Regarding Facebook tracking non-users Mark Zuckerberg said "This kind of data collection is fundamental to how the internet works."
I'm not a networking expert but I know enough to be able to confidently say that nothing at all about this data collection is fundamental to how the Internet works. I guess he was using Silicon Valley speak where "the internet" means "huge corporations who make most of their money by selling ads and illegally collecting as much data as possible".
@eribloodlust i am a networking expert, and i can assure you that advertising is not fundamental in any way shape or form.
The fundamental pieces are some physical cables, and protocols (IP, BGP, DNS). Advertising /may/ pay for some things, but hasn't paid a dime for the cables, IP, or BGP.
let me put my "devils advocate" hat for a moment and say many submarine cables have been paid for by advertising dollars. a similar argument can be made for the current pricing & ubiquity of 100G switching gear -- "hyperscale" datacenters are because of FB & Google. which are ad companies.
@eribloodlust I only play the part occasionally.
@aag @eribloodlust This is not a heresy trial. And pay attention to who you're representing.
@gsonderby @eribloodlust I used the phrase "devils advocate" not in the original catholic canonization sense, but in the more modern sense of "I agree with your position, but here is some information that is contradictory to it"
I'm quite comfortable representing clear & easily explained facts.
@aag If you agree with the position, there's literally no reason to bring up contradictory information, especially when it consists of a dubious assertion like the one above.
There's plenty of people who will advocate for the devil because they serve him. You don't need to do their jobs for them.
@gsonderby there is plenty of reason: a full picture of the facts is a primary requirement for a fruitful discussion on any topic. there is nothing dubious about my assertion & I encourage you to look it up for yourself.
A number of submarine cable project consortium were initiated & are majority owned by FB & Google (ad companies). If submarine cables fall under "fundamental internet infrastructure" then those build from ad revenue are just as fundamental as any other.
@aag Relevance? If these companies had not existed, there would still have been a need for the cables, and they would still have been laid down.
In fact, I find it extremely alarming that as much critical societal infrastructure as is the case is owned by any sort of company, unaccountable to the public and with dubious agendas. So your devil's advocacy is in fact an argument for burning him.
no. not at all, imo.
@hypolite @eribloodlust @aag no, and if we did, we should keep in mind that all the ads and tracking just inflated network traffic, so maybe we would not have needed more bandwidth if there wasn't so much bloat put up by ad companies
(and incompetent web developers)
@aag @phessler @eribloodlust hey! did you know many of the new tech have been payed with war dollars?
:)
Do we need to support the war then?
You pointed out a really interesting point we should analyze, but i think it's not really fair in this context.
@ekaitz_zarraga @phessler @eribloodlust
I think it's important to be cognizant of how much internet infrastructure is driven and funded directly by advertiser companies (FB & Google).
"Fundamental" is the debatable point. I think if Google & FB (and everything they're growth has deployed directly & indirectly) disappeared tomorrow, the internet would function just fine.
far better, even (again, imo)
@aag
Don't be the devil's advocate
@phessler