Who now owns Facebook?


Off-Topic Discussions

1 to 50 of 59 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

About 10 years ago I joined Facebook to play Farmville so I could help a friend with requests. I used the name Goth Guru and there was no problem. The beginning of this year they locked me out demanding a scan of my ID.

Did someone buy the company and change the rules? It seems to me that Trump bought Facebook and kicked out everyone who hated him. Who really owns Facebook? How can I find out?

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Best Guess: Facebook is facing an increasing "Evil Corporate Empire" reputation, and in an honest effort to try to do better, are taking a leaf out of Czarist Russia's book and liberating the serfs from the degenerate yoke of Farmville...whether they like it or not.

It's for your own good, Ivan. Do not be afraid. You're free now.

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

It's part of their much-maligned "real name" policy. :(

They generally don't act until they've noticed you (obviously), which is why it went untouched for so long.


Facebook sells data. They want a LOT of personal information to either use as data, sell as data, or use in their collection of data.

They want verified real people and the people's names because of that. It's been going on for at least 3 years. I think you can also give them a verifiable cell phone number (or used to be able to).

Perhaps they've moved onto requiring only a valid ID or something, in which case, they are discriminating against half the world which doesn't have access or don't have ID's as Facebook probably wants.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

As I have noted before, countless times and in countless places, Facebook is evil.

Dark Archive

Freehold DM wrote:
As I have noted before, countless times and in countless places, Facebook is evil.

~laughs evilly while twirling my mustache~


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Welcome to the non-Facebook crew.

The main perk is that you get a ton of extra time, to waste on other parts of the Internet.


Freehold DM wrote:
As I have noted before, countless times and in countless places, Facebook is evil.

Actually what Goth is falling victim to, are Facebook policies designed to prevent fraud and cyberstalking. Facebook harrassment is a real thing which has led to suicides, so it's in their interests to prevent people from using aliases or fictional identities with their service.

As hard as this may make things for Goth with what he wants to do, I'm with them on this.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Facebook is still evil.


A bunch of my friends on the left went through this a couple years ago when Save Kobane! became a thing.

They'd post things in support of the Kurdish forces fighting ISIS, but those Kurdish groups are usually on American terrorist lists, so Facebook would come around and make people change their online names.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Actually what Goth is falling victim to, are Facebook policies designed to prevent fraud and cyberstalking. Facebook harrassment is a real thing which has led to suicides, so it's in their interests to prevent people from using aliases or fictional identities with their service

Which is a laudable goal. But many many people who use an alias for Facebook that isn't their legal name, or their legal name on all their legal documents, have gotten locked out of their Facebook accounts. People with legitimate reasons for using an alias: gay, lesbian, bi, transgender, or gender-questioning people who can't risk being outted; people who perform under a stage name (like drag artists); and people who are avoiding a stalker/harasser/abuser who persistently tracks them down under their legal name. Facebook was notified of these potential problems before they implemented their policy, and when the predicted problems occurred, Facebook dragged their feet or dismissed those affected. It wasn't until it stated getting covered in news media that Facebook grudgingly started making efforts to accommodate these people. And normally, the account doesn't come to Facebook's attention until someone brings it to the staffs attention; unfortunately, the notifier is usually a harasser/stalker/bigot/doxxer that the alias-user was trying to avoid.

That well over a year later, good people are still running afoul of this Facebook policy--sometimes repeatedly--erodes Facebook's anti-fraud anti-harassment argument.


Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Actually what Goth is falling victim to, are Facebook policies designed to prevent fraud and cyberstalking. Facebook harrassment is a real thing which has led to suicides, so it's in their interests to prevent people from using aliases or fictional identities with their service

Which is a laudable goal. But many many people who use an alias for Facebook that isn't their legal name, or their legal name on all their legal documents, have gotten locked out of their Facebook accounts. People with legitimate reasons for using an alias: gay, lesbian, bi, transgender, or gender-questioning people who can't risk being outted; people who perform under a stage name (like drag artists); and people who are avoiding a stalker/harasser/abuser who persistently tracks them down under their legal name. Facebook was notified of these potential problems before they implemented their policy, and when the predicted problems occurred, Facebook dragged their feet or dismissed those affected. It wasn't until it stated getting covered in news media that Facebook grudgingly started making efforts to accommodate these people. And normally, the account doesn't come to Facebook's attention until someone brings it to the staffs attention; unfortunately, the notifier is usually a harasser/stalker/bigot/doxxer that the alias-user was trying to avoid.

That well over a year later, good people are still running afoul of this Facebook policy--sometimes repeatedly--erodes Facebook's anti-fraud anti-harassment argument.

so. Facebook is still evil, right?


Freehold DM wrote:
so. Facebook is still evil, right?

Until it achieves sentience, it's just a tool, so it is no more evil or good than the people who run it and use it. It is no more evil than the Reapers' ship-launched harpoons.


Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Actually what Goth is falling victim to, are Facebook policies designed to prevent fraud and cyberstalking. Facebook harrassment is a real thing which has led to suicides, so it's in their interests to prevent people from using aliases or fictional identities with their service
Which is a laudable goal. But many many people who use an alias for Facebook that isn't their legal name, or their legal name on all their legal documents, have gotten locked out of their Facebook accounts. People with legitimate reasons for using an alias: gay, lesbian, bi, transgender, or gender-questioning people who can't risk being outted; people who perform under a stage name (like drag artists); and people who are avoiding a stalker/harasser/abuser who persistently tracks them down under their legal name.

I also remember reading articles about Native American users with names like (making it up) Leaping Thundercloud being told they had to change their names.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Goth Guru wrote:
About 10 years ago I joined Facebook to play Farmville so I could help a friend with requests. I used the name Goth Guru and there was no problem. The beginning of this year they locked me out demanding a scan of my ID.

If you are not paying for a product then you are the product. Facebook needs your real name so that they can sell you to other companies. Other companies need that info so that they can cross-reference your name / address / email-address with their consumer data, web trafficking, and the purchasing habits of your credit cards that they purchased from another company. All that just so that you get an ad for a new ninja blender 5 seconds after you told google you were interested in one. The internet gets REALLY CREEPY once you know how you are able to get all those fun google apps, social media sites, and news services without paying money.

Scarab Sages

Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

I also remember reading articles about Native American users with names like (making it up) Leaping Thundercloud being told they had to change their names.

Okay, now that is just stupid. They don't have any excuse for that.

I wonder how they treat Moon-Unit Zappa...?


Like this?

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Actually what Goth is falling victim to, are Facebook policies designed to prevent fraud and cyberstalking. Facebook harrassment is a real thing which has led to suicides, so it's in their interests to prevent people from using aliases or fictional identities with their service

Which is a laudable goal. But many many people who use an alias for Facebook that isn't their legal name, or their legal name on all their legal documents, have gotten locked out of their Facebook accounts. People with legitimate reasons for using an alias: gay, lesbian, bi, transgender, or gender-questioning people who can't risk being outted; people who perform under a stage name (like drag artists); and people who are avoiding a stalker/harasser/abuser who persistently tracks them down under their legal name. Facebook was notified of these potential problems before they implemented their policy, and when the predicted problems occurred, Facebook dragged their feet or dismissed those affected. It wasn't until it stated getting covered in news media that Facebook grudgingly started making efforts to accommodate these people. And normally, the account doesn't come to Facebook's attention until someone brings it to the staffs attention; unfortunately, the notifier is usually a harasser/stalker/bigot/doxxer that the alias-user was trying to avoid.

That well over a year later, good people are still running afoul of this Facebook policy--sometimes repeatedly--erodes Facebook's anti-fraud anti-harassment argument.

This.


1. This is pre Trump, so I get that.

2. Some sites ask for your real name for business purposes, then let you make up a name everyone will see, for personal protection. They could do that, but that would ruin THEIR cyber bullying.

3. I tried to tell them I despise my forced upon me name, but they never even got back to me. They just kept sending me Emails about how I had to send the scan. I finally blocked everything from Facebook as reported spam. Legally changing my name would give me problems with disabled medical coverage, my part time job, ect.

4. I used to buy 10$ Facebook gift cards once a month to spend in several games. They never offered me a paid confidential membership.

5. Mark Zuckerburg is the CEO of Facebook, but whoever owns a controlling share of the stock may be controlling the company. Somebody hacked Mark's other accounts, but I had nothing to do with that. If Anonymous had found anything explaining Facebook's weird behaviour, he or she would have made some kind of announcement.


This has happened to a few of my friends. One is in the the early stages of transition (mtf), and was forced to switch back to her birth name, one switched to his real name for 30 days before going back to his alias (he unfriended me when he switched back, I think he assumes -incorrectly- that I reported him), and the third is fighting due to real world stalker issues.

Quite a mess really.


Goth Guru wrote:


5. Mark Zuckerburg is the CEO of Facebook, but whoever owns a controlling share of the stock may be controlling the company. Somebody hacked Mark's other accounts, but I had nothing to do with that. If Anonymous had found anything explaining Facebook's weird behaviour, he or she would have made some kind of announcement.

Zuckerberg owns 4 million Facebook Class A shares (1 vote per share) and 468 million Class B shares (10 votes per share), giving him overall voting power of 60% of total voting stock. Zuckerberg controls Facebook.


Lab_Rat wrote:
Goth Guru wrote:


5. Mark Zuckerburg is the CEO of Facebook, but whoever owns a controlling share of the stock may be controlling the company. Somebody hacked Mark's other accounts, but I had nothing to do with that. If Anonymous had found anything explaining Facebook's weird behaviour, he or she would have made some kind of announcement.
Zuckerberg owns 4 million Facebook Class A shares (1 vote per share) and 468 million Class B shares (10 votes per share), giving him overall voting power of 60% of total voting stock. Zuckerberg controls Facebook.

EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEVIL!


Freehold DM wrote:
Lab_Rat wrote:
Goth Guru wrote:


5. Mark Zuckerburg is the CEO of Facebook, but whoever owns a controlling share of the stock may be controlling the company. Somebody hacked Mark's other accounts, but I had nothing to do with that. If Anonymous had found anything explaining Facebook's weird behaviour, he or she would have made some kind of announcement.
Zuckerberg owns 4 million Facebook Class A shares (1 vote per share) and 468 million Class B shares (10 votes per share), giving him overall voting power of 60% of total voting stock. Zuckerberg controls Facebook.
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEVIL!


I do. Thinking about getting rid of it. Getting really tired of political stuff boiling down to the lowest common denominator.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I've never even had a Facebook account, not have I been to the site.


Myspace 4 life!!!

Scarab Sages

Kryzbyn wrote:
I do. Thinking about getting rid of it. Getting really tired of political stuff boiling down to the lowest common denominator.

It's been down there for years and years now - longer than there's BEEN Facebook, really. The only real difference between Donald Trump and what's come to be considered "standard" GOP fare is that he speaks without the filter of a dog-whistle. The fact that people are freaking out about it NOW is like people seeing Clark Kent take off his glasses and suddenly shouting "ZOMG YOU'RE SUPERMAN!!!" We suspend disbelief for comic books' sakes, but this isn't comic books (more's the pity). The thinnest veneer of plausible deniability, and apparently it was enough to fool most people. Disgusting - this might have all been prevented if people had been willing to react the way to Reagan/Rush/Newt/Dubya the way they are now to Trump. Yes, Dubya paid proper lip-service to discouraging Islamaphobia, but his policies, "Us/Them" rhetoric, the well-known psychology of his wars communicated the opposite message, and the very fact that he made 9/11 into a paradigm shift instead of just another tragedy (seriously, he could have handled bin Laden the way Bill Clinton handled Timothy McVeigh, and that would have been that - as it happened, I suspect that one possible reason they refused to release photos of Osama's corpse was that it would have revealed that he died with an enormous Cheshire-Cat "PWND J00" grin on his face) and in a way that actually stuck - meanwhile, Trump is still plenty cordial with his rich Arab friends and immigrant wife.

Flame me/flag me/modhammer me if you will, but I had to say it. We should have, and COULD have, drawn the line decades ago. Godwin's Law was a stupid and cowardly penny-wise pound-foolish stance that put the kibosh on timely action. Now it's too late.


I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
...The fact that people are freaking out about it NOW is like people seeing Clark Kent take off his glasses and suddenly shouting "ZOMG YOU'RE SUPERMAN!!!"...

Ah, but there's an explanation for that. :)


I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
Kryzbyn wrote:
I do. Thinking about getting rid of it. Getting really tired of political stuff boiling down to the lowest common denominator.

It's been down there for years and years now - longer than there's BEEN Facebook, really. The only real difference between Donald Trump and what's come to be considered "standard" GOP fare is that he speaks without the filter of a dog-whistle. The fact that people are freaking out about it NOW is like people seeing Clark Kent take off his glasses and suddenly shouting "ZOMG YOU'RE SUPERMAN!!!" We suspend disbelief for comic books' sakes, but this isn't comic books (more's the pity). The thinnest veneer of plausible deniability, and apparently it was enough to fool most people. Disgusting - this might have all been prevented if people had been willing to react the way to Reagan/Rush/Newt/Dubya the way they are now to Trump. Yes, Dubya paid proper lip-service to discouraging Islamaphobia, but his policies, "Us/Them" rhetoric, the well-known psychology of his wars communicated the opposite message, and the very fact that he made 9/11 into a paradigm shift instead of just another tragedy (seriously, he could have handled bin Laden the way Bill Clinton handled Timothy McVeigh, and that would have been that - as it happened, I suspect that one possible reason they refused to release photos of Osama's corpse was that it would have revealed that he died with an enormous Cheshire-Cat "PWND J00" grin on his face) and in a way that actually stuck - meanwhile, Trump is still plenty cordial with his rich Arab friends and immigrant wife.

Flame me/flag me/modhammer me if you will, but I had to say it. We should have, and COULD have, drawn the line decades ago. Godwin's Law was a stupid and cowardly penny-wise pound-foolish stance that put the kibosh on timely action. Now it's too late.

I wasn't talking about it in a partisan fashion, just that there are only 2 groups now. No matter what your opinion may be on any of a hundred different subjects, you are auto-thrown into one of two boxes of people who you only may find commonality with on one issue, and assumptions are made about your character. That, is ridiculous.

I mourn the death of good faith political discourse (whenever it took place).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
Kryzbyn wrote:
I do. Thinking about getting rid of it. Getting really tired of political stuff boiling down to the lowest common denominator.

It's been down there for years and years now - longer than there's BEEN Facebook, really. The only real difference between Donald Trump and what's come to be considered "standard" GOP fare is that he speaks without the filter of a dog-whistle. The fact that people are freaking out about it NOW is like people seeing Clark Kent take off his glasses and suddenly shouting "ZOMG YOU'RE SUPERMAN!!!" We suspend disbelief for comic books' sakes, but this isn't comic books (more's the pity). The thinnest veneer of plausible deniability, and apparently it was enough to fool most people. Disgusting - this might have all been prevented if people had been willing to react the way to Reagan/Rush/Newt/Dubya the way they are now to Trump. Yes, Dubya paid proper lip-service to discouraging Islamaphobia, but his policies, "Us/Them" rhetoric, the well-known psychology of his wars communicated the opposite message, and the very fact that he made 9/11 into a paradigm shift instead of just another tragedy (seriously, he could have handled bin Laden the way Bill Clinton handled Timothy McVeigh, and that would have been that - as it happened, I suspect that one possible reason they refused to release photos of Osama's corpse was that it would have revealed that he died with an enormous Cheshire-Cat "PWND J00" grin on his face) and in a way that actually stuck - meanwhile, Trump is still plenty cordial with his rich Arab friends and immigrant wife.

Flame me/flag me/modhammer me if you will, but I had to say it. We should have, and COULD have, drawn the line decades ago. Godwin's Law was a stupid and cowardly penny-wise pound-foolish stance that put the kibosh on timely action. Now it's too late.

dude.

This is a thread about the evils of Facebook, not politics.

Please, let's keep the hate train rolling without going into politics.

Scarab Sages

Freehold DM wrote:

dude.

This is a thread about the evils of Facebook, not politics.

Please, let's keep the hate train rolling without going into...

You don't think it's a little naïve to think that one truly be taken apart from the other? I'd like it if the world were that cleanly modular, but I'm afraid it isn't (some parts of it might be, but social media and 21st-Century politics? Sorry, that's where it happens now, so they're joined at the hip) - and decent people's aversion to engaging in it is a key component of the vicious cycle that's gotten us here.

That's all I'll say for now.


~stalks Freehold DM to inject him with Facebook Assimilation nanites to incorporate him into the collective~


Kryzbyn, it's been my experience that there's around five to eight groups in current discourse. Right now there are three central groups, one far right, one centre, and one left. Then, among minor groups there are farther left, disguised right, rebellion-fantasizing, unfocused anger, and believes every conspiracy.

Scarab Sages

Scythia wrote:
Kryzbyn, it's been my experience that there's around five to eight groups in current discourse. Right now there are three central groups, one far right, one centre, and one left. Then, among minor groups there are farther left, disguised right, rebellion-fantasizing, unfocused anger, and believes every conspiracy.

Is that last one even possible??? You'd inevitably reach foundational contradictions.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
Scythia wrote:
Kryzbyn, it's been my experience that there's around five to eight groups in current discourse. Right now there are three central groups, one far right, one centre, and one left. Then, among minor groups there are farther left, disguised right, rebellion-fantasizing, unfocused anger, and believes every conspiracy.
Is that last one even possible??? You'd inevitably reach foundational contradictions.

I've seen a couple of those folks. You're applying logic where it isn't involved. ^_^


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Happened to me too, several years ago. My wife and I share an account, and a user name. Had no problems until I contacted customer service about an unrelated issue. Their (very quick) response was to lock me out while not responding to the issue I was bringing to their attention. Only got it unlocked by changing my user name. We still share an account, and a user name, only now one of us is the first name, and one of us the middle name. We kind of need Facebook to keep in touch with friends and family spread out all over the world.

Moral of the story: Don't write to Facebook customer service. Stay under their radar and be happy with whatever they choose to give you.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
Scythia wrote:
Kryzbyn, it's been my experience that there's around five to eight groups in current discourse. Right now there are three central groups, one far right, one centre, and one left. Then, among minor groups there are farther left, disguised right, rebellion-fantasizing, unfocused anger, and believes every conspiracy.
Is that last one even possible??? You'd inevitably reach foundational contradictions.

Have you read many conspiracy theory sites? Logic is just another tool "They" use to control the masses. Part of being Awake is learning that things which seem contradictory actually make more sense.


They should call it Faceshnook.


Guang wrote:

Happened to me too, several years ago. My wife and I share an account, and a user name. Had no problems until I contacted customer service about an unrelated issue. Their (very quick) response was to lock me out while not responding to the issue I was bringing to their attention. Only got it unlocked by changing my user name. We still share an account, and a user name, only now one of us is the first name, and one of us the middle name. We kind of need Facebook to keep in touch with friends and family spread out all over the world.

Moral of the story: Don't write to Facebook customer service. Stay under their radar and be happy with whatever they choose to give you.

Truly, THIS is the answer? To love the shackles Facebook places upon you? You've got to be kidding me!!!


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Freehold DM wrote:
Guang wrote:

Happened to me too, several years ago. My wife and I share an account, and a user name. Had no problems until I contacted customer service about an unrelated issue. Their (very quick) response was to lock me out while not responding to the issue I was bringing to their attention. Only got it unlocked by changing my user name. We still share an account, and a user name, only now one of us is the first name, and one of us the middle name. We kind of need Facebook to keep in touch with friends and family spread out all over the world.

Moral of the story: Don't write to Facebook customer service. Stay under their radar and be happy with whatever they choose to give you.

Truly, THIS is the answer? To love the shackles Facebook places upon you? You've got to be kidding me!!!

Who said love? I've just accepted that I have to pay a certain price for a product I've come to need. How else will we know what my niece is eating for breakfast thousands of miles away?


Pathfinder Adventure Subscriber
Kalindlara wrote:
I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
Scythia wrote:
Kryzbyn, it's been my experience that there's around five to eight groups in current discourse. Right now there are three central groups, one far right, one centre, and one left. Then, among minor groups there are farther left, disguised right, rebellion-fantasizing, unfocused anger, and believes every conspiracy.
Is that last one even possible??? You'd inevitably reach foundational contradictions.
I've seen a couple of those folks. You're applying logic where it isn't involved. ^_^

It's a conspiracy!!!!

Spoiler:
Used four exclamation marks to signify proper unhingedness.

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
Kajehase wrote:
** spoiler omitted **

You need at least 5, though. :O


Scythia wrote:
Kryzbyn, it's been my experience that there's around five to eight groups in current discourse. Right now there are three central groups, one far right, one centre, and one left. Then, among minor groups there are farther left, disguised right, rebellion-fantasizing, unfocused anger, and believes every conspiracy.

This isn't my experience, but I'm glad yours is better :)


Pathfinder Adventure Subscriber
Kalindlara wrote:
Kajehase wrote:
** spoiler omitted **
You need at least 5, though. :O

That's just what they want you to think!!!!

Wake up sheeple!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Kryzbyn wrote:
Scythia wrote:
Kryzbyn, it's been my experience that there's around five to eight groups in current discourse. Right now there are three central groups, one far right, one centre, and one left. Then, among minor groups there are farther left, disguised right, rebellion-fantasizing, unfocused anger, and believes every conspiracy.
This isn't my experience, but I'm glad yours is better :)

I wouldn't describe it as "better" exactly. :P


Kajehase wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:
Kajehase wrote:
** spoiler omitted **
You need at least 5, though. :O

That's just what they want you to think!!!!

Wake up sheeple!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

~prepares to assimilate Kajahase~


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Words cannot describe how much I hate the name policy. A place I work at makes a Facebook profile mandatory, and even having my name out there without attachment to a photograph or phone number makes me squirm.

I just don't like being tracked by people I don't even know the name of, when they can learn quite a bit about me.

*shivers*

With how surveillance in America is going, I guess I should get used to it...


SunstonePhoenix wrote:

Words cannot describe how much I hate the name policy. A place I work at makes a Facebook profile mandatory, and even having my name out there without attachment to a photograph or phone number makes me squirm.

I just don't like being tracked by people I don't even know the name of, when they can learn quite a bit about me.

*shivers*

With how surveillance in America is going, I guess I should get used to it...

Hmmm, maybe it's time to start up a business creating and maintaining Facebook profiles, all perfectly sanitized and completely inoffensive should an employer, or landlord, or loan officer do a drive-by Googling?


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
SunstonePhoenix wrote:

Words cannot describe how much I hate the name policy. A place I work at makes a Facebook profile mandatory, and even having my name out there without attachment to a photograph or phone number makes me squirm.

I just don't like being tracked by people I don't even know the name of, when they can learn quite a bit about me.

*shivers*

With how surveillance in America is going, I guess I should get used to it...

This person looks familiar, i just can't think of where I've seen them.

Handsome though...

1 to 50 of 59 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / Who now owns Facebook? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.