asked whether the regulations should be applied in the US, he replied: “I think everyone in the world deserves good privacy protection.”

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-43822184

Well, we now know that that’s a lot of bull because the BBC report says

Facebook has changed its terms of service, meaning 1.5 billion members will not be protected under tough new privacy protections coming to Europe.

The move comes as the firm faces a series of questions from lawmakers and regulators around the world over its handling of personal data.

The change revolves around which users will be regulated via its European headquarters in Ireland.

Facebook said it planned clearer privacy rules worldwide.

The move, reported by Reuters, will see Facebook users outside the EU governed by Facebook Inc in the US rather than Facebook Ireland.

It is widely seen as a way of the social network avoiding having to apply the upcoming General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) to countries outside the EU.

The change will affect more than 70% of its more than two billion members. As of December, Facebook had 239 million users in the US and Canada and 370 million in Europe.

It also had 1.5 billion members in Africa, Asia, Australia and Latin America, and they are the ones affected by the change.

Users in the US and Canada have never been subject to European rules.

In 2008, Facebook set up its international headquarters in Ireland to take advantage of the country’s low corporate tax rates but it also meant all users outside the US and Canada were protected by European regulations.

The change will mean users outside Europe will no longer be able to file complaints with the Irish data protection commissioner or in the Irish courts.

GDPR, due to come into force next month, offers EU consumers far greater control over their data. It also promises to fine firms found to have breached data rules up to 4% of their annual global revenue.

 

Advertisements

FB: Cambridge strikes back

In Internet on 21/04/2018 at 5:01 am

Cambridge University’s  Psychometrics Centre has responded to Seth Lord Zuckerberg’s slime balling of Cambridge Psychometrics Centre (Think Shanmugam’s attack on PJ Thum)

The Centre, which is located in the Judge Business School, was drawn into the controversy when Facebook banned Cubeyou, another firm that had developed a personality quiz in collaboration with the university’s academics.

Business development director Vesselin Popov insisted it was opt-in only and was in line with Facebook’s policies at the time, so was not at all like the app developed for Cambridge Analytica by Dr Kogan.

He told me that Dr Kogan’s work had raised issues for the university: “Even if an academic does something – quote unquote in their ‘spare time’, with their own company – they still ought to be held to professional standards as a psychologist.”

Dr Kogan and the Cambridge Psychometrics Centre are in dispute over whether a row over his personality app – and the involvement of the centre’s academics – was about ethics or money. I wrote another article about that issue on Friday.

But the two sides agree that Facebook needs to focus on what commercial businesses do with user data, rather than academics.

“It’s very clear that Cambridge Analytica and these kinds of companies are the product of an environment to which Facebook has contributed greatly,” says Mr Popov. “Although they might be making some changes today in response to public and regulatory pressure, this needs to be seen as an outcome of very permissive attitudes towards those companies.”

With an audit of thousands of Facebook apps under way, we may hear more in the coming weeks about just how cavalier some companies have been with our personal data.

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-43758850

Zuckerberg is real life Two-Face Harvey

In Internet on 20/04/2018 at 4:24 am

Remember Batman’s enemy Two-Face Harvey (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-Face)?

Well reading the u/m extract from the by the BBC’s media editor, I couldn’t help think that we need Batman to fight Zuckerberg, the incarnate of Two-Face Harvey :

There’s Mark Zuckerberg, the Ultimate Millennial. He wears t-shirt and jeans, is a Harvard dropout, happiest in New York and San Francisco, who talks a good game about connecting the world. He’s an engineer and geek who built perhaps the most remarkable network in human history, innovating his way to astronomical wealth. This guy is shy, but has a public persona that accommodates it.

Then there’s a chap I call Mark Sorryberg – the Big Tech Villain. He wears an ill-fitting suit, squirms when in Washington, is blamed for damaging all we hold dear – from rigging elections (“He’s killing democracy”!) to promoting extremism (“He’s unweaving society”!) and not paying enough tax (“He’s screwing the poor”!). This guy is so shy he comes across as awkward and uncomfortable when he should be projecting authority.

http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-43740113

Let’s be serious Two-Face Zuckerberg seems to have a

Split personality: Multiple personality disorder, a neurosis in which the personality becomes dissociated into two or more distinct parts each of which becomes dominant and controls behavior from time to time to the exclusion of the other parts. A modern name for this condition is dissociative identity disorder.

https://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=11257

 

What Mark Zuckerberg didn’t say

In Internet on 17/04/2018 at 4:37 am

From NYT Dealbook

Despite two days of congressional testimony, the Facebook chief didn’t address some issues, including the tech giant’s role in violence worldwide. Shira Ovide of Gadfly thinks that his evasiveness about how the company works shows that it’s embarrassed. (Oh, and the European Parliament wants Mr. Zuckerberg to testify, too.)

U.S. lawmakers seem to agree regulation is needed, but doubt that it’s coming. Senator John Cornyn, Republican of Texas, told the NYT, “I think we need to be careful.” Representative Frank Pallone Jr., Democrat of New York, said, “I don’t believe the Republicans will end up doing anything.”

The latest Facebook scandal has finally put a spotlight on data privacy, experts say. One, Doc Searls, told the NYT, “They’re saying, ‘O.K., it’s barn-raising time.’ ” (Facebook still isn’t expecting a hit to sales.)

 

Facebook’s Catch 22

In Internet on 15/04/2018 at 2:00 pm

The following day, he was asked by Congressman Ben Lujan about the data collected on people who had never even signed up to Facebook. Again, Mr Zuckerberg appeared uncomfortable. He had never heard of the widely used term “shadow profiles” to describe this kind of data collection.

Then the congressman took us down an Alice in Wonderland-style rabbit hole, where people who do not use Facebook are told to log in to their Facebook accounts to find out what data Facebook holds on them. “We’ve got to fix that,” he said.

Frederike Kaltheuner from Privacy International tells Tech Tent that this kind of data collection, with users unaware of what is happening, is all too common – and Facebook is far from the only culprit.

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-43758850

Fighting fake news while raising revenue

In Internet on 14/04/2018 at 10:43 am

Funny our Pay and Pay scholar-filled govt didn’t think of this idea first. Uganda in darkest, dysfunctional Africa first tot of taxing users of social media to curb “gossip” (ie fake news) and raise revenue.

Taxing social media should the additional benefit, from the PAP’s point of view of curbing free speech, and so is something that the PAPpies should have tot up before the men from darkest, dysfunctional Africa.

From the BBC

Uganda plans to impose a daily tax on social media users from July in a bid to raise revenue, Finance Minister Matia Kasaija has told Reuters news agency.

The move has been criticised by rights activist Rosebell Kagumire who said: “It’s part of a wider attempt to curtail freedoms of expression.”

Earlier this month, President Yoweri Museveni – who has been in power for more than 30 years – was quoted by Uganda’s privately owned Daily Monitor newspaper as saying in a letter to Mr Kasaija and other officilas that a tax should be introduced on people who use social media for “gossip”.

“I am not going to propose a tax on internet use for educational, research or reference purposes… these must remain free,” he was quoted as saying.

The proposed tax will see each mobile phone subscriber who uses platforms such as WhatsApp, Facebook and Twitter being charged, Reuters reports.

The amount is unclear – Reuters reports that Mr Kasaija said it will be 200 Ugandan shillings ($0.027) a day, while State Minister for Planning David Bahati is quoted by the Daily Monitor as saying it will be 100 shillings.

“We’re looking for money to maintain the security of the country and extend electricity so that you people can enjoy more of social media, more often, more frequently,” Mr Kasaija told Reuters.

True Uganda’s proposed charges are “peanuts” to S’poreans but a dollar a day will make talk cock, sing song, cheap skate anti-PAP cybernuts like Aloysius Foo and Lauschke Amythink twice about using social media.

Interesting takes on FB

In Uncategorized on 14/04/2018 at 4:39 am

Brian Chen’s reaction to what data Facebook had collected about him: “Yikes.” How the company targets you for advertising. Craig Newman argues in Another View that companies should be graded on their data security.

NYT Dealbook

Words that could haunt Zuckerberg

In Internet on 13/04/2018 at 4:09 am

He said on Tuesday “I agree we are responsible for the content.”

NYT Dealbook explains the importance of these words:

These were the most important words from Mark Zuckerberg’s five-hour testimony: “I agree we are responsible for the content.” They may come back to haunt him, given his previous rejection of calling Facebook a publisher. He later backtracked and called his business a tech company, but his acknowledgment may fundamentally shift the conversation — and how the company operates. (All in all, Mr. Zuckerberg did better than anyone had expected.)

Zuckerberg doesn’t know how FB tracks users

In Internet on 12/04/2018 at 3:09 pm

Senator Kamala Harris, a Democrat from California, kicked his balls with this

“During the course of this hearing, these last four hours, you have been asked several critical questions for which you do not have answers,” she said. “Those questions have included whether Facebook can track users’ browsing activity even after the user has logged off of Facebook, whether Facebook can track your activity across devices even when you are not logged into Facebook.”

He promised to provide answers when asked these questions.

FB’s massive data: the S’pore connection

In Internet on 09/04/2018 at 4:49 am

Kogan was here in S’pore from 2013-16 before moving on to Berkeley, California, a regular reader of, and commenter on this blog, yuenchungkwong, (a retired professor of computer science, NUS) informs.

Funny the constructive, nation-building ST  and other local media don’t trumpet the achievements of this Foreign Talent while here. I mean the guy’s a FT where the “T” doesn’t stand for “Trash” but for “Talent”. Usually FTs end up in the news for beating taxi drivers and S’poreans, not for being geniuses.  

After all, it was in 2014 that his infamous app appeared on FB.  

———————————————–

Backgrounder for visiting Martians and other extraterrestrials)

In 2014 a quiz on Facebook invited users to find out their personality type.

It was developed by University of Cambridge academic Aleksandr Kogan (the university has no connections with Cambridge Analytica).

As was common with apps and games at that time, it was designed to harvest not only the user data of the person taking part in the quiz, but also the data of their friends.

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-43465968

The allegation is that because 270,000 people took the quiz, the data of some 50 million users, mainly in the US, was harvested without their explicit consent via their friend networks. FB now says the data of 87m users was harvested

———————————————–

He was even a guest speaker on 2 December 2014 at NUS:(http://blog.nus.edu.sg/psychology/2014/11/24/brown-bag-guest-speaker-dr-alex-kogan-on-2-december/)

I will discuss how big data can be collected, stored, and analyzed, and the types of new insights it can provide to social scientists.

And he was very open on his access to FB data

I focus specifically on Facebook data and two datasets my lab is currently work with: (a) a sample of 50+ million individuals for whom we have the capacity to predict virtually any trait, and (b) a macro-dataset of every friendship made in the world on Facebook from 2006-2012 by all Facebook users at the national-aggregate level.

While here, he married a S’porean, Crystal Ying Chia, and here’s a story about them and their zany sense of humour: https://www.asianmoneyguide.com/crystal-ying-spectre. They adopted a homeless dogs. My mongrels say, “Power to them”.

The latest according to the regular reader is that she has filed for divorce in California. My mongrels want to know what happened to their dog?

My thanks again to yuenchungkwong, a retired professor of computer science, NUS. And prof, if u got any project that utilising yr skills can make money, let me know. Can raise $ for u.

 

 

 

Why some say FB should not do more

In Internet on 08/04/2018 at 4:43 am

but first, as far as I’m concerned the howls of coming from progressives is as Steve Bannon, Trump’s evil genius, OK OK former chief strategist said

liberals and “the opposition media” were looking for excuses to explain Hillary Clinton’s election loss.

If Hilary had won, and it’s clear that she too was using the same type of profiling (as was Obama) but no so effective: I kept getting FB posts dissing Trump from a lesbian, other human rights activists, and ang moh tua kees based here. They must have been targets of Hilary’s ineffective profiling. The Republicans did not target me with videos of Hilary and her lesbians. Sigh.

Btw, Steve has dismissed the idea that Cambridge Analytica’s work for the Trump campaign swayed the 2016 US election.

Coming back the title, some

analysts were pleased that the Facebook boss did not go further. Ben Schachter, an analyst at Macquarie, said Mr Zuckerberg allayed most of his fears that Facebook would “propose radical changes that would impact the business model”. “Our worry was that Facebook, at Zuckerberg’s direction, could take more radical actions than it has in the past to limit the use of audience segmenting, ad targeting, data sharing, and other privacy-related issues that could lower the monetisation of Facebook data,” he said.

FT report

As an Economist columnist said

When a scandal first breaks, executives at the top of a firm and securities analysts outside it are often myopic, viewing it as a public-relations blip that will not alter a firm’s operations or its competitive position. In the case of Facebook, 44 of the 48 Wall Street analysts who cover it still rate it a “buy”, according to Bloomberg. Many have downplayed the scandal, even though Facebook’s shares have dropped by 18% since the news broke on March 17th.

https://www.economist.com/news/business/21739695-corporate-crises-drive-media-and-politicians-wild-do-they-damage-shareholder

Easy way for FB to solve problems

In Internet on 07/04/2018 at 11:26 am

But advertisters wouldn’t like it. And As Money, talks BS walks, it wouldn’t be adopted.

NYT Dealbook

How a ‘Why Me?’ button could help fix Facebook
In his latest column, Andrew suggests a way the company could make its practices more transparent — one that Google and Amazon could consider, while we’re at it: a button next to every ad and piece of content that would explain why a user is seeing it.
More from Andrew:
The “Why Me?” button might create all sorts of problems for Facebook, and its advertisers, too. It would allow users — and rivals — to reverse engineer much of the way the system works. And advertisers would probably object to the idea of making their targeting plans public. But that would be the cost of using such large public platforms with such exact targeting.

 

Facebook: Don’t sien me leh

In Internet on 04/02/2018 at 7:18 am
Facebook was intended to be as wholesome as apple pie?

From NYT Delbook

Here’s what Samidh Chakrabarti, a product manager at the tech giant, wrote in a post on the company’s Hard Questions blog:

Facebook was originally designed to connect friends and family — and it has excelled at that. But as unprecedented numbers of people channel their political energy through this medium, it’s being used in unforeseen ways with societal repercussions that were never anticipated.

Mr. Chakrabarti added that while the company was slow to address Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, it’s working to prevent it happening again.

I tot it was all about attracting eyeballs and ad revenue by way of trolling, echo chambering and the enabling of fake news. And to Make America Great Again by helping Trump become president.

Facebook see govt no ak is it?

In Public Administration on 31/12/2017 at 9:53 am

The details of 263 Facebook users were requested by the Singapore Government between January and June this year, the social media company revealed in a report released on Monday (Dec 18).

The Government made a total of 204 requests for such information, according to the Facebook Transparency Report. Facebook complied with 59 per cent of the requests.

Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/263-facebook-user-details-requested-by-singapore-government-9513160

The BBC reports

Figures provided by Facebook suggest it handed over data in 85% of requests from US law enforcement and 90% in the UK.

So the S’pore authorities requests were rejected a lot more than requests by the Brits and Americans.

“Why liddat?”, we should be asking. Ang moh tua kee isit? China is sure to take note as Zuckerberg is trying to get the Chinese to allow FB in. I doubt if Chinais impressed that FB rejects so many of our govt’s requests since we and China are one-party states. Related posts Keeping power in a one-party state

But to be fair to the PAPpies, S’pore’s reject rate is the same as that of Germany.

Btw, three cheers for ST for reporting the UK and US numbers alonside that of S’pore’s. I’m sure someone sure kanna call up to lim kopi.

Are PM and Ho Ching sad and envious?

In Humour, Internet on 05/11/2017 at 1:52 pm

Remember in 2013 PM said at a Zaobao Forum: “Satisfied people don’t have time to go onto the Internet. Unhappy people often go there.”*? Judging by the postings by the ratty and cheapskate cybernuts on TRE (People like Oxygen, Rabble-Rouser, Bapak and Dosh who see the 70% as the enemy within S’pore and want to see them suffer for voting PAP) he has a point about unhappy people who keep insisting that S’pore is collapsing contrary to the evidence. Yes there are serious problems, but nothing existential.

Sorry for the digression: so what can we gather from PM’s and Ho Ching’s regular posts on Facebook?

According to this, they must be sad and envious

Writing in the London Review of Books, John Lanchester cites numerous studies that suggest Facebook use goes hand in hand with envy and sadness, and quite plausibly causes them.

FT article


John Henry Lanchester (born 25 February 1962) is a British journalist and novelist … His journalism has appeared in theLondon Review of Books (where he is a Contributing Editor), Granta, The Observer, The New York Review of Books, The Guardian, the Daily Telegraph andThe New Yorker

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lanchester

This weekend John Lanchester wrote the cover piece for The Sunday Times Magazine, in which he argued that Facebook was the biggest surveillance enterprise in history, and could destroy civilisation.

—————————————————–

They also got a lot of free time and don’t focus because FB “is also a notorious time-sink and source of distraction” the article goes on.

Btw, Ever wondered this about PM’s Facebook posts?

——————————–

*https://mothership.sg/2013/11/10-signs-prime-minister-lee-hsien-loong-dissatisfied-person/

 

 

Another problem for Anti-PAP websites

In Internet on 30/10/2017 at 4:26 pm

Last year I reported how FB’s algo tweaks affected anti-PAP sites sites like TOC and The Idiots Anti-PAP sites lose traffic after Facebook tweaks algos.

Well things could be getting worse if FB’s latest “experiment” comes to S’pore or is introduced globally.

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-41775010

Facebook panics publishers

In any newsroom around the world these days, the air will be full of mentions of Facebook and Twitter. Publishers know the readers and viewers they want to reach are increasingly spending their time scrolling through those apps on their smartphones. And many publishers have come to rely on the social media giants to give their articles and videos maximum exposure.

So a limited experiment by Facebook in six countries – Sri Lanka, Bolivia, Slovakia, Serbia, Guatemala, and Cambodia – to take unpaid news posts out of the main feed and put them into a separate “Explore” tab, raised serious concerns about the financial importance of Silicon Valley to the news media. Slovakian journalist Filip Struharik documented the impact, writing that publishers in his country were seeing just a quarter of the interactions they used to get before the change.

Joshua Benton, who runs the Nieman Journalism Lab at Harvard University, told me that Facebook and Google together are responsible for around 80% of external traffic to news organisation websites, so publishers are right to be worried.

However, he also said that Facebook has its own worries. “They’re in a tough position because Facebook users prefer posts from their friends and family, but at the same time Facebook has become an absolutely critical source of traffic for news organisations. And Facebook’s business is selling ads.”

So, I asked him, is Facebook trying to distance itself from being treated as a news publisher itself by regulators worried about fake news and foreign political interference? “Facebook did sort of stumble into being the main distributor of news on the planet Earth by accident,” said Benton. “I think a lot of folks at Facebook would be happy if this was just something they didn’t have to worry about.”

Meanwhile Adam Mosseri, Facebook’s head of News Feed, tried to calm frayed nerves. “There is no current plan to roll this out beyond these test countries or to charge pages on Facebook to pay for all their distribution in News Feed or Explore,” he wrote in a blog. But perhaps his use of the word “current” won’t allay every publisher’s fears.

 

Building a Muslim registry, Facebook willing to

In Uncategorized on 15/12/2016 at 3:51 pm
 From NYT Dealbook

Building a Muslim registry. Nine of the most prominent such firms, from Facebook to Booz Allen Hamilton, were asked if they would sell their services to help create a national Muslim registry, an idea recently resurfaced by Mr. Trump’s transition team. Only Twitter said no. – The Intercept

Facebook squeeze on anti-PAP sites continues

In Internet on 04/11/2016 at 9:24 am

Facebook warned on Wednesday that revenue growth could slow next year sending its shares into a tail spin.

One way to increase revenue as the FT reports is to squeeze those who use it for free to attract people to their sites and hence to ads.

Facebook has 4m advertisers, but 60m businesses use Facebook pages for free. If even a small proportion of those could be persuaded to pay to promote their posts, prices would go up.

FT

As I reported earlier our two mainstream anti-PAP alternative media sites have been affected by FB’s recent tweaks in how it promotes stuff.

[I]t more favorably promotes content posted by the friends and family of users, not publishers (Our anti-PAP sites, like all socio-political sites are considered publishers or news sites by Facebook).

The squeeze continues for them when FB makes life more difficult for the freeloaders.

I’m sure Terry’s Online Channel (TOC) will sutvive because Terry and others there work for free or for peanuts, and because it has the goodwill of the influencers of the online community. But at the The Idiots — S’pore (TISG) which claims it’s out to make money, lots of it, even though it had to recapitalise itself last year, things are different. It has no goodwill left among the influencers after its xenophobic stuff or articles that were more fiction than fact.

The internet giveth and then takes away.

But internet taketh away then giveth too

In the US

The Neighborhood Bookstore’s Unlikely Ally? The Internet

Mom-and-pop bookstores are emerging from the decimation of the last decade as they use social media to inspire a loyal customer base.

NYT Dealbook

And in India, Grofers is providing a grocery delivery service, relying on the traditional mom and pop (kirana) stores. And Amazon is testing such a system too in India. Meanwhile, 10i Commercial Services has a service enabling customers to place orders for goods not stocked locally, via a smart device belonging to a Indian local shop.

 

 

Anti-PAP sites lose traffic after Facebook tweaks algos

In Internet on 24/10/2016 at 4:47 am

Is Mark Zuckerberg sucking up to the PAP as part of his efforts to suck up to China ala Duterte?

Two tua kee socio-political sites (even though one says it’s a commercial news agency cum loudhailer for the govt and its agencies and not a socio-political site) are heavily dependent on Facebook to push out (“promote”) their stuff and so help them get views and ad revenue. Their readers are too cheap skate or really that poor? Or not willing to pay for BS even when they consume it avidly?

This reliance on Facebook was especially useful post the GE when readership fell across the board affecting ad income. Problem is that Facebook has tweaked its algorithms (as it does periodically).

It’s latest tweak in June means that it more favorably promotes content posted by the friends and family of users, not publishers (Our anti-PAP sites, like all socio-political sites are considered publishers or news sites by Facebook).

It says that content posted by publishers will show up less prominently in news feeds, resulting in significantly less traffic to the hundreds of news media sites that have come to rely on Facebook.

This means that these sites get less traffic, a lot less. And a lot loss viewers and even less ad revenue.

NYT in June reported:

Facebook said it expected a drop in reach and referral traffic for publishers whose audience comes primarily to content posted by the publisher’s official Facebook page. Facebook plans to start making the changes as soon as this week.

It will have less of an impact, however, if most of a publisher’s traffic comes from individual users sharing and commenting on their stories and videos. As has long been the case, publisher content that your friends interact with will appear higher in the feed compared to posts shared directly by a publisher.

Actually any third-party stuff on the publishers’ FB pages also gets fewer pushes

What this means is that when Chris K  posts something of mine on his FB page, I’ll get a lot more hits than if it’s posted by ownself on SGDaily’s Facbook page: better promotion by FB. No wonder Daniel Yap of TMG is pushing out a lot more TMG pieces on his personal FB wall. Smart man.

Maybe Terry should be doing the same for TOC? And Ravi for TISG when it runs constructive, nation-building, loudhailing stuff that S’poreans really need to know.

And pay Chris K to push out their stuff. After all both publications use him to attract the cybernuts even though he’s no nut. He’s a pensioner. Either that or persude him to do NS and promote their pieces for free.

Or pay FB to promote their stuff. FB is happy to push if it’s paid to promote.

Money talks.

And yes I’m simplifying what the tweaks are doing and why FB is doing what is it doing.

Facebook: Today S’pore, tom China

In China on 07/07/2016 at 5:19 am

The usual ang moh tua kee suspects are blaming the PAP IB of manipulating Facebook’s algorithms to get anti-PAP stuff taken off Facebook.They could be right in their usual attitudes of blaming the PAP (“PAP is always wrong”)and absolving an ang moh company (“Ang mohs know best”) of blame.

But have they ever tot that Facebook is using S’pore to test software for the China market.

Mark Zuckerberg has made it clear that he’s prepared to kowtow to if they’ll let Facebook in. He says he read president Xi’s writings and has invited China’s chief censor to dinner in his home. He’s even run in Beijing without a face-mask. But all to no avail.

So maybe he’s using Spore to test censorship software? Software that can detect and remove criticism of the PAP here that can be modified to detect and remove criticism of Xi, the CCP and other PRC authorities. Surely such software will allow Facebook into China? The Chinese would want competition for their own internet players, lest they think they are more powerful than the CCP.

Mark Zuckerberg a running dog of Xi and the CCP? Now that would upset the ang moh tua kees here: only PAPies do things for money, not ang moh billionaires from Silicon Valley.

 

How Facebook defines “active users”

In Financial competency, Internet on 09/02/2012 at 5:21 am

On the first page of Facebook’s prospectus, it puts the number of its “monthly active users” at 845 million people. It reports the “daily active users” as 483 million people.

Err: According to the company, a user is considered active if he or she “took an action to share content or activity with his or her Facebook friends or connections via a third-party Web site that is integrated with Facebook.”

Come again?

In other words, every time you press the “Like” button on NFL.com, for example, you’re an “active user” of Facebook. Perhaps you share a Twitter message on your Facebook account? That would make you an active Facebook user, too. Have you ever shared music on Spotify with a friend? You’re an active Facebook user. If you’ve logged into Huffington Post using your Facebook account and left a comment on the site — and your comment was automatically shared on Facebook — you, too, are an “active user” even though you’ve never actually spent any time on facebook.com.

Read more here

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/02/06/those-millions-on-facebook-some-may-not-actually-visit/?src=dlbksb

Facebook worth US$76.4bn: Russian bank

In Internet on 09/03/2011 at 9:36 am

Just a few months ago, an investment led by Goldman Sachs valued the social network at $50bn. Now, a group of analysts at an investment bank has looked at how the business is growing and come up with something 50% higher.

A study in BS analysis.

Internet investing: from heloo to zeloo

In Internet on 14/01/2011 at 5:50 am

Or the brutality of the Net. Or “Easy come, easy go”.

Remember MySpace? Latest woes — cutting half of staff.

MySpace valuation: That would put the valuation at about $500 million to $1.2 billion–with the lower end being LESS than Rupert paid for it, and the upper end being twice what he paid for it (hardly the steal of the century).
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/henry-blodget-myspace-worth-zero-2010-2#ixzz1An0bhJ6J All in US$ and Murdoch paid US$580m for it

Facebook is now valued at US$50bn. But only a few yrs ago MySpace was “valued” at US$65bn, though the foot notes said US$5bn.

Facebook: The Chinese boy who got screwed

In Internet on 13/01/2011 at 5:17 am

Wayne Chang’s lawsuit claims he is entitled to a portion of the original $65m settlement made with Facebook.

The 27-year-old formed a file-sharing network called i2hub while studying at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, which he later merged with their social network ConnectU in 2004.

ConnectU was bought by Facebook as part of the settlement and Mr Chang said that means he is due a share of the deal.

Mr Chang said he was “back-stabbed” and that he has been treated the way the Winklevosses claim they have been treated by Facebook.

BBC Online article on the Facebook story.