Live data from Hacker News

Facebook Security Chief Said to Leave After Clashes Over Disinformation

nytimes.com

131–140 of 436 posts

Re: Facebook Security Chief Said to Leave After Clashes Over Disinformation

#131
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who remembers how the Obama campaign's social media analytics and strategy were breathlessly praised ?

[flagged]

I do adhere to the view that wrong is wrong even when others do it, but I'd like a better look into the big data fantasy of the past decade, and that includes a deeper look into the times when this social/data/analytics/targeting bonanza seemed sweet because the teams who were more adept at it were not associated with people or institutions one abhors.

Whataboutism taints conversations when it's an excuse; other kinds of excuses also shut down conversations that should be had.

More plainly, the CA approach to starting the graph was nauseatingly scammy, but how many friends of Obama supporters (and perhaps Clinton - the API changed before the campaign, but maybe some data persisted with the DNC) were aware that their data was being processed by political parties?

Re: Facebook Security Chief Said to Leave After Clashes Over Disinformation

#132
post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This fact has me more confused than anything. What did most people think Facebook was doing... Keeping all the data locked away an never letting anyone make use of it? The interest in that data by political entities should have been especially obvious. Additionally, this information about Cambridge Analytica came out months ago. I remember first hearing about it on a podcast that was mostly focused on the personality…

I think culturally we've accepted that political propaganda is different from run-of-the-mill corporate advertisement. Even the words we use are different: few people would call a TV spot "propaganda", even though both seek to influence people to act in a certain way. People understand and accept the concept and execution of advertisement. Propaganda is not received in the same way.

Interesting point.

I think you're probably right. There's a different emotional impact between being manipulated to consume versus being manipulated in what you think. Of course at the end of the day it's exploiting a similar vulnerability in our wetware.

Re: Facebook Security Chief Said to Leave After Clashes Over Disinformation

#133
post #17

There's breaking reporting that Facebook just had personnel in the Cambridge Analytica offices before the UK authorities could get there with warrants. https://twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/975844154361221121 > BREAKING: Facebook WAS inside Cambridge Analytica's office but have now "stood down" following dramatic intervention by UK Information Commissioner's Office.. https://twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/9758…

Authorities cannot get in until an estimated Wednesday. Tomorrow, they will apply for a warrant from the court, as they did not get sufficient answers to questions previously asked. Now Facebook has moved tonight to go into the London offices. I wonder what they are doing.

Re: Facebook Security Chief Said to Leave After Clashes Over Disinformation

#134
post #92
post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the "breaches" and "abuses" aren't breaches or abuses, it's Facebook's business model working as intended.

This fact has me more confused than anything. What did most people think Facebook was doing... Keeping all the data locked away an never letting anyone make use of it? The interest in that data by political entities should have been especially obvious. Additionally, this information about Cambridge Analytica came out months ago. I remember first hearing about it on a podcast that was mostly focused on the personality…

There are always different levels of privacy. Everybody knew Google was "reading" their emails. The understand of that was never that Google will expose your individual email to a company. Similarly people understood that Facebook used the data about them to monetize and advertise to them. I don't think anyone assumed they'd let someone else literally take that data.

Re: Facebook Security Chief Said to Leave After Clashes Over Disinformation

#135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The man makes some extremely reasonable points. I just wrote a comment along the same lines. I'm glad to see there is some common sense at Facebook. Stamos always seemed a bit too rational to be working at a company like that. I worry what will happen to Facebook after he leaves; they were lucky to have him. Also, I think the real problem here is that the media is attempting to politicize the term "breach," and secur…

How would you define the term breach? Is it fair to use the term breach from the perspective of the user whose data has been acquired? Or is breach only in reference to what the company that collected the data intended to do with it? There’s also seemingly two types of breaches at play: 1. The idea of a security breach, where a company gets “hacked” 2. The idea of a breach of trust, where people had given a company d…

Right, "breach (of trust)" is the terminology getting bandied about, and is absolutely more accurate, but I think it still obscures the issue.

Re: Facebook Security Chief Said to Leave After Clashes Over Disinformation

#136

"Despite the rumors, I'm still fully engaged with my work at Facebook. It's true that my role did change. I'm currently spending more time exploring emerging security risks and working on election security." 2 minutes ago https://twitter.com/alexstamos/status/975875310896914433

Note that doesn't contradict the NYT story, which claims that he essentially gave 8 months notice in December, which he would now be ~3 months into.

Makes you wonder why are they running this story now then. Hell of an interesting timing, almost as if to fit a narrative.

Re: Facebook Security Chief Said to Leave After Clashes Over Disinformation

#137
post #92
post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the "breaches" and "abuses" aren't breaches or abuses, it's Facebook's business model working as intended.

This fact has me more confused than anything. What did most people think Facebook was doing... Keeping all the data locked away an never letting anyone make use of it? The interest in that data by political entities should have been especially obvious. Additionally, this information about Cambridge Analytica came out months ago. I remember first hearing about it on a podcast that was mostly focused on the personality…

"What did most people think Facebook was doing"

People don't think.

Re: Facebook Security Chief Said to Leave After Clashes Over Disinformation

#140

CEO of Cambridge Analytica caught on camera saying they have used bribes and sex workers to entrap politicians. https://www.channel4.com/news/cambridge-analytica-revealed-t...

No different than Spez @ Reddit saying he knows the Facebook accounts of anonymous users accessing adult content and can cross-reference that with their reddit accounts when they are logged in and sell that information to third parties. Reddit probably makes more money that way than any other, but that's just my guess because they clients are loaded and include sovereign states. Tons of sites are no better, probably…

Source on spez?
Post reply on HN