Sheryl Sandberg's here to make it better worse

It looks like Facebook's creepy teen-data-collection app is not going away, mainly because Facebook can't help themselves. Sheryl Sandberg, who I once praised for having better communication skills than Mark Zuckerberg, only to be proven 100% wrong about that during the whole Definers Media business, has once again stepped forward to try to direct the narrative, and her defense of Facebook appears to be almost entirely composed of lies.

As reported by Gizmodo:

Chief operating officer Sheryl Sandberg’s defense? The teens “consented.”

“So I want to be clear what this is,” Sandberg told CNBC’s Julia Boorstin on Wednesday. “This is a Facebook Research app. It’s very clear to the people who participated. It’s completely opt-in. There is a rigorous consent flow and people are compensated. It’s a market research program.”

“Now, that said, we know we have work to do to make sure people’s data is protected,” Sandberg added, repeating a thoroughly unconvincing line that has been rolled out so many times amid Facebook’s constant scandals that it has barreled into self-satire territory. “It’s your information. You put it on Facebook, you need to know what is happening. In this case the people who chose to participate in this program did.”

“But we definitely have work to do and we’ve done it,” Sandberg said, just to hammer home that line.

Here's the problem, though: the teens that Facebook bribed into accepting this app on their phones almost certainly didn't know how comprehensive the data collection would be. They didn't know that Facebook was behind the app, either, since Facebook took pains to hide their involvement:

Facebook had users sideload the app and avoided submitting it through TestFlight, Apple’s beta testing system, which requires Apple review.

And Facebook didn't do anything to protect the privacy of these teens; Apple had already blocked the app before Facebook made a show of "voluntarily" taking it down.

U.S. lawmakers, naturally, are furious, as reported by The Verge:

Tuesday night, a TechCrunch investigation revealed that Facebook had been secretly paying teenagers to install a VPN that let the company see nearly everything they did on their phones. Today, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are lashing out at the tech giant, raising new questions about how the company might fare in future privacy legislation.

“Wiretapping teens is not research, and it should never be permissible.” Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) said in a statement. “Instead of learning its lesson when it was caught spying on consumers using the supposedly ‘private’ Onavo VPN app, Facebook rebranded the intrusive app and circumvented Apple’s attempts to protect iPhone users.”

Blumenthal said that he would be sending letters to Apple and Google to probe them on their involvement by hosting the apps.

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) tweeted, “Wait a minute. Facebook PAID teenagers to install a surveillance device on their phones without telling them it gave Facebook power to spy on them? Some kids as young as 13. Are you serious?” This is Hawley’s first year serving in the Senate, and he has already positioned himself as a strong conservative voice on tech. At his first Judiciary hearing in January, Hawley lambasted President Trump’s attorney general nominee with questions regarding his stance on regulating Silicon Valley companies.

Yes, folks, that's bipartisan agreement that something needs to be done about Facebook, in a country where it took the two major political parties over a month to agree that government was something that needed to exist, and be paid for.

It's not all doom and gloom for Facebook, though. Advertisers have apparently decided that they don't care how terrible Facebook's image is, leading to a 61% jump in earnings despite the firm's bad press, and Facebook managed to gain a few users over the quarter, too. The result? A surge in their share price, of course, meaning that the company's new, more combative media strategy is likely to be the tone we hear from them going forwards. And why not? It's working for them, at least in the near term. And if there's one thing on which you can rely, it's that bad corporate behaviour that gets rewarded with increased share prices and executive bonuses is guaranteed to continue.

All in all, it looks like this year in Facebook is going to be an even bumpier ride than last year, with #deleteFacebook having stalled, Facebook's soul-less advertiser clients having returned, and Facebook's increasingly defiant tone in the face of a continued litany of scandal having finally got the attention of U.S. lawmakers, who are already proposing legislation to put Facebook back in its place.

Buckle up, sunshine. It gets even rougher from here.

This week in Facebook

Facebook's headlines this week are all about the children, and how Zuckerberg & co. are knowingly exploiting them.

First up, this piece from TechCrunch:

Desperate for data on its competitors, Facebook has been secretly paying people to install a “Facebook Research” VPN that lets the company suck in all of a user’s phone and web activity, similar to Facebook’s Onavo Protect app that Apple banned in June and that was removed in August. Facebook sidesteps the App Store and rewards teenagers and adults to download the Research app and give it root access to network traffic in what may be a violation of Apple policy so the social network can decrypt and analyze their phone activity, a TechCrunch investigation confirms. Facebook admitted to TechCrunch it was running the Research program to gather data on usage habits.

Since 2016, Facebook has been paying users ages 13 to 35 up to $20 per month plus referral fees to sell their privacy by installing the iOS or Android “Facebook Research” app. Facebook even asked users to screenshot their Amazon order history page. The program is administered through beta testing services Applause, BetaBound and uTest to cloak Facebook’s involvement, and is referred to in some documentation as “Project Atlas” — a fitting name for Facebook’s effort to map new trends and rivals around the globe.

Pro tip: If you're cloaking your involvement in a shady project because you know it's too shady to be publicly associated with... you should probably be rethinking the whole enterprise. Just saying.

Facebook's "Project Atlas" shenanigans should sound familiar: it wasn't that long ago that Facebook's Onavo app was removed from the iOS app store for violating Apple's terms of service. And the new app is pretty comprehensive, potentially allowing the collections of "photos/videos sent to others, emails, web searches, web browsing activity, and even ongoing location information by tapping into the feeds of any location tracking apps you may have installed." And, while Facebook apparently pulled an about-face at "at 11:20pm PT" (when TC's piece was updated), announced that FB was removing the app from Apple phones, they apparently have no plans yet to do the same on Android phones.

Also, it should be noted that most jurisdictions don't allow 13 year olds to sign legally binding contracts, which means that Facebook's use of just-barely-teens for this effort may be not-quite-legal. Which is when we get to the second piece of Facebook's sketchy and dodgy teen-involving bullshit, as reported by arstechnica:

Two Democratic senators have asked Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg to explain why the social network apparently "manipulated children into spending their parents' money without permission" while playing games on Facebook.

"A new report from the Center for Investigative Reporting shows that your company had a policy of willful blindness toward credit card charges by children—internally referred to as 'friendly fraud'—in order to boost revenue at the expense of parents," US Sens. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) wrote in a letter to Zuckerberg today. "Notably, Facebook appears to have rejected a plan that would have effectively mitigated this risk and instead doubled down on maximizing revenue."

Because parents didn't know that children would be able to make purchases without additional verification, "many young users incurred several thousands of dollars in charges while playing games like Angry Birds, Petville, Wild Ones, and Barn Buddy," the senators' letter said.

What, did you think that Facebook had dodged responsibility for this one? Well, think again, Apple fan, because the Democratically-controlled U.S. House of Representatives aren't about to let this go, and their colleague in the U.S. Senate look to also be keen to get in on the regulating-of-Facebook action. I told you that Facebook's troubles were just getting started.

And so, with two different Facebook-exploits-teens stories in the headlines, we can now head into Wednesday... and the rest of the week. That's right, folks, Facebook's week isn't even over yet. Winning!

Microsoft gets petty with Windows 7 users

As of the end of December, 36.90% of all desktop and laptop users (not just Windows users, mind, but PC users in general) had spent three and a half years actively rejecting Windows 10. This isn't like OS version transitions of years past, where people on the old version might just be procrastinating; thanks to the egregious excesses of the GWX campaign, all of the people who didn't care enough to actively do something were switched to Windows 10 already. No, current-day Windows 7 users are the ones who did care, and who took steps to remain on their OS of choice.

Not only have Windows 7 users actively rejected Windows 10, but many of them appear to be actively rejecting Windows entirely, with MacOS and Ubuntu Linux gaining market share at Windows' expense for most of the last year: Windows gained user market share only in March and July of last year, losing market share in every other month of 2018 for a total loss of 2.31%,with MacOS gaining 1.63% and Linux gaining 0.66% over the same time period. Microsoft set out to change the paradigm of personal computing with Windows 10, and clearly succeeded, but not in the way they wanted; rather than making Windows 10 into the new paradigm, they seem to be ushering in an era in which Windows no longer dominates on the desktop.

And so Microsoft, being Microsoft, have responded to this slow-motion exodus by giving Windows 7 users yet another reason to dump Windows, without giving them any clear new reason to adopt Windows 10 in place. Because of course they have.

This week in Facebook

After starting the new year with a few largely scandal-free weeks, Mark Zuckerberg apparently decided that he was bored, or something, because the Facebook shit resumed flying fast and thick, and Gizmodo had pretty good coverage of it all.

First up: Mark Zuckerberg's thirsty op-ed, in which he opined that people didn't trust Facebook only because we don't understand them:

On Thursday, the Wall Street Journal published a 1,000-word screed by Mark Zuckerberg about the company’s data collecting practices titled “The Facts About Facebook.” In it, Zuckerberg makes noise about the company being about “people,” and insists—as he has been for the majority of his company’s 15-year history—that we should trust it. Zuckerberg appears to think the primary reason users have little faith in the company’s ability to responsibly or ethically handle their data is because of its targeted advertising practices, about which he writes: “This model can feel opaque, and we’re all distrustful of systems we don’t understand.” 

I guess the apology tour is over; Zuck is back to his normal, condescending self.

Gizmodo's Catie Keck goes on to list a few of the reasons why people who understand Facebook just fine also distrust Zuck & Co., starting with FB's lack of transparency, continuing on through Cambridge Analytica, and ending with their scraping and then sharing data about their users (and also about people who've never used Facebook themselves) with advertisers, and other low-lights:

In 2018, we learned that Facebook was data-sharing with other companies like Microsoft’s Bing, Spotify, Netflix, and others in exchange for more information about its users. There were also the revelations that Cambridge Analytica data-scraping was worse than we thought; that Facebook was sharing shadow contact information with advertisers; and that turning off Facebook location-sharing doesn’t stop it from tracking you. That’s obviously totally aside from the George Soros conspiracy theory fiasco; its mishandling of Myanmar genocide; and its standing as a hotbed for rampant misinformation.

As with his year-end Facebook post—which I’ll note here also largely ignored the tsunami of public relations problems the company faced last year—Zuckerberg appears to remain bafflingly optimistic about the function of his company. To be clear, this is the same founder of Facebook who once called users of his product “dumb fucks” for trusting him with their sensitive information.

Lots of links in the original article, if you missed some of those earlier "hits" when they happened.

So, not an auspicious beginning. Zuck wasn't done yet, though; not by a long shot.

Remember that Firefox is an option

I consume a fair bit of basically-free online content, and don't have anything against "paying" the creators of that content by having a little advertising accompany it, as long as those ads are not intrusive, or disruptive, or loaded with crypto-jacking (or other) malware. I only went nuclear on online ads because advertisers couldn't get their shit together.

So, when Google announced that their Chrome browser's selective ad-blocking functionality would be rolling out worldwide, I was cautiously optimistic. I was even considering switching back to Chrome from Firefox, just to see what sort of a web browsing experience I could have on Google's browser, now that I didn't have to be running multiple extensions in order to block the bad guys.

And then, Google had to go and break everybody else's ad-blockers. Because of course they did; Google sells advertising, and obviously they want you to stop blocking as many ads as possible. Which sucks; they're basically taking away consumer choice, just to line their own pockets. Even worse, though, Google aren't just breaking ad-blocking extensions; they're breaking a whole bunch of other stuff in the process.

As reported by ZDNet:

A planned update to one of the Google Chrome extensions APIs would kill much more than a few ad blockers, ZDNet has learned, including browser extensions for antivirus products, parental control enforcement, and various privacy-enhancing services.

[...]

The biggest of these categories would be extensions developed by antivirus makers and meant to prevent users from accessing malicious sites and for detecting malware before it's being downloaded.

Yikes.

OK, maybe there was one company that brought something to CES that consumers might actually buy

It turns out that one company, Hisense, brought an LED display to CES that delivers OLED-comparable performance but with higher refresh rates and zero burn-in, apparently based on something which Dolby developed years ago but abandoned. Linus Tech Tips covered it, describing it as having been "grossly under-covered [...] at the show," something which I'd agree with: as far as I can tell, only Engadget devoted an entire post to it, with The Verge burying one and a half paragraphs about it in their "biggest TVs" CES roundup.

Hisense's ULED XS panels will apparently deliver gaming-calibre 120 Hz refresh rates, OLED-calibre image quality, all using robust, mature tech (i.e. none of Micro-LED's "early days yet" issues). Unlike LG's US$8000 burn-in prone rollup OLED, this could deliver better performance at the same size for less money, and be able to last longer. It's exactly the sort of show-stopping product that should have grabbed a lot of attention at a show dedicated to consumer electronics, and was almost completely ignored.

It will be interesting to see how these things review, and if pricing comes down in the next couple of years, but ULED is currently clocking in at a third the cost of an equivalently-sized OLED panel. $3500 for a 65" OLED panel that will have serious burn-in problems in a couple of years is way too much money, but $1500 for a 65" ULED panel that you might still be using in ten years' time is a much more reasonable proposition. It's the kind of consumer value that the big names at CES simply weren't bothering to offer.

It will be interesting to see if that changes, now that Hisense seems set to shake up the industry with their economical approach to something which would otherwise be a luxury item. Call it practical luxury, I guess? Whatever you call it, here's hoping that next CES sees more of it.

So.... I guess that was CES?

Does anyone else find it weird that 2019's big Consumer Electronics Show wasted the entire week without showcasing anything for actual consumers?

I mean, sure, we got LG's rollup OLED TV, which looks sexy but costs US$8000, and which will need to be replaced in two years' time because of OLED's severe screen burn-in issues. Who can afford to spend $8K every two years on a roll-up gimmick TV? Who is this for?

We also got a plethora of 8K TVs, at a time when even 4K TVs aren't really a thing yet. I mean, it's great that the likes of LG are making 4K sets that are comparable in price to 1080p sets; if you're needing to replace your TV, and don't need a refresh rate higher than 60 Hz for any reason, then you can certainly go 4K because it won't cost extra so why not? But you still don't need a 4K TV for which there's almost no content available, and you definitely don't need an expensive 8K set for which there's even less content on the menu. 8K is nothing but costly, boasting high price points while delivering zero value to the consumer... which was basically the prevailing trend of CES2019.

Oh, yes, and then there's 5G... which, again, boasts a premium price while being completely useless to consumers since there are no 5G networks. And, no, AT&T's 5G E nonsense is not a 5G network, and does not count. Which brings us to CES2019's other prevailing trend, which was straight-up lies told to consumers about expensive products which are being marketed at them, without being in any way designed for them.

Worse yet, the one big discussion about technology that consumers actually care about was never mentioned by any of the big exhibitors.

Windows lost more Steam, too

In case you were still thinking that Windows' 0.83% user market share drop in December was some sort of an error, Steam's Software Survey has corroborated the decline, putting Steam in sync with the overall OS market for a second straight month.

Click to enlarge.

Once again, MacOS (a.k.a. OS X) and Linux were the big gainers, with MacOS 10.14 and Ubuntu 18.10 both showing strong results; the newbie-friendly Linux Mint, a distro that doesn't even register among OS users in the broader marketplace, appears to have gained a significant share among Steam users. Weirdly, only Windows 7's 64-bit version lost Steam users, with Win7's 32-bit version gaining ground alongside all other Windows versions except XP; Win7 64-bit's decline was enough to put Windows in the red overall, though, with a 0.58% overall drop which is only slightly slower than the decline seen in the overall OS market.

In isolation, this sort of behaviour among Steam users could be interpreted as resulting from Valve's Steam Play/Proton initiative, but given that Windows' decline among Steam users is actually less than that seen in the larger OS market, it's difficult to describe this as anything other than just a part of the overall trend, with Windows-dependent PC gamers actually lagging slightly behind everyone else. Whether Steam Play/Proton changes those users' decision-making calculus in the coming months is, of course, anyone's guess. It does seem to be making it somewhat easier for gamers to join the shift away from Windows, though, meaning that Microsoft shouldn't be counting too hard on PC gamers to be a backstop against the overall loss of Windows users.

Nokia channels The Onion, announces 5-camera phone in desperate bid for relevance

One of my all-time favourite pieces on satirical site The Onion took dead aim at the increasingly ridiculous men's grooming industry. It's title? Fuck Everything, We're Doing Five Blades.

Would someone tell me how this happened? We were the fucking vanguard of shaving in this country. The Gillette Mach3 was the razor to own. Then the other guy came out with a three-blade razor. Were we scared? Hell, no. Because we hit back with a little thing called the Mach3Turbo. That's three blades and an aloe strip. For moisture. But you know what happened next? Shut up, I'm telling you what happened—the bastards went to four blades. Now we're standing around with our cocks in our hands, selling three blades and a strip. Moisture or no, suddenly we're the chumps. Well, fuck it. We're going to five blades. 

I laughed, I cried, it became a part of me... and became even funnier when Gillette released a six blade razor only months after The Onion's piece was published. And now, years later, it's giving me flashbacks, thanks to this piece on Thurrott.com:

Nokia’s Next Android Flagship Features Five Cameras

I shit you not, they even have pictures. And a promotional video, which has inexplicably been shot entirely in portrait mode. And claims, like:

The company’s Nokia 9 PureView handset will feature a penta-lens setup with ZEISS optics on the back. The “revolutionary” five-camera setup will, of course, allow for better quality pictures.

Of course, it will.

Windows 10 finally overtakes Windows 7... but it's not the "goods news" story that Microsoft was hoping for

Happy New Year, everybody! 2019 has dawned, and with it, at we already have at least two different posts from sites proclaiming Windows 10's belated ascendancy. Both Thurrott.com (Report: Windows 10 Takes Over Windows 7) and MSPowerUser (NetMarketShare: Windows 10 finally overtakes Windows 7) immediately noticed that Windows 10's usage share is starting the new year at 39.22%, which is finally higher than Windows 7's 36.90% share, according to NetMarketShare.com, and neither could wait to proclaim the future to be smooth sailing for Windows from here on out.

What they've apparently both missed, however, is that Windows has, once again, lost overall market share, with MacOS and Linux gaining at Windows' expense:

Window's share of the market dropped by nearly a full percent in the last month. At that pace, they'll be below 80% by June.

Yes, Windows 10 finally passed Windows 7, and this time WX managed to actually be moving forwards in the process, unlike last month, but Windows overall is still losing users to MacOS, and to Linux. Interestingly, while the Unix-like OSes gained as a group, both BSD and "Unknown" actually lost ground last month; only Linux actually gained, growing by 0.70%.

The other Unix-likes aren't doing as well as Linux is.

Even more interestingly, Ubuntu alone moved from 0.57% to 0.71%, accounting for 0.14% of the Linux's change by itself, and giving this one Linux distro a greater share of the market than Google's ChromeOS... meaning that Linux is not only growing at the expense of Windows, but that most of Linux's gains are coming in the form of a rapidly-emerging leader.

This has enormous potential ramifications for the future.