Anti-FAANG/Big Tech

cross-posted from: https://infosec.pub/post/9936059

I would like to collect the scenarios in which people are forced to enter Google’s #walledGarden (that is, to establish and/or maintain an account).

If someone needs a Google service to access something essential like healthcare or education, that’s what I want to hear about. To inspire a list of things that are “essential” I had a look at human rights law to derive this list:

• right to life
• healthcare
• freedom of expression
• freedom of assembly and of association
• right to education
• right to engage in work and access to placement services
• fair and just working conditions
• social security and social assistance
• consumer protection
• right to vote
• right to petition
• right of access to (government) documents
• right to a nationality (passport acquisition)
• right of equal access to public service in his country

Below is what I have encountered personally, which serves as an example of the kind of experiences I want to hear about:

• Google’s Playstore is a gate-keeper to most Android apps in the world and this includes relatively essential apps, such as:
  • emergency apps (e.g. that dial 112 in Europe or 911 in the US)
  • banking apps
  • apps for public services (e.g. public parking)
  • others?
• (education) Google docs is used by students in public schools, by force to some extent. Thus gdocs sometimes cannot be escaped in pursuit of education. When groups of students collaborate, sometimes the study groups impose use of gdocs. Some secondary school teachers impose the use of Google accounts for classroom projects.
• (education) A public university’s wi-fi network involved a captive portal and the only way to gain access was to supply credentials for a Google or Facebook account.

I’ve noticed that when creating an account for a public service I often have the option to supply credentials for Google or Facebook to bypass the verification process. In all cases of this kind of registration shortcut being used for public service, there was an alternative Google-free way to open the account. But in the private sector, I’ve seen this style of registration that absolutely required a proxy login via some shitty walled garden (like the university wi-fi). So I wonder if there are any situations where a government (anywhere in the world) requires a Google account in order to get service.

cross-posted from: https://infosec.pub/post/9930406

I have never used Facebook. I’m trying to understand the ways in which people are getting trapped in there. Obviously there is an addiction factor, but I’m more interested in how someone who is (hypothetically) immune to addiction might still be forced into #Facebook.

If someone needs Facebook to access something essential like healthcare, that’s what I want to hear about. To inspire a list of things that are “essential” I had a look at human rights law to derive this list:

• right to life
• healthcare
• freedom of expression
• freedom of assembly and of association
• right to education
• right to engage in work and access to placement services
• fair and just working conditions
• social security and social assistance
• consumer protection
• right to vote
• right to petition
• right of access to (government) documents
• right to a nationality (passport acquisition)
• right of equal access to public service in his country

I don’t imagine that Facebook has an essential role in supporting people’s human rights. I assume most gov offices have a Facebook presence, but there is always a way to access the same services outside of FB, correct?

I can think of a couple situations where FB access is important to reaching something essential. E.g.

• A police department recovered stolen bicycles and announced that theft victims could visit the FB page of the police dept. to see if their bicycle appears in the photos. Non-FB users were blocked from the page and there was no other means to reach the photos. Effectively, non-FB users were denied equal access to public services.

• A Danish university has a Facebook page as well as just about every single student. Facebook was used exclusively to announce campus social events and even some optional classes. Students without FB were excluded. In a sense, they were being excluded from some aspects to public education, although strictly speaking the FB exclusive events were not required to obtain a degree.

• Regarding freedom of assembly, there is an activist group in my local area fighting for the right to be offline. I wanted to join the group, but their sole presence is on Facebook, ironically. So my freedom of assembly in this case is conditioned on being trapped in Facebook.

In any case, I would like to hear more examples of what essential information or services is compromised by leaving or neglecting to join Facebook.

#askFedi #Meta #walledGarden

Half a dozen hot-button docs have been pulled from platforms or dropped by digital distributors in the past year, angering filmmakers and viewers: "People do not like to be told they cannot see a film."