As some people are just learning, Facebook has been tracking both users and even non-users in a violation of their privacy that most never opted into. Anytime you visit a Facebook related or enabled site, they are tracking you. Conversely as a Facebook user, they track and relate all of your off-Facebook activity on any site that uses Facebook plugins or functionality (which are a lot of sites). This is horrible and should be stopped but in all fairness “they all do it” and if anything Google is probably worse.
If the above is not bad enough, the PRISM network has backdoors to all of these services so you are being violated directly by corporations and multiple governments who index all of your activity. Privacy is a thing of the past unfortunately.
However there are ways to fight back such as disabling cookies and deleting all cookies regularly and especially to use a random VPN to make tracking harder.
It’s not so much that the majority of people have anything to hide, but privacy is a right everyone has. Most people would object to having cameras in the washroom, not because they are doing something wrong but because you have the right to dignity and privacy.
Hopefully the longstanding issue with most giant online sites from Facebook, Google etc.. will drive demands from people around the world to restore privacy and digital rights in an era where infringement is common.
This is very interesting and about high time. There is hardly any legal basis to single out the banning of cryptocurrency and ICOs when so many other questionable things are promoted on Google, Facebook and Twitter. They could have probably gotten away with banning a few confirmed scam coins or ICOs but they’d also have to demonstrate similar action in other industries that they have never done with this.
The allegation of collusion is important and I am very curious how this plays out. My suspicion is that these actions are voluntary. The CEOs of these companies were essentially convinced and paid out to it by stakeholders of fiat and traditional securities. If not that, here would be an interesting defense if they could make such a defense legally in this scenario I propose. Of course all 3 of the major companies are based in the US and are subject to the laws of the US including being obliged to co-operate by providing the NSA backdoors for spying. What if under the pretext of national security these companies were forced to ban cryptocurrency advertising? It may sound far fetched but the US government even wanted to put tariffs on Canada during negotiations for NAFTA under the pre-text of National Security.
It is hard to say for sure what the truth is but I’ll be following these lawsuits as some of the truth may come out in the reply to the claim, discovery and other filings. One thing I am sure of is that neither company came up with the idea of their own volition. It would be another thing to prove which external force or entity is really responsible for this. Financially it makes little sense since they all stood to profit more from the increased advertising revenue so it is very plausible that some other stakeholders made an offer they couldn’t refuse whether in the form of enticement or being obliged by law (even if falsely under the pre-text of national security).