Okay (geek level 5, here) The best explanation/speculation I heard was that someone within Facebook deleted the BGP connections that connect Facebook's router to the upstream (internet gateway) router. When the gateway saw that, it didn't just see it as "down connections". It looked as if Facebook no longer existed. (BGP = Border Gateway Protocol.)
Sounds like what we used to call a "CLM" - Career Limiting Move - or perhaps not. But that sort of thing doesn't "just happen". Someone told it to.
[This message has been edited by Raydar (edited 10-06-2021).]
Lol, very good. That was way more production preparation than I expected from the internet, but soon someone is going to say [i] They know. Shut it down.[/]
Okay (geek level 5, here) The best explanation/speculation I heard was that someone within Facebook deleted the BGP connections that connect Facebook's router to the upstream (internet gateway) router. When the gateway saw that, it didn't just see it as "down connections". It looked as if Facebook no longer existed. (BGP = Border Gateway Protocol.)
Sounds like what we used to call a "CLM" - Career Limiting Move - or perhaps not. But that sort of thing doesn't "just happen". Someone told it to.
Resume generating event.
With the size of Facebook's foot print and the amount of traffic it would be hard for me to believe that someone just removed part of the config and dropped all of the connections. But I bet someone was puckered up the entire time because they sent him/her to a room with no windows or cameras.
[This message has been edited by Jake_Dragon (edited 10-06-2021).]
Originally posted by steve308: Appears the snowflake has a new word he is enthralled with.
I'm a Boomer. Which means I want to invade other countries to fight people over there instead of over here even though that country had nothing to do with an attack on us. So as a Boomer I support lying about WMDs to achieve this. It also means we need tens of thousands more Afghan interpreters because Hannity and the Republucan Party said so.
The whole "facebook whistleblower" thing puzzles me. The way I understand it, she is claiming that FB is not actively censoring their content. I understand the whole platform-vs-publisher issue, so this is not a comment on that. But there are many, including me, who would be pleased to see an actual free platform. Unless I am misunderstanding, she seems to be blowing the whistle on free speech.
She says Facebook et al are "not safe" because they do not police their content. She blames the profit motive. This story makes me very uneasy. It seems that her point is that free speech is driven by capitalism and is a danger to the public. That sounds less like a whistleblower and more like a government stooge.
Yeah her whole claim was that FB algorithm sends users content that will get them angry in order to keep them engaged and on the site longer, because it makes FB a lot more money..
My question is, is this supposed to be a "trade secret" people are just now realizing? ALL social media sites do this. Even Youtube does it. (ever get videos in your feed about things you just plain don't like or agree with? That's why).. Like i get videos from lots of political you tubers that i don't watch or even know who they are, from both left and right personalities. Why? I don't watch these people, but hey, one of them might say something to piss me off right? Get me engaged and want to take part?
Its similar to click bait, but i call this "rage bait".. Show users things that will likely piss them off, and they are going to be much more likely to participate, which keeps them on the site longer, getting more "clicks" for the site.
This is nothing new and i just assumed most people were aware that social media sites did this. Which is why i ignore any and all political/religious posts and topics on any of these sites.
I may be late to the party on this one, but there is no doubt in my mind that the facebook "outtage" was a result of the whistle blower. They had to shut down to destroy some evidence.
I may be late to the party on this one, but there is no doubt in my mind that the facebook "outtage" was a result of the whistle blower. They had to shut down to destroy some evidence.
Brian
Ok but what would that "evidence" be? What crime has facebook allegedly committed?
We know the FB algorithm uses "rage bait" to engage users. We know facebook sells your personal information to other companies for profit. Her big claim was that FB uses rage bait to engage users. Might make FB look bad for sure, but none of these things are currently illegal. Sure she said FB puts profits before people.. But what big corporation doesn't?
Believe me im not a defender of FB, they could go out of business tomorrow and i would not shed a tear. But so far i have not heard about anything "illegal" that FB has done, other than what i mentioned, which is slimy sure, but not illegal. It does make FB as a company look pretty bad, but unless i missed something else that was said by the "whistle blower", i really don't see what the big deal is. Hopefully more interesting info comes out as time goes on, but if this is all their is, then its kinda a dead story.
[This message has been edited by Jonesy (edited 10-09-2021).]
Ok but what would that "evidence" be? What crime has facebook allegedly committed?
In today's world, one does not have to commit a crime to be the target of "cancel culture". It seems easy enough to drag anyone through the mud. You see attempts here with false, unsubstantiated accusations and misleading innuendo.
I am not suggesting or speculating at any cause for the facebook outage.
In today's world, one does not have to commit a crime to be the target of "cancel culture".
I am not suggesting or speculating at any cause for the facebook outage.
Very true, can't argue with that..
Of course those who like to "cancel" tend to use social media to do so, would they really attempt to take down one of their biggest platforms? Seems counter productive to what they do.
Of course those who like to "cancel" tend to use social media to do so, would they really attempt to take down one of their biggest platforms? Seems counter productive to what they do.
I don't think anyone wants to cancel facebook, but somebody wants them under their thumb.
But that sort of thing doesn't "just happen". Someone told it to.
