Seth Martin
  
Add your name to Austin's open letter To Mark Zuckerberg!

Image/photo


In my campaign for the United States Senate, I have made Facebook a centerpiece of my outreach efforts. I have used both my Personal Profile and my Official Page to connect with friends, family, and supporters, and to share and express our views about the future of the country.

That’s why, on September 22, I was so shocked to receive a notification from Facebook informing me that I had been “blocked” from using Facebook for thirty days because I “recently posted something that violates Facebook’s policies.” Believing this to be a mistake, my campaign reached out to Facebook for more information. Today — six days later — I still have not received an explanation, and the block remains in effect.

At the same time the block was affected, a Facebook Live video I had posted to my Official Page promoting my campaign’s AR-15 giveaway was removed. A few days later, a Status Update posted to my Profile referencing the same giveaway was also removed. I’m confident that such giveaways are consistent with Facebook’s policies — several posts promoting the giveaway, including paid “Dark Posts,” remain visible on our page — so it’s unclear to me why such content would warrant an immediate takedown and thirty-day ban...

#Facebook #Social Networking #Freedom #Liberty @LibertyPod+
Seth Martin
  
This is actually helping Austin's campaign with extra publicity but you can bet that this is a political move on Facebook's part. This open letter is to keep the publicity rolling.
Seth Martin
  
Now, I think a private bakery has a right to not make any cakes they disapprove of, just as a private company (Facebook) has a right to suspend anyone that gives away guns they disapprove of (the presumed reason), but it's bad behavior. Neither should be illegal, but both are worthy of criticism.

The only difference I see is that Facebook is trying to control Missouri politics. It doesn't appear this was a bot banning since it was a video that was removed.
Seth Martin
  
Enough media attention did finally get him out of Facebook jail but still without explanation.
Seth Martin
  last edited: Sun, 24 Sep 2017 13:19:32 -0500  
#Freedom and #Liberty require #Decentralization

Practically everyone knows a geek. Ask your geeks to share their websites by running decentralization software such as Hubzilla, thereby making centralized social networks irrelevant.

Senatorial Candidate Austin Petersen Receives Controversial Facebook Ban 

Image/photo

Former Libertarian Party Presidential candidate Austin Petersen received a 30-day ban on his personal facebook account yesterday for an unspecified TOS violation. Only one post was removed and it contained a video.  The video breaks down his take on Senator Clair McCaskill‘s anti-gun record, specifically her voting for the Assault Weapon Ban. Petersen is concurrently running a promotion which involves giving away an AR-15 – a weapon which would have been illegal under the ban.

#Politics #Facebook #Social Networking @LibertyPod+
Seth Martin
  
Since I know where most everyone who cares about Susie likes to waste their precious time, I took to #facebook to announce the tragic turn of events with her health.

Unfortunately, facebook functionality has only gotten worse. Copying text is no longer permitted, notifications come randomly and can take up to a day.
Mulk
 from Diaspora
The Power of the Dog

THERE is sorrow enough in the natural way From men and women to fill our day; And when we are certain of sorrow in store, Why do we always arrange for more? Brothers and sisters, I bid you beware Of giving your heart to a dog to tear. Buy a pup and your money will buy Love unflinching that cannot lie Perfect passion and worship fed By a kick in the ribs or a pat on the head. Nevertheless it is hardly fair To risk your heart for a dog to tear.

When the fourteen years which Nature permits Are closing in asthma, or tumour, or fits, And the vet's unspoken prescription runs To lethal chambers or loaded guns, Then you will find - it's your own affair, - But ... you've given your heart to a dog to tear.

When the body that lived at your single will, With its whimper of welcome, is stilled (how still!), When the spirit that answered your every mood Is gone - wherever it goes - for good, You will discover how much you care, And will give your heart to a dog to tear!

We've sorrow enough in the natural way, When it comes to burying Christian clay. Our loves are not given, but only lent, At compound interest of cent per cent, Though it is not always the case, I believe, That the longer we've kept 'em, the more do we grieve; For, when debts are payable, right or wrong, A short-time loan is as bad as a long - So why in - Heaven (before we are there) Should we give our hearts to a dog to tear?
Mike Macgirvin
  
Animals outnumber humans in our household by about 10:1 so it's a situation I'm unfortunately quite familiar with.  The time that aware beings share together is always transient. Remember the joy they brought; that's permanent - or at least as permanent as it gets.
elmussol
  
That moment when you realize Noggin the Nog (who we brought from the UK as a young lad) is now twelve. For a lab/springer spaniel cross that's old. Hugs Seth.

Seth Martin
  
Techdirt.Techdirt. wrote the following post Thu, 26 Jan 2017 11:34:50 -0600

Legal Threats By Charles Harder & Shiva Ayyadurai Targeting More Speech

Let's say right upfront: if you are unaware, Shiva Ayyadurai is currently suing Techdirt for our posts concerning Ayyaduria's claims to have invented email. Ayyadurai's lawyer in this matter is Charles Harder, the lawyer who filed multiple lawsuits against Gawker, and is credited by many with forcing that company into bankruptcy and fire sale.

Now Harder, on behalf of Ayyadurai, has sent a demand letter to try to have social media comments posted in response to the lawsuit against us taken down. We are writing about this -- despite the lawsuit against us -- because we believe it is important and we do not intend to have our own speech chilled. This is also why we believe it is so important to have a federal anti-SLAPP law in place, because the chance to chill speech with threats or actual litigation is not a hypothetical problem. It is very, very real.

Harder's letter is to Diaspora, and it demands that certain posts by Roy Schestowitz be removed (which appears to have happened). Schestowitz is the guy behind the Techrights blog, which frequently covers issues related to things like free v. proprietary software and software patents. Harder's letter to Diaspora claims that Schestowitz's posts are defamatory, violate Diaspora's terms of service, and "constitute harassment and intentional infliction of emotional distress."

Image/photo

Harder's letter makes the questionable claim that Diaspora itself is liable for Schestowitz's statements. There is tremendous caselaw on Section 230 of the CDA holding that a website cannot be held liable for speech made by users, so it's odd that Harder would argue otherwise, stating that the posts "qualify under the law to establish liability against you."

Image/photo

One of the key reasons Section 230 of the CDA exists is to protect the freedom of expression of users, so that websites aren't pressured via legal threats to take down speech over fear of liability. That's why it grants full immunity. It is strange for an attorney as established as Harder to either not know this, or to misrepresent this. Elsewhere in the letter, he references Massachusetts law as applying, so it's not as though he's suggesting that some other jurisdiction outside the US applies. So, since Section 230 clearly applies, why would Charles Harder tell Diaspora that it is liable for these statements?

Separately, Harder's letter concludes with the following statement:

This letter and its contents are confidential, protected by copyright law, and not authorized for publication or dissemination.

Image/photo

We have seen similar statements on legal letters in the past and they have generally been considered meaningless, at best. On the question of confidentiality/authorization for publication, that's not how it works. The recipient of such a letter has no obligation to not disseminate it or to ask for authorization without any prior agreement along those lines. You can't magically declare something confidential and ban anyone from sharing it. Furthermore, this is especially true when dealing with legal threat letters. While many lawyers put such language into these letters to try to scare recipients (and avoid a Streisand Effect over the attempt to silence speech), they serve no purpose other than intimidation.

Separately, claims of copyright in takedown or cease & desist letters, while they do show up occasionally, are also generally considered to be overstatements of the law. First off, there are questions raised about whether or not general cease & desist threat letters have enough creativity to get any kind of copyright, but, more importantly, even if there were copyright on such a letter it would be a clear and obvious fair use case to be able to share them and distribute them publicly, as part of an effort to discuss how one has been threatened with questionable legal arguments.

Either way, we believe that this fits a pattern of using legal threats and litigation to silence criticism of public figures. In an era when speaking truth to power is so important, we believe such actions need to be given attention, and need to be called out. We also think they demonstrate why we need much stronger anti-SLAPP laws, at both the state and federal level to protect people's right to speak out about public issues. If you agree, please call your elected representatives and ask them to support strong anti-SLAPP protections, like those found in the SPEAK FREE Act of 2015.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Image/photo Image/photo
Image/photo


#Free Speech #Diaspora #Social Networking #Copyright #Defamation #Anti-SLAPP #Shiva Ayyadurai #Charles Harder #E-Mail @Gadget Guru+ @LibertyPod+

Seth Martin
  last edited: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 12:58:51 -0500  
We use #Hubzilla at my workplace so our data remains our data!
I'm also considering introducing the team to Riot/matrix for a Slack/IRC like experience.

MotherboardMotherboard wrote the following post Tue, 11 Oct 2016 11:45:00 -0500

Facebook's Version of Slack Is Coming for Your Workplace. What Now?

Image/photo

Sitting at work all day scrolling through Facebook is almost definitely frowned upon by your bosses, but Facebook wants to change that with the launch of a new version of Facebook—specifically designed for work—called Workplace.

Facebook is ubiquitous. If it’s not Mark Zuckerberg handing out “Free Basics” to developing countries, it’s internet connectivity beamed down from giant, solar-powered drones. As of July 2016, the social network had 1.71 billion monthly users. Facebook is without doubt one of the most pervasive technological phenomenons of the 21st Century. Thing is, Facebook’s hit a brick wall when it comes to growth. Everybody who would want to use Facebook, generally speaking, is already, or at least will be using Facebook very soon. So, to eke out the last embers of growth in a saturated market, Facebook has now, officially, entered your workplace.

Workplace by Facebook launched on Monday October 10 after almost two years of development and months of beta tests on early customers. The service is the social giant’s new effort to infiltrate businesses around the world, and to rival office apps like Slack and Microsoft’s Yammer. Essentially, it’s a modified version of the Facebook we all know and love/hate. It’s the same algorithms, the same news feeds, the same ability to share photos and documents and chat in groups or in private—only your bosses can see everything that happens and it’s all controlled by your company’s IT team. Workplace is on mobile, too, with standalone apps for Android and iOS meaning employees can access everything remotely, just like users would with the regular Facebook app.

Facebook, with Workplace, is hoping to revolutionise how companies want to work with employees by shedding the old ideals of emails and intranet. “It's for everyone, not just for one team, not just for five percent of the company, it's for everyone from the CEO to the factory workers to the baristas in the coffee shop,” a Facebook spokesperson said at the London launch event this week, which Motherboard attended. “Even people who don't have a desk, even people who have never had a PC, even people who have never had an email.”

Image/photo

Image: Workplace by Facebook

The question is, to what extent will this horizontal workflow management clash with privacy concerns? If your team or company decides to implement Workplace, will signing up be compulsory? It would seem so, if Facebook has its way and truly lets your bosses ditch emails and intranet and all of the inner workings of PC-based bureaucracy. But then what?

The Facebook spokesperson at the launch event said it best when he was explaining how the chief information officer of an airline wanted to be able to see what his staff were doing in their personal, consumer versions of Facebook groups. “Every crew of every flight were using Facebook groups,” the spokesperson said. “It's not necessarily what the CIO of the company wanted, because he wants to control who sees the information.”

But the reason why many organisations will be attracted to Workplace, such as the familiarity employees will have with regular old Facebook, could also be its downfall. Employees will be accustomed to Facebook being a place for gossip, cat videos, and friends. So what’s the decorum for Workplace by Facebook? While the two are completely different applications, old habits die hard. Who can you trust to speak to in private? Is my group being monitored for productivity? Do I have to befriend everyone in the company, and if I block someone’s news feed, will my boss know I hate them?
Your workplace chats may well one day be used as evidence against you

It’s also worth noting, as highlighted in the Gawker vs Hulk Hogan case, in which Gawker Media’s Slack conversations were subpoenaed for court, that your workplace chats may well one day be used as evidence against you. While data on Workplace belongs to the company using it, rather than Facebook, it’s still wise to watch what you say with any office productivity app. Facebook did not immediately respond to Motherboard’s request for comment on whether workplace chats would be susceptible to subpoenas.

Ultimately, Facebook is banking on the familiarity of the platform winning over customers. It’s appears easy to use and offers all of the same features as regular Facebook. But in the end, only time will tell whether employees will ever be, or ever want to be, comfortable using Facebook as a work tool or not.


#CCF #Facebook #Social Networking #Communications #Privacy @Gadget Guru+
Fabio
  
Problem with SpiderOak products is that while are nice in theory, no source is avaiable... so you must trust their words...
Manuel
  
We use #Hubzilla at my workplace so our data remains our data!

:like
Manuel
  
Image/photo

Seth Martin
  last edited: Thu, 06 Oct 2016 18:29:43 -0500  
Facebook is getting the US government on its side before trying to launch its limited internet services in the US.

Facebook is talking to the White House about giving you ‘free’ Internet. Here’s why that may be controversial.

Image/photo



The company has spent the past half-year in conversations with officials.

Facebook has been in talks for months with U.S. government officials and wireless carriers with an eye toward unveiling an American version of an app that has caused controversy abroad, according to multiple people familiar with the matter.

The social media giant is trying to determine how to roll out its program, known as Free Basics, in the United States without triggering the regulatory scrutiny that effectively killed a version of the app in India earlier this year.


#Facebook #Free Basics #FreeBasics #Internet #Corporatism #Crony Capitalism #Capitalism #Politics #Net Neutrality #NetNeutrality #Communications #Social Networking #Zero-Rating @LibertyPod+  @Laissez-Faire Capitalism+  @Gadget Guru+
prep
 from Diaspora
Why thank you Marshall.

Hopefully we can trade notes on social media for a while before our country falls fully into a China clone.
Marshall Sutherland
  
The debt bubble will burst and crash on all their plans before they get that far. (See? I can be an optimist!)
Theaitetos
 from Diaspora
I really wonder why everyone is into this #netneutrality thing. All the nerds rage against the government censoring, controlling, and sifting through the internet, but then they come and beg in the name of net neutrality for a big government agency to install a complete state control system for the internet.
Seth Martin
  last edited: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 13:07:51 -0500  
Mike MacgirvinMike Macgirvin wrote the following post Thu, 08 Sep 2016 04:16:36 -0500
If you know folks who use Facebook and 'logout' regularly to prevent tracking or prevent 'haha I hacked your FB account', I have it on good authority that in the last few days this (logout) has been rendered useless. You are now always logged in. Logging out and visiting a facebook page presents a dialogue to re-connect the last session. Dismissing the dialogue without acting on it actually re-connects the previous session with full access to the "logged out" account. My own investigation suggests that removing all facebook.com cookies might actually log you out, but if this information becomes widely known, they'll just attach a cookie from some obscure domain that you won't be looking for. It's not like they can't afford to buy a domain name.  

Granted there are probably less than a dozen people in the world who logout of Facebook, but if you know any of these people please pass the word along.


#Facebook #Privacy
Mike Macgirvin
  
Not at all. That's a pretty sensible approach. I wasn't aware that FB had an onion friendly service, so thanks for that bit of knowledge.
Michael Meer
  last edited: Sat, 10 Sep 2016 05:49:24 -0500  
You may call it Onion friendly, I call it a trap, cause you have to authenticate. And FB offers saml based Single Sign on.
Your activities in tor may be tracked. Please don't forget they work together with lots of US agencies and you are they product not the customer. It might be possible that your data are more worth when you use tor.

I just can make some guesses, don't know what really happens in the background. But usage of Facebook through tor might harm your privacy even when you use the tor browser. So be careful, think about it and make your decision.
Seth Martin
  
Seth Martin tagged Seth Martin's post with â‹•CCF