Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
I'm not sure if this has been discussed around here:

The shadow profiles.

For those who are not, and have never, been on Facebook, FB maintains a shadow profile of them (or you) anyhow.

Say if somebody you once talked to on the phone gets an account with FB, then FB digs through THEIR computer or handheld device to find all of their business, money accounts, and contacts - including you. Since you do not have an account with Facebook, they create an account to compile data on you.
Your SSN, all of your phone numbers, address, DoB, children, etc.

Is there a reliable way to find all of the contents of these shadow profile with you personal information? Other than just search online and hope you get it all? A way to know which Big Tech Media have shadow accounts on you?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
I'm not sure if this has been discussed around here:

The shadow profiles.

For those who are not, and have never, been on Facebook, FB maintains a shadow profile of them (or you) anyhow.

Say if somebody you once talked to on the phone gets an account with FB, then FB digs through THEIR computer or handheld device to find all of their business, money accounts, and contacts - including you. Since you do not have an account with Facebook, they create an account to compile data on you.
Your SSN, all of your phone numbers, address, DoB, children, etc.

Is there a reliable way to find all of the contents of these shadow profile with you personal information? Other than just search online and hope you get it all? A way to know which Big Tech Media have shadow accounts on you?

---

I have no doubt that they have shadow profiles ... but I wonder how what you say happens.

For example, if my friend is on FB but I am not, where do they get their info on me? AFAIK they have no point of contact TO ME. So when it come TO ME they have no devices to dig thru, to find my contacts, and info like my dob, friends, banks etc. So they'd have to go externally, to data brokers, to get my info. It seems like a lot of effort to gather info on a 'friend of' a FB participant.

---

Quote:

---

Your friend OKs the privacy waiver which is required to sign up with Facebook.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
I'm not sure if this has been discussed around here:

The shadow profiles.

For those who are not, and have never, been on Facebook, FB maintains a shadow profile of them (or you) anyhow.

Say if somebody you once talked to on the phone gets an account with FB, then FB digs through THEIR computer or handheld device to find all of their business, money accounts, and contacts - including you. Since you do not have an account with Facebook, they create an account to compile data on you.
Your SSN, all of your phone numbers, address, DoB, children, etc.

Is there a reliable way to find all of the contents of these shadow profile with you personal information? Other than just search online and hope you get it all? A way to know which Big Tech Media have shadow accounts on you?

---

I have no doubt that they have shadow profiles ... but I wonder how what you say happens.

For example, if my friend is on FB but I am not, where do they get their info on me? AFAIK they have no point of contact TO ME. So when it come TO ME they have no devices to dig thru, to find my contacts, and info like my dob, friends, banks etc. So they'd have to go externally, to data brokers, to get my info. It seems like a lot of effort to gather info on a 'friend of' a FB participant.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

Quote:

---

Your friend OKs the privacy waiver which is required to sign up with Facebook.

---

So? Maybe my friend has my phone number and my email address, and maybe even my physical address. But my friend DOESN'T have ** MY ** SSN, all of MY friends' and family's contacts, DoB's, children and so on.

So my questions is - how does FB get all of ** MY ** information you claim they get from my friend? Where do they get it from if it doesn't come from my friend?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

I understand FB can get my contact info from my friends who are on FB, even if I'm not. I just don't believe they get everything from my friend JSF says, like my SSN, the names of my children, etc.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
You could always check your email address or phone number on a site like https://haveibeenpwned.com/ to see if any data breaches are on record with that info.

I mean... neither Google nor Wikipedia tell you that it's not safe to do so.

;)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

ETA - I was harping about this for years, but nobody seemed to care.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
In the last week or 2, Kim Kommando shared a study on privacy. Before starting the survey questions, a privacy waiver had to be signed.

The real test/survey WAS the waiver.
Regardless of how they answered, every participant signed the contract which gave away the right to name their first-born child, the entirety of their income starting next year, and other outrageous stuff which none of them had bothered to read.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:
ETA - I was harping about this for years, but nobody seemed to care.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:
I understand FB can get my contact info from my friends who are on FB, even if I'm not. I just don't believe they get my "SSN, all of your phone numbers, address, DoB, children" etc from my FB-loving friend, like JSF says.

---

Quote:

---

most people really aren't all that interesting and unless you want to run for public office or aspire to some other high profile position anywhere

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

Quote:

---

most people really aren't all that interesting and unless you want to run for public office or aspire to some other high profile position anywhere

---

... or hold an unpopular opinion, for example. No one and nothing is too insignificant when they have the Utah data center and virtually limitless data storage and mining capabilities. And that btw is the government and business working hand-in-hand: business mining what the government shouldn't be going after b/c it's illegal (but when did that ever stop them?), and government Hoovering up the info.

I'm not being paranoid or trying to make anyone paranoid, but with endless data and capability, the old thinking that they tended to focus on big picture people because they didn't have the space or time for pipsqueaks isn't true anymore. They could start a jacket on everyone and have room left over. Then with 6 degrees between anyone, they could take the most innocuous life and - if they wanted to - concoct a series of connections out of random nothingness.

They probably won't.

But then it's not as if everyone who works for the NSA is pristine clean either and sticking to the limits of professional interest in exercising their powers. According to a Congressional review of the records, analysts illegally tracked ex-girlfriends, for example, with no oversight. You don't need to be important either. All you need to do is piss someone off. Or get somebody's interest.

But anyway, it's like a lot of other bad juju. If it can be done, it will be done.

I'm not for it. But I don't see a lot of hope for this to be brought to a stop. Nobody in government - not even Saint Biden* - wants it to stop, and neither does business. And I don't see a popular movement against it either.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

Well, I'm going to disagree with your conclusion.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:
I summarized your position in my mind as "massive surveillance/ benign neglect". I believe it's more like "massive surveillance/ massive thought control".

---

There's nothing benign about it. It's all highly manipulative, but calculated. There's zero ROI, at least right now, to start busting down doors and essentially kidnapping people for wrongthink. Who knows though? Maybe in another 2 or 3 generations that will start happening. The kids today who were born with a cell phone in their hand are going to be VERY different than any generation before them, and one can only imagine where technology will take us by the time they have kids.

At this stage, I view it only as a fairly successful attempt at thought control, and not outright thought control. In order for it to be an actual success, we would all need to become a hive mind, stripped of all personal agency and individual thought. We're not there yet.

I didn't leave that part out. I just didn't add that to an already very long post.

Quote:

---

That said, some realities can't be hidden from widespread perception - like COVID-19. Government responses are split about it, ranging from "it's not a problem" (very few, like Bolsanaro) to "it's really bad and we need to do something!" (most everyone else around the globe, according to the many different sources I've looked at, from official government-sponsored news to academics everywhere to people I know who've had relatives die of it).

You know, if the sun failed to come up at all for 2 days in a row, pretty much everyone would notice, no matter what the governments said. And though maybe COVID-19 isn't QUITE in the range of that blazingly obvious undeniable reality, I think it's up there.

Look at it this way - using Occam's razor. Why would governments around the globe (some of whom are actively fighting other governments), academics, nurses, doctors, morticians, and ordinary people everywhere all conspire to agree on a COVID-19 fabrication at the same time?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

I disagree. Other than that, and to avoid a long, pointless argument, you can have the last word.

After you ...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
As a social experiment (which I said very early on is what I thought it was), it's been a monstrous success.

The answer is: Yes. It would be exceedingly easy to take away everybody's freedom. Half of them willingly and happily give it up, and then help try to take others down that won't.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JAYNEZTOWN:
Over 50% of Facebook employees believe Donald Trump’s ban should remain in place
https://knowtechie.com/over-50-of-facebook-employees-believe-donald-tr
umps-ban-should-remain-in-place/

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

Well, I'm going to disagree with your conclusion.

What they're after is reality control. And thought control. (BTW most of these aren't my ideas but rather cobbled together from many sources, including SignyM.)


They already have reality control for all but the internet hounds through control of the 'news'.

But to get to specific observations 'out there' about reality control (including pivotal ones from Signy about 'kettling' and blank spots in the news) ...

When it comes to the 'news', most people assume that if it's in the 'news' it's true. And they assume the opposite; if it's NOT in the 'news' then it isn't happening and it isn't true. ie It's 'fake'. When I read the 'news', even on the inet, even from a wide variety of sources across the globe, I always wonder what's not being reported. I assume that there are many articles that are printed because they're smokescreens to hide the absence of important facts, and because they're in support of a 'narrative', (Try to find an article about "The Mighty Wurlitzer".) I'm not diligent or thoughtful enough to know where to look to find the real news, but the question's always on my mind.

But imo if you want to control what people opine, control what they think OTHER people are thinking. People tend to adopt the (apparently) prevalent opinions. Imo what made the (Vietnam) antiwar protests so huge was that they were covered by the media in all their massive chaos. It became acceptable to protest because so many others were protesting. It became acceptable to opine that the war was wrong because so many others publicly thought so, too.



That's where 'kettling' comes in. If you restrict the protests to some more distant place ... and limit the locations ... and you don't report about them (or simply put a few short articles in some obscure sections) ... then it looks like nobody disagrees. And people look around and think to themselves - Well! I guess this is a non-issue! If it's a non-issue to them, then it's a non-issue to me, too! Out of sight, out of mind.

Or you mis-report protests, for example, you report on the 'mostly peaceful', scattered, small, infrequent, BLM protests even though they're 'none of the above'. And then you fade them from the news. Nobody seems to be doing anything! I guess they're not a problem anymore! (if they ever were)

But then you have Jan 6 where the protesters failed to follow the rules. They showed up in huge numbers that were obvious to everyone, and they failed to be kettled. So ... what to do ... (BTW, there were a lot of heavily cropped photos reported that didn't show the true extent of the crowd. And have YOU seen crowd estimates for Jan 6? I haven't.) Aside from minimizing (cropped photos anyone? crowd numbers, anyone?), the media engaged-in and is engaging-in misreporting - like for example calling it an 'insurrection' despite the complete lack of even primitive 1776 weaponry (like guns).

But the one thing you REALLY don't want to have is a repeat. Nobody should take a Jan 6 lesson that having unapproved ideas and having unapproved crowds is tolerated. God forbid a repeat of the anti-war protests of the 60's and 70's in a democracy. Enter social media scouring, facial recognition, and government propaganda. So despite the fact that 99.9% of people there did absolutely nothing wrong except show up to register their opinion, vigilantes of all types including private persons and companies, and government agencies and Congress itself, were/ are hell-bent on identifying anyone and everyone there by any means necessary. Your family, your friends, your neighbors, your employers, and software in anybody's hands, will snitch on you. That'll make a lot of people think twice about joining unapproved gatherings in support of unapproved opinions! And then, there are the troops and fences, just so we all know how dangerous democracy can be.


Censorship's another example of how masses of people can be controlled.

To take your example of pirating songs and movies ... early on a few people were hung by the gates, and fined multi-million dollars in heavily reported fines that were obviously ruinous for the entire rest of their lives. Most people took the lesson and engaged in pirating on the dl and in small amounts afterwards.

So, if you want to censor unapproved opinions in social media ... why not censor The President of the US? What bigger body to hang at the gates then his? (And btw, keep up the drumbeat of RUSSIA!!! RUSSIA!!! RUSSIA!!! just so everyone knows that unapproved opinions must be seditious.)


Anyway, imo censoring the news, censoring opinions, engaging in propaganda, demonizing whatever is unapproved, public 'executions' in the court and on Twitter (for example), and endless surveillance, aren't a non-events. They're part of a larger scheme, to keep everyone thought-controlled, quiet, and in-line.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
At a deeper level, well we've all been prgrammed by commercials and narratives and storylines to expect certain things, like individual "happiness" and consumerism and hypomania.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I haven't read the book, but as I understand it this sounds very much like Noam Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
You forgot to remember...

"Take your shots!"

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
At a deeper level, well we've all been prgrammed by commercials and narratives and storylines to expect certain things, like individual "happiness" and consumerism and hypomania.

---

---

Quote:

---

SPOILER ALERT: Not since 2013 it hasn't.

---

Quote:

---

Reports: Facebook to end rule exemptions for politicians

https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-government-and-politics-techno
logy-business-834bf8c29aeaa10276272c5ca4b112b1

---