Facebook Slides After Report Claims 50% Of Its Users Are Fake

[DamianTV]

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-...users-are-fake

As bad as things have been for Facebook since the Cambridge Analytica scandal broke one year ago, one team of researchers, led by a former peer of Mark Zuckerberg at Harvard who created one of the original Facebook prototypes, thinks the reality of the company's circumstances is even more dire than investors realize.

In a report published Thursday by PlainSite, an independent research shop led by Aaron Greenspan, analysts calculated that Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has been regularly lying to investors and the public about the company's user metrics, and that the company could be overestimating the number of users by as much as 50%.

The team detailed their findings in a 70-page report published on their website.

Facebook has been lying to the public about the scale of its problem with fake accounts, which likely exceed 50% of its network. Its official metrics—many of which it has stopped reporting quarterly—are self-contradictory and even farcical. The company has lost control of its own product.

Ultimately, this is just the latest sign that Facebook - formerly one of the world's most successful companies - is doomed to go the way of CompuServe and AOL.

PlainSite is a project launched by the Think Computer Corporation and Think Computer Foundation which aims to make "data accessible to the public free of charge” and "lets ordinary citizens impact the law- making process," according to Bloomberg. Aaron Greenspan recently told his story about how he fit into the history of Facebook's founding at Harvard on a podcast.

Facebook's fraudulent numbers hurt its customers (advertisers) by overstating the effectiveness of Facebook's product, the company said.

• Fake accounts affect Facebook at its core in numerous ways:
• Its customers purchase advertising on Facebook based on the fact that it can supposedly target advertisements at more than 2 billion real human beings. To the extent that users aren’t real, companies are throwing their money down the drain.
• Fake accounts click on advertising at random, or “like” pages, to throw off antifraud algorithms. Fake accounts look real if they do not follow a clear pattern. This kind of activity defrauds advertisers, but rewards Facebook with revenue.
• Fake accounts often defraud other users on Facebook, through scams, fake news, extortion, and other forms of deception. Often, they can involve governments

...

Full article at link.

[Brian4Liberty]

Not surprising at all. If they never clean up, the percent of fake/unused accounts could be even more than that.

[angelatc]

Everybody I know has 2 or 3 accounts simply because Facebook keeps banning people.

[DamianTV]

Everybody I know has 2 or 3 accounts simply because Facebook keeps banning people.

The sad thing is so many people are banned because of what they are, not what theyve done.

[Stratovarious]

I'm not a fake, I closed mine....
I'm one of those freaks that actually walk the talk on boycotts,
well not on everything* ,
Facebook was exposed by ALEX Jones over 10 years ago, face recognition,
the data mining, algorithms etc, I closed my account at that time and never looked back, things
have just gotten worse there ever since.

*I still watch youtube videos though I was life banned
'just because' .

[DamianTV]

@Stratovarious and @angelatc, what were these bans for?

[Stratovarious]

@Stratovarious and @angelatc, what were these bans for?

Mine was probably for chewing gum.
They wouldn't tell me, and there was no discussion, no appeal.
IMV, all of these mega social media platforms are de facto public utilities,
as they all claim to provide a platform for everyone to 'freely' share their
opinions etc, we also provide revenue stream by having constant
advertising presented to us, millions of subscribers pay for advertising
and placement as well, they ban them too.
Social media T.O.S are typically the vehicle to facilitate the 'production' of
excuses for the banning of opposing views, same applies to the function of
moderators, they are a means of controlling the narrative, censorship.

Censorship should only apply to; Physical Threats/Death Threats,
anything beyond that is a direct and clear assault on our Constitutional Right to
Free Speech.

[angelatc]

@Stratovarious and @angelatc, what were these bans for?

Usually for being conservative.

[angelatc]

Censorship should only apply to; Physical Threats/Death Threats,
.

Then start your own site and make your own rules. But i'd suggest adding porn to that list if you want anybody valuable to frequent the site.

[Stratovarious]

Then start your own site and make your own rules. But i'd suggest adding porn to that list if you want anybody valuable to frequent the site.

I forgot , porn is bannable too, if it is poor quality.

Seriously though, yes of course dear, I think that is a given.

[angelatc]

I forgot , porn is bannable too, if it is poor quality.

Seriously though, yes of course dear, I think that is a given.

Interesting though - Tumblr didn't ban porn until a few weeks back. They just allowed people to filter it out. I don't do Tumblr but I am under the impression that they banned it only after a long struggle with minors posting nudes.

That problem aside, what if people could filter via ideological lines? Yes it's an echo chamber but that's what most people want.

[Stratovarious]

Interesting though - Tumblr didn't ban porn until a few weeks back. They just allowed people to filter it out. I don't do Tumblr but I am under the impression that they banned it only after a long struggle with minors posting nudes.

That problem aside, what if people could filter via ideological lines? Yes it's an echo chamber but that's what most people want.

I don't think I've been to tumbler. Startpage (search engine) has 'settings' including
a 'family filter' and other filters you can set, I'm sure Google has that as well, but
I have extreme allergies to Google.
I don't think allowing porn on a political or say a math site, makes any sense,
social media, well, I really don't know , with a filter....:shrugs:
A filter that routes ideologies as you mentioned would be interesting, though I do enjoy
debate, so I might lose interest.
One nice thing about this site is that there are plenty of like minded posters,
so it's not just a constant barrage of personal attacks from liberals that
are spoonfeed' CNN and nothing else. CNN is trusted though, as you know ....they have the
green star or gold star I forget' color but yea tRUsted... right.......ha ha.