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

Facebook Security Chief Said to Leave After Clashes Over Disinformation

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 436 posts

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

#141

Post by metafunctor »

tptacek wrote: post #122
minimaxir wrote: post #3

Stamos had been actively engaging with security researchers on Twitter over the past few days about CA with heated discussions: > I have deleted my Tweets on Cambridge Analytica, not because they were factually incorrect but because I should have done a better job weighing in. https://twitter.com/alexstamos/status/975069709140877312 Archive of those deleted tweets: https://twitter.com/aprilaser/status/975078309930311…

Note that Stamos' clarification doesn't contradict the NYT, which says he effectively gave 8 months notice in December, a notice period he'd now be just 3 months into.

Agreed. But, what is your point? That HN shouldn't crucify Stamos, there is something else more important we should be looking at?

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

#142

Post by nopriorarrests »

oh_sigh wrote: post #126
jstalin wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Sure do. This kind of double speak is rampant. One that bubbles to the top of my head is that when some people were targeted for anti-HRC messages(I think specifically it was Haitian Americans on the gulf coast), then that was labeled as "voter suppression", but targeting likely voters for Trump and spreading negative information about him, say the access Hollywood tapes, is "informing the voters"

Yes, it's funny. Titles for two articles, both are easy to google:

1. How Obama’s Team Used Big Data to Rally Voters (MIT Technology Review, 2012)

2. How Trump Consultants Exploited the Facebook Data of Millions (NYT, 2018)

No bias here.

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

#144

Post by tptacek »

metafunctor wrote: post #141
tptacek wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note that Stamos' clarification doesn't contradict the NYT, which says he effectively gave 8 months notice in December, a notice period he'd now be just 3 months into.

Agreed. But, what is your point? That HN shouldn't crucify Stamos, there is something else more important we should be looking at?

Just that Stamos' clarification doesn't really clarify anything in the NYT story itself.

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

#145

Post by baq »

ams6110 wrote: post #101
whoisjuan wrote: post #20

Zuckerberg's and Sandberg's response to all these events has been the weakest and lamest that I have ever seen from any leadership, regarding controversial issues that involve a company of this size...and that's hard to beat when you have the likes of BP and Volkswagen... Do they really think that just ignoring the issue will make the problem go away?

When have they really ever had their feet held to a fire on a controversial issue? Zuckerberg is still a pretty young guy, despite his position and all he's done he's still inexperienced in some things. Ever since he started Facebook things have pretty much gone his way. Maybe he just doesn't instinctively know what to do.

In which case he knows exactly what to do, which is shut up. There's nothing he can say right now that will make things better.

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

#146

Post by tptacek »

Mahn wrote: post #136
tptacek wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Probably because they just learned about it? Doesn't seem all that complicated.

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

#147

Post by jdminhbg »

danso wrote: post #97
daodedickinson wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, and sites like Reddit make money on the same sort of thing. It wasn't controversial when Facebook and Google became arms of the Obama and then Clinton campaigns, but now more people are turning on Facebook after learning that their info was sold to the Trump campaign and companies and so on through companies like CA.

Here's a Twitter thread by someone who worked on Obama's campaign talking about her firm's use of Facebook data. It was tweeted by Julian Assange so I'm assuming it's one of the more damning examples of the Obama campaign using social media data: https://twitter.com/cld276/status/975564499297226752 https://twitter.com/cld276/status/975568130117459975 This person asserts that people from Facebook gave them their bless…

> I ran the Obama 2008 data-driven microtargeting team. How dare you! We didn’t steal private Facebook profile data from voters under false pretenses. OFA voluntarily solicited opinions of hundreds of thousands of voters. We didn’t commit theft to do our groundbreaking work.

But isn't the bigger problem sucking up the entire social graph from a small seed of users, not how those users signed up in the first place? If I'm getting spammed via a friends-of-friends connection, I'm not particularly worried about the pretense that initial vector signed up with.

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

#148

Post by jacobolus »

RpFLCL wrote: post #92
fooey wrote: 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…

The story about the conspiracy aspect has been hiding in plain sight since the election https://washingtonmonthly.com/2017/11/24/a-trumprussia-confe...

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

#149

Post by bpicolo »

khazhoux wrote: post #67
daodedickinson wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Very different. CA offered an unethical and possibly illegal service for sale. Show me where Spez did that and I'll agree with you.

Blackmailing politicians is definitively on the illegal side.

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

#150

Post by [deleted] »

confounded wrote: post #140
daodedickinson wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN