Positive interpretation:
The sooner the general public realizes how stupid it is to give these companies their private information the better. Maybe then the internet can move past this phase and become more sane.
WikiLeaks proposes tracking verified Twitter users’ homes, families and finances
81–90 of 136 posts
Re: WikiLeaks proposes tracking verified Twitter users’ homes, families and finances
#82I just found this: https://twitter.com/BethElderkin/status/817461392462807040 "Wiki leaks falsely ID's someone while trying to demonstrate why a mass dox list isn't a terrible waste of their time."
That is just sad. It was bad enough last night when they were using buzzwords like "proximity graph" to make their data mining sound...extra cool, I guess?
Re: WikiLeaks proposes tracking verified Twitter users’ homes, families and finances
#83Ok. I went and read some of the tweets this article is based on. I think what Wikileaks wants to build is a social graph of influential and powerful people (big enough names to have a blue check mark) using their tweets. Then weight and couple that with information on family relations, job, living place and so on - available from other public sources (i.e. Wikipedia biographies, LinkedIn or official websites). Sounds…
The @verified badge does not really signify a "big enough" name. Back when it was a manual process, unless you were a huge celebrity, you got on the list if you were a member of a media organization and if Twitter happened to contact your comms/social media person to submit a list of employees and Twitter names. People with just a hundred or so followers could be verified this way. Now that you can apply to be verifi…
How does one scrape this list? What tools can I use, without signing into Twitter?
Re: WikiLeaks proposes tracking verified Twitter users’ homes, families and finances
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hopefully they start tracking judges and prosecutors too, since they are the group arguably failing the public the most.
Well I sure hope they don't. Legal or not, this is not a direction I'm eager to see our society go. It's basically mass doxxing.
Expensive mass doxing if you follow the proper procedures for doxing, like feeding names into Axciom[1]
Re: WikiLeaks proposes tracking verified Twitter users’ homes, families and finances
#85Isn't privacy by obscurity just as broken as security by obscurity is? I mean, if it is possible to build such a list from publicly available data, the bad guys already should have one so why not make it public? Or are they planning on building the list from leaked data? The article doesn't talk about the origin of the data.
What does "broken" privacy even mean?
Re: WikiLeaks proposes tracking verified Twitter users’ homes, families and finances
#86This makes me lose any remains of support I've had for WikiLeaks.
Re: WikiLeaks proposes tracking verified Twitter users’ homes, families and finances
#87Earlier quoted context omitted.
The @verified badge does not really signify a "big enough" name. Back when it was a manual process, unless you were a huge celebrity, you got on the list if you were a member of a media organization and if Twitter happened to contact your comms/social media person to submit a list of employees and Twitter names. People with just a hundred or so followers could be verified this way. Now that you can apply to be verifi…
Yes. It would have to be coupled with information on how rich and powerful someone is coming from other sources.
Usually, such a process is done by starting with lists of those who are actually powerful. These lists are plentiful, especially in democracies. Starting with the presumption that the world's influencers are all on Twitter is a strange view of how the world works.
Re: WikiLeaks proposes tracking verified Twitter users’ homes, families and finances
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
>He said: “In Russia, there are many vibrant publications, online blogs, and Kremlin critics such as [Alexey] Navalny are part of that spectrum. There are also newspapers like “Novaya Gazeta”, in which different parts of society in Moscow are permitted to critique each other and it is tolerated, generally, because it isn’t a big TV channel that might have a mass popular effect, its audience is educated people in Mosc…
The Guardian’s Summary of Julian Assange’s Interview Went Viral and Was Completely False https://theintercept.com/2016/12/29/the-guardians-summary-of... Please don't try to spread FAKE NEWS.
Interesting, since Assange accused the Guardian of sharing cables (meant for reporting) with the Mossad.
Re: WikiLeaks proposes tracking verified Twitter users’ homes, families and finances
#89Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Guardian’s Summary of Julian Assange’s Interview Went Viral and Was Completely False https://theintercept.com/2016/12/29/the-guardians-summary-of... Please don't try to spread FAKE NEWS.
Greenwald is an occasionally decent writer with a penchant for over-exaggeration and finger pointing. I used to be an ardent fan of The Intercept, but more recently have noticed it becoming far angrier and politically charged. In addition, it seems far more willing to play fast and loose with the truth, lack citation, and generally falsify as much as it accuses. Leading to the current state of the comments section on…
http://www.newsbud.com/2013/12/11/bfp-breaking-news-omidyars...
(Is Newsbud classified as "Fake News" by the "ministry of truth" ?)
Re: WikiLeaks proposes tracking verified Twitter users’ homes, families and finances
#90Isn't privacy by obscurity just as broken as security by obscurity is? I mean, if it is possible to build such a list from publicly available data, the bad guys already should have one so why not make it public? Or are they planning on building the list from leaked data? The article doesn't talk about the origin of the data.
What does "broken" privacy even mean?
>"What does "broken" privacy even mean?"
"Broken" means "doesn't work". In the context of GP's post, the suggestion is that attempting privacy through obscurity doesn't work/is ineffective.