Senators tore into Facebook and Google for making themselves the main distributors for the work of US local newspapers, and taking all the revenue for themselves.

The article is weakened by the use of confused concepts such as "intellectual property" and "consuming" news.

It is correct in criticizing those companies, but it doesn't seem to consider that their data collection ought to be banned outright.

Bogus Johnson wanted to reopen businesses and help them make money, never mind that they would spread Covid-19. Now, as a result, the UK is experiencing a catastrophic spread, like the spring only perhaps worse, and a strict lockdown is following.

The UK should have done that in September, and it would be over now.

The NYU's investigation of Facebook ads has its participants use a browser add-on that incidentally reports other people's personal data when it appears on the participant's screen. Arguably, Facebook is legally bound to try to stop its use.

Facebook may not have the legal power to stop it, and we must hope it does not get that power, because this research is vitally important. Unless, that is, new laws compel Facebook to hand over its preference algorithm (in every version) for investigation.

The experimenters are morally bound to inform participants that the browser add-on will show the experimenters other Facebook useds' personal information they Facebook shows them. That raises another legal/moral question: is it legal, and is it moral, for a participant X to knowingly hand over per Facebook "friends"' data to the experimenters?

IANAL, but I think it is legal, because X has no obligation of secrecy to per Facebook friends. I think it is moral, provided X informs all per Facebook friends that perse will do this, and gives them a chance to avoid showing their data to X.

However, if they are wise, they will be more hesitant to show their data to Facebook than to show it to X and the experimenters. Which means they should stop being zuckers — stop being used by Facebook.

A British functionary in charge of trying to make homeless people fit the strictly narrow categories of aid for the homeless says that this system is fundamentally broken.

*'Red mirage': the 'insidious' scenario if Trump declares an early victory.*