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

Facebook's tentacles reach further than people think

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 302 posts

Re: Facebook's tentacles reach further than people think

#101

Post by zepto »

Mosi1 wrote: post #81
makecheck wrote: post #72

In computer security, every time machines become fast enough to breach the limits of an algorithm we invent something new so that “hard” problems remain “hard” and therefore encryption is still secure. There has been no corresponding increase in the difficulty of invading privacy. 30 years ago, even though you probably “could” observe somebody for a long time and eventually connect some dots about them, it would not…

How many times has your privacy been invaded?

Don't you mean how many times per minute?

Re: Facebook's tentacles reach further than people think

#102

Post by hueving »

qyv wrote: post #94
ghughes wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing will change until the law cracks down on this. The people who work on these systems are smart enough to comprehend the wider consequences, but they do it anyway because money. Without significant external pressure, there will always be a long line of engineers willing to dial their cognitive dissonance up to 11 and build software that is clearly unethical in exchange for a fat paycheck.

I think it is more likely that the market corrects this well before the law. How much longer can the status-quo of online advertising remain intact? Do these targeted ad's really work? There is a ton of time and talent being poured into hyper-advanced targeted advertising systems, how long can this be sustained?

>Do these targeted ad's really work?

The massive income Facebook has seems to imply so.

Re: Facebook's tentacles reach further than people think

#103

Post by hueving »

thr0waway1239 wrote: post #93
baddox wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you pretend I either disagree or have yet to form an opinion, and explain why this is "clearly unethical"?

Unethical: lacking moral principles. Moral: of, relating to, or concerned with the principles or rules of right conduct or the distinction between right and wrong I think it is "clearly wrong" that Facebook creates shadow profiles, because it is violating the freedom of people who have not signed up for their service, in the same way that it is clearly wrong for me to take away your favorite pet for ritualistic sacri…

I think the commenter was looking for an explanation of why you think shadow profiles are unethical.

In your argument you state that it violates peoples' freedom, but you need to define how their freedom is being violated.

Re: Facebook's tentacles reach further than people think

#104

Post by narag »

Idontagree wrote: post #62
narag wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had a similar realization when I found a private photo, so private that I had deleted it from everywhere in some Google's "backup" sites. I am very careful disabling every feature that could mean that personal images or text from my phone will end up "in the cloud" and still it got there through an accident... and a lot of Google's disregard for my wills. It's almost impossible to stop them. The photo being private…

Which sites did you find it on and which did you delete it from?

I deleted it from the phone and my hard disk. I use to take photos with the phone, move through usb to the disk and never publish any photo anywhere.

Where I found it I don't remember because it was some Google site that I hadn't signed up for. I know, they're all connected, but I didn't even know it existed, much less that personal photos could go there.

My frustration comes from the fact that I had already visited several timesevery configuration and options page of the products that I use, choosing not to share anything anywhere with anyone and, god forbid, never backup phone and still it got there.

I have an idea why it could happen: a combination of "sync" option in the phone being activated by an accidental click with a lot of "creativity" in Google's part.

I'm done with this shit. When the time comes to buy a new phone, I will take some drastic measures. Maybe a dumbphone with tethering paired with a tablet, I'm not sure, but not this again.

Re: Facebook's tentacles reach further than people think

#105

Post by PhasmaFelis »

Mosi1 wrote: post #81
makecheck wrote: post #72

In computer security, every time machines become fast enough to breach the limits of an algorithm we invent something new so that “hard” problems remain “hard” and therefore encryption is still secure. There has been no corresponding increase in the difficulty of invading privacy. 30 years ago, even though you probably “could” observe somebody for a long time and eventually connect some dots about them, it would not…

How many times has your privacy been invaded?

Pretty much continuously for the last umpty years, I'd say. It doesn't have to be immediately and personally catastrophic to be a serious problem.

Re: Facebook's tentacles reach further than people think

#106

Post by narag »

tomcam wrote: post #68
narag wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had a similar realization when I found a private photo, so private that I had deleted it from everywhere in some Google's "backup" sites. I am very careful disabling every feature that could mean that personal images or text from my phone will end up "in the cloud" and still it got there through an accident... and a lot of Google's disregard for my wills. It's almost impossible to stop them. The photo being private…

I remember that picture. It was your "PHP programmer of the year award" that you didn't want your Haskell-hacking friends to see. Disgraceful!

LOL! Actually it was just a selfie with a moustache, OK I said it :) I had grown a three weeks beard and took a photo when I was half shaved.

No offense to moustache lovers, it just didn't suit me well.

Re: Facebook's tentacles reach further than people think

#107

Post by jngreenlee »

draw_down wrote: post #83
makecheck wrote: post #72

In computer security, every time machines become fast enough to breach the limits of an algorithm we invent something new so that “hard” problems remain “hard” and therefore encryption is still secure. There has been no corresponding increase in the difficulty of invading privacy. 30 years ago, even though you probably “could” observe somebody for a long time and eventually connect some dots about them, it would not…

Security breaches are bad for capital. Privacy invasions like this are good for capital.

Security breaches are bad for one party's capital, good for another party's capital.

It's interesting to contemplate WHY is there a difference between the two. Security and Private both nasciently have something to do with "info I'd like to keep to myself", but I'm not sure I can come up with a hard delineation between the two, at least when you try to go above "A/S/L" and below "user/pass".

Re: Facebook's tentacles reach further than people think

#108

Post by Theodores »

c3534l wrote: post #74

I signed up for facebook two years ago, didn't put any real information on there, then haven't touched it since. I still get emails about "people you might know" that they have absolutely no business knowing about and aren't in any way connected to my immediate family. It's creepy and I don't want them storing that information about me, but there's nothing I can do. I've been cautious about putting my information on…

I created a Facebook account because I was doing something with a Facebook API, long enough ago that I have forgotten the details of the project. However, lurking in my spam folder there is always 'you have more friends than you might think' as a subject line in there somewhere, from Facebook, trying to lure me back in.

The thing I find funny about this is that they only send out emails with that one subject line. I don't open the emails so the suggested 'friends' might be different with each email, however I am curious why they don't change the subject line, to 'A/B test' me into being part of the known universe of Facebook. Clearly 'you have more friends than you think...' has not worked.

If they had bothered with the 'shadow account' then they would have targetted me a bit better, if they found a Facebook group that was likely to appeal to me then they could theoretically lure me in with 'Cats with Facebook accounts in your area' or 'Today's pictures of squirrels enjoying lunch...' but no, let's just try the email that didn't work last time or the time before.

Sure they have surreal algorithms that are totally creepy in a stalker way that is totally Peeping Tom and should gross people out, but, as per the dumb emails there is nothing that smart about what they are doing.

Re: Facebook's tentacles reach further than people think

#110

Post by anigbrowl »

jacquesm wrote: post #51
anigbrowl wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's actually why I gave up on avoiding it (after leaving my fb account dormant for ~5 years). If I'm being tracked anyway I might as well enjoy the social benefits of the platform, which are not insignificant. FB absolutely knows more about me than any individual person at this point. I've decided, for good or ill, to accept that and leverage it; rather than feeling upset about my inability to enforce a right to p…

There is no way I will go down that route. That's defeat and it simply will not happen with me being an enabler. If that means I'll miss out on the occasional party then so be it.

How is that defeat? I have no desire to waste my precious time in an unwinnable arms race. My freedom of action and self-expression are my primary operational need, and I don't want to spend my life creeping around trying to conceal every fact about myself that might be employed as an attack vector. That's not liberty.
Post reply on HN