• OneMeaningManyNames@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Let’s say this is the official narrative. My argument:

    1. Meta stands to consolidate power and revenue from further mapping devices to real people.
    2. Meta was also originally backed by Peter Thiel, who trades in data mining for secret services, now much more energetically. Zuckerberg is a sexist idiot and his app had no more merit than MySpace. Thiel saw the potential of mapping real idenities to online behavior, and it is no accident Palantir was later implicated in Cambridge Analytica.
    3. A redditor came up with concrete data that others have already posted, that show that Meta’s dark money are all over this case. As for the fine you say that completely explains this, is a very modest for Meta, who is used to pay such fines as a cost of doing business.
    4. Amongst the orgs taking Meta’s money to push this are many conservative organizations, like Heritage but also others (anti-sex, anti-abortion, and anti-trans organizations), who know that these laws will effectively suppress speech. Much like the trans moral panics, the laws are not as stupid as they appear, but carefully designed to obliquely achieve their goals (e.g. police bodies with wombs, in line with the same orgs’ anti-abortion positions).
    5. Governments watch closely as the new corporatist technofascism undoes regulations and checks and balances. They stand to gain from the turmoil and increase their surveillance capabilities even more. Alternatively, some EU goverments might be thinking that this is a way to stick it to US tech monopolies that brainwash their constituents, but they are wrong.
    6. In fact, the approach and outcomes hints toward government contractors in cahoots with surveillance agencies, that it would be surprising if there is no adjacency to Analytica personnel and/or the benefits for state actors and spooks are just an unplanned side-effect.

    Conclusion: There is sufficient basis to consider that the official narrative is not the whole story.

    • 1dalm@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      6 hours ago

      The biggest problem with conspiracy theories like this is always the number of people involved keeping their mouths shut. Anyone that has ever managed a large project knows how impossible it is to keep a large group of people quiet about something. In real life, there are conspiracies. Often very large ones. But they didn’t stay secret for long.

      What is easier to believe: (1) that all these people involved, across countries with leaders of many different political varieties, all agreed to stick to a single narrative in order to cover up a deep international conspiracy to build a massive international database of people’s ages online, OR (2) Meta and other orgs are doing a normal business thing and trying to reduce their liability costs.

      • Tryenjer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Counter-example: Epstein. But just continue to collect the checks for campaigning in favour of big brother Zuck, Thiel and their corporate and government friends. LoL

        • 1dalm@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          I don’t agree that Epstein is much of a counter point. There were lots of people taking about him, it really wasn’t that closely held of a secret, and he was arrested and prosecuted and murdered for it. Ultimately, with the files released, there really isn’t much in them that we didn’t already know.

      • WillowWhisper@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Not everyone needs to be ‘in the know’, in fact most of the time people won’t even try to think through a position and it’s consequences. They’ll just support it based on surface level arguments. Also Meta isn’t exactly drowning in liability when they’re raking in billions in profit. Power stands to gain when information is controlled

        • 1dalm@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          You really underestimate the trouble meta and YouTube are in. The specific rulings were barely tickets to them, but if they are upheld then follows flood gates of identical lawsuits are going to be opened up. They had millions and millions of child users in the 2010s that they knowingly served an addictive product to. If the current ruling is upheld, then there will likely be a very large class action settlement to payoff all the past injured users. But instead of changing their product going forward they want to get rid of the responsibility for their product entirely.

          Stop making up fake conspiracies and be mad about that.