It's been a long time since the big news about psychological experiments performed on users without their consent [0]. However, intentional emotional manipulation unquestionably remains a core goal for the mainstays of Facebook - marketing, advertising, propaganda, and politics. Heart rate is a visceral emotional indicator that would add value in the context of Facebook, in ways that aren't as accessibly exploitable from the ecosystems of Apple.<p>[0] <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook_emotional_manipulation_experiment" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook_emotional_manipulatio...</a>
> I’m well aware that if you want your health data to remain private, smartwatches are certainly risky. But we’re way past that now. These devices can and have saved lives, and despite some early skepticism, wearables aren’t going anywhere.<p>The Apple Watch is <i>right there</i>.<p>Apple is very clearly committed to user privacy, to the fullest extent reasonably possible in the current climate. Indeed, they've even doubled down on privacy harder than ever before as of the WWDC keynote this week—one particular item of note being that where the hardware will support it, they'll be moving Siri processing on-device, rather than requiring it to go to their servers. At this point, any FUD alleging that they <i>might</i> still be taking your data, or <i>might</i> want to at some future date, is founded in no actual evidence whatsoever, and is actively detrimental to the cause of privacy as it causes people to think that they "might as well" get something from FB or Google because they're "no different".<p>If you want a smartwatch, and want your data to remain private, just get an Apple Watch.
>clearly there’s a market for Facebook hardware—look at the success of its smart display, Portal.<p>Is that a joke? I haven’t heard of anyone buying that. Only people balking at the mere idea of it.
reading the article I feel there is some disconnect between the text of the article and the headline and the writer may not actually want to die instead of letting Facebook monitor their heart rate.<p>I guess I wouldn't rather die either. I would just rather buy an Apple Smartwatch, but I guess that's pragmatism for you.
> I’m well aware that if you want your health data to remain private, smartwatches are certainly risky. But we’re way past that now. These devices can and have saved lives, and despite some early skepticism, wearables aren’t going anywhere.<p>So the main thrust is: wearables are shit and leaky, but they save lives [citation needed] you can be as insecure as you like, unless you're facebook.<p>I mean surly the scum that make crappy adware riddled android phones are worse? or is it not as fashionable to dunk on them? Especially as only poor people buy those?
I don't feel like reading the article but I support the statement in the headline. I wouldn't give any of the faang companies access to my health information unless they paid my salary and I block those recruiters.
I'd trust FB with my data over say.. Equifax, and they have way more important data than my pulse. But they also got hacked for bad software maintenance and no one is constantly shitting on them.<p>Not that I use it, but idk FB is a scapegoat if anything.<p>...Also I know it's whataboutism but common lol. People are so entitled with their privacy when it means nothing to their actual safety. Comes off so weak and whiny.
I admittedly find this attitude perplexing.<p>My pulse is far less private to me than my email or messages. Same with my medical history. I get that there would be situations where someone might want to hide certain conditions or histories, but for the average person, wouldn't having one's medical data leaked be a lot less harmful than having one's messages leaked?
I love how people are vilify Facebook like they are almost hiring forced labour and willfully collaborate with authoritarian regimes...<p>Oh wait that is Apple which people follow like a cult...
Color me shocked....<p>I am not going to defend Facebook, but this is ridiculous how people here are willing to look through pink-eyed glasses for their "favorite" companies.<p>Downvote away, that is the best counter-argument :)