Why in the flaming fuck are you still using facebook?
I am just shy of 70 and if I can quit (10yrs ago) so can you.
I have a lot of college and HS friends on thier. I like to follow thier lives, but I don’t live anywhere near them. I dislike it greatly. But it is impossible to expect them all to move to a less worse platform. Of course, I don’t click on ads, or follow random people… I don’t even have it on my phone. But they sure do splash images if hot chicks as often as they can. Shows how desperate they are. Oh, and I rarely post anything. Guess I am kind of a leech.
I never started. From the beginning, I thought that posting ALL your personal info on a website was a profoundly STUPID thing to do.
So I registered my name, just so nobody else could, but I’ve never posted a single thing on it, and never will.
Facebook names are not unique.
I only keep mine around for marketplace and our neighborhood group chat (which is handy because our city councilman is in it). I can’t remember the last time I actually browsed it, though.
One specific man‽
Donald Trump. Zuck knows what his Führer likes.
He and his friend Jeff are “enigmas.”
So secret. So edgy. So unique.
Now the whole world knows so… Yeah…
One man noticed, took offense and tipped off the guardian. That’s who they’re referring to.
I feel sorry for these kids - their parents are clearly dumb fucks for still using facebook.
Don’t blame the people for being psychologically manipulated by revenue and shareholder profits. Never blame people for mass marketing psychological manipulation practices.
Exactly. Under no circumstances should people actually take responsibility for their actions and decisions!
This was an appropriate position for this situation like 10 years ago before this image was public. Now I squarely blame them for being dumb fucks.
People with good Critical Thinking Skills recognize propaganda, and don’t fall for it.
Scrolled past this headline and audibly groaned in disgust. Husband asked why so I read it to him.
Him: What is with these creephounds?!? Me: They creeps!
Him: What is with these creephounds?!? Me: They creeps!
I hope you both mean Facebook and not the targeted men.
I very rarely use them but when I do I am targeted non-stop by FB and especially Insta with pictures of young girls. It’s absolutely disgusting and embarrassing (if someone sees it.) The search page is the worst. I don’t click on any of them, I scroll past them as fast as possible in my feed, I don’t like or follow anything like that, and yet it never stops. And that’s one of the main reasons I won’t use them other than to communicate with specific family members or friends.
I mean if grown men are looking for 13 year old school girls to talk to, I don’t feel bad for them if they get busted. However, the creeps that used those photos aren’t really much different, and it seems as though this was just literally a case of Meta trying to entice adult men to connect with young girls.
One of the mothers who had her child’s picture used without consent:
With 267 followers, her Instagram account usually had modest reach but the post of her child attracted nearly 7,000 views, 90% from non-followers, half of whom were aged over 44 and 90% of whom were men.
These are the people who want to strip away regulations. The party of if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear. Just don’t ask us any questions about what we’re hiding because it’s classified.
We were talking about Meta scrolling through the IG accounts of parents with teenagers going backs to school, selecting and saving pictures without consent or notification. The thought of somebody (even if it is AI) creeping on you or your child’s account, selecting a photo that they judge suits their needs, saving it to God knows where, and using it as bait to target men who they suspect have similar taste to their own, and are looking for kids to prey on, is not exactly reassuring to say the least.
Even if this was a case of trying to nab somebody who has nefarious intent (which there is no indication of) normally they hire adults that look young to bust people like that. And even then, between AI and Photoshop, I am highly suspicious there would be any legitimate reason they would need to be looking for actual kids to use as bait. And even if any of that was actually the case, there is no way in hell they couldn’t have at least asked for permission instead of burying it in their terms of agreement. This is exploitation of children. Given the world we live in, and the people we all know know were involved in the tech industry and also clients of Epstein, I would be freaking the fuck out of that was my kid.
There is this repeating ad on Sync for Lemmy which pisses me off to no end. They are for various women’s jewelry and the angle of the pictures make the image look very different than what it actually is.
Stopped using it recently just now because of this.
I think I’ve seen that one.
This is why Facebook is so dangerous. If you really want to give up your own privacy that much, go for it. But when you post pictures with other people in it, or talk about them with your friends/family, you’re giving up their privacy too. And they don’t get a choice about it.
Just don’t put pictures of your kids online, especially when you the parent describe them as “schoolgirls in short skirts with either bare legs or stockings”, and especially not on social media.
One of my sons didn’t care my wife (used to) post his pics. The other at times, nearly violently, opposed having his pix online since he was about five or six years old.
Isn’t that description just the article author describing the pictures, not the captions that the parents used? There are no quotes around that part.
I was about to say, it’s normal for meta. But then I read they made private posts public on the other platform.
No, just no. No excuse for that at all.
Ah, they made it private on Facebook, but not on Threads. Which they didn’t know it was also being posted to, but that’s by-the-by.
Well, I still have a Facebook account for the few people that are only on there. I am getting ads showing Threads posts, and if you click it, it takes you to threads and wants you to make an account.
So I’m assuming what is happening is that they’re taking posts from one service and showing them on their other services with click through to make accounts on those services. I guess they’re not honouring the privacy setting on the source service. Which if that is the case, is just terrible.
One mother said her account was set to private, but the posts were automatically cross-posting to Threads where they were visible.
Oh, this might be some instagram/threads thing then, I know they share an account. I don’t use either of those services.
I know on Facebook there’s these ads for threads and it’s putting random thread “stories” (I don’t know what they’re called) up on the timeline. So I thought they were doing a similar thing between all three services and not honouring the privacy setting.
Still, just my personal opinion. If there’s automatic crossposting, the default really should be to use the more restrictive privacy setting for each service.
Teshnikully, you waive a LOT of rights on anything you post on their service. I’m not sure the “private post” thing would hold against sending your pictures to a third party in the first place.
Of course, it’s shitty. But they put that provision in their TOS a long time ago.
I’m not trying to defend Meta, but where in the article does it say that private posts were shared publicly? I’m only seeing that public posts made by adults were used this way. The main rub is Facebook being accused of intentionally serving these publicly posted photos of children in school uniforms (by parents) as bait to join another one of their platforms. Like, a grown man was sent multiple advertisements where this was the exact content, no back to school pictures of young men, or any other type of photo. That they sexualized children algorithmically to bait men into using Threads, and are justifying it’s ok because the parents shared the photo publicly and didn’t opt out of the advertising settings (which seem to be a way to gain followers?).
One of the men was like, I’ve no idea why they keep sending me these pictures, I don’t engage with them. That might be an even more interesting story, because either Facebook is trying to offer sexualized children to uninterested men, or they know exactly which men are interested in sexualized children and instead of using it to push intervention ads, ban them from seeing the content their AI can definitely classify as enticing, or anything else, they use it to try to make more money.
I’m not trying to defend Meta, but where in the article does it say that private posts were shared publicly?
Third paragraph
One mother said her account was set to private, but the posts were automatically cross-posting to Threads where they were visible.
Ah, thank you and sorry, I should have just searched before posting.
Part of the issue is the quotes from Facebook rep saying they only do this with public posts, makes me wonder if its user error, platform lying, a bug, etc. but fuck all that. Any situation like this is strictly the platform’s fault, idc if the mother is mistaken and actually posted it publicly, if that’s possible then it’s bad design. Invest more in UX and less in user manipulation. If a parent was intentionally removed out their children, we’d expect the platform to prevent that, not enable it.
I’m wondering if their algorithm recommended this kind of photo because they were being viewed by a lot of men in his age range.
I think the algorithm knew just enough to guess “hey that’s a skirt and hey that’s an exposed leg, and images with those things in them do really with certain customers, and since this was posted by an adult’s account I should auto generate an ad with these images and show it to those customers” but not enough to realize “this is a picture of a child posted by their adult parent’s account”
I log into Facebook once every six months and the ads and reel suggestions are extremely horny
“Yes, I posted this pictures online but I didn’t realize there are man on the internet!”
Kind of sounds like you’re making excuses for Meta and for pedophiles at the same time.
Who’s the pedophile in this story? The person that posted the picture or the person that was shown it in an ad?
Neither. Your comment blamed parents but not Meta. It also talked about “men on the internet” as if they can be expected, as a normal man thing, to be into photos of kids. The concern is not men in general but pedophiles. And the responsibility is not just with parents but with Meta.
Sorry but this is just hilarious. Stupid parents mindlessly posted picture of their children on the internet and are not outraged that someone dared to look at them in a way they didn’t expect. Is the picture sexual or not? If not, who cares how some guy looks at it. If yes, why would parents post them? I know, let’s insert some imagined pedophiles into this story so we can justify our rage.
Stupid parents
Idgaf how stupid their parents are, kids should be protected from being fucking pimped out to sell meta’s brainwashing trash
Is the picture sexual or not?
Give me a break, if we know fucking anything about human sexuality its that different people get aroused by different shit, and sometimes they get aroused by shit they shouldn’t, like children
who cares how some guy looks at it
It feels worth noting here that what actually happened is a single 37 year old dude took it upon himself to call a newspaper and say “yo, Facebook is shoving a bunch of schoolgirls pictures in my face, no boys, just girls, like I think they expect me to be into it, and that feels wrong.” There was no creepy man in this story, the only creep here was the algorithm.
