Latest news about Bitcoin and all cryptocurrencies. Your daily crypto news habit.
Something happened this week that rarely occurs, history offered up a side-by-side comparison with a control. Heads of respective social network and messaging platforms Facebook and Telegram were each brought before their home governments, the United States for Mark Zuckerberg, Russia for Pavel Durov. How the two men responded is telling, and should inform everyone concerned with privacy, especially cryptocurrency enthusiasts.
Also read:Â CBSâs NCIS Los Angeles Weaves Stolen Bitcoin Into Script, LL Cool J Is on the Case
Facebook and Telegram Have Very Different Principles
Mike Butcher at Tech Crunchâs Disrupt back in 2015, put it to Pavel Durov of Telegram fame directly, âDoes it concern you ISIS uses Telegram?â Mr. Durov looks away from his interviewer, Mr. Butcher, as if the answer is somewhere at the back of the room. âThatâs a good question,â he says, considerately. Mr. Butcher asks pointedly, interrupting, âYou sleep well at night knowing terrorists use your platform?â Mr. Durov again congratulates the line of questioning, and answers, âI think that privacy, ultimately, and our right for privacy, is more important than our fear of bad things happening like terrorism.â
Mr. Durovâs post after a Russian court ruled Telegram be banned.
Such answers would be instant business suicide in the US, England, etc. Mr. Durov would be publicly attacked in the press, vilified by government minders. And yet here he is, in San Francisco, among the tech literati, talking the fundamental principle of cryptographic currency, privacy. Terrorism to the average person in the United States is a Pavlovian word, it rallies all manner of folks from varying backgrounds to support expansion of state power with few exceptions. Â Â
Zuck has beef with Appleâs Cook, according to notes photographed at the hearings.
Contrast that answer, and the ethos behind it, with Mark Zuckerberg, founder of Facebook, and his testimony over two days this week to both houses of the US federal legislature. The nuanced evasions. The weird punts to his âteamâ and their âgetting backâ to lawmakers. The strange repetitive salutation, âSenatorâ and âCongressmanâ for every answer.
During his first day of testimony, Mr. Zuckerberg was asked by Senator John Thune, South Dakota, of the Joint Commerce and Judiciary Committee about Facebookâs decade-long line of apologies and promises to do better on the issue of privacy. The caesar haircut, suited, and sitting on a four inch booster cushioned Mr. Zuckerberg, again acknowledged âmistakes.â He then took the opportunity to wax nostalgic about his Harvard dorm room days, adding the company was in the process of an âoverall, broader philosophical shift.â
The Shift to Good and Healthy
He continues, noting that Facebookâs main goal over its lifetime has been building tools to connect people, and this has come at the expense of the companyâs âresponsibility.â Facebook has chased the bucks, aiming for world dominance without really caring about how its platform changes peopleâs minds, while charging for every scammy ad. Theyâve obviously not spent enough of their massive profits on hiring people to monitor and select what messages they put out.
Itâs not enough to build tools, Mr. Zuckerberg insisted, âwe need to make sure theyâre used for good. We need to now take a more active role in policing the ecosystem [âŠ] making sure all the members of our community are using these tools in a way thatâs going to be good and healthy.â
Facebook and US law enforcement, 2017
Mr. Zuckerberg and his assembled 27,000 or so employees are to review content, pushing users toward what they consider good and healthy. Good and healthy, it turns out, seems to correspond, increasingly, to governmentsâ whims. According to Facebookâs own metrics, it does indeed acquiesce to a staggering 85% of US law enforcement requests. In the United Kingdom, that number rises to 90% regularly.
Ironically, in Mr. Durovâs native Russia, Facebook has ârestricted access to content reported by the Federal Service for Supervision of Communications, Information Technology, and Mass Media for allegedly violating local laws related to extremism, illegal gambling, and the promotion of self-harm and suicide,â a marked difference from Telegramâs defiance this week.
Orders of magnitude might point to a completely different business when attempting to compare Facebook to Telegram. And thatâs probably a fair criticism. 200 million users (Telegram) versus 2 billion (Facebook) is a literal world of difference. But Telegram holds fast to parts of the cypherpunk ideal: censorship resistance, relative anonymity, a badass tech that can be accessed by anyone.
Using Facebook, even if readers are not dastardly criminals, carries a risk the hoi polloi should consider carefully. Most arenât special enough to warrant activity on the level discussed here, of course, but that could very well change, and one neednât be paranoid to understand the trending pipeline from Facebook to government law enforcement agencies the world over. The two are getting more difficult to distinguish. Â
Which messaging app do you prefer? Share your thoughts in the comments section below.
Images courtesy of Shutterstock, Andrew Harnik/AP/REX/Shutterstock.
Do you agree with us that Bitcoin is the best invention since sliced bread? Thought so. Thatâs why we are building this online universe revolving around anything and everything Bitcoin. We have a store. And a forum. And a casino, a pool and real-time price statistics.
The post Greedy Facebook Versus Ideological Telegram: Why Principles Matter appeared first on Bitcoin News.
Disclaimer
The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not reflect the views of Bitcoin Insider. Every investment and trading move involves risk - this is especially true for cryptocurrencies given their volatility. We strongly advise our readers to conduct their own research when making a decision.