> Facebook is going to use all this data — not to improve our lives — but to target better marketing and advertising messages at us
It's entirely possible that better targeted marketing and advertising can "improve" our lives. To state this outcome as a dire dystopian end point is making a huge cynical assumption about the motives of companies and commerce in general. I honestly believe that Facebook (and Google for that matter) actually want to improve our lives. I honestly believe that they think that they can introduce advertising in such a way that it's a win win for both parties, at least for a significant number of people.
That doesn't mean I'm naive about things, or even agree. But to see this assumption - that these companies are out to intentionally make our lives worse - written into editorial reporting as if it's a foregone conclusion, is disappointing.
I believe you mis-characterized the statement you're objecting to: "...not to improve our lives — but to target better marketing and advertising messages at us."
"but to target better marketing and advertising messages at us" does not equal "are out to intentionally make our lives worse". His point is that is clear that FB _will_ benefit from the newly acquired data. You have confidence we all _might_ benefit. The OP points out FB's history, which is undeniably historic in how it has challenged social norms for privacy. It is also no secret that FB (and Google, and ...) make money from advertising, and that rich datasets of details about people make for financially richer advertisers. Skepticism (maybe a little cynicism, even) is not unhealthy or "mean", in this context.
No one doubts that better targeted marketing and advertising can "improve" lives. The dystopian part of this scenario is vesting just two companies with so much power. For example, FB (and Twitter) have already begun restricting API access to apps that are too big or unwilling to be bought out. In the absence of an alternate (or competing) network, they control your experience (and user data). Besides the negative consequences for commerce, there are wider implications for individuals. Dictators and totalitarian regimes sincerely believe they are doing best for their people. That may not be the case.
> Facebook is going to use all this data — not to improve our lives — but to target better marketing and advertising messages at us
It's entirely possible that better targeted marketing and advertising can "improve" our lives. To state this outcome as a dire dystopian end point is making a huge cynical assumption about the motives of companies and commerce in general. I honestly believe that Facebook (and Google for that matter) actually want to improve our lives. I honestly believe that they think that they can introduce advertising in such a way that it's a win win for both parties, at least for a significant number of people.
That doesn't mean I'm naive about things, or even agree. But to see this assumption - that these companies are out to intentionally make our lives worse - written into editorial reporting as if it's a foregone conclusion, is disappointing.