The Lifelog/Facebook Connection

[Dark_Grey]

Reading threads on Mark Zuckerberg's strange testimony before Congress. The obvious dog and pony show aside, some users posted very curious infographics on something I'd never heard of or seen before: 

Apparently, in the early 2000's, the Pentagon/DARPA had been developing an electronic database of everyone's...everything. Wiki - LifeLog

Quote

The objective of the LifeLog concept was "to be able to trace the 'threads' of an individual's life in terms of events, states, and relationships", and it has the ability to "take in all of a subject's experience, from phone numbers dialed and e-mail messages viewed to every breath taken, step made and place gone"

Big Gov attempting to monitor every aspect of your life is nothing new. Where it gets really weird is the similarities between the platforms. Right down to the end date of Lifelog and the creation date of Facebook.

Here is the Wired.com article featured in the pic above. Lifelog was extinguished by privacy advocates fairly quickly.

Quote

But civil libertarians immediately pounced on the project when it debuted last spring, arguing that LifeLog could become the ultimate tool for profiling potential enemies of the state.
[...]
"I am sure that such research will continue to be funded under some other title," wrote Karger in an e-mail. "I can't imagine Darpa 'dropping out' of such a key research area."

So what do you guys think? Did Zuckerberg really "develop Facebook in his dorm room" or is he a front for something much more sinister? If this is true, DARPA has been effectively mapping the social lives and travel habits of over 2 billion people for over a decade. 

Wow.

[Piney]

I wouldn't be shocked that he is on the Puzzle Palace payroll. They were far too gentle with him....

[Dark_Grey]

3 minutes ago, Piney said:

I wouldn't be shocked that he is on the Puzzle Palace payroll. They were far too gentle with him....

His eyes freak me the hell out. His facial expression in the OP pic says "nervous to be in court" but his eyes are as dead as dead can be. Very empty, sociopath eyes. And yes, I agree - they lobbed slow pitch after slow pitch and Zuckerberg just repeated programmed responses until the time ran out.

[Lilly]

There's something very *wrong* with Facebook...I've always felt this way. I've never had a Facebook account. Some of my friends (real life friends) have even tried to talk me into it but I won't do it. I now have a bad feeling that eventually we may all be forced in some manner. Perhaps it will be in order to have a bank account or pay our bills or have a credit card? I have a feeling that eventually you just won't have the choice. 

[Matt Vinyl]

That is quite a worrying thought, Lilly. But could indeed have an element of truth within!

[Lilly]

7 minutes ago, Matt Vinyl said:

That is quite a worrying thought, Lilly. But could indeed have an element of truth within!

I'm not saying I'm correct...but it's a distinct impression/feeling I've had for a long time now and it's getting stronger as time goes by. 

[Piney]

16 minutes ago, Lilly said:

I'm not saying I'm correct...but it's a distinct impression/feeling I've had for a long time now and it's getting stronger as time goes by. 

I always felt the same. 

[Lilly]

8 minutes ago, Piney said:

I always felt the same. 

Wow, I think you're the only other person I've come across who has expressed having the same feeling. Maybe it's in our DNA or something? LOL! 

[Shiloh]

14 hours ago, Lilly said:

There's something very *wrong* with Facebook...I've always felt this way. I've never had a Facebook account. Some of my friends (real life friends) have even tried to talk me into it but I won't do it. I now have a bad feeling that eventually we may all be forced in some manner. Perhaps it will be in order to have a bank account or pay our bills or have a credit card? I have a feeling that eventually you just won't have the choice. 

I was on Facebook a long time ago, and It struck it as odd to me as to how he got rich when he sold nothing, or had no advertisements. I assumed he must have been selling email accounts, as he went through all of mine and sent invites to everyone in my email database saying "I had invited them." (which I didn't) Anyway, I didn't trust him and left.

[GlitterRose]

That is kinda creepy.

[Lilly]

On 4/13/2018 at 10:23 PM, Vilasarius said:

I was on Facebook a long time ago, and It struck it as odd to me as to how he got rich when he sold nothing, or had no advertisements. I assumed he must have been selling email accounts, as he went through all of mine and sent invites to everyone in my email database saying "I had invited them." (which I didn't) Anyway, I didn't trust him and left.

Exactly, Marky made himself obscenely wealthy by selling the personal and private information of others to the highest bidders. 

I was struck (during the 'interview' by Congress) how when he was asked about giving out his own personal/private information (example, question of what hotel he was staying in) he did not give an answer.  Mr Zuckerberg guards his personal privacy...and I'm betting he uses the highest levels of encryption and technology to do so. This should make everyone question why they should just be giving up their own personal privacy. For what? To have 'Facebook friends' and a really 'cool' social media profile? 

[.ZZ.]

My thoughts today:

 

"Gee! Your hair smells terrific!"

Edited April 15, 2018 by .ZZ.

[Derek Willis]

This is an extract from the Wiki page about Mark Zuckerberg and the beginnings of Facebook:

The site went up over a weekend, but by Monday morning, the college shut it down, because its popularity had overwhelmed one of Harvard's network switches and prevented students from accessing the Internet. In addition, many students complained that their photos were being used without permission. Zuckerberg apologized publicly, and the student paper ran articles stating that his site was "completely improper."

So right from the start he was using personal information without permission, and what he was doing was considered improper. But loads of students loved it, and that is where the money would be ...

I find it unlikely, however, that the U.S. government would approach a twenty-year-old student and ask him to head-up the biggest surveillance system ever created. 

Edited April 15, 2018 by Derek Willis

[GlitterRose]

2 hours ago, Derek Willis said:

This is an extract from the Wiki page about Mark Zuckerberg and the beginnings of Facebook:

The site went up over a weekend, but by Monday morning, the college shut it down, because its popularity had overwhelmed one of Harvard's network switches and prevented students from accessing the Internet. In addition, many students complained that their photos were being used without permission. Zuckerberg apologized publicly, and the student paper ran articles stating that his site was "completely improper."

So right from the start he was using personal information without permission, and what he was doing was considered improper. But loads of students loved it, and that is where the money would be ...

I find it unlikely, however, that the U.S. government would approach a twenty-year-old student and ask him to head-up the biggest surveillance system ever created. 

I dunno...I guess I can.

Their first words would probably be something like...you're gonna be rich. 

[freetoroam]

2 hours ago, Derek Willis said:

This is an extract from the Wiki page about Mark Zuckerberg and the beginnings of Facebook:

The site went up over a weekend, but by Monday morning, the college shut it down, because its popularity had overwhelmed one of Harvard's network switches and prevented students from accessing the Internet. In addition, many students complained that their photos were being used without permission. Zuckerberg apologized publicly, and the student paper ran articles stating that his site was "completely improper."

So right from the start he was using personal information without permission, and what he was doing was considered improper. But loads of students loved it, and that is where the money would be ...

I find it unlikely, however, that the U.S. government would approach a twenty-year-old student and ask him to head-up the biggest surveillance system ever created. 

I think the government thought they had just hit the jackpot without having to buy a ticket. Facebook was created and thousands of people were posting their lives on it...no surveillance was needed, thousands think they are celebrities because they got hundreds of cyber friends  and get likies and to achieve this all they have to do is post personal details about themselves. 

There is nothing private about facebook.

People tell others details about their lives on facebook which they would not dare tell people face to face. Facebook has grabbed some of its users minds by the ball locks.

 

[Derek Willis]

21 minutes ago, freetoroam said:

I think the government thought they had just hit the jackpot without having to buy a ticket. Facebook was created and thousands of people were posting their lives on it...no surveillance was needed, thousands think they are celebrities because they got hundreds of cyber friends  and get likies and to achieve this all they have to do is post personal details about themselves. 

There is nothing private about facebook.

People tell others details about their lives on facebook which they would not dare tell people face to face. Facebook has grabbed some of its users minds by the ball locks.

 

Well, do you reckon all the other social media platforms are also part of the plan? Are the mobile phone operators who know where everyone is and who they talk to part of the plan? Are the email service providers part of the plan? It seems to me that governments certainly have access to all this data, but I think they reacted to what was being created by people like Mark Zuckerberg, rather than being the originators. Just like when Alexander Graham Bell invented the telephone.

[freetoroam]

12 hours ago, Derek Willis said:

Well, do you reckon all the other social media platforms are also part of the plan? Are the mobile phone operators who know where everyone is and who they talk to part of the plan? Are the email service providers part of the plan? It seems to me that governments certainly have access to all this data, but I think they reacted to what was being created by people like Mark Zuckerberg, rather than being the originators. Just like when Alexander Graham Bell invented the telephone.

Mobile phone ops knowing where you are is different from people posting personal details about themselves online. My point was people are giving themselves to who ever want to take their details, some people are making it so easy for them. 

If i send a text to my husband to tell him i will be buying some new  underwear on my way home from work...so what, if i want him to see me wear it i will wait till we are alone in the bedroom and not post me wearing it on the internet. 

Edited April 16, 2018 by freetoroam

[Lilly]

Personally, I think the government most likely approached Mr Zuckerberg after the fact. Once Facebook became a huge collector of personal data that was most likely when the government told him he would have to 'play ball' with them or risk being on their 'bad side'. 

[Tiggs]

In retrospect Facebook  -- or something like it -- was inevitable.

Anyone remember Myspace?

Internet's always going to need a central hub -- a common place to connect to other people.

[Kismit]

It certainly appears that there should be legal protections for individual privacy.

However we live in a world where our information is gathered for advertising purposes. 

Advertising purposes is a loose term I am using because I include anything that is designed to stir your own reactions psychologically.

It is not the information gathering which is the issue. If it where paid surveys and online studies you agree to would cause the same level of shock.

It is selling information which does not belong to you, which was gathered via a third party without your aproval is wrong. So wrong. 

[Dark_Grey]

On 4/15/2018 at 11:31 AM, Derek Willis said:

Well, do you reckon all the other social media platforms are also part of the plan? Are the mobile phone operators who know where everyone is and who they talk to part of the plan? Are the email service providers part of the plan? It seems to me that governments certainly have access to all this data, but I think they reacted to what was being created by people like Mark Zuckerberg, rather than being the originators. Just like when Alexander Graham Bell invented the telephone.

Their original plan was to create what is essentially Facebook. As per the OP, privacy advocates shut that down but if something appears on the market that does that same task, why would Big Gov let such a juicy opportunity just slip by? We know dragnet surveillance already exists so is it really a stretch to believe they could be taking full advantage of such a widely used platform?

Quote

"I am sure that such research will continue to be funded under some other title," wrote Karger in an e-mail. "I can't imagine Darpa 'dropping out' of such a key research area."