If he have two shits about users' rights all he could do was sue CA. And he could extend that policy to any developer that went the same path. Warning perpetrators that all that will happen to them in case of misconduct is to get banned is irrelevant, they could simply reapply with a fake ID, new company and whatnot.
Zuckerberg on Cambridge Analytica situation
151–160 of 583 posts
Re: Zuckerberg on Cambridge Analytica situation
#152[deleted]
Re: Zuckerberg on Cambridge Analytica situation
#153Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They knew it was illegal but put all the incentives for companies not to follow the rules. Offtopic but i cant help it. You get what you measure. Which is why economies that only measure profit optimize for nothing but profit. When a nationstate says "It's illegal to do X" but has mandatory accounting practices that do not measure X but only measure profit, we should not be surprised that companies like Facebook do…
> When a nationstate says "It's illegal to do X" but has mandatory accounting practices that do not measure X but only measure profit We don't need accountants to measure legality. That's what we have law enforcement and courts for. Investors care about profits; behaving illegally should hurt profits. Deputising a multi-billion dollar company's thousands of shareholders as its moral police is an absurd proposal.
Law enforcement and courts aren't funded in a way that makes that effective.
Re: Zuckerberg on Cambridge Analytica situation
#154Earlier quoted context omitted.
This was how FB has always designed to work from the beginning Not exactly. In all fairness, as Zuck points out, this is a key part of the story, and in theory, why this is different: In 2015, we learned from journalists at The Guardian that Kogan had shared data from his app with Cambridge Analytica. It is against our policies for developers to share data without people's consent. This raises the question of what Fa…
> It is against our policies for developers to share data without people's consent. Not to mention that it's arguable that "consent" was really given for facebook to share the data in the first place. I'd be interested to see some polling results asking if facebook users knew what facebook was up to and whether they feel OK with it.
I'd also be really interested to see screenshots of what the users saw when they clicked "ok." I've been able to find a few screenshots online for other apps, but nothing that indicates what it would have looked like in 2013.
Re: Zuckerberg on Cambridge Analytica situation
#155 It seems to me that they are planning to restrict what an application can see about users, but what about what an user can take from her friends. Can a bad actor like Kogan harvest private information by using fake profiles or even some famous people with lot of friends? It seems to me that the problem is much worse than it seems, like a fundamental flaw in this particular social network, if everything becomes an island how users are going to network?
Re: Zuckerberg on Cambridge Analytica situation
#156I don't feel like this post does enough to talk about how the online marketing tools were used for the sole purpose of persuading people's opinions.
Re: Zuckerberg on Cambridge Analytica situation
#157you people use facebook still?
....bunch of losers.
Re: Zuckerberg on Cambridge Analytica situation
#1581000 word statement. Number of times the word "advertising" was mentioned: 0 Facebook continues to pretend it's business model is unicorns and kittens, not selling user data for money.
It's not really selling it's user data for money; it's selling access to it's users for money. Sure, user data allows some advanced targeting, but the reason they make the profit they do is that people are buying ads for people to see, not data about them. That's an important distinction.
They are selling market making for an ad market. Any market is a trade of both value and information.
Re: Zuckerberg on Cambridge Analytica situation
#159"... we immediately banned Kogan's app from our platform, and demanded that Kogan and Cambridge Analytica formally certify that they had deleted all improperly acquired data. They provided these certifications." How is it at all possible to certify that data has been deleted and no copies were taken..?
This feels strange to those of us from technical spheres, but much of the world works without formal verification of facts. There are in theory severe penalties, both implicit and explicit, that ostensibly act as deterrent to bad actors. This is usually only noteworthy when it fails, but by and large it works. The friction involved if we did not generally accept someone's (signed, notarized, appropriately formalized)…
Could smart contracts (maybe in addition to a Trusted Execution Environment) be used to enforce these sorts of guarantees?
Re: Zuckerberg on Cambridge Analytica situation
#160Copy pasta for people that don't want to go on that bloody website?
yeah, is there a non facebook.com link?