31–40 of 67 posts
https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-future/facebook-instagram-and... Instead of ArsTechnica, why not link to the ACLU's website?
>Twitter did not provide access to its “Firehose,” but has an agreement, via a subsidiary, to provide Geofeedia with searchable access to its database of public tweets.
I really would like Twitter to share what search words were entered. It would give us a first-hand window on what government agencies are trying to monitor, usually secretly.
https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-future/facebook-instagram-and... Instead of ArsTechnica, why not link to the ACLU's website?
I prefer journalism to the original source's post. The ACLU is an advocate for its cause; a secondary source can provide context, other sources, opposing points of view, etc. For example, compare a post by a political candidate, with its natural extreme bias, to a newspaper article about it, which includes fact-checking, expert analysis, their opponent's reaction, etc.
That's the reason Wikipedia requires secondary sources for its citations and forbids primary sources.
EDIT: Fleshed it out a bit.
This is a very messy, multi-layered issue. First of all, a large part of a social network's utility is derived from sharing data about oneself. This data is public, for the benefit of other participants of the social network. Some of those participants may have agendas that are contrary to one's own: stalkers, adversaries, data aggregators -- it's impossible to know all of them ahead of time, and a granularity of per…
I totally disagree. Care to expand on that?
Government loves its surveillance. Try this though, if you live next to a cop, FBI agent or public official place a high res video camera on your property facing their house and leave it live streaming. Post it to a website with photos of all their family and children, their license plate numbers the time they leave for work etc. All things that are publicly available and captured from a simple video camera. Start having multiple people do the same and locate it all on your website. Then watch how fast the hypocrisy rears its head.
This is a very messy, multi-layered issue. First of all, a large part of a social network's utility is derived from sharing data about oneself. This data is public, for the benefit of other participants of the social network. Some of those participants may have agendas that are contrary to one's own: stalkers, adversaries, data aggregators -- it's impossible to know all of them ahead of time, and a granularity of per…
>Second, it ought to be a person's reasonable expectation that law enforcement is a benevolent actor. I totally disagree. Care to expand on that?
Basically, if you're afraid to go ask a police officer for help (which, apparently, is fairly common among black people in US, for example), then something is very wrong about police, and needs to be fixed.
This is a very messy, multi-layered issue. First of all, a large part of a social network's utility is derived from sharing data about oneself. This data is public, for the benefit of other participants of the social network. Some of those participants may have agendas that are contrary to one's own: stalkers, adversaries, data aggregators -- it's impossible to know all of them ahead of time, and a granularity of per…
>Second, it ought to be a person's reasonable expectation that law enforcement is a benevolent actor. I totally disagree. Care to expand on that?
This is a very messy, multi-layered issue. First of all, a large part of a social network's utility is derived from sharing data about oneself. This data is public, for the benefit of other participants of the social network. Some of those participants may have agendas that are contrary to one's own: stalkers, adversaries, data aggregators -- it's impossible to know all of them ahead of time, and a granularity of per…
>Second, it ought to be a person's reasonable expectation that law enforcement is a benevolent actor. I totally disagree. Care to expand on that?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Second, it ought to be a person's reasonable expectation that law enforcement is a benevolent actor. I totally disagree. Care to expand on that?
I think the point is that police etc should not behave in such a way that many people immediately assume that an encounter would likely be antagonistic. Basically, if you're afraid to go ask a police officer for help (which, apparently, is fairly common among black people in US, for example), then something is very wrong about police, and needs to be fixed.
This is a very messy, multi-layered issue. First of all, a large part of a social network's utility is derived from sharing data about oneself. This data is public, for the benefit of other participants of the social network. Some of those participants may have agendas that are contrary to one's own: stalkers, adversaries, data aggregators -- it's impossible to know all of them ahead of time, and a granularity of per…
>Second, it ought to be a person's reasonable expectation that law enforcement is a benevolent actor. I totally disagree. Care to expand on that?
This is a very messy, multi-layered issue. First of all, a large part of a social network's utility is derived from sharing data about oneself. This data is public, for the benefit of other participants of the social network. Some of those participants may have agendas that are contrary to one's own: stalkers, adversaries, data aggregators -- it's impossible to know all of them ahead of time, and a granularity of per…
2. If this were true, why would we need the Bill of Rights? The entire point of the Fourth Amendment, for example, is to protect citizens against unreasonable searches -- by law enforcement.
3. This would be true if the data were only shared on a need to know basis, which has not been demonstrated. Facebook allows users to give it data under one set of pretenses, and then turns around and uses/sells this data under a different set. I agree the other questions are important, but none of them would be possible if Facebook were not abusing its role.
The NSA FISA orders are getting endless complaints, and yet Verizon and others are handing this data over under a "court" order. In this case, Facebook is doing effectively the same thing, but for profit.