Posts Tagged ‘Instagram’

Dump WhatsApp

January 10, 2021

Time to ditch WhatsApp if you were foolish enough to use.

Yet another reason NOT to use WhatsApp. Data will be shared with Facebook.

WhatsApp and Instagram are owned by Facebook, the businesses model steal and abuse personal data, harvesting of data to manipulate people.

Trump did not happen by accident or in a vacuum. Trump was enabled by Facebook.

There is no excuse for using WhatsApp or Instagram when alternatives exist, Signal, Telegram, Skype, Twitter.

Telegram has the advantage of being open source.

Before you migrate, tell all your contacts where you have migrated to.

With Instagram, a link in your biography direct to twitter.

WhatsApp gives a take it or leave it.

Uninstall now, once you have warned all your contacts and told them where to find you.

Never direct into facebook, always direct out.

Facebook must be broken up, stripped of WhatsApp and Instagram.

Facebook and all Big Tech must be taxed at 5% of revenue where that revenue is generated.

The algorithms used by Big Tech must be open and transparent, subject to open peer review.

Lincoln BIG demonstrates how to squander public money

February 12, 2019

Lincoln BIG is a parasitical organisation that extracts a levy on top of business rates on businesses in Lincoln town centre.

This levy is something few businesses can afford, for many struggling small businesses it is the final straw that breaks the camel’s back, especially as they see little in return.

The latest example of how to squander public money are the heart silhouettes that have appeared in the town centre.

People I have spoken to thought it was something to do with British Heart Foundation, maybe because it copies their logo and one is located outside a BHF charity shop, but no.

Wrong on many levels, not simply an appalling waste of public money.

Passers-by encouraged to take a selfie. That is let’s encourage and reinforce Narcissist Syndrome.

Lincolnshire, according to a recent survey, is where more than half of teens and young people are suffering mental problems, mental health problem exasperated by social media.

Once taken, encouraged to post on Instagram.

Instagram claims ownership of pictures posted, are not visible on twitter, act as bait to draw into the facebook walled garden where personal data is stolen and abused and then used to manipulate facebook users.

But worst of all, Instagram hosts material that leads teens to self-harm and commit suicide.

Is it really a proper use of public funds to promote Instagram, direct vulnerable people to a site that is complicit in teen self-harm and suicide and by directing there Lincoln BIG are also complicit.

Lincoln BIG is also squandering public money to promote Cosy Club, a ghastly corporate chain, a fake 1930s bar, so fake a Monty Python parody of fake.

It is time to bin Lincoln BIG.

Facebook founder complains a private facebook photo made public

December 26, 2012
Zuckerberg spat with Schweitzer

Zuckerberg spat with Schweitzer

You have to laugh when facebook founder complains a private facebook photo made public.

Randi Zuckerberg — older sister to Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg — posted a photo from a family gathering to Facebook (of course), showing her sisters using Facebook’s new Snapchat-esque ’Poke’ app on their phones, with Mark Zuckerberg watching with a confused look on his face. It popped up on the Facebook newsfeed of mediaite Callie Schweitzer who subscribes to Zuckerberg. Assuming the photo was a public one, Schweitzer tweeted it to her nearly 40,000 Twitter followers. Zuckerberg was not pleased.

How did this happen?

Facebook has once again changed privacy settings. The picture got out due to tagging.

Tagging is a violation of privacy, people may not wish to be tagged in a photo.

Rather than faulting facebook for what it does best, violating personal privacy, Randi Zuckerberg had the gall to blame Schweitzer. She tweeted:

Always ask permission before posting a friend’s photo publicly. It’s not about privacy settings. It’s about human decency.

It makes you want to throw up, a member of the Zuckerberg family tweeting to others about respecting privacy and human decency when the entire facebook business model is built around violating personal privacy. When facebook is only too happy to sell your personal data and everything you do.

Earlier this month Instagram (owned by facebook) changed their terms and conditions. Your photos would be sold to advertisers, you would not even be told about, let alone paid.

Pot calling the kettle black!

It would appear to be OK to violate the privacy of facebook users, but not if their name is Zuckerberg

Instagram bullshit

December 19, 2012

I will be quitting Instagram today. What a bummer. You should all read their new rules. — Pink

Trust me, deleting your Instagram account is satisfying. — Mia Farrow

No more Instagram. — Kate Walsh

Either Kevin Systrom is stupid or he thinks Instagram users are stupid.

It could not have been more explicit, from 16 January 2013, new terms and conditions come into force, you have no choice, you are opted in like it or not, and once opted in Instagram deem that you have granted permission for your pictures to be sold to third parties whether you like it or not, you won’t get paid, you won’t even be notified.

We may share your information as well as information from tools like cookies, log files, and device identifiers and location data with organisations that help us provide the service to you… (and) third-party advertising partners.

To help us deliver interesting paid or sponsored content or promotions, you agree that a business may pay us to display your username, likeness, photos, in connection with paid or sponsored content or promotions, without any compensation to you.

But according to Kevin Systrom co-founder of Instagram, it does not mean what was writ, that is just poor use of English language.

Our intention in updating the terms was to communicate that we’d like to experiment with innovative advertising that feels appropriate on Instagram. Instead it was interpreted by many that we were going to sell your photos to others without any compensation. This is not true and it is our mistake that this language is confusing. To be clear: it is not our intention to sell your photos. We are working on updated language in the terms to make sure this is clear.

Now what when it is at home is ‘ experiment with innovative advertising that feels appropriate on Instagram’, other than bullshit, within a denial that is in itself bullshit.

It was not ‘ interpreted by many that we were going to sell your photos to others without any compensation’, that is what Instagram explicitly stated would happen on 16 January 2013, and the only way to stop this happening was to delete your Instagram account, which many have quite wisely chosen to do.

Facebook, which owns Instagram, and paid a ludicrous price for a fairly worthless application, is a rapacious corporation that thinks nothing of violating the privacy of its users.

Also contrast Kevin Systrom had to say with what Carolyn Everson, Facebook vice president of global marketing, had to say:

There are many brands that use Instagram right now to try to get a feel for how to engage with their followers. We will definitely be figuring out a monetisation strategy. When that will happen, I can’t comment, but it’s going to happen.

What therefore is going on?

Yesterday, according to Anonymous, 500,000 users deleted their Instagram accounts. Today Instagram violating their users and the reaction of users was the front page story on the Metro, so expect more users to delete their accounts. All of which will send facebook shares into free fall.

As already noted, facebook paid a ludicrous amount for a worthless application. The price was not paid in cash, it was cash and facebook shares. Now you will understand the statement of Kevin Systrom. It is not that he cares about users, but he does care about his wealth rapidly vanishing.

Announcing the apparent change of mind, Instagram co-founder Kevin Systrom told users: “It is not our intention to sell your photos.” He didn’t say “It never was”. He didn’t even say “We never will.”

Systrom claimed the language the original terms and conditions used “raised questions”. His problem is that it didn’t. It told us what sort of a company Instagram is. No wonder users are still closing their accounts.

Would Systrom have even contradicted the Instagram violation of users if there had not been a mass deletion of Instagram accounts?

We all know the answer, which is why the advice is delete Instagram.

The advice is still, delete your Instagram account, post on twitter with the hashtag #BoycottInstagram that you have closed your account.

Instagram abuses its users

December 18, 2012

A dramatic shift in Instagram’s privacy policy means the company can now sell your photographs and use your images in adverts – without payment or notification.

Instagram has claimed the right use any picture uploaded to the service to promote its corporate customers’ products without any compensation to the user who originally took it.

Instagram violates users with terms and conditions

Instagram violates users with terms and conditions

I want to delete my Instagram account

I want to delete my Instagram account

Goodbye Instagram, you won't be missed!

Goodbye Instagram, you won’t be missed!

There are many brands that use Instagram right now to try to get a feel for how to engage with their followers. We will definitely be figuring out a monetisation strategy. When that will happen, I can’t comment, but it’s going to happen. — Carolyn Everson, Facebook vice president of global marketing

For Facebook, this is a case study in how to waste a billion dollars. The company bought a popular service, set about stripping it of what made it successful, and paved the way for the inevitable replacement. — Forbes

Having declared war on twitter, Instagram is now violating its users.

I have never understood why anyone uses Instagram. It is a rubbish application that turns good pictures bad. If you wish to process images, then use a software package like Paintshop Pro or Photoshop.

Facebook paid a ludicrous price for Instagram, far, far more than it was worth, for a trivial application that a couple of half decent software engineers could knock out in a few days. Facebook paid a high price because it was not the application facebook was buying, it was the user database. That gives an inkling of what your personal data is worth to facebook, a company that does not recognise personal privacy.

Following a stock market flotation, with shares going into free fall, facebook has been under growing pressure to milk its assets. Its assets is you!

Milk is the operative word. Users are being herded like cattle.

Once Instagram was acquired by facebook, it was obvious abuse of personal data was going to take place. The only surprise, is that it has not happened sooner.

Nick Pickles, director of privacy and civil liberties campaign group Big Brother Watch:

People thought they were Instagram’s customers, but in reality users are Instagram’s product. It goes to show when respecting people’s data and privacy come into conflict with profit, there’s only ever going to be one winner. Users are now paying the price of Facebook’s acquisition of the company and unfortunately this kind of move will be seen time and time again as long as it is our personal data and advertising paying for services.

Last week, users found posting their Instagram pictures to twitter no longer worked. One good thing, I guess, fewer rubbish photos posted to twitter.

From 16 January 2013, new terms and conditions will be imposed on users. No choice, you are opted in by Instagram. The only way to opt out is to delete your Instagram account, but first delete all the information held, including all you pictures.

The new terms and condition are a serious breach of personal privacy, and quite possibly a breach of data protection across Europe. Users used Instagram to share with their friends, not to share with unknown third parties.

Basically in a nutshell, your pictures, personal information, can be shared with third parties, your pictures used in adversing campaigns.

Instagram can share information about its users with Facebook, its parent company, as well as outside affiliates and advertisers

All your personal information, including photos, is for sale.

You could star in an advertisement — without your knowledge

Your pictures, including of you or your friends, can be used in advertising campaigns. Let us say you hate McDonald’s, do not like Starbucks coffee or their tax dodging, how would you then feel to find they are using your photos to promote their products, how would your friends feel if pictures of them are used? And they can use your name. And you do not get paid, or even notified.

Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, a Washington-based advocacy group, said that the use of a person’s likeness in ads could run into some state laws protecting personal privacy.

Most states have laws that limit the use of a person’s ‘name or likeness’ for commercial purposes without consent. The legal purpose is to allow people to obtain the commercial value of their images and endorsements, which is a big issue for celebrities and others, but also a reasonable concern for Facebook users whose images are used by Facebook to encourage friends to buy products and services.

Underage users are not exempt

Would you be happy to find pictures of your kids are being used?

Ads may not be labeled as ads

It gets worse. We usually know ads are ads. But what if they are not obviously ads?

You acknowledge that we may not always identify paid services, sponsored content, or commercial communications as such.

Want to opt out? Delete your account!

Do not like? Tough, you are automatically opted in. The only way to opt out is to delete your account. If you remain, you are deemed to have agreed to violation of your personal privacy.

This is like a rape victim being deemed to be a willing participant to rape because she did not scream out.

Instagram also reserves the right to share any cookie derived data with third parties.

The choice is yours. You do not have to be a willing victim to what amounts to rape of your personal data by Instagram. You can delete your account. And that is the recommended course of action.

Prior to deleting your account, you may wish to download all your pictures held on Instagram using Instaport (sign in with your Instagram account).

There are alternatives. You can upload direct to twitter, you can upload to twitpic (which will automatically post to twitter). Or try Snapseed.

If you know Instagram users (they are the ones who send out bad pictures), then please warn them and advise to delete their Instagram accounts. Even if they do not care about abuse by Instagram, make it clear you do (as they may be holding information, pictures, relating to you).

When you delete your Instagram account please advise all your followers on twitter with the hashtag #BoycottInstagram and tell them why.

Instagram may have been one of the fastest growing companies on the net. Let’s see how quickly we can kill it.

Instagram declares war on twitter

December 10, 2012

I stand with Twitter will you? — Bianca Jagger

Instagram, the Facebook-owned photo sharing app, has disabled the feature that allows twitter to properly display its photos. In essence facebook is waging war on twitter using Instagram as its proxy.

I am at a complete loss why anyone would wish to use Instagram. All it does is turn good photos bad. I have yet to see one good photo after it has been bastardised by Instagram.

If you want to play around with pictures, then use photoshop or paintshop pro.

Since its acquisition by facebook, yet another reason not to use Instagram.

Facebook paid a ludicrous price for Instagram. An application that a couple of good software designers could knock out in a few days.

What facebook were paying for was the user base. If nothing else it shows what your personal information is worth to facebook.

And that is what this is about. Facebook wish to turn the internet into a facebook privately owned and controlled intranet. They want to know everything about you, not only what you are doing on facebook, but external to facebook.

Last month, Facebook proposed changes to its data-sharing rules that would allow the social network to use data collected by Instagram to “tell us information about you” and “improve the quality of ads.” The change will allow Facebook, which has more than a billion registered users, to build more complete profiles of its users – and target advertisements – using people’s personal data from its social network and from Instagram.

Never sign on to an application using facebook, as that gives facebook access to what you are doing. Always use personal ID and password.

It was very foolish of Paulo Coelho, someone who should know better, to change how wordpress-based blog, that no longer is it possible to comment by giving e-mail address, now have to comment via facebook. This immediately grants facebook to what you are doing external to facebook, who you are linked to. But worse, it grants a back door access to all your personal information on facebook (e-mail, place of work, friends, likes) to any malicious entity browsing the blog.

Paulo Coelho is not alone in opening a connection to facebook.

Pictures uploaded to facebook are not as secure as you may believe. Even if you have set high privacy settings, location and other information is available to third parties.

Never use facebook apps for the same reason. Delete all facebook apps, but not before ticking the box to delete data.

Instagram is breaking the way the net works. Social networks are just that, social and networks, Instagram is breaking the way they work. The intention being to force everyone to operate within the facebook walled garden.

There are superior alternatives to Instagram. Use twitpic, or failing that, upload pictures direct to twitter.

Facebook, Instagram, Google, and the Monopoly Fallacy

April 13, 2012

Ah yes. The Net is abuzz with the sound of a billion dollars (I’m refraining from the “Dr. Evil” references with great effort) landing in Instagram’s lap, courtesy of Mark Zuckerberg’s Facebook. And whatever the associated mix of cash and Facebook stock turns out to be, that’s one hell of lot of moolah for a firm that’s only been around a couple of years, has a grand total of 13 employees, and zero income (not to mention nada profit).

They don’t even have their own infrastructure — they use Amazon Web services array of servers, though one might assume now that at some point those functionalities will be assimilated into Facebook’s farm.

But what really fascinates me about this acquisition is how it puts another nail firmly in the coffin of false arguments that Google, twitter, or various other large Web services firms are monopolies in their operational spheres, potentially or currently in need of antitrust enforcement.

What is Zuckerberg really buying with Instagram?

The entire management and staff of the company can be counted on three hands, with fingers to spare. Good people to be sure, but probably not worth a billion dollars.

What of Instagram’s core technology — letting people take photos, pretend to be artists by applying various filters (a capability provided by innumerable other programs and apps), then sharing the results with their so-called friends and followers — is there a billion dollars of value there?

Some 30 million or so Instagram users come along (like it or not!) with the deal, who will almost certainly find themselves intimately entwined with Facebook’s existing 800-odd million users at some stage. A significant collection of warm bodies, but a billion bucks worth? Hmm.

So again, what is Zuckerberg really getting for that billion dollar price tag?

Peace of mind.

My gut feeling is that Facebook saw the shadow of a significant potential competitor forming in cyberspace, and decided to nip it in the bud — while it was still practical to do so just by throwing a chunk of money in the appropriate direction.

But how could Instagram — no infrastructure, no income, hardly any employees — be a threat to the 800-pound gorilla of social networking that is Facebook?

Zuckerberg isn’t my idea of a good role model, but he’s nobody’s fool.

He knows full well what many of us have been saying for years — that disruptive competition on the Web can appear and grow quickly at any time, and will usually be essentially just a single click away for your current users.

The Cadillac that is Facebook looked in its rear-view mirror, and realized that the little Nash Rambler of Instagram was pulling up with surprising speed.

With users increasingly able to easily extract their data from existing services if they want to switch — Google has long supported Data Liberation, and Facebook is now moving in a similar direction — that “one click away” competitive reality is now even more the order of the day.

And the counterexamples are equally instructive.

Where effective competition does not exist, cannot be easily created, or where users cannot move between competitors without pinning the hassle meter in the red zone, we see complacency and often abusive behaviors that indeed do call for regulatory approaches.

Microsoft’s antitrust problems were fundamentally the result of their unwillingness to play fair, by their maneuvers to lock PC manufacturers and users into Windows environments whether they wanted to be there or not.

The giant ISPs in the U.S. who control most Internet access have spent decades manipulating the regulatory and political environments to purposely limit effective competition, to make it as difficult as possible for subscribers to switch services where any competition did exist, and to utterly control the “road” that connects subscribers to the Internet itself.

There was no “one-click” escape from Microsoft’s anticompetitive behavior, and there isn’t one today for users in the increasing concentrated, restrictive, and manipulative world of the immensely powerful major U.S. ISPs.

So perhaps we owe Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg some gratitude after all.

They have helped to illustrate the fallacies of accusations claiming evil monopolistic behavior by Google or other major Web services firms where users are free to easily switch between competitors, while also pointing us toward a better understanding of why regulatory oversight of the dominant ISPs is so badly needed.

The key to understanding Internet competition is in the click.

Facebook has provided us all with a billion dollar lesson in why this is true.

Just please don’t send us the bill.

— Lauren Weinstein


%d bloggers like this: