Tag Archive for Mark Zuckerberg

Facebook Friends Without Benefits

Facebook Friends Without BenefitsThe USPTO has granted Facebook (FB) a patent that could be used to help lenders determine your creditworthiness. The Social Networker plans to allow creditors to look at who is in your social network to judge your creditworthiness.

bank check the credit rating of the members of you Facebook network to decide if you are worthy of a loanBusiness Insider says the patent would make it possible for banks to check the credit rating of the members of your Facebook network to decide if you are worthy of a loan. It seems that your shiftless uncle Louie is going to determine if you get a mortgage. According to BI, the patent states:

… When an individual applies for a loan, the lender examines the credit ratings of members of the individual’s social network who are connected to the individual through authorized nodes. If the average credit rating of these members is at least a minimum credit score, the lender continues to process the loan application. Otherwise, the loan application is rejected.

TFacebook logohe patent was first discovered by Atlanta legal tech start-up SmartUp was part of a bundle of patents Facebook acquired in 2010 when it purchased the patents from failed social network Friendster for $40 million.

BI reports that the patent may walk a legal tight rope. The U.S. Equal Credit Opportunity Act requires creditors to tell applicants why they have been denied credit, so using social data to determine someone’s credit risk could walk a fine line. Despite federal law, the author points out that financial institutions are already using applicant’s social data to help verify their identity. For example, Lending Club, and Affirm use online data for decision-making.

Rb-
Back in 2010, I wrote about this day coming.

Many banks are now outsourcing their social network data mining operations to firms such as Rapleaf. (now TowerData).

Maybe it is time to un-friend your kid in college with no job and crazy aunt Patti in Paducah and instead friend Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, and Mark Zuckerberg.

Related articles

 

Ralph Bach has been in IT long enough to know better and has blogged from his Bach Seat about IT, careers, and anything else that catches his attention since 2005. You can follow him on LinkedInFacebook, and Twitter. Email the Bach Seat here.

Cisco CEO Talks Cash at Tech Dinner

Cisco CEO Talks Cash at Tech DinnerSometimes my view from the Bach Seat is just so right….

The BusinessInsider reports that former Apple (AAPL) CEO Steve Jobs told his biographer Walter Isaacson what really went on when the tech titans supped with President Barack Obama earlier this year.

repatriation tax holiday that would allow major corporations to avoid tax payments on overseas profitsWhile the tech titans were slated to discuss America’s economy and what could be done to create more jobs in the U.S. according to Mr. Isaacson, Google‘s (GOOG) Eric Schmidt, then Yahoo (YHOO) chief Carol Bartz, and Oracle‘s (ORCL) Larry Ellison and Cisco (CSCO) CEO John Chambers annoyed Obama. The business leaders seemed more concerned with boosting their own company instead of America’s economy. Mr.Isaacson focuses on Cisco’s Chambers as an example:

Cisco's (CSCO) John Chambers annoyed President Obama“Chambers, for example, pushed a proposal for a repatriation tax holiday that would allow major corporations to avoid tax payments on overseas profits if they brought them back to the United States for investment during a certain period. The President was annoyed, and so was Facebooks’s Mark Zuckerberg, who turned to Valerie Jarrett, sitting to his right, and whispered, “We should be talking about what’s important to the country. Why is he just talking about what’s good for him?

rb-

I noted Cisco’s John Chambers’ editorial in the WSJ calling for a tax holiday last year.

Related articles

 

Ralph Bach has been in IT long enough to know better and has blogged from his Bach Seat about IT, careers, and anything else that catches his attention since 2005. You can follow him on LinkedInFacebook, and Twitter. Email the Bach Seat here.

10 Security Reasons to Quit Facebook

10 Security Reasons to Quit FacebookJoan Goodchild wrote an article for CSO Online that said Baby Boomers quit Facebook faster than they join based on information from Inside Facebook. The data indicate that after a huge growth in Facebook membership among the over-55 age group that same demographic began to defect in large numbers, just months after signing up. The CSO Online article quotes Scott Wright, a security consultant based in Canada and runs the site streetwise-security-zone.com says Boomers leave Facebook because they have discretion.

10 ways Facebook does not allow discretion

Here are 10 ways that Facebook does not allow for discretion, driving Boomer permanently off of Facebook.

Facebook1. Your Privacy is History Mr. Wright recalled an academic claim that the notion of privacy differs widely among generations. “The 20-something view of privacy is basically that their parents not see what they are doing. That’s about it,” he said. Apparently, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg agrees. He claims that openly sharing information with many people is today’s social norm. He went on to say “We view it as our role in the system to constantly be innovating and be updating what our system is to reflect what the current social norms are.” Many have translated this to mean Facebook doesn’t think its users want much privacy, and the policies of the site show that view. “If you can’t maintain privacy online and off, then you can’t speak freely,” said Bethan Tuttle, an Washington-based independent consultant and privacy advocate. Tuttle says in the article that the massive and quick growth Facebook has experienced, coupled with a lack of privacy-centric leadership has left end-user privacy as casualty.

2. They don’t have your best interests in mind Tom Eston, creator of the website socialmediasecurity.com points out, the business model of Facebook and Twitter, is to make user information as public as possible to generate new ways to make money. Mr. Eston said in the article;

They are really startups if you think about it. They don’t have a true business model … Their philosophy is the more you share, the more information they have to make money with. With that in mind, can you really count on them to protect you?

And do you know just how much information you are sharing that can be used not only by Facebook, but by the application developers that create those fun quizzes and games? Wright says most people don’t. (I wrote about this problem here).

3. Frequent redesigns affect privacy settings Mr. Wright in the CSO Online article said,

Just when people figure out the privacy settings on Facebook, they go and change them again … It always seems like it is being done in everyone’s best interest, but if you really examine it, they have never done anything other than to try to get people to share more information.

Facebook redesigns often make public, and searchable, certain user information that was previously private, and many of the features you can make private are left public unless you go in and adjust your privacy settings. This is no small task, according to Ms. Tuttle, “I am really good online but it took me several tries to get my Facebook privacy settings where I needed them to be.”

Phishing4. Social engineering attacks are getting more targeted Most Facebook users have received messages on their wall asking “Have you seen this video?” or “Is this you in this photo?” By clicking on the link, the user runs the risk of being infected by malware. These are known as social engineering attacks, and they are becoming more sophisticated said Mr. Wright. “They are becoming very targeted. Even seasoned security professionals are falling for them,” he said. The more information you share, coupled with a decrease in privacy, only means it is even easier for cyber criminals to get information about you that can be used to trick you into clicking on a bad link.

5. You can’t trust the ads Most web users think advertisements are harmless, unfortunately, some contain malicious links. One common scenario involves a pop-up from the ad that claims your computer is infected and prompts you to download software to fix it. Instead of helpful software, you end up downloading something nasty. This is now commonly known in the security community as “scareware,” and it’s still a very effective way to snare unsuspecting users.

6. Spam Spam claiming to be from Facebook has increased according to the article. “I think it’s a security concern,” said Mr. Eston. “Mostly because spammers can use that vulnerability to make you think the message is coming from Facebook when it is not. Many users simply wonder “Why is Facebook sending me this?” and instinctively open the message and log in to what turns out to be a fake screen that steals credentials.

7. You don’t really know your friends The author cites a report from security firm Cloudmark which concluded that close to 40 percent of new Facebook profiles are fakes.  Having lots of friends is dangerous because it opens you up to more security risks. Mr. Wright said those who get targeted for hacking are the users who have lots of friends (here is an example). The more friends you have, the more reach a criminal will have when he breaks into your profile and sends out a bad link to everyone.

8. You can’t help yourself from being dumb The attention around the site pleaserobme.com brought to light the safety concerns around social networking. Pleaserobme aggregates the Twitter feeds of people who play Foursquare, a location-sharing application. The problem is while playing the game, many users are also publicly broadcasting that their home is likely unattended and a good “opportunity” (as the site terms it) for thieves. As Ms. Tuttle put it, you need to think about what you are doing and many people are not. You’re putting yourself out there in potentially dangerous ways, particularly if you don’t know all of your “friends” that well.

9. The great unknown CSO Online says there is a lot of speculation about a Facebook IPO and future business strategy. What does this mean for users? Mr. Wright said some fear it means an increase loss of privacy as the social networking site inevitably looks for ways to make money by offering up valuable user information to advertisers and developers. Mr. Wright said,

One of the things I find most interesting is that there are still many people who are scared to death of social networking sites. These are usually the people who don’t see value in them. In the end, they may be the wisest of us all.

Bill Clinton i angry at you for using social media

10. Ex’s, creeps and parents Facebook is making it possible for people to be cyber stalked, even if they aren’t friends anymore, said Mr. Eston. Although the physical and virtual connections are broken, having mutual friends makes it easier for your ex to keep tabs on you. The same goes for any creepy guy or girl you are trying to avoid. Or you may get a friend request from a parent, which Mr. Wright claims many 20-something users consider the worst thing that could ever happen in the history of social networking. “That is a big driver for quitting,” he said. “Once the parent friends some of these people they immediately think ‘I’ve got to get out of this!

What do you think?

Are you concerned about your privacy on Facebook?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
Related articles

Ralph Bach has been in IT long enough to know better and has blogged from his Bach Seat about IT, careers and anything else that catches his attention since 2005. You can follow him on LinkedInFacebook, and Twitter. Email the Bach Seat here.

Tech Titans Talk Tax Cuts with POTUS

Tech Titans Talk Tax Cuts with POTUSFortune is reporting that a group of tech, pharmaceutical, and energy giants are lobbying for a tax cut that would allow them to bring home the estimated $1 trillion they’ve got parked overseas at a steeply discounted rate. Fortune’s sources say that Apple (AAPL), Cisco (CSCO), and Oracle (ORCL)  are among the major players looking to win a one-year tax amnesty on their foreign earnings, allowing them to repatriate that money at a tax rate of about 5%, instead of the 35% they face now.

Multinationals prevailed on Congress to approve a one-year tax holiday once before, as part of a jobs package in 2004. Back then, the companies argued the relief would help them boost economic growth because they’d plow their repatriated money into research, investment, and hiring. And while plenty of outfits benefited from the break – 843 corporations made use of the holiday, bringing back a total of $362 billion, according to the IRS — the broader economic benefits were dubious.

The Treasury Department wrote rules trying to make sure that the recovered cash was in fact invested back into the companies. But money is fungible. Although the rules expressly prohibited using the funds for dividend payments or stock buybacks, later analysis has shown participants sent most of it to shareholders anyway. One study cited by Fortune from the National Bureau of Economic Research found that for every dollar of repatriated cash, companies bumped up shareholder payouts between 60 and 92 cents.

A tax holiday would bring a substantial amount of cashback to the United States and paying that out to shareholders is good for the economy,” said study co-author Kristin Forbes, an economics professor at MIT’s Sloan School of Management and a member of then-President George W. Bush‘s council of economic advisers told Fortune. “But if you’re a politician claiming this will create a lot of jobs or new investment, it isn’t supported by the data.”

In order to sell the deal, Cisco CEO John Chambers and Oracle president Safra Catz argued in an October editorial in the Wall Street Journal that a second holiday would help put Americans back to work. But they don’t promise that companies would drive all of their repatriated money directly into job-creating investments. They acknowledge that companies might pass the money along to shareholders again. But Mr. Chambers and Ms. Catz argue on top of direct investments, the tax cut holiday would spur a new stimulus by boosting markets, thereby increasing consumer confidence. And they say the tax revenue itself could fund $50 billion worth of credits to encourage new hiring — a sum only possible in the unlikely event companies decide to bring home the entirety of their overseas reserves.

President Obama’s recent dinner with Silicon Valley’s tech titans was a star-studded event according to TechCrunch.

Obama tech- dinner toast

Invitee included Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Apple CEO Steve Jobs, Yahoo (YHOO) CEO Carol Bartz, Cisco’s CEO John Chambers, Twitter CEO Dick Costolo, Oracle CEO Larry Ellison, Netflix (NFLX) CEO Reed Hastings, Genentech Chairman Art Levinson; Google (GOOG) CEO Eric Schmidt; former state controller and venture capitalist Steve Westly Doerr, and Stanford University President John Hennessy. The event was held at Kleiner Perkins partner John Doerr’s home.

After the dinner, White House press secretary Jay Carney said the group talked about ways to invest in innovation and how to increase jobs in the private sector. He said Mr. Obama also discussed proposals to invest in research and development and his goal of doubling exports in five years.

rb-

I don’t think it’s unreasonable to assume that what POTUS calls, “increase jobs in the private sector” would mean a “tax cut holiday” for the tech titans.

It should be no surprise that the Tech Titans who supped with POTUS were big political contributors and supporters of the tax cut holiday. What happened to “Yes We Can”?

 

Ralph Bach has been in IT long enough to know better and has blogged from his Bach Seat about IT, careers, and anything else that catches his attention since 2005. You can follow him on LinkedInFacebook, and Twitter. Email the Bach Seat here.