20 Burst results for "Zubov"
Democracy Now! Audio
"zubov" Discussed on Democracy Now! Audio
"Roger. I wanted to ask you the. What are they Interesting aspects of the hearing was at both democrats and republicans on the senate committee were equally hostile and skeptical in terms of the role of facebook. But excuse me for being somewhat skeptical about the potential for real action here. Because i mean under one hand there would be the alternative of actually breaking up facebook breaking up. This huge goliath or either even deeper reforms at address what you raise. Which is the issue of the zubov so brilliantly documented of the commodification of the self by by the digital giant companies of our day which facebook. It's only one of them. So what direction do you see. Potentially going in congress to address. What's what's been here. So i think skepticism by congress is still appropriate but i will tell you as somebody who works with congress all the time. I took great joy in watching the hearing yesterday to see a republican senator to reach out to the chairman and suggested the two of them co-sponsor a new piece of legislation to address one of the issues that came up and then a second time republican talking about the national security aspect that ms how can talked about and the idea of people on live television coming together. That is not something we've seen from congress in a long time and i agree with you. There are a lot of reasons to be skeptical but my my perspective on this is if i could get into that room with them i'd say listen. Facebook is the poster child for was wrong today but the real problem is that in the united states we have abdicated too much power to corporations we've essentially said we're not going to regulate them. Were not going to supervise what they're doing. And in the process we've allowed power to accumulate in a highly concentrated way which is bad for democracy but worse than that. We've allowed business models and as you just described surveillance. Capitalism this notion of using surveillance to gather every piece of data possible about a person the construction of models allow you to predict their behavior and then recommendation engines that allow you to manipulate their behavior. That business model which began with google spread to facebook. Amazon and microsoft is now being adopted throughout the economy. You cannot do a transaction anywhere in the economy with people collecting data which they then buy and sell in a third party marketplace and that is in my opinion and i think if you ask to shun zubov she would agree with this. That that is is immoral child labor. And if i could sit these members of the senate down i say listen guys. You're mad at facebook today but the way to solve the problem for kids the way to solve the problem democracy the way to solve all these problems in jessica. I'm sure is going to talk about the civil rights aspects of this because they are humongous and but the way to do that is to end surveillance capitalism because if we can't predict the rights of individuals but if you will our human autonomy what do we have but i wanted to bring jessica in to get her reaction to the hearing but also just a few figures that that i've dug up in terms of facebook users in the united states about two hundred million of facebook users in latin america. Two hundred eighty million more people. In latin america are using facebook than in the united states itself. A the a mentioned in her testimony. What would happen in myanmar and ethiopia the ethnic cleansing situations. There that were foward in some degree by facebook. The opium only has six million facebook followers six percent of their population me and mar forty percent of their population. So what did you find from the hearings. What how can mention about this whole issue of how facebook deals with integrity a core across languages and nations. Someone who's worked quite a bit on this issue through the best at facebook campaign where we're calling out the disparities and how facebook is enforcing its rules in english and spanish. I was very interested in the revelation that eighty seven percent of facebook's investment in what they call integrity. The integrity of their systems is devoted to english. Despite that only nine percent of facebook users are using and speaking english on the platform. Another thing that how can reveal is that facebook seems to invest a lot more in users who make more money even though the risks to users are not necessarily distributed based on income. And of course. They're not right. We know that in society and in our digital world in particular that women people of color religious minorities ethnic minorities are often disproportionately targeted with bigotry. And so it was very interesting to hear her. Reflect and share the internal information that reveals that facebook has not adequately invested to keep people safe across languages so it should come as no surprise then that they played a contributing role in the genocide in myanmar that they are responsible for the rise authoritarianism and the philippines and brazil and india and ethiopia because they have not implemented type of mechanisms they have not invested in the the human personnel that is required to conduct content moderation and so when i take coupled with facebook's incredibly disappointing and disrespectful response and i layer on top of that how time after time facebook has refused to offer to offer any transparency whatsoever pertaining to the most basic questions about how they moderate content across languages in non english languages. I'm horrified bid and there's a there's a very racist element to the lack of investment across language. And i think that needs to be addressed right away. You know going back. To rogers point about the need to tamp down on on surveillance capitalism. I think that's exactly right and another thing. That i thought but was really important that how can said is that we actually need to think through. New regulatory frameworks. And i think the time is now for congress to pass a data privacy and civil rights law that limits the collection of our personal data that limits algorithm discrimination that provides greater transparency. About what the companies are doing and what they know about the harms they're causing across the globe and that really provides accountability too. Not just the american public but people across the world. So i think congress needs to act. I was also encouraged by the real legitimate questions that came from both sides of the aisle. This was much less of a circus than other hearings we've seen about. These issues does seem like congress is getting much more serious about this. I hope they act. I think your skepticism is totally valid. And i and i want to lift up here that the federal trade commission has the authority to look into this more deeply right away and that should that should be imperative. That should that should happen right away. And the federal tree commission needs the budget and the investment to.
Democracy Now! Audio
"zubov" Discussed on Democracy Now! Audio
"Roger. I wanted to ask you the. What are they Interesting aspects of the hearing was at both democrats and republicans on the senate committee were equally hostile and skeptical in terms of the role of facebook. But excuse me for being somewhat skeptical about the potential for real action here. Because i mean under one hand there would be the alternative of actually breaking up facebook breaking up. This huge goliath or either even deeper reforms at address what you raise. Which is the issue of the zubov so brilliantly documented of the commodification of the self by by the digital giant companies of our day which facebook. It's only one of them. So what direction do you see. Potentially going in congress to address. What's what's been here. So i think skepticism by congress is still appropriate but i will tell you as somebody who works with congress all the time. I took great joy in watching the hearing yesterday to see a republican senator to reach out to the chairman and suggested the two of them co-sponsor a new piece of legislation to address one of the issues that came up and then a second time republican talking about the national security aspect that ms how can talked about and the idea of people on live television coming together. That is not something we've seen from congress in a long time and i agree with you. There are a lot of reasons to be skeptical but my my perspective on this is if i could get into that room with them i'd say listen. Facebook is the poster child for was wrong today but the real problem is that in the united states we have abdicated too much power to corporations we've essentially said we're not going to regulate them. Were not going to supervise what they're doing. And in the process we've allowed power to accumulate in a highly concentrated way which is bad for democracy but worse than that. We've allowed business models and as you just described surveillance. Capitalism this notion of using surveillance to gather every piece of data possible about a person the construction of models that allow you to predict their behavior and then recommendation engines that allow you to manipulate their behavior. That business model which began with google spread to facebook. Amazon and microsoft is now being adopted throughout the economy. You cannot do a transaction anywhere in the economy without people collecting data which they then buy and sell in a third party marketplace and that is in my opinion and i think if you ask to shun zubov she would agree with this. That that is is immoral child labor and if i could sit these members of the senate down i say listen guys. You're mad at facebook today but the way to solve the problem for kids the way to solve the problem democracy the way to solve all these problems in jessica. I'm sure is going to talk about the civil rights aspects of this because they are humongous and but the way to do that is to end surveillance capitalism because if we can't predict the rights of individuals but if you will our human autonomy what do we have but i wanted to bring jessica in to get her reaction to the hearing but also just a few figures that that i've dug up in terms of facebook users in the united states about two hundred million of facebook users in latin america. Two hundred eighty million more people. In latin america are using facebook than in the united states itself. A the a mentioned in her testimony. What would happen in myanmar and ethiopia the ethnic cleansing situations. There that were foward. In some degree by facebook ethiopia only has six million facebook followers six percent of their population me and mar forty percent of their population. So what did you find from the hearings. What how can mention about this whole issue of how facebook deals with integrity a core across languages and nations as someone who's worked quite a bit on this issue through the best at facebook campaign where we're calling out the disparities and how facebook is enforcing its rules in english and spanish. I was very interested in the revelation that eighty seven percent of facebook's investment in what they call integrity. The integrity of their systems is devoted to english. Despite that only nine percent of facebook users are using and speaking english on the platform. Another thing that how can reveal is that facebook seems to invest a lot more in users who make more money even though the risks to users are not necessarily distributed based on income. And of course. They're not right. We know that in society and in our digital world in particular that women people of color religious minorities ethnic minorities are often disproportionately targeted with bigotry. And so it was very interesting to hear her. Reflect and share the internal information that reveals that facebook has not adequately invested to keep people safe across languages so it should come as no surprise then that they played a contributing role in the genocide in myanmar that they are responsible for the rise authoritarianism and the philippines and brazil and india and ethiopia because they have not implemented type of mechanisms they have not invested in the the human personnel that is required to conduct content moderation and so when i take coupled with facebook's incredibly disappointing and disrespectful response and i layer on top of that how time after time facebook has refused to offer to offer any transparency whatsoever pertaining to the most basic questions about how they moderate content across languages in non english languages. I'm horrified i'm disgusted. And there's a there's a very racist element to the lack of investment across language. And i think that needs to be addressed right away. You know going back to rogers point about the need to tamp down on on surveillance capitalism. I think that's exactly right and another thing. That i thought but was really important that how can said is that we actually need to think through. New regulatory frameworks. And i think the time is now for congress to pass a data privacy and civil rights law that limits the collection of our personal data that limits algorithm discrimination that provides greater transparency. About what the companies are doing and what they know about the harms they're causing across the globe and that really provides accountability too. Not just the american public but people across the world. So i think congress needs to act. I was also encouraged by the real legitimate questions that came from both sides of the aisle. This was much less of a circus than other hearings we've seen about. These issues does seem like congress is getting much more serious about this. I hope they act. I think your skepticism is totally valid. And i and i want to lift up here that the federal trade commission has the authority to look into this more deeply right away and that should that should be imperative. That should that should happen right away. And the federal tree commission needs the budget and the investment to.
Democracy Now! Audio
"zubov" Discussed on Democracy Now! Audio
"Roger. I wanted to ask you the. What are they Interesting aspects of the hearing was at both democrats and republicans on the senate committee were equally hostile and skeptical in terms of the role of facebook. But excuse me for being somewhat skeptical about the potential for real action here. Because i mean under one hand there would be the alternative of actually breaking up facebook breaking up. This huge goliath or either even deeper reforms at address what you raise. Which is the issue of the shona zubov so brilliantly documented of the commodification of the self by by the digital giant companies of our day which facebook. It's only one of them. So what direction do you see. Potentially going in congress to address. What's what's been here. So i think skepticism by congress is still appropriate but i will tell you as somebody who works with congress all the time. I took great joy in watching the hearing yesterday to see a republican senator to reach out to the chairman and suggested the two of them co-sponsor a new piece of legislation to address one of the issues that came up and then a second time republican talking about the national security aspect that ms how can talked about and the idea of people on live television coming together. That is not something we've seen from congress in a long time and i agree with you. There are a lot of reasons to be skeptical but my my perspective on this is if i could get into that room with them i'd say listen. Facebook is the poster child for was wrong today but the real problem is that in the united states we have abdicated too much power to corporations we've essentially said we're not going to regulate them. Were not going to supervise what they're doing. And in the process we've allowed power to accumulate in a highly concentrated way which is bad for democracy but worse than that. We've allowed business models and as you just described surveillance. Capitalism this notion of using surveillance to gather every piece of data possible about a person the construction of models that allow you to predict their behavior and then recommendation engines that allow you to manipulate their behavior. That business model which began with google spread to facebook. Amazon and microsoft is now being adopted throughout the economy. You cannot do a transaction anywhere in the economy without people collecting data which they then buy and sell in a third party marketplace and that is in my opinion and i think if you ask to shun zubov she would agree with this. That that is is immoral child labor and if i could sit these members of the senate down i say listen guys. You're mad at facebook today but the way to solve the problem for kids the way to solve the problem democracy the way to solve all these problems in jessica. I'm sure is going to talk about the civil rights aspects of this because they are humongous and but the way to do that is to end surveillance capitalism because if we can't predict the rights of individuals but if you will our human autonomy what do we have but i wanted to bring jessica in to get her reaction to the hearing but also just a few figures that that i've dug up in terms of facebook users in the united states about two hundred million of facebook users in latin america. Two hundred eighty million more people. In latin america are using facebook than in the united states itself. A the can mentioned in her testimony. What would happen in myanmar and ethiopia the ethnic cleansing situations there. That were foward. In some degree by facebook ethiopia only has six million facebook followers six percent of their population me and mar forty percent of their population. So what did you find from the hearings. What how can mention about this whole issue of how facebook deals with integrity a core across languages and nations as someone who's worked quite a bit on this issue through the best at facebook campaign where we're calling out the disparities and how facebook is enforcing its rules in english and spanish. I was very interested in the revelation that eighty seven percent of facebook's investment in what they call integrity. The integrity of their systems is devoted to english. Despite that only nine percent of facebook users are using and speaking english on the platform. Another thing that how can reveal is that facebook seems to invest a lot more in users who make more money even though the risks to users are not necessarily distributed based on income. And of course. They're not right. We know that in society and in our digital world in particular that women people of color religious minorities ethnic minorities are often disproportionately targeted with bigotry. And so it was very interesting to hear her. Reflect and share the internal information that reveals that facebook has not adequately invested to keep people safe across languages so it should come as no surprise then that they played a contributing role in the genocide in myanmar that they are responsible for the rise authoritarianism and the philippines and brazil and india and ethiopia because they have not implemented type of mechanisms they have not invested in the the human personnel that is required to conduct content moderation and so when i take coupled with facebook's incredibly disappointing and disrespectful response and i layer on top of that how time after time facebook has refused to offer to offer any transparency whatsoever pertaining to the most basic questions about how they moderate content across languages in non english languages. I'm horrified i'm disgusted. And there's a there's a very racist element to the lack of investment across language. And i think that needs to be addressed right away. You know going back to rogers point about the need to tamp down on on surveillance capitalism. I think that's exactly right and another thing. That i thought but was really important that how can said is that we actually need to think through. New regulatory frameworks. And i think the time is now for congress to pass a data privacy and civil rights law that limits the collection of our personal data that limits algorithm discrimination that provides greater transparency. About what the companies are doing and what they know about the harms they're causing across the globe and that really provides accountability too. Not just the american public but people across the world. So i think congress needs to act. I was also encouraged by the real legitimate questions that came from both sides of the aisle. This was much less of a circus than other hearings we've seen about. These issues does seem like congress is getting much more serious about this. I hope they act. I think your skepticism is totally valid. And i and i want to lift up here that the federal trade commission has the authority to look into this more deeply right away and that should that should be imperative. That should that should happen right away. And the federal tree commission needs the budget and the investment to.
THIS IS DEMOCRACY
"zubov" Discussed on THIS IS DEMOCRACY
"Roger. I wanted to ask you the. What are they Interesting aspects of the hearing was at both democrats and republicans on the senate committee were equally hostile and skeptical in terms of the role of facebook. But excuse me for being somewhat skeptical about the potential for real action here. Because i mean under one hand there would be the alternative of actually breaking up facebook breaking up. This huge goliath or either even deeper reforms at address what you raise. Which is the issue of the zubov so brilliantly documented of the commodification of the self by by the digital giant companies of our day which facebook. It's only one of them. So what direction do you see. Potentially going in congress to address. What's what's been here. So i think skepticism by congress is still appropriate but i will tell you as somebody who works with congress all the time. I took great joy in watching the hearing yesterday to see a republican senator to reach out to the chairman and suggested the two of them co-sponsor a new piece of legislation to address one of the issues that came up and then a second time republican talking about the national security aspect that ms how can talked about and the idea of people on live television coming together. That is not something we've seen from congress in a long time and i agree with you. There are a lot of reasons to be skeptical but my my perspective on this is if i could get into that room with them i'd say listen. Facebook is the poster child for was wrong today but the real problem is that in the united states we have abdicated too much power to corporations we've essentially said we're not going to regulate them. Were not going to supervise what they're doing. And in the process we've allowed power to accumulate in a highly concentrated way which is bad for democracy but worse than that. We've allowed business models and as you just described surveillance. Capitalism this notion of using surveillance to gather every piece of data possible about a person the construction of models that allow you to predict their behavior and then recommendation engines that allow you to manipulate their behavior. That business model which began with google spread to facebook. Amazon and microsoft is now being adopted throughout the economy. You cannot do a transaction anywhere in the economy with people collecting data which they then buy and sell in a third party marketplace and that is in my opinion and i think if you ask to shun zubov she would agree with this. That that is is immoral child labor and if i could sit these members of the senate down i say listen guys. You're mad at facebook today but the way to solve the problem for kids the way to solve the problem democracy the way to solve all these problems in jessica. I'm sure is going to talk about the civil rights aspects of this because they are humongous and but the way to do that is to end surveillance capitalism because if we can't predict the rights of individuals but if you will our human autonomy what do we have but i wanted to bring jessica in to get her reaction to the hearing but also just a few figures that that i've dug up in terms of facebook users in the united states about two hundred million of facebook users in latin america. Two hundred eighty million more people. In latin america are using facebook than in the united states itself. A the can mentioned in her testimony. What would happen in myanmar and ethiopia the ethnic cleansing situations there. That were foward. In some degree by facebook ethiopia only has six million facebook followers six percent of their population me and mar forty percent of their population. So what did you find from the hearings. What how can mention about this whole issue of how facebook deals with integrity a core across languages and nations as someone who's worked quite a bit on this issue through the best at facebook campaign where we're calling out the disparities and how facebook is enforcing its rules in english and spanish. I was very interested in the revelation that eighty seven percent of facebook's investment in what they call integrity. The integrity of their systems is devoted to english. Despite that only nine percent of facebook users are using and speaking english on the platform. Another thing that how can reveal is that facebook seems to invest a lot more in users who make more money even though the risks to users are not necessarily distributed based on income. And of course. They're not right. We know that in society and in our digital world in particular that women people of color religious minorities ethnic minorities are often disproportionately targeted with bigotry. And so it was very interesting to hear her. Reflect and share the internal information that reveals that facebook has not adequately invested to keep people safe across languages so it should come as no surprise then that they played a contributing role in the genocide in myanmar that they are responsible for the rise authoritarianism and the philippines and brazil and india and ethiopia because they have not implemented type of mechanisms they have not invested in the the human personnel that is required to conduct content moderation and so when i take coupled with facebook's incredibly disappointing and disrespectful response and i layer on top of that how time after time facebook has refused to offer to offer any transparency whatsoever pertaining to the most basic questions about how they moderate content across languages in non english languages. I'm horrified i'm disgusted. And there's a there's a very racist element to the lack of investment across language. And i think that needs to be addressed right away. You know going back to rogers point about the need to tamp down on on surveillance capitalism. I think that's exactly right and another thing. That i thought but was really important that how can said is that we actually need to think through. New regulatory frameworks. And i think the time is now for congress to pass a data privacy and civil rights law that limits the collection of our personal data that limits algorithm discrimination that provides greater transparency. About what the companies are doing and what they know about the harms they're causing across the globe and that really provides accountability too. Not just the american public but people across the world. So i think congress needs to act. I was also encouraged by the real legitimate questions that came from both sides of the aisle. This was much less of a circus than other hearings we've seen about. These issues does seem like congress is getting much more serious about this. I hope they act. I think your skepticism is totally valid. And i and i want to lift up here that the federal trade commission has the authority to look into this more deeply right away and that should that should be imperative. That should that should happen right away. And the federal tree commission needs the budget and the investment to.
Democracy Now! Audio
"zubov" Discussed on Democracy Now! Audio
"Roger. I wanted to ask you the. What are they Interesting aspects of the hearing was at both democrats and republicans on the senate committee were equally hostile and skeptical in terms of the role of facebook. But excuse me for being somewhat skeptical about the potential for real action here. Because i mean under one hand there would be the alternative of actually breaking up facebook breaking up. This huge goliath or either even deeper reforms at address what you raise. Which is the issue of the zubov so brilliantly documented of the commodification of the self by by the digital giant companies of our day which facebook. It's only one of them. So what direction do you see. Potentially going in congress to address. What's what's been here. So i think skepticism by congress is still appropriate but i will tell you as somebody who works with congress all the time. I took great joy in watching the hearing yesterday to see a republican senator to reach out to the chairman and suggested the two of them co-sponsor a new piece of legislation to address one of the issues that came up and then a second time republican talking about the national security aspect that ms how can talked about and the idea of people on live television coming together. That is not something we've seen from congress in a long time and i agree with you. There are a lot of reasons to be skeptical but my my perspective on this is if i could get into that room with them i'd say listen. Facebook is the poster child for was wrong today but the real problem is that in the united states we have abdicated too much power to corporations we've essentially said we're not going to regulate them. Were not going to supervise what they're doing. And in the process we've allowed power to accumulate in a highly concentrated way which is bad for democracy but worse than that. We've allowed business models and as you just described surveillance. Capitalism this notion of using surveillance to gather every piece of data possible about a person the construction of models allow you to predict their behavior and then recommendation engines that allow you to manipulate their behavior. That business model which began with google spread to facebook. Amazon and microsoft is now being adopted throughout the economy. You cannot do a transaction anywhere in the economy without people collecting data which they then buy and sell in a third party marketplace and that is in my opinion and i think if you ask to shun zubov she would agree with this. That that is is immoral child labor. And if i could sit these members of the senate down i say listen guys. You're mad at facebook today but the way to solve the problem for kids the way to solve the problem democracy the way to solve all these problems in jessica. I'm sure is going to talk about the civil rights aspects of this because they are humongous and but the way to do that is to end surveillance capitalism because if we can't predict the rights of individuals but if you will our human autonomy what do we have but i wanted to bring jessica in to get her reaction to the hearing but also just a few figures that that i've dug up in terms of facebook users in the united states about two hundred million of facebook users in latin america. Two hundred eighty million more people. In latin america are using facebook than in the united states itself. A the a mentioned in her testimony. What would happen in myanmar and ethiopia the ethnic cleansing situations. There that were foward. In some degree by facebook ethiopia only has six million facebook followers six percent of their population me and mar forty percent of their population. So what did you find from the hearings. What how can mention about this whole issue of how facebook deals with integrity a core across languages and nations. Someone who's worked quite a bit on this issue through the best at facebook campaign where we're calling out the disparities and how facebook is enforcing its rules in english and spanish. I was very interested in the revelation that eighty seven percent of facebook's investment in what they call integrity. The integrity of their systems is devoted to english. Despite that only nine percent of facebook users are using and speaking english on the platform. Another thing that how can reveal is that facebook seems to invest a lot more in users who make more money even though the risks to users are not necessarily distributed based on income. And of course. They're not right. We know that in society and in our digital world in particular that women people of color religious minorities ethnic minorities are often disproportionately targeted with bigotry. And so it was very interesting to hear her. Reflect and share the internal information that reveals that facebook has not adequately invested to keep people safe across languages so it should come as no surprise then that they played a contributing role in the genocide in myanmar that they are responsible for the rise authoritarianism and the philippines and brazil and india and ethiopia because they have not implemented type of mechanisms they have not invested in the the human personnel that is required to conduct content moderation and so when i take coupled with facebook's incredibly disappointing and disrespectful response and i layer on top of that how time after time facebook has refused to offer to offer any transparency whatsoever pertaining to the most basic questions about how they moderate content across languages in non english languages. I'm horrified i'm disgusted. And there's a there's a very racist element to the lack of investment across language. And i think that needs to be addressed right away. You know going back to rogers point about the need to tamp down on on surveillance capitalism. I think that's exactly right and another thing. That i thought but was really important that how can said is that we actually need to think through. New regulatory frameworks. And i think the time is now for congress to pass a data privacy and civil rights law that limits the collection of our personal data that limits algorithm discrimination that provides greater transparency. About what the companies are doing and what they know about the harms they're causing across the globe and that really provides accountability too. Not just the american public but people across the world. So i think congress needs to act. I was also encouraged by the real legitimate questions that came from both sides of the aisle. This was much less of a circus than other hearings we've seen about. These issues does seem like congress is getting much more serious about this. I hope they act. I think your skepticism is totally valid. And i and i want to lift up here that the federal trade commission has the authority to look into this more deeply right away and that should that should be imperative. That should that should happen right away. And the federal tree commission needs the budget and the investment to.
Democracy Now! Audio
"zubov" Discussed on Democracy Now! Audio
"Roger. I wanted to ask you the. What are they Interesting aspects of the hearing was at both democrats and republicans on the senate committee were equally hostile and skeptical in terms of the role of facebook. But excuse me for being somewhat skeptical about the potential for real action here. Because i mean under one hand there would be the alternative of actually breaking up facebook breaking up. This huge goliath or either even deeper reforms at address what you raise. Which is the issue of the zubov so brilliantly documented of the commodification of the self by by the digital giant companies of our day which facebook. It's only one of them. So what direction do you see. Potentially going in congress to address. What's what's been here. So i think skepticism by congress is still appropriate but i will tell you as somebody who works with congress all the time. I took great joy in watching the hearing yesterday to see a republican senator to reach out to the chairman and suggested the two of them co-sponsor a new piece of legislation to address one of the issues that came up and then a second time republican talking about the national security aspect that ms how can talked about and the idea of people on live television coming together. That is not something we've seen from congress in a long time and i agree with you. There are a lot of reasons to be skeptical but my my perspective on this is if i could get into that room with them i'd say listen. Facebook is the poster child for was wrong today but the real problem is that in the united states we have abdicated too much power to corporations we've essentially said we're not going to regulate them. Were not going to supervise what they're doing. And in the process we've allowed power to accumulate in a highly concentrated way which is bad for democracy but worse than that. We've allowed business models and as you just described surveillance. Capitalism this notion of using surveillance to gather every piece of data possible about a person the construction of models to predict their behavior and then recommendation engines that allow you to manipulate their behavior that business model which began with google spread to facebook. Amazon and microsoft is now being adopted throughout the economy. You cannot do a transaction anywhere in the economy without people collecting data which they then buy and sell in a third party marketplace and that is in my opinion and i think if you ask to shun zubov she would agree with this. That that is is immoral child labor. And if i could sit these members of the senate down i say listen guys. You're mad at facebook today but the way to solve the problem for kids the way to solve the problem democracy the way to solve all these problems in jessica. I'm sure is going to talk about the civil rights aspects of this because they are humongous and but the way to do that is to end surveillance capitalism because if we can't predict the rights of individuals but if you will our human autonomy what do we have but i wanted to bring jessica in to get her reaction to the hearing but also just a few figures that that i've dug up in terms of facebook users in the united states about two hundred million of facebook users in latin america. Two hundred eighty million more people. In latin america are using facebook than in the united states itself. A the can mentioned in her testimony. What would happen in myanmar and ethiopia the ethnic cleansing situations there. That were foward. In some degree by facebook ethiopia only has six million facebook followers six percent of their population me and mar forty percent of their population. So what did you find from the hearings. What how can mention about this whole issue of how facebook deals with integrity a core across languages and nations as someone who's worked quite a bit on this issue through the best at facebook campaign where we're calling out the disparities and how facebook is enforcing its rules in english and spanish. I was very interested in the revelation that eighty seven percent of facebook's investment in what they call integrity. The integrity of their systems is devoted to english. Despite that only nine percent of facebook users are using and speaking english on the platform. Another thing that how can reveal is that facebook seems to invest a lot more in users who make more money even though the risks to users are not necessarily distributed based on income. And of course. They're not right. We know that in society and in our digital world in particular that women people of color religious minorities ethnic minorities are often disproportionately targeted with bigotry. And so it was very interesting to hear her. Reflect and share the internal information that reveals that facebook has not adequately invested to keep people safe across languages so it should come as no surprise then that they played a contributing role in the genocide in myanmar that they are responsible for the rise authoritarianism and the philippines and brazil and india and the yoga because they have not implemented type of mechanisms they have not invested in the the human personnel that is required to conduct content moderation and so when i take coupled with facebook's incredibly disappointing and disrespectful response and i layer on top of that how time after time facebook has refused to offer to offer any transparency whatsoever pertaining to the most basic questions about how they moderate content across languages in non english languages. I'm horrified i'm disgusted. And there's a there's a very racist element to the lack of investment across language. And i think that needs to be addressed right away. You know going back to rogers point about the need to tamp down on on surveillance capitalism. I think that's exactly right and another thing. That i thought but was really important that how can said is that we actually need to think through. New regulatory frameworks. And i think the time is now for congress to pass a data privacy and civil rights law that limits the collection of our personal data that limits algorithm discrimination that provides greater transparency. About what the companies are doing and what they know about the harms they're causing across the globe and that really provides accountability too. Not just the american public but people across the world. So i think congress needs to act. I was also encouraged by the real legitimate questions that came from both sides of the aisle. This was much less of a circus than other hearings we've seen about. These issues does seem like congress is getting much more serious about this. I hope they act. I think your skepticism is totally valid. And i and i want to lift up here that the federal trade commission has the authority to look into this more deeply right away and that should that should be imperative. That should that should happen right away. And the federal tree commission needs the budget and the investment to.
Democracy Now! Audio
"zubov" Discussed on Democracy Now! Audio
"Roger. I wanted to ask you the. What are they Interesting aspects of the hearing was at both democrats and republicans on the senate committee were equally hostile and skeptical in terms of the role of facebook. But excuse me for being somewhat skeptical about the potential for real action here. Because i mean under one hand there would be the alternative of actually breaking up facebook breaking up. This huge goliath or either even deeper reforms at address what you raise. Which is the issue of the zubov so brilliantly documented of the commodification of the self by by the digital giant companies of our day which facebook. It's only one of them. So what direction do you see. Potentially going in congress to address. What's what's been here. So i think skepticism by congress is still appropriate but i will tell you as somebody who works with congress all the time. I took great joy in watching the hearing yesterday to see a republican senator to reach out to the chairman and suggested the two of them co-sponsor a new piece of legislation to address one of the issues that came up and then a second time republican talking about the national security aspect that ms how can talked about and the idea of people on live television coming together. That is not something we've seen from congress in a long time and i agree with you. There are a lot of reasons to be skeptical but my my perspective on this is if i could get into that room with them i'd say listen. Facebook is the poster child for was wrong today but the real problem is that in the united states we have abdicated too much power to corporations we've essentially said we're not going to regulate them. Were not going to supervise what they're doing. And in the process we've allowed power to accumulate in a highly concentrated way which is bad for democracy but worse than that. We've allowed business models and as you just described surveillance. Capitalism this notion of using surveillance to gather every piece of data possible about a person the construction of models that allow you to predict their behavior and then recommendation engines that allow you to manipulate their behavior. That business model which began with google spread to facebook. Amazon and microsoft is now being adopted throughout the economy. You cannot do a transaction anywhere in the economy with people collecting data which they then buy and sell in a third party marketplace and that is in my opinion and i think if you ask to shun zubov she would agree with this. That that is is immoral child labor and if i could sit these members of the senate down i say listen guys. You're mad at facebook today but the way to solve the problem for kids the way to solve the problem democracy the way to solve all these problems in jessica. I'm sure is going to talk about the civil rights aspects of this because they are humongous and but the way to do that is to end surveillance capitalism because if we can't predict the rights of individuals but if you will our human autonomy what do we have but i wanted to bring jessica in to get her reaction to the hearing but also just a few figures that that i've dug up in terms of facebook users in the united states about two hundred million of facebook users in latin america. Two hundred eighty million more people. In latin america are using facebook than in the united states itself. A the can mentioned in her testimony. What would happen in myanmar and ethiopia the ethnic cleansing situations there. That were foward. In some degree by facebook ethiopia only has six million facebook followers six percent of their population me and mar forty percent of their population. So what did you find from the hearings. What how can mention about this whole issue of how facebook deals with integrity a core across languages and nations as someone who's worked quite a bit on this issue through the best at facebook campaign where we're calling out the disparities and how facebook is enforcing its rules in english and spanish. I was very interested in the revelation that eighty seven percent of facebook's investment in what they call integrity. The integrity of their systems is devoted to english. Despite that only nine percent of facebook users are using and speaking english on the platform. Another thing that how can reveal is that facebook seems to invest a lot more in users who make more money even though the risks to users are not necessarily distributed based on income. And of course. They're not right. We know that in society and in our digital world in particular that women people of color religious minorities ethnic minorities are often disproportionately targeted with bigotry. And so it was very interesting to hear her. Reflect and share the internal information that reveals that facebook has not adequately invested to keep people safe across languages so it should come as no surprise then that they played a contributing role in the genocide in myanmar that they are responsible for the rise authoritarianism and the philippines and brazil and india and ethiopia because they have not implemented type of mechanisms they have not invested in the the human personnel that is required to conduct content moderation and so when i take coupled with facebook's incredibly disappointing and disrespectful response and i layer on top of that how time after time facebook has refused to offer to offer any transparency whatsoever pertaining to the most basic questions about how they moderate content across languages in non english languages. I'm horrified i'm disgusted. And there's a there's a very racist element to the lack of investment across language. And i think that needs to be addressed right away. You know going back to rogers point about the need to tamp down on on surveillance capitalism. I think that's exactly right and another thing. That i thought but was really important that how can said is that we actually need to think through. New regulatory frameworks. And i think the time is now for congress to pass a data privacy and civil rights law that limits the collection of our personal data that limits algorithm discrimination that provides greater transparency. About what the companies are doing and what they know about the harms they're causing across the globe and that really provides accountability too. Not just the american public but people across the world. So i think congress needs to act. I was also encouraged by the real legitimate questions that came from both sides of the aisle. This was much less of a circus than other hearings we've seen about. These issues does seem like congress is getting much more serious about this. I hope they act. I think your skepticism is totally valid. And i and i want to lift up here that the federal trade commission has the authority to look into this more deeply right away and that should that should be imperative. That should that should happen right away. And the federal tree commission needs the budget and the investment to.
Democracy Now! Audio
"zubov" Discussed on Democracy Now! Audio
"Roger. I wanted to ask you the. What are they Interesting aspects of the hearing was at both democrats and republicans on the senate committee were equally hostile and skeptical in terms of the role of facebook. But excuse me for being somewhat skeptical about the potential for real action here. Because i mean under one hand there would be the alternative of actually breaking up facebook breaking up. This huge goliath or either even deeper reforms at address what you raise. Which is the issue of the zubov so brilliantly documented of the commodification of the self by by the digital giant companies of our day which facebook. It's only one of them. So what direction do you see. Potentially going in congress to address. What's what's been here. So i think skepticism by congress is still appropriate but i will tell you as somebody who works with congress all the time. I took great joy in watching the hearing yesterday to see a republican senator to reach out to the chairman and suggested the two of them co-sponsor a new piece of legislation to address one of the issues that came up and then a second time republican talking about the national security aspect that ms how can talked about and the idea of people on live television coming together. That is not something we've seen from congress in a long time and i agree with you. There are a lot of reasons to be skeptical but my my perspective on this is if i could get into that room with them i'd say listen. Facebook is the poster child for was wrong today but the real problem is that in the united states we have abdicated too much power to corporations we've essentially said we're not going to regulate them. Were not going to supervise what they're doing. And in the process we've allowed power to accumulate in a highly concentrated way which is bad for democracy but worse than that. We've allowed business models and as you just described surveillance. Capitalism this notion of using surveillance to gather every piece of data possible about a person the construction of models to predict their behavior and then recommendation engines that allow you to manipulate their behavior that business model which began with google spread to facebook. Amazon and microsoft is now being adopted throughout the economy. You cannot do a transaction anywhere in the economy without people collecting data which they then buy and sell in a third party marketplace and that is in my opinion and i think if you ask to shun zubov she would agree with this. That that is is immoral child labor. And if i could sit these members of the senate down i say listen guys. You're mad at facebook today but the way to solve the problem for kids the way to solve the problem democracy the way to solve all these problems in jessica. I'm sure is going to talk about the civil rights aspects of this because they are humongous and but the way to do that is to end surveillance capitalism because if we can't predict the rights of individuals but if you will our human autonomy what do we have but i wanted to bring jessica in to get her reaction to the hearing but also just a few figures that that i've dug up in terms of facebook users in the united states about two hundred million of facebook users in latin america. Two hundred eighty million more people. In latin america are using facebook than in the united states itself. A the a mentioned in her testimony. What would happen in myanmar and ethiopia the ethnic cleansing situations. There that were foward. In some degree by facebook ethiopia only has six million facebook followers six percent of their population me and mar forty percent of their population. So what did you find from the hearings. What how can mention about this whole issue of how facebook deals with integrity a core across languages and nations as someone who's worked quite a bit on this issue through the best at facebook campaign where we're calling out the disparities and how facebook is enforcing its rules in english and spanish. I was very interested in the revelation that eighty seven percent of facebook's investment in what they call integrity. The integrity of their systems is devoted to english. Despite that only nine percent of facebook users are using and speaking english on the platform. Another thing that how can reveal is that facebook seems to invest a lot more in users who make more money even though the risks to users are not necessarily distributed based on income. And of course. They're not right. We know that in society and in our digital world in particular that women people of color religious minorities ethnic minorities are often disproportionately targeted with bigotry. And so it was very interesting to hear her. Reflect and share the internal information that reveals that facebook has not adequately invested to keep people safe across languages so it should come as no surprise then that they played a contributing role in the genocide in myanmar that they are responsible for the rise authoritarianism and the philippines and brazil and india and ethiopia because they have not implemented type of mechanisms they have not invested in the the human personnel that is required to conduct content moderation and so when i take coupled with facebook's incredibly disappointing and disrespectful response and i layer on top of that how time after time facebook has refused to offer to offer any transparency whatsoever pertaining to the most basic questions about how they moderate content across languages in non english languages. I'm horrified i'm disgusted. And there's a there's a very racist element to the lack of investment across language. And i think that needs to be addressed right away. You know going back to rogers point about the need to tamp down on on surveillance capitalism. I think that's exactly right and another thing. That i thought but was really important that how can said is that we actually need to think through. New regulatory frameworks. And i think the time is now for congress to pass a data privacy and civil rights law that limits the collection of our personal data that limits algorithm discrimination that provides greater transparency. About what the companies are doing and what they know about the harms they're causing across the globe and that really provides accountability too. Not just the american public but people across the world. So i think congress needs to act. I was also encouraged by the real legitimate questions that came from both sides of the aisle. This was much less of a circus than other hearings we've seen about. These issues does seem like congress is getting much more serious about this. I hope they act. I think your skepticism is totally valid. And i and i want to lift up here that the federal trade commission has the authority to look into this more deeply right away and that should that should be imperative. That should that should happen right away. And the federal tree commission needs the budget and the investment to.
Democracy Now! Audio
"zubov" Discussed on Democracy Now! Audio
"Roger. I wanted to ask you the. What are they Interesting aspects of the hearing was at both democrats and republicans on the senate committee were equally hostile and skeptical in terms of the role of facebook. But excuse me for being somewhat skeptical about the potential for real action here. Because i mean under one hand there would be the alternative of actually breaking up facebook breaking up. This huge goliath or either even deeper reforms at address what you raise. Which is the issue of sheshona. Zubov so brilliantly documented of the commodification of the self by by the digital giant companies of our day which facebook. It's only one of them. So what direction do you see. Potentially going in congress to address. What's what's been here. So i think skepticism by congress is still appropriate but i will tell you as somebody who works with congress all the time. I took great joy in watching the hearing yesterday to see a republican senator to reach out to the chairman and suggested the two of them co-sponsor a new piece of legislation to address one of the issues that came up and then a second time republican talking about the national security aspect that ms how can talked about and the idea of people on live television coming together. That is not something we've seen from congress in a long time and i agree with you. There are a lot of reasons to be skeptical but my my perspective on this is if i could get into that room with them i'd say listen. Facebook is the poster child for was wrong today but the real problem is that in the united states we have abdicated too much power to corporations we've essentially said we're not going to regulate them. Were not going to supervise what they're doing. And in the process we've allowed power to accumulate in a highly concentrated way which is bad for democracy but worse than that. We've allowed business models and as you just described surveillance. Capitalism this notion of using surveillance to gather every piece of data possible about a person the construction of models to predict their behavior and then recommendation engines that allow you to manipulate their behavior that business model which began with google spread to facebook. Amazon and microsoft is now being adopted throughout the economy. You cannot do a transaction anywhere in the economy with people collecting data which they then buy and sell in a third party marketplace and that is in my opinion and i think if you ask to shun zubov she would agree with this. That that is is immoral child labor. And if i could sit these members of the senate down i say listen guys. You're mad at facebook today but the way to solve the problem for kids the way to solve the problem democracy the way to solve all these problems in jessica. I'm sure is going to talk about the civil rights aspects of this because they are humongous and but the way to do that is to end surveillance capitalism because if we can't predict the rights of individuals but if you will our human autonomy what do we have but i wanted to bring jessica in to get her reaction to the hearing but also just a few figures that that i've dug up in terms of facebook users in the united states about two hundred million of facebook users in latin america. Two hundred eighty million more people. In latin america are using facebook than in the united states itself. A the can mentioned in her testimony. What would happen in myanmar and ethiopia the ethnic cleansing situations there. That were foward in some degree by facebook if the opium only has six million facebook followers six percent of their population me and mar forty percent of their population. So what did you find from the hearings. What how can mention about this whole issue of how facebook deals with integrity a core across languages and nations as someone who's worked quite a bit on this issue through the best at facebook campaign where we're calling out the disparities and how facebook is enforcing its rules in english and spanish. I was very interested in the revelation that eighty seven percent of facebook's investment in what they call integrity. The integrity of their systems is devoted to english. Despite that only nine percent of facebook users are using and speaking english on the platform. Another thing that how can reveal is that facebook seems to invest a lot more in users who make more money even though the risks to users are not necessarily distributed based on income. And of course. They're not right. We know that in society and in our digital world in particular that women people of color religious minorities ethnic minorities are often disproportionately targeted with bigotry. And so it was very interesting to hear her. Reflect and share the internal information that reveals that facebook has not adequately invested to keep people safe across languages so it should come as no surprise then that they played a contributing role in the genocide in myanmar that they are responsible for the rise authoritarianism and the philippines and brazil and india and ethiopia because they have not implemented type of mechanisms they have not invested in the the human personnel that is required to conduct content moderation and so when i take coupled with facebook's incredibly disappointing and disrespectful response and i layer on top of that how time after time facebook has refused to offer to offer any transparency whatsoever pertaining to the most basic questions about how they moderate content across languages in non english languages. I'm horrified i'm disgusted. And there's a there's a very racist element to the lack of investment across language. And i think that needs to be addressed right away. You know going back to rogers point about the need to tamp down on on surveillance capitalism. I think that's exactly right and another thing. That i thought but was really important that how can said is that we actually need to think through. New regulatory frameworks. And i think the time is now for congress to pass a data privacy and civil rights law that limits the collection of our personal data that limits algorithm discrimination that provides greater transparency. About what the companies are doing and what they know about the harms they're causing across the globe and that really provides accountability too. Not just the american public but people across the world. So i think congress needs to act. I was also encouraged by the real legitimate questions that came from both sides of the aisle. This was much less of a circus than other hearings we've seen about. These issues does seem like congress is getting much more serious about this. I hope they act. I think your skepticism is totally valid. And i and i want to lift up here that the federal trade commission has the authority to look into this more deeply right away and that should that should be imperative. That should that should happen right away. And the federal tree commission needs the budget and the investment to.
Democracy Now! Audio
"zubov" Discussed on Democracy Now! Audio
"Roger. I wanted to ask you the. What are they Interesting aspects of the hearing was at both democrats and republicans on the senate committee were equally hostile and skeptical in terms of the role of facebook. But excuse me for being somewhat skeptical about the potential for real action here. Because i mean under one hand there would be the alternative of actually breaking up facebook breaking up. This huge goliath or either even deeper reforms at address what you raise. Which is the issue of shonen. Zubov so brilliantly documented of the commodification of the self by by the digital giant companies of our day which facebook. It's only one of them. So what direction do you see. Potentially going in congress to address. What's what's been here. So i think skepticism by congress is still appropriate but i will tell you as somebody who works with congress all the time. I took great joy in watching the hearing yesterday to see a republican senator to reach out to the chairman and suggested the two of them co-sponsor a new piece of legislation to address one of the issues that came up and then a second time republican talking about the national security aspect that ms how can talked about and the idea of people on live television coming together. That is not something we've seen from congress in a long time and i agree with you. There are a lot of reasons to be skeptical but my my perspective on this is if i could get into that room with them i'd say listen. Facebook is the poster child for was wrong today but the real problem is that in the united states we have abdicated too much power to corporations we've essentially said we're not going to regulate them. Were not going to supervise what they're doing. And in the process we've allowed power to accumulate in a highly concentrated way which is bad for democracy but worse than that. We've allowed business models and as you just described surveillance. Capitalism this notion of using surveillance to gather every piece of data possible about a person the construction of models that allow you to predict their behavior and then recommendation engines that allow you to manipulate their behavior. That business model which began with google spread to facebook. Amazon and microsoft is now being adopted throughout the economy. You cannot do a transaction anywhere in the economy without people collecting data which they then buy and sell in a third party marketplace and that is in my opinion and i think if you ask to shun zubov she would agree with this. That that is is immoral child labor and if i could sit these members of the senate down i say listen guys. You're mad at facebook today but the way to solve the problem for kids the way to solve the problem democracy the way to solve all these problems in jessica. I'm sure is going to talk about the civil rights aspects of this because they are humongous and but the way to do that is to end surveillance capitalism because if we can't protect the rights of individuals but if you will our human autonomy what do we have but i wanted to bring jessica in to get her reaction to the hearing but also just a few figures that that i've dug up in terms of facebook users in the united states about two hundred million of facebook users in latin america. Two hundred eighty million more people. In latin america are using facebook than in the united states itself. A the a mentioned in her testimony. What would happen in myanmar and ethiopia the ethnic cleansing situations. There that were foward in some degree by facebook if the opium only has six million facebook followers six percent of their population me and mar forty percent of their population. So what did you find from the hearings. What how can mention about this whole issue of how facebook deals with integrity a core across languages and nations as someone who's worked quite a bit on this issue through the best at facebook campaign where we're calling out the disparities and how facebook is enforcing its rules in english and spanish. I was very interested in the revelation that eighty seven percent of facebook's investment in what they call integrity. The integrity of their systems is devoted to english. Despite that only nine percent of facebook users are using and speaking english on the platform. Another thing that how can reveal is that facebook seems to invest a lot more in users who make more money even though the risks to users are not necessarily distributed based on income. And of course. They're not right. We know that in society and in our digital world in particular that women people of color religious minorities ethnic minorities are often disproportionately targeted with bigotry. And so it was very interesting to hear her. Reflect and share the internal information that reveals that facebook has not adequately invested to keep people safe across languages so it should come as no surprise then that they played a contributing role in the genocide in myanmar that they are responsible for the rise authoritarianism and the philippines and brazil and india and ethiopia because they have not implemented type of mechanisms they have not invested in the the human personnel that is required to conduct content moderation and so when i take coupled with facebook's incredibly disappointing and disrespectful response and i layer on top of that how time after time facebook has refused to offer to offer any transparency whatsoever pertaining to the most basic questions about how they moderate content across languages in non english languages. I'm horrified i'm disgusted. And there's a there's a very racist element to the lack of investment across language. And i think that needs to be addressed right away. You know going back to rogers point about the need to tamp down on on surveillance capitalism. I think that's exactly right and another thing. That i thought but was really important that how can said is that we actually need to think through. New regulatory frameworks. And i think the time is now for congress to pass a data privacy and civil rights law that limits the collection of our personal data that limits algorithm discrimination that provides greater transparency. About what the companies are doing and what they know about the harms they're causing across the globe and that really provides accountability too. Not just the american public but people across the world. So i think congress needs to act. I was also encouraged by the real legitimate questions that came from both sides of the aisle. This was much less of a circus than other hearings we've seen about. These issues does seem like congress is getting much more serious about this. I hope they act. I think your skepticism is totally valid. And i and i want to lift up here that the federal trade commission has the authority to look into this more deeply right away and that should that should be imperative. That should that should happen right away. And the federal tree commission needs the budget and the investment to.
Democracy Now! Audio
"zubov" Discussed on Democracy Now! Audio
"Roger. I wanted to ask you the. What are they Interesting aspects of the hearing was at both democrats and republicans on the senate committee were equally hostile and skeptical in terms of the role of facebook. But excuse me for being somewhat skeptical about the potential for real action here. Because i mean under one hand there would be the alternative of actually breaking up facebook breaking up. This huge goliath or either even deeper reforms at address what you raise. Which is the issue of sheshona. Zubov so brilliantly documented of the commodification of the self by by the digital giant companies of our day which facebook. It's only one of them. So what direction do you see. Potentially going in congress to address. What's what's been here. So i think skepticism by congress is still appropriate but i will tell you as somebody who works with congress all the time. I took great joy in watching the hearing yesterday to see a republican senator to reach out to the chairman and suggested the two of them co-sponsor a new piece of legislation to address one of the issues that came up and then a second time republican talking about the national security aspect that ms how can talked about and the idea of people on live television coming together. That is not something we've seen from congress in a long time and i agree with you. There are a lot of reasons to be skeptical but my my perspective on this is if i could get into that room with them i'd say listen. Facebook is the poster child for was wrong today but the real problem is that in the united states we have abdicated too much power to corporations we've essentially said we're not going to regulate them. Were not going to supervise what they're doing. And in the process we've allowed power to accumulate in a highly concentrated way which is bad for democracy but worse than that. We've allowed business models and as you just described surveillance. Capitalism this notion of using surveillance to gather every piece of data possible about a person the construction of models to predict their behavior and then recommendation engines that allow you to manipulate their behavior that business model which began with google spread to facebook. Amazon and microsoft is now being adopted throughout the economy. You cannot do a transaction anywhere in the economy with people collecting data which they then buy and sell in a third party marketplace and that is in my opinion and i think if you ask to shun zubov she would agree with this. That that is is immoral child labor. And if i could sit these members of the senate down i say listen guys. You're mad at facebook today but the way to solve the problem for kids the way to solve the problem democracy the way to solve all these problems in jessica. I'm sure is going to talk about the civil rights aspects of this because they are humongous and but the way to do that is to end surveillance capitalism because if we can't predict the rights of individuals but if you will our human autonomy what do we have but i wanted to bring jessica in to get her reaction to the hearing but also just a few figures that that i've dug up in terms of facebook users in the united states about two hundred million of facebook users in latin america. Two hundred eighty million more people. In latin america are using facebook than in the united states itself. A the can mentioned in her testimony. What would happen in myanmar and ethiopia the ethnic cleansing situations there. That were foward. In some degree by facebook ethiopia only has six million facebook followers six percent of their population me and mar forty percent of their population. So what did you find from the hearings. What how can mention about this whole issue of how facebook deals with integrity a core across languages and nations as someone who's worked quite a bit on this issue through the best at facebook campaign where we're calling out the disparities and how facebook is enforcing its rules in english and spanish. I was very interested in the revelation that eighty seven percent of facebook's investment in what they call integrity. The integrity of their systems is devoted to english. Despite that only nine percent of facebook users are using and speaking english on the platform. Another thing that how can reveal is that facebook seems to invest a lot more in users who make more money even though the risks to users are not necessarily distributed based on income. And of course. They're not right. We know that in society and in our digital world in particular that women people of color religious minorities ethnic minorities are often disproportionately targeted with bigotry. And so it was very interesting to hear her. Reflect and share the internal information that reveals that facebook has not adequately invested to keep people safe across languages so it should come as no surprise then that they played a contributing role in the genocide in myanmar that they are responsible for the rise authoritarianism and the philippines and brazil and india and ethiopia because they have not implemented type of mechanisms they have not invested in the the human personnel that is required to conduct content moderation and so when i take coupled with facebook's incredibly disappointing and disrespectful response and i layer on top of that how time after time facebook has refused to offer to offer any transparency whatsoever pertaining to the most basic questions about how they moderate content across languages in non english languages. I'm horrified i'm disgusted. And there's a there's a very racist element to the lack of investment across language. And i think that needs to be addressed right away. You know going back to rogers point about the need to tamp down on on surveillance capitalism. I think that's exactly right and another thing. That i thought but was really important that how can said is that we actually need to think through. New regulatory frameworks. And i think the time is now for congress to pass a data privacy and civil rights law that limits the collection of our personal data that limits algorithm discrimination that provides greater transparency. About what the companies are doing and what they know about the harms they're causing across the globe and that really provides accountability too. Not just the american public but people across the world. So i think congress needs to act. I was also encouraged by the real legitimate questions that came from both sides of the aisle. This was much less of a circus than other hearings we've seen about. These issues does seem like congress is getting much more serious about this. I hope they act. I think your skepticism is totally valid. And i and i want to lift up here that the federal trade commission has the authority to look into this more deeply right away and that should that should be imperative. That should that should happen right away. And the federal tree commission needs the budget and the investment to.
Democracy Now! Audio
"zubov" Discussed on Democracy Now! Audio
"Roger. I wanted to ask you the. What are they Interesting aspects of the hearing was at both democrats and republicans on the senate committee were equally hostile and skeptical in terms of the role of facebook. But excuse me for being somewhat skeptical about the potential for real action here. Because i mean under one hand there would be the alternative of actually breaking up facebook breaking up. This huge goliath or either even deeper reforms at address what you raise. Which is the issue of the zubov so brilliantly documented of the commodification of the self by by the digital giant companies of our day which facebook. It's only one of them. So what direction do you see. Potentially going in congress to address. What's what's been here. So i think skepticism by congress is still appropriate but i will tell you as somebody who works with congress all the time. I took great joy in watching the hearing yesterday to see a republican senator to reach out to the chairman and suggested the two of them co-sponsor a new piece of legislation to address one of the issues that came up and then a second time republican talking about the national security aspect that ms how can talked about and the idea of people on live television coming together. That is not something we've seen from congress in a long time and i agree with you. There are a lot of reasons to be skeptical but my my perspective on this is if i could get into that room with them i'd say listen. Facebook is the poster child for was wrong today but the real problem is that in the united states we have abdicated too much power to corporations we've essentially said we're not going to regulate them. Were not going to supervise what they're doing. And in the process we've allowed power to accumulate in a highly concentrated way which is bad for democracy but worse than that. We've allowed business models and as you just described surveillance. Capitalism this notion of using surveillance to gather every piece of data possible about a person the construction of models that allow you to predict their behavior and then recommendation engines that allow you to manipulate their behavior. That business model which began with google spread to facebook. Amazon and microsoft is now being adopted throughout the economy. You cannot do a transaction anywhere in the economy without people collecting data which they then buy and sell in a third party marketplace and that is in my opinion and i think if you ask to shun zubov she would agree with this. That that is is immoral child labor and if i could sit these members of the senate down i say listen guys. You're mad at facebook today but the way to solve the problem for kids the way to solve the problem democracy the way to solve all these problems in jessica. I'm sure is going to talk about the civil rights aspects of this because they are humongous and but the way to do that is to end surveillance capitalism because if we can't predict the rights of individuals but if you will our human autonomy what do we have but i wanted to bring jessica in to get her reaction to the hearing but also just a few figures that that i've dug up in terms of facebook users in the united states about two hundred million of facebook users in latin america. Two hundred eighty million more people. In latin america are using facebook than in the united states itself. A the a mentioned in her testimony. What would happen in myanmar and ethiopia the ethnic cleansing situations. There that were foward. In some degree by facebook ethiopia only has six million facebook followers six percent of their population me and mar forty percent of their population. So what did you find from the hearings. What how can mention about this whole issue of how facebook deals with integrity a core across languages and nations. Someone who's worked quite a bit on this issue through the best at facebook campaign where we're calling out the disparities and how facebook is enforcing its rules in english and spanish. I was very interested in the revelation that eighty seven percent of facebook's investment in what they call integrity. The integrity of their systems is devoted to english. Despite that only nine percent of facebook users are using and speaking english on the platform. Another thing that how can reveal. Is that facebook vest. A lot more in users who make more money even though the risks to users are not necessarily distributed based on income and of course. They're not right. We know that in society and in our digital world in particular that women people of color religious minorities ethnic minorities are often disproportionately targeted with bigotry. And so it was very interesting to hear her. Reflect and share the internal information that reveals that facebook has not adequately invested to keep people safe across languages so it should come as no surprise then that they played a contributing role in the genocide in myanmar that they are responsible for the rise authoritarianism and the philippines and brazil and india and ethiopia because they have not implemented type of mechanisms they have not invested in the the human personnel that is required to conduct content moderation and so when i take coupled with facebook's incredibly disappointing and disrespectful response and i layer on top of that how time after time facebook has refused to offer to offer any transparency whatsoever pertaining to the most basic questions about how they moderate content across languages in non english languages. I'm horrified i'm disgusted. And there's a there's a very racist element to the lack of investment across language. And i think that needs to be addressed right away. You know going back to rogers point about the need to tamp down on on surveillance capitalism. I think that's exactly right and another thing. That i thought but was really important that how can said is that we actually need to think through. New regulatory frameworks. And i think the time is now for congress to pass a data privacy and civil rights law that limits the collection of our personal data that limits algorithm discrimination that provides greater transparency. About what the companies are doing and what they know about the harms they're causing across the globe and that really provides accountability too. Not just the american public but people across the world. So i think congress needs to act. I was also encouraged by the real legitimate questions that came from both sides of the aisle. This was much less of a circus than other hearings we've seen about. These issues does seem like congress is getting much more serious about this. I hope they act. I think your skepticism is totally valid. And i and i want to lift up here that the federal trade commission has the authority to look into this more deeply right away and that should that should be imperative. That should that should happen right away. And the federal tree commission needs the budget and the investment to.
Democracy Now! Audio
"zubov" Discussed on Democracy Now! Audio
"Roger. I wanted to ask you the. What are they Interesting aspects of the hearing was at both democrats and republicans on the senate committee were equally hostile and skeptical in terms of the role of facebook. But excuse me for being somewhat skeptical about the potential for real action here. Because i mean under one hand there would be the alternative of actually breaking up facebook breaking up. This huge goliath or either even deeper reforms at address what you raise. Which is the issue of the zubov so brilliantly documented of the commodification of the self by by the digital giant companies of our day which facebook. It's only one of them. So what direction do you see. Potentially going in congress to address. What's what's been here. So i think skepticism by congress is still appropriate but i will tell you as somebody who works with congress all the time. I took great joy in watching the hearing yesterday to see a republican senator to reach out to the chairman and suggested the two of them co-sponsor a new piece of legislation to address one of the issues that came up and then a second time republican talking about the national security aspect that ms how can talked about and the idea of people on live television coming together. That is not something we've seen from congress in a long time and i agree with you. There are a lot of reasons to be skeptical but my my perspective on this is if i could get into that room with them i'd say listen. Facebook is the poster child for was wrong today but the real problem is that in the united states we have abdicated too much power to corporations we've essentially said we're not going to regulate them. Were not going to supervise what they're doing. And in the process we've allowed power to accumulate in a highly concentrated way which is bad for democracy but worse than that. We've allowed business models and as you just described surveillance. Capitalism this notion of using surveillance to gather every piece of data possible about a person the construction of models that allow you to predict their behavior and then recommendation engines that allow you to manipulate their behavior. That business model which began with google spread to facebook. Amazon and microsoft is now being adopted throughout the economy. You cannot do a transaction anywhere in the economy without people collecting data which they then buy and sell in a third party marketplace and that is in my opinion and i think if you ask to shun zubov she would agree with this. That that is is immoral child labor and if i could sit these members of the senate down i say listen guys. You're mad at facebook today but the way to solve the problem for kids the way to solve the problem democracy the way to solve all these problems in jessica. I'm sure is going to talk about the civil rights aspects of this because they are humongous and but the way to do that is to end surveillance capitalism because if we can't predict the rights of individuals but if you will our human autonomy what do we have but i wanted to bring jessica in to get her reaction to the hearing but also just a few figures that that i've dug up in terms of facebook users in the united states about two hundred million of facebook users in latin america. Two hundred eighty million more people. In latin america are using facebook than in the united states itself. A the can mentioned in her testimony. What would happen in myanmar and ethiopia the ethnic cleansing situations there. That were foward. In some degree by facebook ethiopia only has six million facebook followers six percent of their population me and mar forty percent of their population. So what did you find from the hearings. What how can mention about this whole issue of how facebook deals with integrity a core across languages and nations as someone who's worked quite a bit on this issue through the best at facebook campaign where we're calling out the disparities and how facebook is enforcing its rules in english and spanish. I was very interested in the revelation that eighty seven percent of facebook's investment in what they call integrity. The integrity of their systems is devoted to english. Despite that only nine percent of facebook users are using and speaking english on the platform. Another thing that how can reveal is that facebook seems to invest a lot more in users who make more money even though the risks to users are not necessarily distributed based on income. And of course. They're not right. We know that in society and in our digital world in particular that women people of color religious minorities ethnic minorities are often disproportionately targeted with bigotry. And so it was very interesting to hear her. Reflect and share the internal information that reveals that facebook has not adequately invested to keep people safe across languages so it should come as no surprise then that they played a contributing role in the genocide in myanmar that they are responsible for the rise authoritarianism and the philippines and brazil and india and ethiopia because they have not implemented type of mechanisms they have not invested in the the human personnel that is required to conduct content moderation and so when i take coupled with facebook's incredibly disappointing and disrespectful response and i layer on top of that how time after time facebook has refused to offer to offer any transparency whatsoever pertaining to the most basic questions about how they moderate content across languages in non english languages. I'm horrified i'm disgusted. And there's a there's a very racist element to the lack of investment across language. And i think that needs to be addressed right away. You know going back to rogers point about the need to tamp down on on surveillance capitalism. I think that's exactly right and another thing. That i thought but was really important that how can said is that we actually need to think through. New regulatory frameworks. And i think the time is now for congress to pass a data privacy and civil rights law that limits the collection of our personal data that limits algorithm discrimination that provides greater transparency. About what the companies are doing and what they know about the harms they're causing across the globe and that really provides accountability too. Not just the american public but people across the world. So i think congress needs to act. I was also encouraged by the real legitimate questions that came from both sides of the aisle. This was much less of a circus than other hearings we've seen about. These issues does seem like congress is getting much more serious about this. I hope they act. I think your skepticism is totally valid. And i and i want to lift up here that the federal trade commission has the authority to look into this more deeply right away and that should that should be imperative. That should that should happen right away. And the federal tree commission needs the budget and the investment to.
Democracy Now! Audio
"zubov" Discussed on Democracy Now! Audio
"Roger. I wanted to ask you the. What are they Interesting aspects of the hearing was at both democrats and republicans on the senate committee were equally hostile and skeptical in terms of the role of facebook. But excuse me for being somewhat skeptical about the potential for real action here. Because i mean under one hand there would be the alternative of actually breaking up facebook breaking up. This huge goliath or either even deeper reforms at address what you raise. Which is the issue of shonen. Zubov so brilliantly documented of the commodification of the self by by the digital giant companies of our day which facebook. It's only one of them. So what direction do you see. Potentially going in congress to address. What's what's been here. So i think skepticism by congress is still appropriate but i will tell you as somebody who works with congress all the time. I took great joy in watching the hearing yesterday to see a republican senator to reach out to the chairman and suggested the two of them co-sponsor a new piece of legislation to address one of the issues that came up and then a second time republican talking about the national security aspect that ms how can talked about and the idea of people on live television coming together. That is not something we've seen from congress in a long time and i agree with you. There are a lot of reasons to be skeptical but my my perspective on this is if i could get into that room with them i'd say listen. Facebook is the poster child for was wrong today but the real problem is that in the united states we have abdicated too much power to corporations we've essentially said we're not going to regulate them. Were not going to supervise what they're doing. And in the process we've allowed power to accumulate in a highly concentrated way which is bad for democracy but worse than that. We've allowed business models and as you just described surveillance. Capitalism this notion of using surveillance to gather every piece of data possible about a person the construction of models to predict their behaviour and then recommendation engines that allow you to manipulate their behavior that business model which began with google spread to facebook. Amazon and microsoft is now being adopted throughout the economy. You cannot do a transaction anywhere in the economy without people collecting data which they then buy and sell in a third party marketplace and that is in my opinion and i think if you ask to shun zubov she would agree with this. That that is is immoral child labor. And if i could sit these members of the senate down i say listen guys. You're mad at facebook today but the way to solve the problem for kids the way to solve the problem democracy the way to solve all these problems in jessica. I'm sure is going to talk about the civil rights aspects of this because they are humongous and but the way to do that is to end surveillance capitalism because if we can't predict the rights of individuals but if you will our human autonomy what do we have but i wanted to bring jessica in to get her reaction to the hearing but also just a few figures that that i've dug up in terms of facebook users in the united states about two hundred million of facebook users in latin america. Two hundred eighty million more people. In latin america are using facebook than in the united states itself. A the a mentioned in her testimony. What would happen in myanmar and ethiopia the ethnic cleansing situations. There that were foward in some degree by facebook if the opium only has six million facebook followers six percent of their population me and mar forty percent of their population. So what did you find from the hearings. What how can mention about this whole issue of how facebook deals with integrity a core across languages and nations. Someone who's worked quite a bit on this issue through the best at facebook campaign where we're calling out the disparities and how facebook is enforcing its rules in english and spanish. I was very interested in the revelation that eighty seven percent of facebook's investment in what they call integrity. The integrity of their systems is devoted to english. Despite that only nine percent of facebook users are using and speaking english on the platform. Another thing that how can reveal is that facebook seems to invest a lot more in users who make more money even though the risks to users are not necessarily distributed based on income. And of course. They're not right. We know that in society and in our digital world in particular that women people of color religious minorities ethnic minorities are often disproportionately targeted with bigotry. And so it was very interesting to hear her. Reflect and share the internal information that reveals that facebook has not adequately invested to keep people safe across languages so it should come as no surprise then that they played a contributing role in the genocide in myanmar that they are responsible for the rise authoritarianism and the philippines and brazil and india and ethiopia because they have not implemented type of mechanisms they have not invested in the the human personnel that is required to conduct content moderation and so when i take coupled with facebook's incredibly disappointing and disrespectful response and i layer on top of that how time after time facebook has refused to offer to offer any transparency whatsoever pertaining to the most basic questions about how they moderate content across languages in non english languages. I'm horrified i'm disgusted. And there's a there's a very racist element to the lack of investment across language. And i think that needs to be addressed right away. You know going back to rogers point about the need to tamp down on on surveillance capitalism. I think that's exactly right and another thing. That i thought but was really important that how can said is that we actually need to think through. New regulatory frameworks. And i think the time is now for congress to pass a data privacy and civil rights law that limits the collection of our personal data that limits algorithm discrimination that provides greater transparency. About what the companies are doing and what they know about the harms they're causing across the globe and that really provides accountability too. Not just the american public but people across the world. So i think congress needs to act. I was also encouraged by the real legitimate questions that came from both sides of the aisle. This was much less of a circus than other hearings we've seen about. These issues does seem like congress is getting much more serious about this. I hope they act. I think your skepticism is totally valid. And i and i want to lift up here that the federal trade commission has the authority to look into this more deeply right away and that should that should be imperative. That should that should happen right away. And the federal tree commission needs the budget and the investment to.
Starcastic Remarks-The Only Dallas Stars Fan-Led Podcast
"zubov" Discussed on Starcastic Remarks-The Only Dallas Stars Fan-Led Podcast
"I am ryan and This is where Stories happen for the stars. We talk about these sort of things and unfortunately we live in a state where football is king and we fell in love with hockey. So hopefully you'll enjoy our banter back and forth Chris we've been gone for a while. Nothing's happened right absolutely. Nothing except for hockey stopped making sense but you know oh my goodness everybody. There is so much that We have to talk about in. You may not hear us talk about everything this evening. No so there's no way. I mean we probably what four hours probably if we actually mitch and everything. So we'll do what we're going to split this up into two episodes Tonight and then we also got tomorrow night so for those. That are listening on the podcast side. You'll get another one too Tomorrow as well So specifically what we're gonna do tonight we're gonna think stars perspective only all right so we're going to look at just the star side of the news in. See what we got going on here. 'cause garlic just with the stars so much as a happened over the course of the last couple of weeks with the seattle expansion draft in and also with the Also with the nhl draft in also with free agency which Nobody thought that the stars were going to be super affluent in the free agency. And that's exactly what happened. Boy were they wrong. Okay so let's talk about just the first bit of stars news that i want to mention this one just broke. I think this morning it might have been this morning. Just yesterday. it's long overdue but Sergei zubov the man. The myth legend himself number fifty six. Mr hall of famer now is finally getting his number retired by the dallas stars and that will be happening in january and of this upcoming season. And i believe it's going to be against the capital. So congratulations to mr sergei zubov not like he Didn't deserve it or anything or not that we didn't expect it but It couldn't have gone to a more deserving Person among the stars. Blue liners loves zubov integral to the cup run. It'll always be part of dell stars history well in it. It seemed for the longest time for a while that He was not going to get his number in the Hall of fame has number his name in the hall of fame at all even though he no one a couple of cups in had been in an integral part of all of these Teams and especially for the dallas stars for years and years and years so that makes What is that a rip to four hall of famers that were on that stanley cup. team was madonna bell. Four carboneau and zubov now so for those guys very integral parts of the dallas stars. Congratulations to sergei zubov But let's get down into stuff that we really want to talk about that. Seattle expansion draft will and brett hull breath five so bad i can just imagine hall lake st watching ahead to look it up. Going crazy is on. She's just not say bread whole in night as a guy who scored over six hundred goals. Something no big deal. Okay but can you just imagine him watching our stream and being do what the heck man. i think. We're good all right. All right hopefully never sees this. And i don't feel awkward and bad anyways. Okay so let's get to the seattle expansion drafts oregon talk specifically with the stars so one move before the seattle expansion draft actually starts for the stars and what everybody thought was going to be the pick for..
On Point with Tom Ashbrook | Podcasts
"zubov" Discussed on On Point with Tom Ashbrook | Podcasts
"It did and all about the warm up for the election. So it's a perfect storm well and regarding the tech part of it what i think. More and more people are finding increasingly appalling. Is that as you said. this actually isn't by accident. It's by design right. There are very specific. Decisions made by You know facebook. For example that that state clearly they are not interested in the advancement of truth or a robust debate of ideas but rather they are interested in simply delivering to shareholders. And that's why i mean as you. Well know jonathan shoshana zubov calls it an epidemic coup that in fact there's a deliberate coup in terms of how we know what we know so so so that sort of chaos part of it i think is is pretty well trodden ground and i appreciate you bringing it into your analysis here about its impact on the overall constitution of knowledge. As you as you describe it In fact we've got some feedback from listeners. Here russell says both sides can't face the truth or facts. The media seems to be the catalyst sources in today's world consequently the public align themselves with propaganda. They listen to or view. So that's one side of your dichotomy here jonathan. I'd love to spend a considerable amount of time on the other side. The conformity side. You say that there's a rise in the pressures towards conformist thinking and you particularly take aim on the left and there's sort of different aspects of the left we could explore here but i was wondering if we could spend a few minutes talking about how you see this happening on university campuses. And here's why because you we'll talk about solutions a little bit later but one of the solutions you talk about is that diversity of viewpoints is actually quite important to the constitution of knowledge. What evidence do we have Polling evidence or or analyses about the adequacy or lack of diversity of viewpoints on university campuses. Now who will. We know from lots of survey research that about two thirds of university. Students say that they're reluctant to state their true opinions on politics and other controversial matters for fear of calling out facing other kinds of of social retribution and pretty robustly confirmed and by the way. It's not that different from the same number. In american society. Generally whereabouts sixty percent of americans say they're reluctant to state their true political views because of social pressure and third of americans across again by the way amazingly all ideologies from the right to the left a third of americans say that they worry about losing job or career opportunities. If they're frank about politics this according to one study this is about four times. The level of chilling that we saw the height of the mccarthy era so what we're seeing now on campus but also increasingly off campus is an epidemic environment that is hostile to diversity of viewpoints. Where people are just afraid to speak out if they disagree but tell me. Tell me more about that because you actually write in quite a bit of detail about college campuses in particular and because you you you consider universities one of the key pillars of this constitution of knowledge so if we are moving towards a university culture across this country that supposed be one of the places where this this sort of debating and sorting and filtering of diversity of ideas then leads to common sets of behaviors and beliefs. And yet we're not having that. That robust churn if i can put it that way. I mean tell me a little bit more about what you've written about the evidence that you see for that. Who will there. Certainly the kinds of polls we talked about there. I interviewed many professors students for for my book And i frequently heard professors say for example and by the way progressive professors on the left and on the right this is not an ideological phenomenon strictly speaking they said i'm afraid of my students. I'm afraid of getting investigated. If i say the wrong thing. I'm just generally afraid of the climate around here Students say the same thing. Those students who turns out are now the main enforcers of social conformity on campus. Not a majority of students but very outspoken minority. That's very capable of weaponising. Things like investigation so the professor might get reported if they use the n. Word in a law class where the cases about that word so that creates a chilled environment. the most poignant comment i think in my whole book i was talking to a senior rising senior at one of the famous. Liberal arts colleges. I won't name it but you've heard of it and she saying that. She regrets the fact that she has not been exposed to conservative viewpoints in college even though she's a liberal and then she said that she gives herself some solace because she says well at least been exposed to a variety of progressive viewpoints. And that just made me cringe. Because the core the constitution of knowledge the very center of wyatt works is like the us constitution. you have to have diversity. we don't see our own biases. We just cannot and if all we're talking to people who share our biases we will make error. We will go wrong. We will go down into epa stomach bubbles and rabbit holes and when you start seeing departments and even disciplined in academia where conservatives are scarce. Hen's teeth you get a couple of problems. One is the chilling effect. We talk about where everybody thinks. You're crazy if you have a certain non orthodox point of view but the second is that the science becomes bad. You stop asking the questions that ought to be asked in the challenges posed by other points of view hub. So we know now. Another important sources statistical information. We know now that in some of the humanities and social.
860AM The Answer
"zubov" Discussed on 860AM The Answer
"We could go today. I was happy to do so in part because the RSC has decided that the party must focus On forging consensus on three issues to put the Republicans back in control of the House and the Senate consensus. Two are fairly easy to define. The first is immigration. We're in my view. The GOP must press for completion of the border wall and I returned to most that former President Trump's border policies in tandem with a generous policy towards those already in the country without Legal permission, especially dreamers. Overseas Republicans must unify in defense of Taiwan. And candor, candor, candor. About the goals and the ambitions of the Chinese Communist Party of the story. Championed by former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Senator Tom Cotton. That candor must be married to robust hikes and defense spending. And focus on the needs of the Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force and Space Force ahead of those of the army. But the question of big tech Terrain on which the Republican Party fractures Because many free market conservatives do not share the idea that any company that is big is suspect. My view, which I presented at the gathering. Was preceded by the disclosure that I worked for The Washington Post, which is owned by Amazon founder Jeff Bezoza. It's a routine disclosure for the post. Does not impact my point of view in any way any more than Salem media groups, indication of my radio show or my contract with NBC affects what I write or what I say disclosure. They're important, however. And with the big tech, it's always a key issue to know by whom commentators are being paid. So just for the lie of the green, as they say in golf. I am most influenced by Shoshana Zubov's the Age of surveillance capitalism. And somewhat by traditional and I trust theory. The sort that power the unanimous Supreme Court. Uh huh. Strike down the N C. Double A, uh, rules against athlete compensation via educational grant earlier this week. The court decided that the N C two is basically a cartel. Big tech is most definitely not a cartel, All right, got nothing to do with typical cartels. But the organizing principle for regulating Silicon Valley should not be our traditional and I trust life still equipped. The tech revolution. Instead, we ought to use good old fashioned criminal law concepts, especially those around the crimes of theft and fraud and conspiracy to commit either or both. The biggest flaw in most of big text business models. Is a general willingness to loot an individual's personal information. And thus his or her privacy without payment for this this for this data and without informed consent. His last point about informed consent is crucial. If you out there right now, Listening are the very rare individual who reads, understands and agrees.
On The Media
Facebook and Antitrust
"Beginning to look a lot. Like sherman. Senator john sherman. That is who in one thousand nine hundred ninety sponsored the antitrust law that bears his name one hundred thirty years ago he pronounced quote if we will not endure a king as a political power. We should not into her king over the production transportation and sale of any of the necessities of life on february. Eighteenth one thousand nine hundred to without any warning. The president ordered his justice department to file suit against one of the trust. In which j. p. morgan had major interest the northern securities company. Its goal was the monopolistic control of all of the railroads between the great lakes and the pacific ocean. Since then other powerful repressive kings have been dethroned from standard oil to eastman kodak to at and t. and t.'s. Dogwoods as good as gold. It was independent on our currency. It was gold. Now it's gone. That was one thousand nine hundred eighty four. This is now twenty years into the digital century. Big tech remains supreme. All but unchecked by law and regulation the so-called duopoly of google and facebook valued at just under two trillion dollars between them control thirty five percent of the six hundred billion dollar global advertising market. Not to mention evermore of our personal lives. This is harvard. Professor emeritus shoshana zubov in the documentary. The social dilemma. Facebook discover that they were able to affect real world behavior and emotions without ever triggering. The users awareness. They are completely clueless in the past. Ten days came a storm first week before last. Forty eight states and territories along with the federal trade commission filed suit against facebook that suit alleges that facebook bought up rivals with the explicit intention of stifling competition legal filings include an email from mark zuckerberg in two thousand eight in which he allegedly said quote. Better to buy than to compete. And then this past week. A second thunderclap. When texas's attorney general announced new antitrust charges against google the suit claims that google in a conspiracy with facebook abused its market power to chip away at consumer privacy protections and rig the advertising market. But if you think they trust busting senator. Sherman has come out from decades of hiding. That's not quite the case for decades. Antitrust doctrine has been fixated to the exclusion of everything else on harm to the consumer as measured by out of pocket costs social media mind control and the erosion of democracy do not fit into that calculation that sort of the traditional metric that we've used to bring antitrust cases and to really understand and measure consumer harm. It's been those price hikes that really hit consumers pockets Vossen author of the twenty two thousand nine paper. The antitrust case against facebook and illegal consultant in texas suit is on the leading edge of an evolved antitrust doctrine based on harms not necessarily inflicted at the cash register for example invasion of privacy on a grand scale. I just found it so interesting. You know why is it that the communications utility in the twenty first century that all consumers use essentially conduct something similar to surveillance. You sign up for facebook and facebook not only monitors your communications on facebook but even when i go to for example the new york times in the morning facebook is making a record of that and it is extracting from consumers the permission to basically track them across the internet. And it didn't seem obvious to that. Consumers would sign up for that proposition is something that they really liked. It's also a bit ironic. Because as i understand it. In the beginning. Facebook was favorably compared to. Let's say my space in early social network where your personal profile was at least one point. Public and facebook was theoretically an antidote to that. That's right if you go back in history you see how. Facebook entered the market with very firm. Privacy promises it got users to choose facebook over other competitors in the market and only after it gained market power and competitors exited the market. Was it finally able to extract this sort of surveillance term from consumers a large and you contract that facebook's growth goes up privacy protections straight down that's right and the fascinating thing about the new york attorney general's suit last week. Is that internal communications. Confirm that that's indeed. How facebook internally was considering strategic moves about decreasing users privacy. I don't remember another case that has been brought in a market where the price is zero and the government is deciding to defend the people based on things like a lack of innovation in the market. A lack of choice. Everybody uses facebook to stay in contact with their friends and family. And then just privacy harms.
Recode Decode
Jack Dorsey, Shoshana Zubov And Harvard Business School discussed on Recode Decode
"In the red chair is Shoshana Zubov, a professor mirada of Harvard Business School who's written several books about technology and economics. Her most recent book is called the age of surveillance capitalism. The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power, that's a lot there. That's going on. So let's talk a little bit about your background. So people get a sense. This is getting a lot of attention your book. And especially I I've been using the word surveillance quite a lot especially about surveillance economies surveillance states and things like that a longtime issue in human history. But now, it's never more important than ever. So why don't we talk a little bit about how you got to writing this particular book and some things you've done in the past who left here a little bit of your background. Well, I think the impetus for this book, which has been a long time in the making seven years just to produce this book, but many years before that and the the ideas and development. The real driver. Here's the sense that Har hopes and dreams for the digital future. Our sense of an empowering and democratizing. Israel future was at the beginning, which it was at the beginning. And a sense that this dream was slipping away. And that the reasons why it was flipping away the causes of this shift were we're not really clear, not really well understood forces taking shape very much behind the scenes, and it's almost like we woke up and suddenly the internet was owned and operated by private capital under a kind of regime, a new economic logic. That really was not well understood. And so my motivation CARA has come from really wanting to spend the time to understand to name exactly what this economic logic is and how its own imperatives its own compulsions created a completely different trajectory toward the digital future. Something that we didn't buy into yet. We did. Expect and because it's so unprecedented. It is by its very nature difficult to perceive. Absolutely. And also typical control and I like the word compulsion. Because I think that's a really good way to put it. It's it's an emotional word. But it's not it's actually it has to do what it's doing. It has to do what it's doing it to machine that's got to move in a direction that it's moving and the people in it are not bad people. They're not bad actors, but they themselves now are caught up in an economic machine that sometimes they even don't understand very well, and where it's driving and what its imperatives are. And most important what the consequences of those are interesting. I just did an interview on Twitter with Jack Dorsey that was sort of a bit of a goat rodeo. But it was interesting because a lot of the questions like a for specifics, and he couldn't do them. And it was really fascinating people found that part the most fascinating besides the platform being. Terrible to try to conduct any kind of conversation on. But we let me get here for your background talk about some of the things you've done before this. And then I want to get into the term surveillance capitalism, which I think is a fantastic way to put it. Let me hear rectory of your career. What you you've started where to get to this kind of topic? Well, as far as my professional career I began studying the shift to the digital and nineteen seventy eight. So where are you going to care? Fantastic. But I'm actually quite old hats off. So I'll date myself. I'll come right out there and date myself. I mean, I I started in nineteen seventy eight interviewing office workers Linux type workers factory workers who were the first the front line of our workforce that was shifting to the digital medium.
Jared and Katie
Kenan and Kel once sold their Super Bowl tickets, 'balled out' at Chili's instead
"Keenan Thompson also talked about the time that he had the chance to go to a Super Bowl was his first one I have never been to civil. I got tickets to go one time when I was young, and they gave me and kale Zubov, and we were living in San Diego bad Super Bowl, and they send us down in this limousine or whatever, but my debit card game, and my money was funny. I didn't know how to juggle. My finances. It didn't make any sense to me to go to Super Bowl with no money and not be able to buy anything or whatever. So all these people were at the exit ramp seven tickets, and they got some tickets. I mean, how much would you give us a ticket? He was like twenty five hundred what you wanna make some super brand right now. Chilies and balled out. I like that seriously to me the Super Bowl tickets are ridiculous. Outrageous. Right now that are half a million dollars. That's outrageous and the cheapest bowl tickets like four thousand five thousand dollars, right? And you go there and what I don't like about. It is half the places rooting for one team half the place of rooting for. I'm saying it's like, and then you go there so crazy out of control, and yes, it's an experience. But I'll tell you one thing if I five thousand dollars per ticket or even twenty five hundred dollars per ticket for five to ten thousand dollars to sit at Chili's where you could see right unscreened. I'm doing it. Yeah. Yeah. L E not to take it up. Take them up on that. Although as a Redskins fan has been almost thirty years. Yeah. I would maybe try to go to a Super Bowl tickets were five. If I knew you can't win our friend tripper that we know that works here. He went to he's a big Denver Broncos fan, and he went when they played in New York the Super Bowl was in New York and his team got beat by forty sitting there like. I just spent two thousand three four or five thousand dollars to get their fly there. Did he go by himself? Yeah. And he's there and watched him get destroyed that would be just to get there through the security in the lines. I don't wanna wait in line. Security apparently is insane. I think the department of homeland security helping work this Super Bowl in Atlanta at the Mercedes though. So you just gotta sit there and away. And I guess the experience is great. And I know a lot of people that go, and they love it. I think going to the Super Bowl, and I I've never been maybe