171–180 of 583 posts
Facebook, you provided them with that data, you fuckers!
"The good news is that the most important actions to prevent this from happening again today we have already taken years ago" What an asshole, if this were true this wouldn't have happened. I liked Zuck until today, now I think he's a lying sack of crap, which probably means he'll make a great politician.
"They trust me -- dumb fucks" right at the start was not enough warning?
“They were worried that the large app developers were building their own social graphs, meaning they could see all the connections between these people,” he said. “They were worried that they were going to build their own social networks.”
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/20/facebook-data-c...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The trusting developers not to sell any data but putting zero safeguards in place to prevent this and extremely punitive repercussions despite being repeatedly told by the public, media, and even high level employees tells me Facebook can't plead ignorance to this and they not only knew this was happening, but they probably intended for it to happen. Why would they intend for it to happen? They didn't make any money…
They sold the data by proxy by knowingly letting the 3rd parties syphon the data. Why else would they be at CA when the cops showed up? Are you being intentionally obtuse?
Democracy only works when everyone gets an equal vote. What are the consequences when special interest groups, including from abroad, can pay to use the official Facebook APIs and craft targeted messages to shape the public opinion?
We have seen the consequences of this approach. Trump won by the smallest margin. Brexit was nudged with 100% false and misleading statements (300m for NHS, showing refugees from Syria etc.) Should we be OK with this much power available on tap?
The real questions Zuckerberg needs to answer are: what political campaigns are being run? Who is being targeted with political messages? What are the budgets like? Most importantly, who is ultimately paying for shaping the political opinions in our democracies?
This is a question that strikes at the heart of our society. Facebook is not going anywhere. Google is not going anywhere. People will continue to put all their personal data in cloud services without thinking about any Privacy policies whatsoever.
We should have an open debate about how much digital opinion shaping is acceptable before we have built a tool that sells the democratic decision making to the highest bidder. There is a reason why political spending is so carefully controlled in Europe. Facebook needs to own up and come clean on the state of political advertising taking place on their platform.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The trusting developers not to sell any data but putting zero safeguards in place to prevent this and extremely punitive repercussions despite being repeatedly told by the public, media, and even high level employees tells me Facebook can't plead ignorance to this and they not only knew this was happening, but they probably intended for it to happen. Why would they intend for it to happen? They didn't make any money…
I think it is ridiculous to think that Facebook is sharing data to 3rd party sources out of charity. If you provide more value via data to integrating applications than any of your competitors, you will continue to have the largest share of the market. So yes, there is profit incentive.
The introvert in me wants to say that's a good outcome in that Facebook serves as a honeypot for certain types of personalities which I tend not to like very much. But speaking more broadly, it makes me worry for society.
If they're serious about this, and I'm leaning toward they aren't really serious about it, this will affect a lot of startups, specifically in advertising, but probably a lot of mobile apps as well: “First, we will investigate all apps that had access to large amounts of information before we changed our platform to dramatically reduce data access in 2014, and we will conduct a full audit of any app with suspicious a…
> They’re also pointing out that Zuck is fine meeting with Xi Jinping, meeting with Medvedev but refuses to appear before the US Congress and sends the company counsel instead. Worth noting that Zuck wants something from Xi and Medvedev, has everything he needs in terms of support from the US Gov.
Facebook as almost insured that it becomes the whipping post of the FAANG companies as the government wants to look hard on tech. Im genuninely not sure what Zuck can do as long as Apple, Google and Amazon don't make mistakes in the same way.
The next 10 years are going to be a lot like the old ad age about being chased out of a campsite by a bear. It's unimportant to be the fastest (best) of the group, you just cant be the slowest.
The trusting developers not to sell any data but putting zero safeguards in place to prevent this and extremely punitive repercussions despite being repeatedly told by the public, media, and even high level employees tells me Facebook can't plead ignorance to this and they not only knew this was happening, but they probably intended for it to happen. They knew it was illegal but put all the incentives for companies n…
> 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…
https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2014/oct/01...