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

Zuckerberg on Cambridge Analytica situation

facebook.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 583 posts

Re: Zuckerberg on Cambridge Analytica situation

#391

Post by jayess »

taurath wrote: post #230

Re: His first "fix": > 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 activity. We will ban any developer from our platform that does not agree to a thorough audit. And if we find developers that misused personally identifiable information, we will…

50? Try thousands? Just see the comments above from folks who created developer accounts just so they could spy on friends...

Re: Zuckerberg on Cambridge Analytica situation

#392

Post by hype7 »

greenmana wrote: post #180
dustingetz wrote: post #81

Earlier 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…

Slightly offtopic too, but I would love to hear suggestions for good books on economics and/or philosophy that would discuss non-monetary profit and values. https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2014/oct/01...

An alternative approach I’ve long been fond of is to lengthen time horizons. In the long run, bad behavior is much more likely to come back and bite you. If you can get incentive structures on a longer term time horizon, you’re much less likely to engage in risky behavior that might have short term payoffs but sinks you in the long run.

Re: Zuckerberg on Cambridge Analytica situation

#393

Post by haberman »

cmac2992 wrote: post #169
haberman wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/0z3F0BH9Q0wNK0nz1 I think this is from 2013.

Nice. This doesn't seem to mention sharing data about your friends though? I wonder if that would have been mentioned separately to grant access to your friends data?

Re: Zuckerberg on Cambridge Analytica situation

#394

Post by jayess »

Slansitartop wrote: post #379
jondubois wrote: post #141

It seems that everyone just hates Facebook and we're collectively trying to nit pick any missteps that they make. I think that the whole issue is not surprising at all. Definitely not newsworthy. I'm pretty sure that everyone and everyone's mum knew that Facebook was doing stuff like this. What changed is that now we all distrust and dislike Facebook at some deep level... So we respond strongly to even the most munda…

> I'm pretty sure that everyone and everyone's mum knew that Facebook was doing stuff like this. "Everyone" knew Facebook was gathering tons of data on its users and everyone else, but we didn't understand many of the implications until now. People assumed it was just useful for banner-ad type stuff. There are probably even more implications of this data collection that we have still yet to discover.

That's BS. The Obama campaign bragged about using Facebook data and was praised for it.

Re: Zuckerberg on Cambridge Analytica situation

#395

Post by detaro »

haberman wrote: post #393
cmac2992 wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/0z3F0BH9Q0wNK0nz1 I think this is from 2013.

Nice. This doesn't seem to mention sharing data about your friends though? I wonder if that would have been mentioned separately to grant access to your friends data?

It mentions "list of friends", but not what kind of data is attached to entries in said list.

Re: Zuckerberg on Cambridge Analytica situation

#396

Post by [deleted] »

bhauer wrote: post #75

Meta: Zuckerberg's statement is, unsurprisingly, hosted at "facebook.com" and uses JavaScript to render. My browser is configured to not execute JavaScript from facebook.com because that site has a reputation for undermining privacy. Therefore, I cannot read the statement that I assume at least has some tangential relationship to the way facebook.com handles privacy. Alas.

[deleted]

Re: Zuckerberg on Cambridge Analytica situation

#397

Post by rock_hard »

seem_2211 wrote: post #317
gwicks56 wrote: post #54

1000 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.

All I want is Mark Zuckerberg to say is "this isn't a community, we're a multi billion dollar company. We have a pretty cool website where you can do a bunch of stuff, and we mine your personal data (and sell it) to pay for it. Sound like a good deal? We think so." But no, we've got to pretend Facebook is a touchy-feely community. I get the feeling that Facebook is ashamed of the way they make their billions.

Why do you have such a hard time believing that he is well intended?

You seem lost in a false narrative that he is out to get you :(

I challenge you to rethink your position assuming he means well...just for the fun of it...and share with us what your conclusion would be

Re: Zuckerberg on Cambridge Analytica situation

#398

Post by snake117 »

automoton1 wrote: post #385
Thriptic wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly this; no one is sorry, they're sorry they got caught after the fact. This is simply an attempt at ass covering and shifting blame onto Cambridge Analytica so users / investors / governments don't sue Facebook.

Should Facebook be sued?

I want to say yes, but there is a problem with suing these sorts of monopolistic companies. If Facebook were to be sued, for lets say $100 million in a class action lawsuit, even if they end up paying, it ultimately won't change their behavior. They have enough money to pay that, take a small hit in their earnings for the short term, and then continue as if nothing happened.

Re: Zuckerberg on Cambridge Analytica situation

#399

Post by xkjkls »

toss1 wrote: post #358
xkjkls wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What good would that do if you wanted to know what someone was doing with a profile they downloaded of you prior to 2015? FB says that any developer giving that data to another organization would violate its TOS, but given the sheer scale of apps that were on Facebook back then, it almost certainly happened many thousands of time.

True, I was only looking at regulations going forward, this wouldn't tell you at all what was exfiltrated in the past. I'd totally support that requirement even tho it's a massive task (it's not like FB lacks the funds/resources).

I'm sure they totally have access to that information, but that will tell you "X organization accessed Y at Z time", and it may be almost impossible to determine what was done with that data after that point. Even if transferring the data collected was against Facebook's ToS, we at least know of one example (Cambridge Analytica) where that happened, and given that there were 8 million total developers on Facebook Graph, it's sort of unlikely to imagine there weren't thousands of other actors that did the same thing.

Which all leads you to conclude, any Facebook data you had prior to 2015 is probably in the hands of someone you don't really trust. That's not a fun scenario; even if facebook fixes things from that point forward.

Re: Zuckerberg on Cambridge Analytica situation

#400

Post by Kalium »

Thriptic wrote: post #285
nabla9 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was standard crisis management PR sermon. "learn from this experience", "doesn't change what happened in the past. ", "responsibility", "going forward", "together". You find this same boilerplate from athletes who beat their wife, do drugs, or kill people.

Exactly this; no one is sorry, they're sorry they got caught after the fact. This is simply an attempt at ass covering and shifting blame onto Cambridge Analytica so users / investors / governments don't sue Facebook.

You're absolutely right. This is a bullshit non-apology in which nobody is actually sorry for anything. It's crap and does nothing but try to shift blame.

Yet, maybe it serves a purpose? It doesn't matter how sorry they actually feel, nobody is going to feel better from a large, public, self-flagellating apology. Nobody is going to be happier or more mollified or satisfied. All it's going to accomplish is to provide grist for the lawsuit mill - after all, why apologize if you're not guilty?

Again, you're completely right. They're clearly not sorry.

Post reply on HN