Tag Archives: Algorithmic Dictatorship

Facebook Acquires Giphy while Congress steps in with Antitrust Suspicions

A long, slow, converging consensus is coming to expose Facebook, Amazon and Google

On Friday, May 15th, Facebook announced that it will be buying Giphy— the world’s most popular GIF site on the internet, social media, and messaging services. Giphy is already an integrated part of iMessage, Tinder, Slack, and Twitter, and Facebook now owns it for a reported $400 million.

Acquiring a GIF-generating site seems inconspicuous enough for Facebook, the social media conglomerate that already owns Instagram, WhatsApp, Oculus VR, and many other subsidiaries. Nevertheless, the purchase raised some red flags in Washington, especially for Democrats like Senators Elizabeth Warren (MA) and Senator Amy Kolchubar (MN) as well as Representatives Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY) and David Cicilline (RI), all of whom have been critical of major corporate mergers throughout the coronavirus pandemic.

click to see “Facebook the Inside Story” and help
Lynxotic and all independent booksellers.

Because of COVID-19, many small businesses are facing immense hardships. They are in a vulnerable state, desperate for money and far more likely to sell out. By contrast, major corporations not only have the funds to stay afloat, but also the continued stability to take advantage of the smaller, more jeopardized companies. Senator Warren and Rep. Ocasio-Cortez have thus proposed the “Pandemic Anti-Monopoly Act” to halt all big-business mergers until the situation gets better for their small business counterparts.

Hence, Facebook’s purchase of Giphy comes at a dubious time. Giphy is no small time company, but Facebook’s ownership of it could still lead to increased exploitation down the road. Because the site is integrated into so many different apps and services already, it will provide Facebook with covert entrance’s into all of those platforms’ data.

As brought to the foreground in 2016’s Cambridge Analytica scandal, Facebook keeps an overabundance of data on each of its users. The site tracks and analogs everything we do, and that information does not remain confidential. Facebook sells it to other services, businesses, or even political assets, usually (but not always) for the sake of marketing.

With WhatsApp and Instagram already in house Giphy appears to be a bridge too far

With Giphy under the site’s control, Facebook’s data-mining efforts will overreach even farther. It will be able to access information from our Tweets, iMessages, Tinder matches, and even business correspondences via Slack. Evidently, the purchase entails a whole lot more than just the newfound ability to insert GIFs directly into our statuses.

click to see “Life After Google” and
help Lynxotic and all independent
bookstores.

The politicians against business mergers during the pandemic are by-and-large the same people who have been fighting Facebook for the past few years, demanding heightened security and increased regulations for big-tech across the board. Right now, the Department of Justice is planning antitrust charges for Google and many attorney generals are investigating Amazon for their monopolistic control over the market. If these cases prove successful, we might finally see some legislation passed to keep the long-unrestricted tech moguls in check.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has not yet commented directly on the Giphy acquisition, nor has he provided a public response to the “Pandemic Anti-Monopoly Act” proposition. In typical Facebook fashion, all the website has really done to help in these trying times is create a new “hug” reaction icon. It’s a nice addition, but hardly makes up for the company’s clear manipulation of the present circumstances.

If there is one shred of good news amidst the purchase so far, it is that Giphy will thankfully not be removing their library of embarrassing Mark Zuckerberg GIFs. Moreover, we can also take solace in the fact that there are many more GIF-worthy Zuck moments to come.


Find books on Big TechSustainable EnergyEconomics and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Enjoy Lynxotic at Apple News on your iPhone, iPad or Mac and subscribe to our newsletter.

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page.

Google about to face Long Overdue Antitrust Charges from Department of Justice

Photo Collage / Lynxotic / Adobe Stock

Europe Leads the Way and U.S. Justice About to Arrive

It is safe to say that Google is a hegemonic force in the digital world. The site practically has a monopoly on internet searches and it holds nearly a third of the money tied up in online advertising. Because of the United States’ lax laws regarding cyber security, Google’s dominance has largely gone unchecked over the years. That is, until now.

Click to see “Life after Google” and
help Lynxotic and all independent
bookstores

According to the New York Times, the U.S. Justice Department is currently planning to hit Google with a long overdue antitrust suit. The Department hopes to get the charges out by the beginning of the summer, and although details are still under wraps, it’s likely that they will aim to hold Google and parent company Alphabet Inc. accountable for its monopolistic control of the internet.

Of course, Google does not actually “own” the internet—nobody does. Nevertheless, Google has sliced itself a disproportionately large piece of the pie. In its nebulous origins, the worldwide web was hardly created with intentions, but it started out as a place of anonymity and level playing-fields for all users. Unfortunately, in the age of ubiquitous social media, online anonymity is a thing of the past, and technological juggernauts like Google have severely skewed that long lost level playing-field ideal.

Now, more than ever, big tech must be held to account

Not only does Google’s tyranny stray from the internet’s egalitarian genesis, but it also strays from the rule of law. 1890’s Sherman Antitrust Act banned monopolies in the United States as well as trusts that hurt trade. The federal government enforced the act in 1948 to break up Hollywood’s overbearing studio system in U.S. v Paramount. It recently made an appearance in the 1990s, when the Justice Department sued Microsoft, leading to a 2001 settlement with the company.

Click to see “Goliath” and help
Lynxotic and all independent bookstores

Government entities have tried to get Google on antitrust operations before. In 2013, the Federal Trade Commission investigated the website for antitrust violations, but dropped the case after nineteen months. Quite frankly, Google possesses near-untouchable power, and as aforementioned, our federal laws regarding the internet are quite loose. Thus, even though Google clearly holds too much influence for any one company, it remains a difficult beast to pin down.

If the Justice Department does manage to win against Google this time around, it could be the start of a much needed crackdown on algorithmic dictatorship. Not just Google, but Amazon, Twitter, Facebook, and Apple have all faced criticism for their exploitation of user data and capitalism. Many believe that it is time for these companies’ unregulated dogmas to end.

Accountability is key, even for seemingly nonthreatening businesses that exist in the digital ether. The Justice Department expects that attorney generals from many states will join the them in this crackdown on Google, paving the way for a more technologically equitable future.


Find books on Big TechSustainable EnergyEconomics and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Enjoy Lynxotic at Apple News on your iPhone, iPad or Mac and subscribe to our newsletter.

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page.

Algorithms in Your Life: YouTube Claims it Pulled Bogus Propaganda but Google Algo not Designed for that

A Story that’s Getting Old, Lies and Deception are Flooding All Outlets on Precipice of 2020 Election Year

Over the past few months, false videos on YouTube posing as established American news outlets have garnered millions of views. Selling themselves as CNN or Fox News, these fake accounts present inflammatory and fabricated content to their viewers, effectively deceiving the American public by spreading misinformation.

The Google-owned YouTube says they have taken down as many of these videos as it can, but companies such as CNN insist that the website needs to do more to proactively inhibit such activity. After all, the source of the problem is rooted deep within the very fiber that keeps YouTube (and the current monopolized Internet as a whole) running.

What is really going on in the YouTube case is an exploitation of two fundamental aspects of the Internet. Namely, these fake accounts are taking advantage of the web’s free ranging platform, and they are manipulating the data-based algorithms that keep the Internet efficiently feeding billions in ad revenue to the platforms like, google search, YouTube, Facebook and Amazon.

The web’s “free” policy refers to the fact that anyone can post anything on the Internet, although “free” in this case is a deceiving concept. Long before the Internet was a global phenomenon, the system was built upon a somewhat libertarian foundation where all users had equal access and unrestricted contribution power to information. The potential fault in this model, however, is that there is little accountability or security. As we are seeing today, with so much unchecked info, lying becomes easy and the line between true and false greys.

Algorithms are the Gatekeepers, Automation for Advertising Dollars

As for the algorithms, websites like YouTube, Google, Amazon, Facebook, and so on, depend on formulas that learn more about you the more you use them. A term that is gradually beginning to become more important but not yet fully understood, an algorithm is a set of instructions, managed by Artificial Intelligence.

The key point is that the companies mentioned above maintain total secrecy as to the settings of the algorithm, however, by viewing the public results it is clear that in all cases the algorithm is programmed to benefit advertisers, and thereby increase profits for the companies.

As per wikipedia:

“In mathematics and computer science, an algorithm is a finite sequence of well-defined, computer-implementable instructions, typically to solve a class of problems or to perform a computation. Algorithms are unambiguous specifications for performing calculation, data processing, automated reasoning, and other tasks.”

This is how YouTube recommends videos for you, Facebook shows you suggested posts, Amazon advertises things that fit your taste, and Google can anticipate your searches before you even type anything in. It is based mostly off of your previous use—your activity provides data that these tech companies manipulate, own and sell (which you unwittingly agreed to by clicking the ubiquitous “terms of service” agreement).

However, as the access to Internet platforms, and therefore the ability to interact with others, has become a virtual monopoly controlled by the platforms, the ethics surrounding data rights and algorithms have become less clear.

Most Internet users have allowed access to their personal information in some way or another. Through “free” email accounts, social media, messages, pictures, purchases, and so on, your entire identity is encrypted somewhere in the cybernetic ether, and you have little control over it.

The consequences of this go beyond just getting offered offensive videos or unsolicited ads. The companies that made the bogus CNN accounts, for example, cleverly played YouTube’s algorithms so you would be redirected there after watching legitimate news stories. Because the majority of people consume news through their computers, fake news and real news have become increasingly difficult to distinguish.

More and More Political Manipulators are Gaming the Algos

Moreover, these misleading accounts are not always coming from Internet trolls. Some of them are run by malicious enterprises or foreign governments trying to influence geopolitical processes. Such was the case behind the now well known, infamous case of Cambridge Analytica’s interference in the 2016 Presidential Election.

Cambridge Analytica—a British political consulting firm—marketed for the Trump campaign using people’s Facebook data. At the height of the campaign, the company allegedly consulted with Russian officials to assist in Trump’s eventual election.

Due to the algorithmic control of websites like Facebook, once Cambridge Analytica had information on a single user, it was able to acquire information on every person that that single user ever interacted with online. Via just a handful of connections, the company was able to quickly collect data on nearly the entire nation. Thus, even if you avoided all of Cambridge Analytica’s tricks, you could still be targeted through just a few degrees of separation.

There is really no way of knowing who Facebook is sharing your data with or how they are using it. In fact, you don’t even know what your own data is, as most websites bar their users from accessing the very information that they provide. The only way to find out how you are being targeted is by consuming the suggested version of yourself that these tech companies feed back to you.

The situation is certainly eerie on a personal level, but it also transcends the individual to impact phenomena on a far greater scale. With the Trump administration as evidence, Cambridge Analytica’s approach obviously worked in some capacity. Likewise, businesses and organizations can manipulate data to promote their version of the world. Through the unrestricted world of the Internet, powerful users can alter history, conflate truths, and shape the American psyche into thinking whatever they deem real.

Certain sectors of the government have been working to try and fix this problem. Mark Zuckerberg has gone before Congress to answer for Facebook’s place in the Cambridge Analytica case. Likewise, the California Consumer Privacy Act will take effect on January 1st, giving people greater personal data rights in the Golden State.

Don’t expect the companies mentioned above, having a combined market value of more than $3 trillion, to cooperate or rein in this problem voluntarily. This algorithmic dictatorship benefits criminals like those that were behind the Trump election meddling, but most of all the system benefits the platforms themselves, at a level that is mind-bogglingly obscene. This system will change only when they are broken up or gone.

Data is the most profitable resource on the planet (recently topping oil), and it is because of our data inputs that Google and Facebook, among others, remain “free” websites. The real price for online “services” like search and social platforms is very high indeed and users are getting scammed out of more than they may realize.

Ultimately, like in politics and life itself, it is the masses, the users themselves in this case, that can decide if they want an algorithmic dictatorship, or if it is time to sweep away the current dysfunctional system and replace it with one where the price is not so steep.


Find books on Big TechSustainable EnergyEconomics and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Enjoy Lynxotic at Apple News on your iPhone, iPad or Mac and subscribe to our newsletter.