251–260 of 583 posts
Anyone else remember Beacon? This was how FB has always designed to work from the beginning. They've just been toying with the PR ways to say it to make people accept it without thinking. The election woke people up. I found this from 2011 when they shut it down as a "mistake." ( https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2011/11/our-commitment-to-the-f... ). Unfortunately, it looks like they removed the launch release - but it wo…
What's the tl;dr: on Beacon?
Is Zuck still at school? "I'm sorry for running a business model that made me squillions" just doesn't cut it with me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's in Facebook's benefit for advertisers to gather all that data, because the only way they can actually use it to make money is by advertising to the users on Facebook. I find it incredibly hard to believe that this thought never crossed anybody's mind.
Have you ever looked at FB's ad platform? You don't download everyone's data and target the campaign yourself. You target, "18-25 males in these zip codes who like the yankees". I don't see how you go from that platform (hosted and controlled by facebook) to something else.
It's even mentioned in that article how to get around the fix they put in so you couldn't target a group of less than 20 people.
I'm not sure if this particular method still works, but let's take a step back and think before we make claims about what is and is not possible in a complex system with lots features and knobs to twiddle. Whether this was an emergent feature from other features of the system or a specifically desired and designed behavior, at least at one point Facebook allowed very fine grained targeting.
1: http://ghostinfluence.com/the-ultimate-retaliation-pranking-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then make "no requests for users email" part of the terms of using the API?
Sure, and maybe they'll put it right next to the "you're not allowed to save any data" clause.
There's really no way to check if someone has made a copy of data if you've given them that data.
It's not that hard to check if an application prompts a user for an email address.
The issue here is not some developer gaining a temporary snapshot of a few million records, it is that Facebook _itself_ is doing and productizing real-time psychological profiling on billions of people.
You can find a plenty of hits searching for 'facebook run psychological experiment on users.' Here [1] is one of a plethora of sources discussing it.
[1] - https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/facebook/10932534/Fac...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then make "no requests for users email" part of the terms of using the API?
But there are many legitimate use cases of sharing email addresses. Just scratching the surface, * someone used Facebook Connect to login to NYTimes Web site, curious about their Food & Recipes newsletter, wants to sign up * someone logging into e-commerce shop through Facebook Connect, making a purchase and then deciding that yes, they would like to track and manage their order on the retailer's Web site, and they w…
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…