Tag Archives: facebook

Small Business Dilemma: are Big Solutions Hiding in plain sight?

https://cdn.useriver.com/RiverTrailer_v2.mp4

Above:Content Discovery App – River video Clip Introduction

An Unlikely Holy Grail: User Sophistication and the Will to Exist Online

In late 2018 a small firm was looking into opportunities in organizing an online co-op for small businesses (CSSinc), similar to the co-ops created by farmers during the great depression. Where else to start than a trade show of more than 1000 small businesses in Las Vegas. In an informal test, they checked all the web sites listed in the show directory as an indicator of the state of web sophistication among the participants.

Story Cover feature image by Joshua Chun 

Shockingly, nearly 90% were either primitive and barely functioning or not functioning at all, yielding a 404 error or “site not found”.

Read more: How Apple Created the Tech Universe

Naturally the 10% that were functioning, a few of which at a high level, were all the largest companies attending the show. With costs to set up, and even designing a company web site, at an all time low, why would so many pass up the opportunity to make use of this powerful tool?

‘This is Water’  and the internet dilemma that has swallowed the world

From The New Yorker:

In 2005, David Foster Wallace addressed the graduating class at Kenyon College with a speech that is now one of his most read pieces. 

In it, he argues, gorgeously, against “unconsciousness, the default setting, the rat race, the constant gnawing sense of having had, and lost, some infinite thing.” He begins with a parable:

There are these two young fish swimming along, and they happen to meet an older fish swimming the other way, who nods at them and says, “Morning, boys. How’s the water?” And the two young fish swim on for a bit, and then eventually one of them looks over at the other and goes, “What the hell is water?”

This oft quoted passage is about how the world around us can be easily misunderstood by lack of awareness. And, maybe, by the lack of any perceived need to notice what’s really going on. 

The two most shocking things about the anecdote above, regarding 90% of small businesses lack of internet presence (or sophistication), are how this could be the case after more than 20 years of the internet being at the center of commerce and, well, life, and what it says about the “water” we are all swimming in. 

Read more: Apple Search is Coming: Google, Facebook & Amazon Surveillance

2020 is the year that the internet became even more important for all our lives. Less obvious is that it is also the year that the problems and obstacles are more important than ever to overcome, and that starts with seeing the water we are all swimming in. 

The Social Dilemma’ is also a Small Business Dilemma

In this acclaimed documentary (available on Netflix) a lot of both problems and solutions focus on the dangers of the current giant-tech dominated internet environment on the “end-user” and the general public. 

The Social Dilemma on Netflix

While that sphere of influence is a serious and growing problem, it is the control and domination by a few massive companies, to the virtual exclusion of smaller businesses, that, to a large degree caused the sick, twisted inequitable and unfair system in the first place. 

The relative size imbalance is literally so massive that it is rendered incomprehensible, and, like water to the fish mentioned above, invisible. 

A happy shiny logo of, say, coca-cola, looks just as harmless (or menacing, depending on the perspective) as that of Amazon or Facebook, who may be hundreds of times larger in market-cap than the soft-drink giant with long history as a “big” American company. Size of this magnitude is impossible to conceive of by most of us.

But the perception of the giants that control the internet as harmless, or even beneficial and to be admired, is rapidly changing. Therein also lies the potential for probably the only hope of positive change for small business and for society in the US and across the globe. 

A Revolution of Perception is Required and already Underway

Part of the problem, one that is growing, admittedly, every day, is the sheer scale of the inequity and corruption. Why even try, as a small business, to go up against the giants that “own” the water we swim in?

Ultimately what is necessary is a sea-change (forgive the continued metaphor) within overall population, both consumers and small businesses. And that starts with the perception that it is the “people” that decide how and what the internet will be who will be “permitted” to interact. An Algorithm own as proprietary secret software by an internet behemoth? Or a decentralized more kaleidoscopic solution that was an inherent promise from the initial days of the internet’s creation?

The signs of change are all around. The “direct to consumer” trend that has produced massive success stories also paved the way for the emerging system of smaller companies being able to reach out directly and actually do business with customers with, sometimes, minimal involvement of the giants. 

The signs that this can work are gradually being seen – shopify’s success in offering software and services to businesses wanting to establish a direct connection to buyers is a growing trend. There are many other companies that have recognized the trend and are trying to ride this wave toward a different method of communication between businesses and so-called consumers. 

Here are some examples of companies that are taking a new approach to the way we communicate and interact online:

However, the ultimate driver of positive change in the internet will be the increased sophistication of users, both professional and at the individual level. 

User Sophistication and Trust: an unlikely but all-important Grail

Facebook, Instagram, Pinterest, Twitter, TikTok and more have all embraced direct in-app-shopping as a way to expand beyond content.  Even Google has started a program to allow buyers to purchase from search results without leaving the platform. While these initiatives are all coming from the giant tech firms themselves, they are, ultimately, sowing the seeds of their own demise. 

They are, in essence, teaching buyers to forego the now standard system of choosing between Amazon and “the rest” in online shopping. This choice, helped along by billions in losses to subsidize “impossibly low” prices plus free shipping paid for by Amazon’s loss-leader strategies, was never a fair or realistic one and created the massive, unsustainable imbalances in online commerce we see today. 

The massive and very real paranoia of the giant companies is based on the clear and deep understanding that the competition is always “1-click-away”, which is the unfulfilled promise of the internet in the first place.

D.L.

The greatest obstacle has never been the massive price-dumping schemes or even the sell-at-a-loss free shipping concept that kept buyers from having a second choice in e-commerce. It has been the lack of user sophistication of the sellers and the buyers in the online forum which prevented easier movement from one online option to another. 

The massive and very real paranoia of the giant companies is based on the clear and deep understanding that the competition is always “1 click away”, which is the unfulfilled promise of the internet in the first place.

So called “moats” and systems to block users from initiating and exercising choice are built-up and keep getting deeper and more complex. But sophisticated users can, and eventually will, easily just opt-out at any time, when alternatives that they prefer begin to proliferate. 

And there is a growing and invisible ocean that already exists all around us. As far-fetched as it may seem “the ocean we swim in” will one day be in no way similar to the deeply problematic one we swim in today and a thorough a change from the bottom up as well as the top down will, finally, bring about a new era in online communication and commerce. 


Subscribe to our newsletter for all the latest updates directly to your inBox.

Find books on PoliticsSustainable EnergyRacial Equality & Justice and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Enjoy Lynxotic at Apple News on your iPhone, iPad or Mac.

Apple Search Plans & Potential are Casting a Massive Shadow on Google Anti-Trust Case

Above: Photo Collage / Lynxotic

Search Battle Lynxotic Predicted is about to Breakout Big time

In a year that has already offered AppleOne5G, and perpetual AirTag teases, Apple Inc might have yet another major project hidden up its sleeve. According to a report from the Financial Times, the tech company has recently partaken in research and development indicative of creating a new original search engine.

Read More: Apple iPhone 12 Pro Models are Here and There’s More

For years, Google has been the default search engine on Apple devices. This is part of an ongoing deal between the two companies where Google pays Apple a pretty penny to foreground their services. Now, however, Google is facing an antitrust suit from the Department of Justice. This case claims that Google has a monopoly over search and directly sites its relationship with Apple as evidence.

If the DOJ manages to win against Google, it could be the end of its search engine arriving pre-encrypted in all iPhones, iPads, and Macs. Thus, an in-house Apple search engine comes at an opportune time. Not only will it provide Apple with a new default search platform, but it will also muster some competition against Google— one of the things that the antitrust case desperately calls for.

Any Engine at All by Apple is Earth-shattering to the Status Quo of Big Tech

Nothing is set in concrete about this speculative Apple search engine yet. All we know for sure is that the latest version of iOS 14 shows signs of increased search technology. Under the upgraded operating system, iPhone users can type in questions directly on their devices’ home screens and arrive at Internet results without any middleman. This has also led to an uptick in Apple’s spidering tools, which comb and datafy the web for a smoother search experience. 

These changes in iOS 14 are subtle, but given the context, they could be laying the seeds for something much larger. Tellingly, former Google head of search John Geannandrea also oversees these recent Apple advancements. Geannandrea joined Apple three years ago, and while his main focus at the company has been Siri thus far, he obviously has the expertise and experience for helming a Google-like project.

Some believe that Siri is the base of Apple’s increased search interests. Perhaps the new technologies are simply working to refine the voice assistant rather than setting up a wholly alternative Google competitor. At the same time, though, with the proper expansion, Siri could very well evolve into a worthy Google rival, especially if it becomes the one-stop search engine on all Apple devices.For now, users will just have to wait while events unfold. Experts say that the antitrust case against Google will go on for years, and if Apple is indeed developing its own search engine alternative, it will likely take just as long.


Check out all our Apple Coverage

Subscribe to our newsletter for all the latest updates directly to your inBox.

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.

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

Amazon, Facebook, and Google will be accountable if Anti-trust law revisions hold

New Reports call for laws to rein in giant monopolies

Amid a zany week of political theater and election drama, the federal government has actually managed to make quiet, nonpartisan progress on an important issue. On Tuesday, October 7th, Democratic members of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust finally released a long-awaited report concerning the dominant technological companies in America and their legally dubious corporate power.

Read More: Apple is Coming 4U: Facebook, Amazon and Google Surveillance facing US scrutiny and danger from New Software

The report comes at the end of a sixteen-month investigation into the tech giants, arriving to the conclusion that America’s four biggest tech companies—Amazon, Google, Facebook, and Apple— all partake in anti-competitive practices that could be reprehensible by law.

Essentially, with the exception of Apple, these four conglomerates have created near-monopolies in their respective fields. Amazon controls 40% of e-commerce in America, and endorses business models that squander the competition and abuse third-party sellers through data mining. Apple has argued that they do not have a monopoly stake in phones, Android (google) and Samsung, have a larger worldwide base, and in other areas Apple has an even less dominant position. Only in dollar denominated success do they hold the absolute top spot.

 Google has an even larger monopoly on Internet searches, also utilizing data to bind users to their content and prioritize their services over all other websites.

Facebook, meanwhile, is a hegemonic vacuum for social media outlets, endorsing a “copy, acquire, and then kill” technique according to the report. Essentially, rather than compete with other platforms, Facebook sucks them into inescapable, self-serving positions.

Apple is not in quite as much hot water as the other three companies. The report mainly accuses Apple of binding its users to the Apple Store, which creates an extra, sometimes expensive, hurdle for App developers to get over if they want their product widely available. The report accuses Google of doing something similar with Android, saying that the software forces people to use Google on their devices.

Read More: Zuckerberg Promises Change as Facebook Value plummets $56 Billion after Ad Boycott

Of course, all of these companies have denied any illegality in their actions— each citing the free market and defending their business practices as entirely fair when responding to the report.

Generally in gridlock and inept, this is one area where Government must act decisively

However, Congress does not seem to agree. In light of the recent report, many Democrats are in favor of rewriting the U.S. Antitrust Laws to better protect a fair, competitive economy. Traditionally, the Antitrust Laws keep businesses in check on behalf of consumers, but they have not been touched in decades, and capitalism has developed immensely since then.

The amount of power that these three companies have garnered demonstrates that the laws now need to consider affairs between businesses as well, lest a handful of power-hungry entities override the market.

Some Republicans, however, have pushed back against the idea of rewriting the Antitrust Laws. Notably, Representative Kelly Armstrong from North Dakota did not sign the committee’s report on Tuesday. While he agrees that something nefarious is at hand with these tech companies, his remedy focuses on greater oversight from the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission, upping the enforcement rather than adjusting the laws itself.

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

Even if certain politicians disagree on how to address the issue, the nonpartisan support for cracking down on big-tech in America is nevertheless a milestone, and it comes at a crucial time. While thousands of Americans are facing economic strife due to the COVID-19 pandemic, billionaires (especially tech moguls) are seeing their stocks skyrocket.

According to a financial study covered in USA Today, billionaires now hold more of the world’s wealth than ever before— $10.8 trillion. Tech billionaires in particular hold $1.8 trillion of that, a whopping 42.5% increase from just a year and a half ago.

The bulk of American Antitrust Laws were written at the turn of the twentieth century. Since then, the state of the world has changed. The state of the economy has changed. And perhaps most immensely, the state of technology has changed. Algorithmic dictatorships are growing almost as quickly as class divides in America. So perhaps it is time for the law to change as well.


Subscribe to our newsletter for all the latest updates directly to your inBox.

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.

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

Dig deeper into Netflix’s “The Social Dilemma” with these books on the dangers of Social Media

Reprogramming civilization via Social Media….

“The Social Dilemma” a documentary now available to watch on Netflix, exposes some hard truths and dangers of social networking.  Former employees from juggernaut tech companies including Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Pinterest and many others are interviewed, many of whom co-invented and developed the very structures and business models that are creating major problems as broken-down and discussed in the docu-drama. 

Read More: Apple’s Ad Spotlights in a Hilarious Tour de Force: Why Privacy Matters on your iPhone

Not much of a spoiler alert, but social media companies not only sell our user data, but in conjunction use all that data to create an ultra-sophisticated psychological profile, ultimately to have the powerful ability to manipulate us. Your privacy, surveillance capitalism, positive intermittent reinforcement, artificial intelligence (AI), algorithms, dopamine hits, are just some of the terms used within the film and very much prevalent in social media. 

There are only two industries that call their customers ‘users’: illegal drugs and software”

Edward Tufte 

We’ve curated a list of books written by the former tech employees that appeared in the documentary, as well as provided some additional information from the publisher. Click to see more book information, we’ve provided links for purchase that if interested that helps out independent books stores.  

Weapons of Math Destruction by Cathy O’Neil

Click Here to See “Weapons of Math Destruction
and help Independent Bookstores.
Also Available on Amazon.

We live in the age of the algorithm. Increasingly, the decisions that affect our lives–where we go to school, whether we can get a job or a loan, how much we pay for health insurance–are being made not by humans, but by machines. In theory, this should lead to greater fairness: Everyone is judged according to the same rules.

But as mathematician and data scientist Cathy O’Neil reveals, the mathematical models being used today are unregulated and uncontestable, even when they’re wrong. Most troubling, they reinforce discrimination–propping up the lucky, punishing the downtrodden, and undermining our democracy in the process. Welcome to the dark side of Big Data.

NEW YORK TIMES BESTSELLER – A former Wall Street quant sounds the alarm on Big Data and the mathematical models that threaten to rip apart our social fabric–with a new afterword. “A manual for the twenty-first-century citizen . . . relevant and urgent.”–Financial Times. NATIONAL BOOK AWARD LONGLIST – NAMED ONE OF THE BEST BOOKS OF THE YEAR BY The New York Times Book Review – Boston Globe – Wired – Fortune – Kirkus Reviews – The Guardian – Nature – On Point

Automating Humanity by Joe Toscano 

Click Here to See “Automating Humanity
and help Independent Bookstores.
Also Available on Amazon.

Automating Humanity is an insider’s perspective on everything Big Tech doesn’t want the public to know–or think about–from the addictions installed on a global scale to the profits being driven by fake news and disinformation, to the way they’re manipulating the world for profit and using our data to train systems that will automate jobs at an explosive, unprecedented scale.

Toscano provides a critique of modern regulation, including parts of the new European Union’s General Data Proctection Regulation (GDPR) suggesting how we can create proactive, adaptable regulation that satisfies both the needs of consumer safety and commercial success in the international economy. The content touches on everything from technology, economics, and public policy to psychology, history, and ethics, and is written in a way that is accessible to everyone from the average reader to the technical expert. Click Here to See “Automating Humanity” and help Independent Bookstores. Also Available on Amazon.

The Age of Surveillance Capitalism by Shoshana Zuboff 

Click Here to See “The Age of Surveillance Capitalism
and help Independent Bookstores.
Also Available on Amazon.

In this masterwork of original thinking and research, Shoshana Zuboff provides startling insights into the phenomenon that she has named surveillance capitalism. The stakes could not be higher: a global architecture of behavior modification threatens human nature in the twenty-first century just as industrial capitalism disfigured the natural world in the twentieth.

Zuboff vividly brings to life the consequences as surveillance capitalism advances from Silicon Valley into every economic sector. Vast wealth and power are accumulated in ominous new “behavioral futures markets,” where predictions about our behavior are bought and sold, and the production of goods and services is subordinated to a new “means of behavioral modification.”

The threat has shifted from a totalitarian Big Brother state to a ubiquitous digital architecture: a “Big Other” operating in the interests of surveillance capital. Here is the crucible of an unprecedented form of power marked by extreme concentrations of knowledge and free from democratic oversight. Zuboff’s comprehensive and moving analysis lays bare the threats to twenty-first century society: a controlled “hive” of total connection that seduces with promises of total certainty for maximum profit–at the expense of democracy, freedom, and our human future. Click Here to See “The Age of Surveillance Capitalism” and help Independent Bookstores. Also Available on Amazon.

Ten Arguments for Deleting Your Social Media Accounts Right Now by Jaron Lanier

Click Here to See
Ten Argument for Deleting Your Social Media Accounts
and help Independent Bookstores.
Also Available on Amazon.

You might have trouble imagining life without your social media accounts, but virtual reality pioneer Jaron Lanier insists that we’re better off without them. In Ten Arguments for Deleting Your Social Media Accounts Right Now, Lanier, who participates in no social media, offers powerful and personal reasons for all of us to leave these dangerous online platforms.

Lanier’s reasons for freeing ourselves from social media’s poisonous grip include its tendency to bring out the worst in us, to make politics terrifying, to trick us with illusions of popularity and success, to twist our relationship with the truth, to disconnect us from other people even as we are more “connected” than ever, to rob us of our free will with relentless targeted ads. How can we remain autonomous in a world where we are under continual surveillance and are constantly being prodded by algorithms run by some of the richest corporations in history that have no way of making money other than being paid to manipulate our behavior? How could the benefits of social media possibly outweigh the catastrophic losses to our personal dignity, happiness, and freedom? Lanier remains a tech optimist, so while demonstrating the evil that rules social media business models today, he also envisions a humanistic setting for social networking that can direct us toward a richer and fuller way of living and connecting with our world. Click Here to See “Ten Argument for Deleting Your Social Media Accounts” and help Independent Bookstores. Also Available on Amazon.

The Righteous Mind by Jonathan Haidt 

Click Here to See “The Righteous Mind
and help Independent Bookstores.
Also Available on Amazon.

Drawing on his twenty five years of groundbreaking research on moral psychology, Haidt shows how moral judgments arise not from reason but from gut feelings. He shows why liberals, conservatives, and libertarians have such different intuitions about right and wrong, and he shows why each side is actually right about many of its central concerns. In this subtle yet accessible book, Haidt gives you the key to understanding the miracle of human cooperation, as well as the curse of our eternal divisions and conflicts. If you’re ready to trade in anger for understanding, read The Righteous Mind.

In this “landmark contribution to humanity’s understanding of itself” (The New York Times Book Review) social psychologist Jonathan Haidt challenges conventional thinking about morality, politics, and religion in a way that speaks to conservatives and liberals alike. Click Here to See “The Righteous Mind” and help Independent Bookstores. Also Available on Amazon.


Subscribe to our YouTube Channel

Subscribe to our newsletter for all the latest updates directly to your inBox.

Find books on The Social Dilemma,  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.

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

Apple’s Ad Spotlights in a Hilarious Tour de Force: Why Privacy Matters on your iPhone

Yes that includes Netflix -and-chill text invites

We all constantly interact with our iPhone in a myriad of ways. We use our phones for directions, searching for information, snapping a photo, communicating with work-family-friends-lovers, buying (drunk-dailing), accessing our financial data, enter and compiling health data…. the list goes on and on!

Read More: Apple Privacy in iOS 14 and Big Sur: Safari to offer deep pervasive control of personal data

Apple’s newest ad highlights how important our privacy really is. Although funny, the ad also depicts what the worst case scenario could look like.

Privacy is extremely high on Apple’s list

No one would knowingly would scream out their password, but through this clever comedic device the video spotlights the scary truth that if your valuable information were to be shared continuously, the situation would be grave, indeed. Apple wants to make it clear that privacy should be a “given” and that they have taken extra steps to ensure users information will be safe.

Subscribe to our YouTube Channel


Check out all Lynxotic Apple Coverage

Subscribe to our newsletter for all the latest updates directly to your inBox.

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.

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

Apple is Coming: Facebook, Amazon and Google Surveillance facing US scrutiny and danger from New Software

Apple will expose the worst of predatory surveillance by Facebook, Amazon and Google with new privacy features

While wrong is wrong regardless of the perpetrator, when it comes to gargantuan tech behemoths, a company with a clearly defined mission such as Apple or Tesla are in a different category than Amazon, Facebook and Google.

While Tesla’s stated mission is to “accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable energy” and Apple’s original mission statement, written by Steve Jobs was “to make a contribution to the world by making tools for the mind that advance humankind”, predatory vultures hide behind ridiculous slogans like “aim to be Earth’s most customer centric company” (while decimating partners and competitors by any means necessary) and “don’t be evil” (don’t get caught) and “to give people the power to build community and bring the world closer together” (…all while stealing data for profit from every person on earth).

Click to See “Steve Jobs
and to help Lynxotic
and Independent Bookstores.
Also Available on Amazon.

It’s just not the same – particularly as Steve Jobs, while at Apple, pushed himself and his company to invent and build many powerful examples of “tools for the mind” and Elon Musk’s Tesla brought the electric car back from the dead (after it was nearly snuffed out by big oil) and is making incredible headway in revolutionizing battery and solar technology, all with a view to literally save the planet from a climate catastrophe.

Bezos? Became the richest living human via the destruction of millions of small business and jobs all while undercutting competitors by selling virtually anything he got his hands on at a significant loss; simply to cause the demise of any competitor or partner that might threaten his rise to idiotically massive personal wealth.

Zuckerberg? Pioneered ways to suck data from virtually every human with a view to monetizing every living soul exclusively for himself and his company. Illustration? Dividing Facebook’s market cap by the number of employees it has yields the sum of $14,906,500.00 per employee. Macy’s? That’d be $16,829. (Thanks to Scott Galloway for the numbers)

Read More: In Understatement of the Century, Treasury Secretary Mnuchin says Amazon “destroyed the retail industry”

Google merely owns (91.75% as of June 2020) the search entryway to all web sites. It decides if you should or should not find them. If it can boost profits by hiding one and featuring another, either through “paid search” or by pointing you toward its own properties while hiding competitors from you, it will do exactly that. Ask the European Union’s anti-trust investigators. For them, this company is a convicted law breaker.

https://video-lynxotic.akamaized.net/Safari-Privacy-BigSur.mov
EXCERPTs FROM APPLE PRESENTATION FOR privacy settings FROM WWDC 2020

The Beginning of the End for Infinite Tracking: Apple’s EcoSystem will Protect Users Privacy

Click to See Apple Products
and to help Lynxotic.

Announced at WWDC 2020, Apple is adding serious features to its various new operating systems. One big feature in Safari is the ability to track, and block as desired, all manner of data intrusions. These are not only identified, but shown and tracked and analyzed with a kind of professional dashboard, showing just how invasive and persistent these invisible spies are.

Apple is big, with more than 1.4 billion devices. Starting in around 2021 they will all be able to identify and block data surveillance by Amazon (the largest of all spies), Google and Facebook, among others. Thanks that’s not a big deal? Think again.

Read More: Cracks in The Wall: Apple, Google, Amazon and Facebook Silently Declare Wars Against Each Other

…the overall stance being taken regarding online tracking and surveillance should be seen for what it is: the first step to correcting the mistake of history that allowed the internet to be kidnapped and held hostage by a handful of companies that pretend to be “free” or “customer obsessed” while they are, in fact, Robber Barons that make the Standard Oil monopoly look like Santa Claus.

– D.L.

Tracking the Trackers will Change Your Life

Tracking the trackers is a clear and aggressive privacy stance, taken by the one company among the big four, that does not have a huge stake in you being the victim of online surveillance and tracking.

Not to say that Apple is blameless. Many are complaining about its fee structure for software sold by third parties via the app stores. While this issue is certainly a valid one, the overall stance being taken regarding online tracking and surveillance should be seen for what it is: the first step to correcting the mistake of history that allowed the internet to be kidnapped and held hostage by a handful of companies that pretend to be “free” or “customer obsessed” while they are, in fact, Robber Barons that make the Standard Oil monopoly look like Santa Claus.


Subscribe to our newsletter for all the latest updates directly to your inBox.

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.

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

Cracks in The Wall: Apple, Google, Amazon and Facebook Silently Declare Wars Against Each Other

Above: Photo Collage / Lynxotic / Adobe Stock / Pink Floyd

Virtually every day a targeted feature or software change is announced in an attempt to damage the monopoly next door

Competition is the cornerstone of capitalism. Except, sometimes, when monopolies take hold. This week CEO’s of the largest tech firms will be grilled (or at least questioned) on just how each of them got so big, and why they should not be broken up or regulated, in order to improve competition in the online marketplace that is now the world’s lifeblood.

The mistake of history that allowed Google, Amazon and Facebook to emerge from the dot-com era of zero profit companies as winner-take-all trillion dollar behemoths is finally being questioned by the masses, which has led to government investigation and inquiry.

Click to See “Goliath
and to help Lynxotic
and Independent Bookstores.
Also Available on Amazon.

Apple was not founded during the 90s, actually produces products and does not rely on the monetization of user data as it’s main revenue generator; it does not sell below cost in a loss-leader system designed to cripple any competition and has a completely different business ethos, all of which separates the three mentioned above into a different category for this writer.

Nevertheless, in a world where giants from an earlier time are dwarfed by the sheer size and power of these 4 (Microsoft and Tesla are excluded from this article since each has its own backstory and are best looked at separately), a situation has arisen where only one giant has the power to even touch, let alone threaten, another giant.

There are many ways that these giants have always fought one another, yet as they staked out territories and empires, there seemed to be, at times, a tacit agreement that the domain of one would not be violated by another, like an unspoken mafia code or territorial claim.

Those lines between the giants are getting blurry as a silent siege is building and those previously “untouchable” areas of commerce are being targeted.

The fight may be about dollars in the end, but it is the essential control of data and user behavior that leads to all power, and therefore value and income. And each giant has staked a claim to a method or means to control and influence the behavior of billions of eyeballs and souls. Any change in that status quo is a big deal for these entrenched companies, and potentially good news for small businesses and consumers who are, without a doubt, little more than victims of the current insanely evil system.

Those lines between the giants are getting blurry as a silent siege is building and those previously “untouchable” areas of commerce are being targeted.

– D.L.

Here are a few of the new fronts where this hidden and secret battle is being fought:

Google Shopping, following Walmart, is trying to lure 3rd party sellers and sales away from Amazon

Already under fire for rigging search results to favor itself, Google is doubling down, in a sense, via drastically lowering fees for 3rd party sellers to use Google Shopping to get direct sales from Shopify or other non-Amazon sources.

Since Amazon’s fees can approach 30% for some lower cost items (such as books) this will be a powerful incentive for sellers to shift focus away from Amazon’s predatory fee structure and to a platform that potentially could bring in sales with less cost to the seller (and therefore a better end value to the buyer).

Click to See deals on Apple Products and to help Lynxotic.

Google is offering zero commission listing and, in a big announcement, also currently charging zero, in the US, for the “buy on google” checkout system. This is in the process of expanding and rolling out, and, potentially, by the fall and holiday season, could provide an interesting shift in how small business can operate online.

Walmart started allowing 3rd party sellers onto its online store several years ago but, recently, kicked that process into overdrive with a new system that allows all Shopify accounts the choice to sell on Walmart.com via a direct link between the two.

Bookshop.org, with whom Lynxotic is affiliated via our sister site Cherrybooks.org, is also a company that is attempting to break the stranglehold Amazon has had on online book sales. Surprisingly successful already, with its B Corp non-profit-like structure and alliances with independent bookstores sale have exploded. Affiliate advertising from huge media companies such as the New York Times have climbed on board and the largest book distributor in the US is a partner for fulfillment. Bookshop.Org has been able to put a tiny dent in the largest, most powerful competitor imaginable, showing, perhaps, that there are cracks emerging in the corrupt business models of these giants and they are not 100% invulnerable after all.

https://video-lynxotic.akamaized.net/iPadOS14Safari-AppleNews2.mov
Live iPad OS 14 exampleS & Excerpt from Apple’s WWDC 2020 Presentation

Apple’s iOS 14 and iPad OS 14 (along with mac 11 OS Big Sur) will begin to break Google’s search monopoly with direct links in Safari and Spotlight

For companies wanting to bring traffic and customers to their web sites for many years there has been only one very big game available, so-called SEO. SEO stands for Search Engine Optimization which refers in the words “search” and “engine” to one that controls over 90% of search traffic: Google (91.75% as of June 2020).

So it could be called GEO or just GO for Google Optimization. And this is a massive industry in and of itself.

Click to See “Steve Jobs
and to help Lynxotic
and Independent Bookstores.
Also Available on Amazon.

Increasingly, however, this monopoly is also being challenged. Not only in Europe where massive fines against the search giant have been levied, but in the growing options for sites to be found in ways other than qualifying for a first page placement (paid for or otherwise) in Googles search results.

Soon, for the billion + apple device users worldwide, there will be a new way to find news sources and other web sites. Both search in Safari and Spotlight, which is the device level search system on iPhone, iPad and Mac computers, will soon have results that link directly to the source, bypassing google in the process.

This is a small statement but will have a huge effect in the real world. The reason is simple but mind-blowing: a search result choice not controlled by google, available on one billion plus devices, has the potential to begin to break the monopoly, and Google’s ability (and how much) to charge for the privilege of being found through its search results.

How the Apple search results are generated and what companies would be featured in those direct results is as yet unknown and may never be released (like Google’s proprietary algorithm). The emergence of ASO (Apple Search Optimization) notwithstanding, just the fact that there is a new player presenting new opportunities for news outlets and eCommerce companies to be found by Apple device owners, is very interesting news indeed.

https://video-lynxotic.akamaized.net/Safari-Privacy-BigSur.mov
EXCERPTs FROM APPLE PRESENTATION FOR privacy settings FROM WWDC 2020

Apple will expose the worst of predatory surveillance by Facebook, Amazon and Google with new privacy features

Announced at WWDC 2020, the new operating systems are coming with serious features that track, and block as desired, all manner of data intrusions. These are not only identified, but shown and tracked and analyzed with a kind of professional dashboard, showing just how invasive and persistent these invisible spies are.

…the overall stance being taken regarding online tracking and surveillance should be seen for what it is: the first step to correcting the mistake of history that allowed the internet to be kidnapped and held hostage by a handful of companies that pretend to be “free” or “customer obsessed” while they are, in fact, Robber Barons that make the Standard Oil monopoly look like Santa Claus.

– D.L.

Tracking the trackers is a clear and aggressive privacy stance, taken by the one company among the big four, that does not have a huge stake in you being the victim of online surveillance and tracking.

Not to say that Apple is blameless. Many are complaining about its fee structure for software sold by third parties via the app stores. While this issue is certainly a valid one, the overall stance being taken regarding online tracking and surveillance should be seen for what it is: the first step to correcting the mistake of history that allowed the internet to be kidnapped and held hostage by a handful of companies that pretend to be “free” or “customer obsessed” while they are, in fact, Robber Barons that make the Standard Oil monopoly look like Santa Claus.

Above: Photo / Bansky


Subscribe to our newsletter for all the latest updates directly to your inBox.

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.

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

Zuckerberg Promises Change as Facebook Value plummets $56 Billion after Ad Boycott

A building chorus of dissenting voices from well heeled and carefully researched corporate ad buyers

Zuckerberg faces the music (collage / Lynxotic)

The Facebook ad boycott has been going on for several weeks now, as more and more companies are abstaining from promoting content on the social media website until it makes greater amends to eliminate hate speech on its platform. At first, many expected that the boycott would not be enough to spark real change. After all, only about a hundred companies are engaged in it, and Facebook hosts over 8 million advertisers. However, now that a few key players have joined the movement, Facebook is facing palpable financial and PR consequences, heralding an indirect response.

Companies started to boycott ads on Facebook earlier this month, as civil rights groups such as the NAACP, the Anti-Defamation League, Sleeping Giants, Color Of Change, Free Press and Common Sense criticized the site for providing a platform for racist and bigoted content. These groups were particularly critical of Facebook failing to censor President Trump‘s inflammatory post regarding the Black Lives Matter protests following George Floyd’s death. In the post, Trump stated, “When the looting starts, the shooting starts,” endorsing a hateful rhetoric riddled with dark precedents.

Facebook was defensive of allowing Trump’s post go unedited at first, with CEO Mark Zuckerberg playing the free-speech card that has kept Facebook relatively unaccountable in the past for the mounds of unsavory content plastered on the site.

Now, however, Facebook is waking up to a significant hit to the wallet.

Major ad contributors have joined the boycott against Facebook including Verizon, Coca-Cola, Unilever, and dozens upon dozens more, with most making a statement that they will abstain from advertising on Facebook through the summer or until the site changes its methods. It is part of a movement titled “Stop Hate For Profit,” targeted at companies that make money off of bigotry.

Money matters, apparently, particularly big, big sums

As mentioned above, the companies who have joined the movement are but a drop in Facebook’s ocean of advertisers. Nevertheless, amidst the boycott and all of the negative PR Facebook has acquired as a result, the site’s stock price has dropped significantly. On Friday, June 26th, its stock went down more than 8%, representing a loss $56 billion in market value for the company. Even for a company like Facebook, that is not exactly chump-change.

Non-coincidentally, later that same day, Zuckerberg released a statement outlining Facebook’s plans to be more proactive about censoring content on the website. In a thirteen minute video and accompanying post, the CEO explained that going forward, Facebook will be making more efforts to ensure that all users feel safe on the website. This includes prohibiting ads that target or demean certain demographics, making it more apparent when content is or is not deemed “newsworthy,” and increasing security for content related to the upcoming election, flagging hoax videos and removing the spread of misinformation.

A long list of convictions and potential crimes is beginning to mount

The larger question exists as to why now, after facebook’s lax and predatory behaviors are well known and documented, suddenly these major advertisers have woken to the urgency of change? BLM and antitrust, along with a long list of highly critical investigative reports from major news over a period of years, might just be building into a tsunami of anti-facebook sentiment too big to ignore.

It was Facebook’s complacency with spreading misinformation during the 2016 Election—as well as the Cambridge Analytica privacy breeches— that instigated the website’s fall from grace nearly four years ago. Since then, Facebook among other big-tech labels have been the subject of greater criticism for their role in politics, culture, and public discourse.

While Zuckerberg’s latest video feels more substantial than most of his responses to criticism. It attempts to off some possible real solutions to the problems rather than just hollow suggestions or distractive rebranding techniques. Still, many are not satisfied, hoping that Facebook will focus more on removing all hateful content rather than simply flagging it, or adjusting its corporate allegiances so they stop selling data to or providing a platform for institutions that aim to disenfranchise people.

As the boycott continues, perhaps Facebook’s response will grow more progressive, but Zuck and his company continue to toe that delicate line between upholding freedom of speech and quelling unambiguously offensive content. Likewise, it will be interesting to see what the boycotters do in the coming months. Facebook is a crucial advertising platform for most of these corporations. By the end of the summer, will they start using the site again, or will they continue to hold out until greater change comes about?

To endorse the former would seem like a sellout, like the entire boycott was but a disingenuous gesture. However, to carry on with the boycott indefinitely begs the question of how much Facebook needs to adjust itself before returning to the public’s (as well as other business’) good graces.

Ultimately, the question is whether real change is finally coming; for us all to have a choice of more than a single, solitary option for our social media network (facebook), search engine (google) or eCommerce destination (amazon).


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.

New Tech and Business Stories: Bill Maher on Bezos, The Big 3’s Evil Empire and Tesla’s Big Breakthrough

Have you seen the monologue from Bill Maher on Amazon and Bezos? If not you better take a look. Can’t say if Bill is a barometer of the pulse of the public at large, but this time he seems to be spot-on. There could be a sea-change coming, even as we all reflect on the massive changes wrought this year, not only by the pandemic itself, but by the collateral damage and collateral advantage, in some cases, that came with it like a tsunami after an earthquake.

Perhaps change can be good. Tesla and Elon Musk are trying, at least, and the upcoming announcements regarding battery tech breakthroughs are like a ray of sustainable sunshine in a world of clouds and rain. Quibi appears to be struggling out of the gate (surprising no one!) but with billions in their war chest it’s likely too soon to count them out entirely. After you check out the Bill Maher video below, you might want a little deeper background on the landscape that led to Amazon’s insane dominance, so check out the extended, anonymously sourced reporting by our News Staff.

We are All Search Hostages until the Internet is Free of the Big Three:

Photo Collage / Lynxotic / Adobe Stock

Isn’t it funny that the so called bursting of the dot-com bubble in 2000 which resulted in a nearly 75% drop in the tech heavy NASDAQ index by March, 2000. Ultimately, among survivors and upstarts, the winner-takes-all saga led to no less than three trillion dollar companies. Click to see complete story.


Tesla and Elon Musk to Announce EV Breakthrough in June, details leaked to Reuters:

Photo Collage / Lynxotic / Adobe Stock

Tesla has proven already that a well designed and engineered EV has many superior qualities compared to an equivalent ICE (internal combustion engine) vehicle. Teslas have shown that they can last up to one million miles with far less maintenance. Click to see complete story.


Is Jeff Bezos soon to be World’s First Trillionaire? No Chance in Hell. Here’s Why:

Photo Collage / Lynxotic / Adobe Stock

A recent “study” has been cited by a gaggle of digital media outlets. Featuring headlines such as “Jeff Bezos Could Be the World’s First Trillionaire, and the Overwhelming Response Is ‘Thanks I Hate It’ (Vice.com) and“Jeff Bezos could become world’s first trillionaire, and many people aren’t happy about it” (USA Today) and trending on twitter via the hashtag #bezostrillionaire and #RIPCapitalism. Click here to see complete story.


Quibi Shifts Gears Following Rough Start :

Photo Collage / Quibi

Jeffrey Katzenberg and Meg Whitman launched Quibi on April 6th. The latest project from the two well-experienced entertainment moguls, Quibi is a streaming service designed for the smallest of screens— namely, smartphones and other mobile devices. The subscription based platform’s initiative is to provide short bursts of entertainment for people on the go, keeping content between seven and ten minutes long apiece. Click to see complete story.


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.

Top Tech Stories this Week from Facebook, Google, Elon Musk and Amazon

With half the world seemingly at the beach, and most of us focused on the right way to survive coming out of lock-down, you may have missed the incredibly active news coming out of the tech space. Not just space itself, but a variety of interesting looks toward the future, both in law and anti-trust issues and, yes, space itself both from the fantasy as well as reality perspective.

With the coronavirus pandemic implications for the economy and business at the forefront of looming threats, at least in terms of non-medical issues, the big tech giants; Amazon, Google and Facebook are all getting warnings that the government are a-coming with serious questions as to the behavior of the former, if not outright legal actions. And the people at large, in particular small business owners may not be far behind.


A Bully with a “Nice” Promise is Still just a Bully:

Photo Collage / Lynxotic / Adobe Stock

Funny thing about promises made by politicians and owners of public companies. Although truth will eventually come out due to public access to accounting, these are often so far in the future that virtually anything can be promised today with no need for a specific plan or transparent numbers to back them up. Click to see complete story.


Elon Musk – Tom Cruise Space Film makes News out of Brilliant Redundancy:

Photo Collage / Lynxotic / Adobe Stock

From “Star Trek” to “Star Wars,” “Interstellar” to “2001,” outer space has been the primary setting for a wide range of science fiction and action movies over the years. Still, never has a film actually been shot in the infinite frontier. Sure we have footage from the stars (even from the moon and Mars), but no feature film has been bold enough to actually construct a full-length narrative with principal photography occurring in space. Click to see complete story.


Read More: SpaceX Starship Plans for The Moon, Mars and Earth-to-Earth Transport


Facebook Acquires Giphy while Congress steps in with Antitrust Suspicions:

Photo Collage / Lynxotic / Adobe Stock

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. Click to see complete story.


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

Photo Collage / Lynxotic / Adobe Stock

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 complete story.


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.

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.

Facebook Sued by IRS over $9 Billion in Unpaid Taxes for Undervaluing Irish Subsidiary

Photo Collage / Lynxotic

Like Al Capone alleging an alternate Crime as a quicker way to Prosecute Social Media Gangster?

Facebook is in hot water once again; this time with the Internal Revenue Service. The IRS filed a lawsuit against the social network company for undervaluing a property it sold to an Irish subsidiary in 2010. The suit went to court in San Francisco on February 18th and Facebook expects that it will last three to four weeks.

If Facebook loses the suit, then the company will owe the IRS up to $9 billion in unpaid taxes plus interest and penalties. Facebook, however, refuses to plead guilty, claiming that its estimates were accurate when proposed, as the company was yet to receive immense ad revenue or reach wide international appeal in 2010.

Click to buy “Facebook: The Inside Story” and at the same time help Lynxotic and All Independent Local Bookstores

Just to clarify, what Facebook “sold” to Ireland in 2010 was not exactly a proper sale. Essentially, it was the original “American” Facebook outsourcing itself to its “Irish” Facebook subordinate. Such is not an uncommon practice for global businesses, especially in tech, for Ireland has very low corporate tax rates and thus is an easy place for companies to pocket extra billions of dollars in royalties every year.

While perhaps ethically shady, all of this is indeed legal for an American enterprise. It is but a sneaky loophole that Facebook is certainly not the first or last to take advantage of. According to the IRS, though, Facebook undersold itself to Ireland and thus ends up with a tax evasion charge.

Although a Pittance for the Giant Company there appears to be a Growing Pattern of Problems at Facebook

This is not the first time that a tech company has been caught red-handed getting criminally avaricious with this loophole. The European Union charged Apple Inc over $15 billion for receiving illegal Irish tax benefits in 2016. Similarly, just last year Google paid $1 billion after a French investigation dug into its international tax record. Google announced at the end of 2019 that it would stop abusing Ireland and the Netherlands for their tax incentives.

The trial is ongoing, and will see statements from Facebook executives such as hardware chief Andrew Bodsworth and Chief Technology Officer Mike Schroepfer amongst others. CEO Mark Zuckerberg will likely not be called to the stand this time around. His legal testimonies will probably remain before Congress, wrapped in the realms of international espionage and data rights rather than dry taxation discrepancies. After all, to a company like Facebook or a guy like Zuck, what is $9 billion but a temporary fluctuation?


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.

“Facebook: The Inside Story” Longtime Zuck Confidant to Release Tell All on History of Facebook

Zuckerberg Montage / Lynxotic

Infamous or just Out of Control, New Origin Story Details could Shed light on the Gargantuan Beast

Facebook has been one of the most important enterprises of the twenty-first century so far. With well over a billion users worldwide, few companies have received more coverage and attention than Mark Zuckerberg’s social network, which is only celebrating its sixteenth birthday this month.

Naturally, as the World Wide Web enters its thirties in the 2020s, tech writers and modern scholars in all fields are starting to reference Facebook as a contemporary relic and topic of interest. In the future, we will likely find entire library sections worth of books dedicated to Facebook and its impact on the planet. We have already seen a handful of texts as well as an Oscar nominated David Fincher movie (“The Social Network”) that flesh out the website’s story and societal intricacies.

On February 25th, however, we may finally get an initial, definitive book written about Facebook. Steven Levy’s “Facebook: The Inside Story” is part Zuckerberg biography, part corporate history, part digital humanities study, and part sociological analysis, focusing in intimate detail on the rise, development, impact, and complications that Facebook has undergone since its initial lowly launch out of a 2004 Harvard University dorm room.

Steven Levy is a lead editor at Wired.com and has also written for The New Yorker, Rolling Stone, Newsweek, and Esquire amongst other publications. He is one of the world’s foremost technology journalists, covering the latest of industrial achievements (and pitfalls) over the past couple decades. He has published seven books before “Facebook: The Inside Story,” including ones centering on the Macintosh computer and on the iPod. “Facebook” is his first book to focus on a singular website, though, and it is the amalgamation of over ten years worth of research, journalism, and reporting on the topic.

Click to buy “Facebook: The Inside Story” and at the same time help Lynxotic and All Independent Local Bookstores

Levy’s relationship with Zuckerberg goes way back to 2006, when the entrepreneur was but a young university student trying to get his inter-collegiate social network site called “TheFacebook” up from the ground. As a devoted reporter, Levy has naturally met with Zuckerberg many times over the years and has religiously followed Facebook since its beginnings.

These years of relationships, interviews, and studious dedication have given Levy a keen insight into Facebook. In addition to unparalleled interpersonal access to Mark Zuckerberg and COO Sheryl Sandberg, the author also incorporates the experiences of other Facebook employees and users into his book, painting a holistic picture of the website from the inside and out.

Levy expertly chronicles the site’s somewhat tragic-hero trajectory, from Facebook’s nefarious beginnings to Zuckerberg’s infamous trial against the Winklevoss twins, from its “golden age” of uncontroversial influence in the early 2010s to its current hot-water situation following the 2016 election Cambridge Analytica scheme and the modern awareness regarding data rights.

Thoroughly Researched with an Attempt at a Definitive Take

Over five-hundred and ninety two pages, the book shares everything in a riveting narrative fashion, but Levy does not spare the reader some thoughtful analysis in the process. Today, we might associate Facebook (not to mention its extensive subsidiaries such as Instagram and Whatsapp) with contentious matters of privacy and ethicality, with grey legal areas and questionable security practices. Mark Zuckerberg’s name alone might evoke feelings of contempt, and one might immediately link him to his blundering appearance before Congress in 2019 or gross examples of an algorithmic dictatorship.

Levy does not shy away from these interpretations and complications surrounding Facebook, but he also reminds us that a time once existed when Zuckerberg was seen as an ingenious hero and Facebook was praised as a platform that could connect the world.

And connect the world it did… but now the consequences of doing so are coming to the foreground. Whether your deleting your account, boycotting the website, or fervently posting updates every hour of the day, Facebook has likely impacted you in someway or another over the past two decades. Thus, Levy’s book is not just an interesting read, but an important one—what is likely to be the first of many exhaustive books written about the network that tethered, shaped, and perhaps shrewdly deformed the modern social world.


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.

Google’s Larry Page and Sergey Brin Step Down, Displacing Accountability To Sundar Pichai

Larry Page and Sergey Brin, the founders of Google and respective President and CEO of its parent company Alphabet Inc, have officially announced plans to step down from their high-ranking management roles in the tech world. Page and Brin created the Google search engine in 1998 when they were PhD students at Stanford University. Since then, the two have expanded the company into a multi-purpose technological empire. 

Now, twenty-one years later, the forty-six year old entrepreneurs are resigning from their leading positions at Google. However, given the stress that Google is under, they are retiring at a suspiciously convenient time. And even though they are sacrificing their titles, they are simultaneously managing to maintain stakes in the Google brand.

Taking over for Page and Brin is Pichai Sundararajan—better known as Sundar Pichai, the former number-two at Google who has practically been acting as the face of the company for the past few years. As the two founders have found themselves more invested in Google’s experimental sectors recently—Brin focusing on GoogleX’s driverless cars and Google Glasses while Page has shifted his attention towards flying automobiles—most of the Google’s more widely-used properties have fallen under Pichai’s supervision.

Pichai has been with Google since 2004. He is responsible for convincing the company to start its own browser in 2008, which lead to the immensely successful Google Chrome. In 2013, he took over the Android Division, better integrating Google properties into the line of smartphones without sacrificing their affordability. He also spearheaded the development of Chrome OS, the operating system that fuels Google’s popular Chromebook laptops.

Indeed, Pichai is an obvious choice to replace Page and Brin as CEO of Google and Alphabet. The man has practically been running the company’s mainstream innovations for the past ten years, while its founders take the backseat to play out their billion dollar tech fantasies. 

Then again, Page and Brin are far from exiled from the Google community. Although they are no longer acting leaders, they will still keep their fourteen percent stakes in the company’s finances. As majority stockholders, they will also retain influence over Alphabet’s decisions. Thus, Page and Brin’s step down from power is hardly a step down at all, but rather an excuse to hold onto control while dodging personal accountability in trying times.

And trying times these are indeed for Google. Within the past year especially, Congress and other authorities have been cracking down on tech conglomerates such as Facebook, Amazon, Apple, and of course, Google. Like its fellow cyber juggernauts, Alphabet has been criticized for having a monopoly on data. Not only are users starting to think that Google wields too much power, but they also fear what it is doing with such power, as the worldwide company becomes oddly elusive when questioned about its privacy standards, information distribution, and business ethics.

Even Marc Zuckerberg had the slightest integrity to come before Congress and speak for Facebook during the Senate Committee hearing on big tech last year. Page and Brin, however, were nowhere to be found. Despite being requested at the hearing, they left a conspicuously empty seat in Washington DC with Google’s name on it.

Ever since cyber ethics and big tech have become hot topics in the media, the founders of Google have been moving further and further away from the spotlight. Their resignation from Alphabet as a whole signifies their ultimate fall into the shadows, where no one can accuse them of immorality or illegality on behalf of the company. The burden will now fall on Pichai.

In a way, little has changed. Pichai has more or less been answering for Page and Brin for a while, handling publicity and leading all of the launches that come from Google. Now, however, he holds the actual crown—even if Page and Brin are keeping the royal treasure. With any luck, though, maybe Pichai will improve Google, not just by creating more innovative software, but by bettering Alphabet’s approach to security, designing tech with human decency in mind, and actually owning up and responding to some of the company’s mistakes as they come.

It’s unlikely and perhaps foolishly optimistic, but it’s a silver lining that users can grasp onto given the (albeit somewhat empty) change in Google’s leadership.


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.

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.

Twitter, Facebook and Instagram accounts deleted for Pro-Trump Fake Postings, 55 Million Users Affected

Photo Illustration / Lynxotic

Another batch of Fraudulent, pro Trump Social Media Manipulators are Identified and Removed, for now

In blog posts from Twitter and Facebook the removal of a large number of fake accounts and actors were announced. On Twitter the number of accounts was nearly six thousand which were part of a larger network of 88,000.

The announcements were detailed and each provided data on the techniques used, including the use of A.I. generated photos. The Twitter accounts were also confirmed to be Saudi-Backed and propagated by a social media “marketing” company called Smaat that was operating on behalf of the Saudi State.

All related parties have been banned, although it is hard to imagine that it will be difficult for them to resume a similar campaign behind a different front. The blog posts appear to be an effort, at the least, to show that the companies are attempting to monitor this kind of dangerous propaganda.

“We exist to serve the public conversation around the world. To this end, we’ll continue to take strong enforcement action against any state-backed information campaigns which undermine our company’s mission, principles, and policies.”

– Twitter blog Post

As for Facebook and Instagram, the “Coordinated Inauthentic Behavior” that was removed was said to originate in Vietnam, Georgia and the U.S. Georgia, of course is the former Soviet republic that Trump was in negotiations with, around 2012, to build an eponymous tower (with help, allegedly, from Russia).

Vietnam, on the other hand, is the communist country alleged to be a likely cover for Chinese and Anti-Chinese actors. In this case Facebook has linked the activity to a company called BL which Facebook connected to the Epoch Media Group. These groups manipulated content using coordinated inauthentic behavior, spam and misrepresentation as well as other activities that violate Facebook and Instagram policies.

All parties involved have been permanently banned. In total, again according to the blog post, the various parties in each network spent approximately $10 million on advertising, using various currencies, including $US, Korean Won, Vietnamese dong, Indonesian rupiah, Australian dollars, the New Taiwan dollars and Canadian dollars.

It has become clear, in part through investigations during the Trump Impeachment hearings, that international interference in U.S. politics, far from being on the wane after the Russian pro-Trump interference in the 2016 elections, is set for a potential explosion into 2020.

The concept that appears to be going through the minds of nefarious actors across the globe is: “if it worked once, why not continue and expand”. Regardless of a provable, direct connection to Trump, there are many interested international parties that have agendas that allign with a Trump victory in 2020.

Deeper Issues Arise as this Example is Likely Just the Tip of the Iceberg

As many have pointed out, Trump faces possible prosecution and incarceration if he fails to win the 2020 election, so the stakes are very high indeed. That, combined with an obvious disregard for rules or laws of political campaigns, let allow social media, there will undoubtedly be many more instances of fraud and “inauthentic behavoir” from here on out.

This is exactly the issue that Democrats pointed during the impeachment process and which made impeachment not only necessary but a requirement. Based on the circumstances clearly indicating that Trump is likely to repeat or attempt to repeat the same actions and behaviors, including high crimes and misdemeanors, and encourage, if not engage in actions such as the Russian interference that got him elected in 2016.

“Shall the man who has practiced corruption & by that means procured his appointment in the first instance, be suffered to escape punishment, by repeating his guilt?”

— GEORGE MASON IN A DEBATE ALSO ATTENDED BY JAMES MADISON, JULY 20TH, 1787

Now, the billion dollar question is, if social media companies doing voluntary self-policing, turning down tens of millions of dollars (if not far more) in advertising revenue, and spending on departments and programs dedicated to monitoring this fraudulent spam and worse, can be counted on to do all of this and more for our benefit?

After Facebook refused to take down a political ad, paid for by Trump backers, known to be false, and not significantly different from the bogus content that Facebook reported today by foreign actors, can they be trusted to thoroughly and adequately monitor such massive networks and remove offenders before more damage has been done?

And what of the life of lies, such as imaginary “investigations” that keep cropping up against Democratic candidates that are potentially running against Trump in 2020?

The example posted by Facebook invents an investigation into Elizabeth Warren and another related to Nancy Pelosi, goes on even after the accounts are deleted and banned. I had seen the anti-Warren fabrication on twitter and, disregarded it, as it seemed superficial and implausible, yet now it is also proven be not only fake and fabricated but posted by foreign criminal actors with a pro Trump agenda.

This brings up the larger issue, one of reader and prospective voter sophistication. The huge question that arises over and over, as the Trump lies and crimes are cataloged and ajudicated, is how anyone could believe this man, let alone believe in him.

The answer is, unfortunately, sad and depressing for our future. Just as Hitler was accepted and even loved by most of the German population before he ultimately led them and himself to a dead end, the blind belief and naive “loyalty” of people can never be overestimated.

Those ridiculous stories about Ukraine conspiracies spread by Putin and propagated by Trump himself and then on to his various followers, themselves both imaginary and some real (but hypnotized and deluded), will likely still be quoted by fools and evil, self-serving sycophants for years to come.

That is, unless the 180 million plus Americans, and their allies around the world, who know better and see the danger that Trump represents in all its horror, find a way to drown the lies in an even larger deluge of real news. And, once rid of this would-be dictator, never let apathy and social media fraud control another election. 2020 preview or fantasy from neverland?


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.

The iPhone 12 could see a Serious Sales Boom for Apple due to 5G and Starlink Internet

https://www.apple.com/105/media/us/iphone-11-pro/2019/3bd902e4-0752-4ac1-95f8-6225c32aec6d/films/product/iphone-11-pro-product-tpl-cc-us-2019_1920x1080h.mp4

Rumors Already Predicting big things for the iPhone 12: 5G plus Starlink will only Add to the Furor…

Seems like just yesterday that Apple Inc. released the iPhone 11 and 11 Pro. Consumers are still riding high on the hype and performance of these latest smartphone models. Nevertheless, Apple is already looking to the future and creating estimates for the iPhone 12 in 2020. According to Digitimes, Apple expects that the iPhone 12 will be one of the company’s most successful models.

While the 11 and 11 Pro are expected to have sold 80 million units by the end of 2019, Apple predicts that they will receive over 100 million orders for the 12 next year. 

Apple anticipates such high figures for the iPhone 12 in part due to oncoming innovations in 5G and satellite Internet. While the software and hardware details of the new phone remain shrouded in mystery for now, there is high confidence that the device will be built for the latest advances in Internet speed and 5G networking—a powerful upgrade that is bound to bring in many customers. 

Right now, the term “satellite Internet” may seem like something slow, old-fashioned, and used only by people living in remote locations where traditional broadband sources are unavailable. This may be the case at the moment, but new technology known as “Low Earth Orbit” micro-satellites could bring satellite Internet access with fiber optic speeds and beyond. Constellations of these micro-satellites could not only deliver the internet to more people around the world, they could potentially reinvent satellite Internet as a high-speed and perhaps even premiere way for virtually all people to get online.

Many tech companies have been trying to perfect micro-satellites and get the upper hand and dominate the skies. Leading the charge is Elon Musk’s SpaceX, which intends to cover the stratosphere with thousands of low-orbit satellites through its StarLink initiative. The company has already gotten approval by the FCC to launch several thousand micro-satellites into the sky, and they intend to keep launching more until they have a massive interconnected network of satellites orbiting the globe.

Meanwhile, Jeff Bezos, Richard Branson & OneWeb, Google, and Facebook are all playing competitive catch up with SpaceX on the micro-satellite front. Jeff Bezos has been pursuing Project Kuiper, a satellite-oriented task which aims to provide worldwide broadband access via space. While certainly not as far along as StarLink, Kuiper plans to have hundreds of satellites in the sky in the near future.

Google has an alternative route to Low Earth Orbit micro-satellites, relying on weather balloons with antennas to stand in for cell towers and provide service to greater areas—an initiative that the company has coined “Loon.” Simultaneously, Facebook tried to make headway with its “FreeBasics” project, whereby the social network also wants to get more people active and connected on the web, and, of course, logged into its Social Network. 

5G Speeds will be the Big Upgrade but the extended Competition and Coverage of Satellites are Next

After purchasing Intel’s 5G modem unit earlier this year, and with 5G modems by Qualcom already widely expected to be in the iPhone 12, Apple is uniquely positioned to be at the forefront of this looming expansion of mobile data networks and satellite internet access points.

It’s important to remember that 5G and satellite internet both have the potential to be much faster than current broadband connections. However, the roll out timing is uncertain and the speed increases will depend on various systems and stages of network build as well as many other factors. For example, an ultra fast satellite system is being built by LeoSat which will be used by Enterprise level customers at up 5.2 Gigabits, close to double the speed of fiber, but this will be exclusively business users, at least initially.

It is the sheer breath of competition and the wide array of systems in the mix that insures that there will be more options, and more speed coming online by 2021. Not only for mobile phones but for mobile laptops and as wireless home and business routing systems also.

What all this means, in a nutshell, for Apple, is that more people will want to buy smartphones that are capable of accessing these newer, faster internet providers. If StarLink (or any of the other upcoming satellite services) can provide a greater fraction of the world with Internet access, more people will desire the latest devices to make full use that Internet. Likewise, these consumers will also want the device that is most compatible with 5G and micro-satellite technology.

Given Apple’s record, the company will probably release the iPhone 12 in September, 2020. 5G will already be in an ongoing build-out phase, with T-mobil launching on December 6, 2019 and Verizon, AT&T and Sprint already in the mix. StarLink will likely not be up and ready by that time—they are aiming for an initial roll out to start as early as mid 2020 and with continuous expansion to 2022 and beyond. However, the project will certainly be further along in becoming a worldwide sensation, with launches of multiple satellites happening every few months.

With 5G speed, and an Operating System fit for the latest forms access in its arsenal, and with the fastest chips and most powerful software and systems to accommodate the added bandwidth, the iPhone 12 has the potential to be a blockbuster of historic proportions, even by Apple’s high standards.


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.

Amnesty International Calls Out Google and Facebook for Lack of Cyber-Security And Invasion of Privacy

Consensus Building Rapidly Against the Business Models of Internet Giants

Earlier this week, Amnesty International, a non-governmental organization from the UK, called Google and Facebook’s practices of omnipresent surveillance on people around the world an “assault on privacy.” The organization, which focuses on human rights, recently released a report outlining how these two major tech companies hold too much power and should change their business models to stop infringing on users’ personal information. 

Amnesty International’s accusations may seem extreme, but that does not mean that they are inaccurate. While Google and Facebook might appear to be free websites, the reality is that you pay for their services with your data. Whenever you search for something, you feed the sites information—information that they can sell, manipulate, market, or use for a countless number of other things, some of them perhaps unethical.

The upside is that data is cheap, and therefore these websites are not about to start charging you. The downside, however, is that there are really no limits to how tech juggernauts like Google or Facebook (or Apple, or Amazon, or Microsoft for that matter) use the data you provide them. No concrete laws in the United States monitor these companies’ use of data, and given that the Internet was built as a place of free-flowing information, there are no internal boundaries that stop these websites from taking full, unrestricted advantage of your information.

This is not the first time that Facebook and Google have been called out for issues regarding privacy and cyber-ethics. Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg has found himself before Congress on more than one occasion recently. Ever since it became known that Cambridge Analytica used web data to falsely advertise on Facebook during the 2016 elections, the social network’s surveillance tactics have been in question.  

Benign Monarchs? Not Likely.

As for Google, the website practically has a monopoly on web-searches across the world. The search engine accounts for 90% of the Internet searches on Earth, and it is not always transparent about what it does with the resulting data. With such huge numbers, though, Google can afford to distribute your extensive information to just about anyone—even government organizations or institutions with malintent.

The two companies usually respond to these kinds of accusations with vague optimism about current and future cyber-safety. Google claims to have changed its model within the last year, making the site more user-friendly and giving its patrons more control. Meanwhile, Facebook has largely stood its ground when it comes to online freedom. Zuckerberg and other Facebook officials have suggested that they will heighten security, but they simultaneously stand by that censorship on any scale is constrictive and antithetical to the website’s intent.

Facebook also owns Instagram, Messenger, WhatsApp, and several other websites/apps that are used across borders, making the issue a conglomerate and worldly one. Although they are both American companies by origin, both Facebook and Google are international entities. Thus, creating laws around their practices is a complicated and culturally sensitive process.

At the same time, though, these enterprises have been going unchecked and unchallenged for well over a decade now. When they started, the digital world was much smaller and very different than it is now. Technology has changed, and so has the world— now the rules that govern it must follow suit.


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.

Tech Week in Review: Streaming Wars, Disney+ & AppleTV+, Zuckerberg’s 5th Estate, AirPods Pro, Tesla and more

https://www.apple.com/105/media/us/airpods-pro/2019/1299e2f5_9206_4470_b28e_08307a42f19b/films/product/airpods-pro-product-tpl-cc-us-2019_1920x1080h.mp4
Apple Promotional Video for AirPods Pro

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.

Facebook Updates Logo to ALL CAPS in Colorful, Hopeless Re-Branding Stunt

Graphic Collage / Lynxotic

Facebook Attempts to Rebrand itself with New, Colorful All-Caps Logo for all Owned and Acquired Apps

In the fifteen years that Facebook has graced our computer screens, the website has undergone many aesthetic and technical changes, yet its lower-case, white printed name set against a blue background has stood the test of time as the company’s unmistakable corporate logo. However, even the most familiar things must evolve at some point. Despite its long run, Facebook’s corporate logo is finally changing and the change is far from subtle.

Facebook’s updated logo no longer reads “facebook” but instead shouts “FACEBOOK” in all-caps, slightly bolded Helevetica font. According to Mark Zuckerberg, the new logo is meant to offer a sense of security and optimism, with its soft edges and comfortable spacing reminding users that the website was created to bring people together.

Perhaps even more dramatically than the all-caps decision, though, Facebook’s new logo is also losing its signature blue and white color combo. The company’s name will now be written in transitional colors, changing hue depending on the application it is seen on.

The logo will be seen on multiple applications, as Facebook also announced that it will start branding itself more straightforwardly on the company’s other apps and sites. One may not know that Facebook owns Messenger, Instagram, WhatsApp, Oculus, Workplace, Portal, and Calibra. The company plans on making this Facebook-family of services more blatantly related, printing “from Facebook” on each homepage using the new logo.

New Facebook Marketing Stunt Comes Amidst Political Strife and Corporate Pitfalls

This re-branding marketing stunt could not have come at a more astute time for Facebook. The company has been in hot water for well over a year at this point, and the pot is beginning to boil over.

During the 2016 election, the Cambridge Analytica British Consulting Firm used Facebook to steal data and falsely advertise for the Trump campaign. Since then, the company has been accused of profiting off of fake-news and not doing enough to police their content. 

New multi-colored version of the Logo released as an animated GIF

Just a couple weeks ago, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez grilled Mark Zuckerberg before Congress, exposing the young CEO’s ignorance as well as his lack of initiative to address Facebook security issues and protect its users. 

Similarly, Senator Elizabeth Warren has scathingly called out Facebook during her Democratic presidential campaign. Part of her anti-corporation platform includes breaking up the big tech conglomerates—that means Apple, Google, Amazon, and yes, Facebook. Essentially, Warren gave a voice to the widely accepted belief that Facebook currently holds too much control and has become an unchecked power. 

No—Facebook is not on great terms with its users nowadays. More and more people are deleting their accounts on the site that once ruled social media, following the #deletefacebook trend growing across the globe. Sadly, there is not a whole lot Facebook can do about the underlying causes, though. As dumbfounded as Zuckerberg may have seemed before congress, these cyber-security questions are far from simple. 

For now, Facebook is doing what it can for itself. It is changing its image, hoping that the updated logo and united approach to the multiple apps will revamp interest in the site and maybe just cover up some of the hostility it currently faces. A new logo doesn’t actually solve anything. Facebook will still remain the same old site it always has been. So how do we take the new logo? As a sign of corporate reformation on Facebook’s behalf? Or as a symbolic front to distract user’s from the company’s inaction? Or is it just a logo? A marketing ploy like any other meant to make the website more modern and appealing to digital passerbys.


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.

Zuckerberg Skillfully Cornered on Facebook Policies by AOC at D.C. Hearings

Photo Graphic Collage / Lynxotic

Zuckerberg stumbled and evaded while attempting to respond to AOC on Facebook Behaviors and Policies, especially its Political “Lie Exemption” Policy

While Mark Zuckerberg’s controversial Libra cryptocurrency project is what initially got him into the House for another hearing on October 23rd, the House Financial Services Committee Members took this as an opportunity to express their concerns about Facebook’s paramount involvement in a variety of controversial issues.

Each committee member was given five minutes to address their Facebook policy concerns with Zuckerberg, and they did not waste their time, especially Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez as she interrogates him regarding Facebook’s influential role in endangering the nation’s democracy and general safety.

Here’s a brief rundown of the topics she addresses that continue to put Zuckerberg and his insidiously dangerous Facebook ‘megaphone‘ under hot water to this very day:

Libra Cryptocurrency: Another Scam to hide behind an Outsourced Entity in order to Evade Accountability? This time, he’s going for the Poor and “Unbanked”

On June 14, 2019, Zuckerberg released his plans to launch a cryptocurrency project called Libra on Facebook, and since then, it’s been facing a lot of criticism from the government and anti-trust regulators.

The Libra cryptocurrency is a part of Facebook’s future mobile payment system, proposed at Facebook’s annual developer conference in April. The crypto currency project aims to allow Facebook’s 2.4 billion worldwide users to exchange payments with minimal fees and without the need for a third-party software.

“It’s not that Facebook is evil, which it may or may not be. Facebook hasn’t shown an ability to think through unintended consequences or prevent bad actors from weaponizing its platform.”

ScotT Galloway, Marketing Professor at NYU, Author of “The Four”, well-known for his unsparing critiques of influential tech companies

But, while the idea appears to have good intentions behind it, much like many of Zuckerberg’s other ideas, the problems and potential dangers are in the details.

So, the real issue is in how the Libra cryptocurrency project can potentially influence Facebook’s extremely wide global user base in a number of negative ways.

“If 50 percent of Facebook users all of a sudden use this coin, then you potentially have a new reserve currency globally. If you would weaponize a global currency and start monkeying with it, you could have what capitalists fear more than war: a recession–or some sort of a global economic meltdown.”

SCOTT GALLOWAY

California Representative Congressman Brad Sherman interrogated Zuckerberg extensively on this topic during the Financial Services Committee Hearing, which illustrated these repercussions specifically.

Brad Shermon eloquently points out a pattern that Zuckerberg struggles to answer. He appears to be attempting to hide behind platitudes of egalitarian ideals in order to avoid accountability for content controlled by his platform.

“…but for the richest man in the world to come here and hide behind the poorest people in the world and say that’s who you are trying to help, you are trying to help those to whom the dollar is not a good currency—drug dealers, terrorists and tax evaders..”

Rep. Brad Sherman to Zuckerberg at the House FInancial Services COMmittee Hearing

Cambridge Analytica: AOC cites Facebook’s Biggest Scandal that brought ‘Catastrophic Impact’ to American Democracy in the 2016 Election

But the House Financial Services Committee wasn’t having it, and AOC Exposes Facebook’s Flaws for All to See:

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez begins her five-minute interrogation by citing Facebook’s Cambridge Analytica Data Scandal from 2018. Her reasoning is that, before even considering the Libra cryptocurrency issue, it’s important to analyze how Facebook handled Cambridge Analytica because the Libra cryptocurrency project has potential for far worse.

Essentially, AOC gave Zuckerberg a chance to make a case for himself. He had an opportunity to show that he and Facebook are equipped to adequately deal with the repercussions of establishing Libra, and to answer this fundamental question: has Facebook learned from its past mistakes regarding the Cambridge Analytica Data Scandal so that they could take the necessary actions to ensure that data scandals won’t happen again?

Next she asks, what year and month did Zuckerberg first become aware of Cambridge Analytica? He doesn’t remember, but it was probably around March 2018, when the scandal became public.

When did Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg become aware of Cambridge Analytica? Again, Zuckerberg says he doesn’t know, so AOC asks a follow-up question. Did anyone on his leadership team know about Cambridge Analytica prior to when the initial report came from The Guardian on December 11, 2015? Now, for this one, Zuckerberg believes that this was the case and that members of his leadership team were tracking it internally. Additionally, he takes this opportunity and appears to try to avoid responsibility by saying that he was aware of Cambridge Analytica as an entity, but he also wasn’t aware of how they were using Facebook specifically.

When was the issue discussed with his board member Peter Teal? Once again, Zuckerberg proclaims his ignorance, to which AOC iterates that his answers are unacceptable. It is unacceptable that he did not properly discuss the “largest data scandal” with respect to his company that had “catastrophic impacts on the 2016 election.”

While Zuckerberg flaggingly scrambles to defend himself by explaining that they did discuss the issue when it happened, he fails to answer whether Facebook is capable of being accountable for their actions by addressing their mistakes with handling data privacy so that they wouldn’t be repeated. If Facebook truly cared about handling data privacy, then they would have taken extensive measures to address the issue. Maybe then, Zuckerberg would’ve actually remembered enough about the issue to answer AOC’s questions.

Read more: Zuckerberg claims Facebook is the ‘5th Estate’ while in Reality he runs Algorithmic Dictatorship

Facebook Policy allows Politicians to Pay to Spread Misinformation

Zuckerberg’s seemingly flagrant irresponsibility with regards to handling Facebook leads AOC to confront him on the current hot topic: “Facebook’s official policy to allow politicians to pay to spread disinformation in 2020 elections and in the future.” She demands to know how far this policy could be pushed before Facebook decides to fact-check and take down these posts, because, again, they have the potential to influence the next election directly.

Could politicians enact voter suppression by advertising wrong election date to zip codes with primarily black communities? Zuckerberg vaguely explains that content will be taken down if it were to cause an obvious immediate harm. Okay, but what if it’s not obvious? Will his answer suffice then? The answer is likely no, because infinite ways can be found to dodge this issue, then, once again, and we’re back to square one.

Further she presses him, Could she (AOC) run ads targeting Republicans in primaries saying that they voted for the Green New Deal? Zuckerberg is unsure, but answers that she probably could. Elizabeth Warren recently did something similar in her “Zuckerberg Supports Trump” ad.

Does Zuckerberg see the potential problem here with a complete lack of fact-checking on political advertisements? To that, he appeals to common morals: lying is bad. His logic is that he doesn’t want to prevent constituents from seeing that politicians had lied, which clarifies that Zuckerberg won’t take these ads down.

The problem with this logic is that the general public is assumed to have the ability to differentiate between lies and the truth. But, as this current presidency has proven, many, if not most, people clearly do not.

Thoughts on Zuckerberg’s On-Going Dinner Parties with Far-Right Figures? Debatable, or so he tries to imply.

Further, Zuckerberg’s on-going dinner parties in which he cultivates relationships with known politically far-right figures is also suspicious. After all, there have been numerous times that alt-right entities abused social media platforms in the service of discrimination and hate crimes.

Did Zuckerberg discuss the alleged social media bias against conservatives, and does he believe that this bias exists? Zuckerberg indicated that he couldn’t remember the question or answer it, appearing to want to avoid confirming or denying these associations under oath, so AOC moved on.

Next she asked Zuckerberg to explain why he named the Daily Caller, a publication well-documented to have ties to white supremacists, an official fact-checker for Facebook? Once again, Zuckerberg tries to escape responsibility by saying that they don’t actually appoint independent fact-checkers and that they come from an independent organization called the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) that has rigorous standards for who they allow to serve as a fact-checking entity.

White-supremacist-tied publications meet a rigorous standard for fact-checking? Zuckerberg had no answer, which is again, an indicator that she had pushed him into areas he would prefer to avoid. After research, it turns out that he lied, or at minimum mis-led in his answer on multiple points, First, the (IFCN) have generally “certified” a total of 62 organizations globally, but it is, indeed, Facebook and presumably Zuckerberg personally, that chose the 6 in particular that are Facebook partners.

There’s a Pattern Here: Facebook and other Social Media Platforms Need to be held Accountable

Clearly, Zuckerberg still thinks that he could get by with excuses in an effort to absolve himself from the endless blame that Facebook receives from The Media for meddling with numerous socially-influential affairs.

It’s hard not to notice that while Mr. Zuckerberg has been given many chances to make amends for Facebook’s failures, the opportunity has been for naught, apparently, because his private for-profit company is only interested in maintaining user engagement, which he now claims is in the name of free speech and equality. However, clearly, these cannot actually be achieved without specifically executing processes that address the discriminatory practices.


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.