Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Has anyone tried to debunk the myth that Facebook is listening?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 87 posts

Re: Ask HN: Has anyone tried to debunk the myth that Facebook is listening?

#61

Post by logicallee »

paulcole wrote: post #51
logicallee wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe it's listening based on an overwhelming amount of anecdotal evidence reported all over the Internet. (Where there's smoke, there's fire.) Including by intelligent, scientifically-minded people. At the same time, it wouldn't take much at all for me to believe otherwise: a simple blinded test where some people leave their phones in a room, researchers come and talk about some subject (absent the owners), then…

>an overwhelming amount of anecdotal evidence reported all over the Internet This is exactly why I believe pizzagate, am a 9/11 truther, etc.

Public interpretation of shared information is not at all the same as anecdotal evidence!

Don't conflate these two things. I know beans make people fart because of anecdotal evidence I've heard from different people. That doesn't make this "fact" wrong.

On the other hand, interpretation of public information is quite different.

-

Aside:

Also I have a small aside here for you personally. I'd like to remove something from your mind so that you never speak about it again. I don't want 9/11 truthers derided here on Hacker News because I consider the example to be one that should not be included here. Flat earthers? Sure.

As for 9/11: I'm not a "9/11" truther. I've never called for an investigation into it. I don't care about it. But for you, if you care about this subject for some reason, the standard for whether you should be a 9/11 truther, in the sense that you believe anyone had any prior knowledge those acts would be committed, is whether you find any leaks to that effect by such a government official.[1]

The standard regarding whether it is feasible for 9/11 to have included a controlled demolition is the opinion of civil engineers, whose profession this sort of thing is.[2]

So while I can't speak for you, I do have my own standards. This does not mean I'm a 9/11 truther. I'd like you to stop using it as an example, though. Use things that are false (like flat earth) if you want to make some kind of cheap point, please.

Note: I want to reiterate that I am in no way, shape, or form, a 9/11 truther.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6eMq5Rit1w - "From about August 23rd, every night, until September 2nd, September 3rd." This insider says "We are never going to look for who they are, and it's probably not worth looking for them." Her Wikipedia page is quite credible as an insider. In addition it includes major smears on her character and a complete refutation over the official channels you would expect. She meets the standard outlined above.

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architects_%26_Engineers_for_9... - "The organization has compiled a list of criteria for a controlled demolition that it says the collapse of the World Trade Center meets: the destruction followed the path of greatest resistance, the debris was symmetrically distributed, the rapid onset of the destruction, explosions and flashes reported by witnesses, steel elements were expelled from the building at high speed, the pulverization of the concrete, expanding pyroclastic clouds, lack of pancaked stories in the debris, isolated explosions 20 to 40 stories below the wave of destruction, molten steel and thermite traces found in the debris."

Re: Ask HN: Has anyone tried to debunk the myth that Facebook is listening?

#62

Post by notatoad »

superbrama wrote: post #56
notatoad wrote: post #2

Install the facebook app on lineageOS, open up privacy guardian, and see for yourself exactly how often it uses your microphone. It's definitely not listening to everything you say.

Just pointing out that this is far from a conclusive invalidation technique. Too many ways such spyware could still exist or operate.

i realize i'm fighting a losing battle by posting in a conspiracy theory thread, but okay: what are those ways that the facebook app could listen to you without the OS knowing it's using the microphone?

Re: Ask HN: Has anyone tried to debunk the myth that Facebook is listening?

#63

Post by superbrama »

notatoad wrote: post #62
superbrama wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just pointing out that this is far from a conclusive invalidation technique. Too many ways such spyware could still exist or operate.

i realize i'm fighting a losing battle by posting in a conspiracy theory thread, but okay: what are those ways that the facebook app could listen to you without the OS knowing it's using the microphone?

I don’t know, but one would need to thoroughly audit the code to find out one way or another. One would not draw conclusions about the non-existence of such a feature just because they’ve made exterior measurements (exterior to the black box blob of fb code) that don’t give affirmative indication. Contrarily if the technique you described did uncover such surreptitious microphone activity, that might be a bit more conclusive.

(Hard to disprove until you’ve considered all ways it could occur, and reviewed each one, and even that leaves possibilities for mistakes in method or theory)

The viewpoint is that there’s no hard evidence such behavior occurs from their code, not that it couldn’t be the case (still). Maybe some revelation will come out but I’m not betting on it. Fb is too smart for that and their official explanation makes sense.

For those that “believe”, this lesson never gets old: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thing_(listening_device) In this example, if your theory for locating a bug was based on the requirement of an electrical signal, you’d have missed such a bug entirely. Next to impossible therefore to disprove such a bug exists, if you can’t consider all of the ways in which it can exist. Hope that helps you on your mission to learn reverse engineering (a skill sadly missed in the USA throw it away culture)

Re: Ask HN: Has anyone tried to debunk the myth that Facebook is listening?

#64

Post by mikeash »

ben_jones wrote: post #31
mikeash wrote: post #15

It’s trivial to debunk by observing that many people who say they’ve experienced this are using iPhones. On iOS, apps can’t silently use the microphone in the background. A background app using the microphone is always accompanied by a red status bar saying that they’re doing it. This doesn’t show Facebook listening, therefore we can conclude that they’re not, at least on iOS. It’s possible they might be doing it on…

Wasn't there just a story about Apple giving Uber special permissions (which were not turned off after they were no longer needed) so they could do stuff on the Apple watch? Is it that much of a stretch to think they would also give Facebook special permissions?

Yes, it is that much of a stretch. Apple temporarily gave Uber that special permission in order to make their Watch app work better for their users. It’s extremely unlikely that Apple would give Facebook special permission in order to spy on users to no benefit to the people who actually pay Apple money. And somehow it’s gone unnoticed all this time.

Re: Ask HN: Has anyone tried to debunk the myth that Facebook is listening?

#65

Post by superbrama »

cryoshon wrote: post #55
chmike wrote: post #38

Facebook may only need to recognize a few keywords. The one that companies had payed for. It wouldn't be that many. An approximate recognition is good enough. So processing and data transmission could be small. As long as there is no uncontestable proof, the doubt must benefit Facebook. The testimonies are not uncontestbale proofs. Considering the million people uisng the facebook app, there will always be a small se…

>As long as there is no uncontestable proof, the doubt must benefit Facebook. they have a history of privacy violations they have an incentive to snoop further i see no reason to offer the benefit of the doubt to either hypothesis, as anecdotes do not constitute data but for what it's worth, my hunch is that there's some extra snooping going on that has yet to be unearthed. might not be audio, necessarily.

Interesting, curious to hear more. What techniques are you referring to? Some re-appropriation of mobile hardware for cross sensory applications? Data sharing of some kind?

Re: Ask HN: Has anyone tried to debunk the myth that Facebook is listening?

#66

Post by superbrama »

logicallee wrote: post #43
paulcole wrote: post #10

The people who believe it’s listening would never accept even the most ironclad “proof” that it’s not. This is a hallmark of conspiracy theorists. So why bother?

I believe it's listening based on an overwhelming amount of anecdotal evidence reported all over the Internet. (Where there's smoke, there's fire.) Including by intelligent, scientifically-minded people. At the same time, it wouldn't take much at all for me to believe otherwise: a simple blinded test where some people leave their phones in a room, researchers come and talk about some subject (absent the owners), then…

I disagree with your feelings about the anecdotes given there is an official account that’s more likely. Why would fb come out officially saying no, knowing they’ll be uncovered eventually if the answer ever were yes?

Also, your techniques could reveal a false negative both in the existence of a bug in the particular build of fb code being tested, and that such a mechanism could have existed in previous versions but already removed.

Re: Ask HN: Has anyone tried to debunk the myth that Facebook is listening?

#68

Post by logicallee »

superbrama wrote: post #66
logicallee wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe it's listening based on an overwhelming amount of anecdotal evidence reported all over the Internet. (Where there's smoke, there's fire.) Including by intelligent, scientifically-minded people. At the same time, it wouldn't take much at all for me to believe otherwise: a simple blinded test where some people leave their phones in a room, researchers come and talk about some subject (absent the owners), then…

I disagree with your feelings about the anecdotes given there is an official account that’s more likely. Why would fb come out officially saying no, knowing they’ll be uncovered eventually if the answer ever were yes? Also, your techniques could reveal a false negative both in the existence of a bug in the particular build of fb code being tested, and that such a mechanism could have existed in previous versions but…

Likelihood has to be judged against the evidence. A lot of scientifically-minded people have tested it for themselves and found ads to appear when they spoke about subject explicitly to test whether ads would appear. I recall several specific cases. It's not quite scientific enough for me, but I'd expect a scientific study to have the same conclusion.

Just like if you do a scientific study of whether baked beans make you toot, yes, you will find that they do.

Although you state there is a high likelihood of a false negative, it would be a useful study for me and others in the more likely case that it matches the informal n=1 studies numerous technical people performed by themselves.

Re: Ask HN: Has anyone tried to debunk the myth that Facebook is listening?

#69

Post by superbrama »

logicallee wrote: post #68
superbrama wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree with your feelings about the anecdotes given there is an official account that’s more likely. Why would fb come out officially saying no, knowing they’ll be uncovered eventually if the answer ever were yes? Also, your techniques could reveal a false negative both in the existence of a bug in the particular build of fb code being tested, and that such a mechanism could have existed in previous versions but…

Likelihood has to be judged against the evidence. A lot of scientifically-minded people have tested it for themselves and found ads to appear when they spoke about subject explicitly to test whether ads would appear. I recall several specific cases. It's not quite scientific enough for me, but I'd expect a scientific study to have the same conclusion. Just like if you do a scientific study of whether baked beans make…

Source?

Re: Ask HN: Has anyone tried to debunk the myth that Facebook is listening?

#70

Post by 2_listerine_pls »

readhn wrote: post #27
Techonomicon wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You probably wouldn't do that sort of processing constantly on device. Battery intensive

is it possible that there are tools available that do the job with minimum energy consumption but they are not out in the open yet? i wonder what tech military has that we dont know is even possible today?

The military is not at the forefront of R&D, but they may be able to restrict whatever they deem important. For instance, this can happen with patents. Some patents are reviewed by a committee before they are published.
Post reply on HN