[afnog] Another Perspective - Kentik's View on the Facebook Outage

Bill Woodcock woody at pch.net
Sat Oct 9 07:43:36 UTC 2021

> On Oct 9, 2021, at 8:50 AM, Philip Paeps <philip at trouble.is> wrote:
> On 2021-10-09 13:48:41 (+0800), Mark Tinka wrote:
>> On 10/9/21 02:29, Markus Akena Wipfler wrote:
>>> No argument there. But FB is not for free. We are the product. We pay with our privacy.
>> I know making this statement of "being the product if it's free" has gained a lot of popularity in recent years, but for me, it doesn't track. It sounds clever to say, but it's wrong.
>> Yes, you are giving up some things by being a patron to a service that you do not pay money for. But Facebook is not the first product where we have done these things. "Free with advertising" has been a model for a very long time, long before Facebook, and long before the Internet, in which there is no indication that users are treated like "the product".
> I agree that the users are not Facebook's products.  As far as I'm aware, Facebook does not engage in human trafficking after all.  The users' data are the product.

Ah, so the users are the cows, which Facebook milks for the product?

Or the users are the hosts, which Facebook bleeds for the product?

Just trying to figure out where we’re taking the analogy, if we’re developing it by community-editorial-process.



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP
URL: <http://www.afnog.org/pipermail/afnog/attachments/20211009/c93bf095/attachment.sig>

More information about the afnog mailing list