Put in the wider context of some of the other corporate exploitation of the average person, this isn't really that big a deal. But it's one of those things that people intuitively understand, and when it's about children it resonates much more quickly. It's really revealing of their corporate culture. Hope it leads to something substantive.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
It's hard to believe these are real people talking about other real people.Gillian: Would you refund this whale ticket? User is disputing ALL charges…
Michael: What’s the users total lifetime spend?
Gillian: It’s $6,545 – but card was just added on Sept. 2. They are disputing all of it I believe. That user looks underage as well. Well, maybe not under 13.
Michael: Is the user writing in a parent, or is this user a 13ish year old
Gillian: It’s a 13ish yr old. says its 15. looks a bit younger. she* not its. L*ol
Michael: … I wouldn’t refund
Gillian: Oh that’s fine. cool. agreed. just double checking
It won't lead to anything substantive though because the system is incentivized for this type of behavior. After all the exploitative practices in the banking industry led to global recession it took only 3 years for this to happen. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wells_Fargo_account_fraud_scandal You'll always get these sort of abuses in capitalism. It's not something that can be legislated or regulated out. It's just part of parcel of that type of economic system.Put in the wider context of some of the other corporate exploitation of the average person, this isn't really that big a deal. But it's one of those things that people intuitively understand, and when it's about children it resonates much more quickly. It's really revealing of their corporate culture. Hope it leads to something substantive.
It's hard to believe these are real people talking about other real people.
Agree with you on the bigger picture, but I'm a little more optimistic about this scenario. The banking industry combined is more powerful, influential and important than Facebook, so the forces protecting it are weaker. This year it's felt like that the attacks on them are getting stronger, even if they're still powder-puff in the grand scheme of things. Those two things combined make me think it may get to a point where Facebook will have to evolve or will get taken down. As a result I think they'll bring in some regulation to tackle some of the key areas of misbehaviour from Facebook and whatever they define their "industry" as.It won't lead to anything substantive though because the system is incentivized for this type of behavior. After all the exploitative practices in the banking industry led to global recession it took only 3 years for this to happen. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wells_Fargo_account_fraud_scandal You'll always get these sort of abuses in capitalism. It's not something that can be legislated or regulated out. It's just part of parcel of that type of economic system.
It's not like you wave a magic wand and voila, everything is clean. Like anything the industry is changing, at a more rapid pace than ever before. Compliance is pretty much on top for most banks and you can see than in ever increasing fines levied on them. Pretty much every senior management pay can now be clawed back if found negligent, There are even proposals to hold senior executives personally accountable for the cases, which I believe should be the norm. The industry is not there right now, but it's moving in right direction imo.It won't lead to anything substantive though because the system is incentivized for this type of behavior. After all the exploitative practices in the banking industry led to global recession it took only 3 years for this to happen. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wells_Fargo_account_fraud_scandal You'll always get these sort of abuses in capitalism. It's not something that can be legislated or regulated out. It's just part of parcel of that type of economic system.
Facebook are the worst by a country mile. Apple are probably the best in that they do fight for your privacy, albeit to maintain their reputation. The worst they get is to let other companies use their platform to abuse your data but it’s generally because they slipped through the net rather than actively assist like Facebook do.Ok but who is the absolute worst and who isn't so bad? Or are you saying there's not much between them? It's a genuine question, I have my own ideas (some of which require foil hats) but want to see what some of you lot think...
While that is undoubtedly true google has a pretty decent track record up to now (in comparison). Should they decide to be cnuts they can easily do the most damage though.I’d say Facebook and Google are the worst as the product they sell are the consumers and their personal data. Their true customers are advertisers and those who purchase this data.
Microsoft and Apple mainly deal with the sale of material goods/software.
Not to say the latter two don’t use consumer data, but the former deal solely in it. This makes it much more liekly they will be unscrupulous, unethical, intrepid in their immoral ingenuity and therefore more harmful to their users.
They haven't really broken too many laws in comparison to Facebook (to the best of my knowledge) but they essentially kicked off the whole trend of collecting customer data at an insane rate to then monetise it and sell it on, vastly changing the way we perceive personal freedoms and privacy. Of course, individuals are perhaps partially culpable in that we weren't careful about what we gave away, but then Google were undoubtedly capitalising on the average individual's online illiteracy at the same time. Their route to the top was basically paved by eroding privacy.While that is undoubtedly true google has a pretty decent track record up to now (in comparison). Should they decide to be cnuts they can easily do the most damage though.
I don't think you can fault either of these companies for using a totally legal business model. Do you really think that if it weren't for Google this kind of trade-off would not be a reality?They haven't really broken too many laws in comparison to Facebook (to the best of my knowledge) but they essentially kicked off the whole trend of collecting customer data at an insane rate to then monetise it and sell it on, vastly changing the way we perceive personal freedoms and privacy. Of course, individuals are perhaps partially culpable in that we weren't careful about what we gave away, but then Google were undoubtedly capitalising on the average individual's online illiteracy at the same time. Their route to the top was basically paved by eroding privacy.
Did they? I thought airmiles and other similar rewards programs started that trend.They haven't really broken too many laws in comparison to Facebook (to the best of my knowledge) but they essentially kicked off the whole trend of collecting customer data at an insane rate to then monetise it and sell it on, vastly changing the way we perceive personal freedoms and privacy. Of course, individuals are perhaps partially culpable in that we weren't careful about what we gave away, but then Google were undoubtedly capitalising on the average individual's online illiteracy at the same time. Their route to the top was basically paved by eroding privacy.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Threatening who? Us?
Threatening who? Us?
Your reckon he's got a small penis?
feck 'emamazon not going to new york
Trump must really admire Bezos. It’s makes him smart to pay no tax.
there's a lot of VC investment going into cancer cure companies these days, we might not be that far offif you think about it, it is crazy and also not crazy. also I am very smart
hopefully your head won't explode when an evil billionaire cures cancercant wait. i love when brands build in a space