Zuck's already said we're "dumb fucks" for trusting him. Believe people when they tell you who they are.
Zuckerberg on Cambridge Analytica situation
521–530 of 583 posts
Re: Zuckerberg on Cambridge Analytica situation
#522Earlier quoted context omitted.
... That doesn't prove what you are saying. "sucked out the whole of the social graph" is a non-technical statement that doesn't have an explicit meaning, nor is it specified what user data they were scraping.
Look later in the thread. The estimate is that Obama took data from about 190 million profiles, about 189 million of which gave his campaign no explicit access to their data, and about half of whom would have explicitly objected to Obama’s use of their data had they known about it. You might think “well that’s egregious, but the rules at the time allowed it”. Unfortunately, even that isn’t true. Obama’s app did not p…
Pulling user data(and friend data) from the API was "fair game" pre 2014. It was an explicit permission you could ask for.
Gleaming insights from that data and then using that data for targeting on FB is/was the point.
Creating an app that collected the data under false pretenses, transferring that data to another 3rd party and then claiming you never had that data makes it a different situation.
Re: Zuckerberg on Cambridge Analytica situation
#523Earlier quoted context omitted.
Look later in the thread. The estimate is that Obama took data from about 190 million profiles, about 189 million of which gave his campaign no explicit access to their data, and about half of whom would have explicitly objected to Obama’s use of their data had they known about it. You might think “well that’s egregious, but the rules at the time allowed it”. Unfortunately, even that isn’t true. Obama’s app did not p…
Pulling user data(and friend data) from the API was "fair game" pre 2014. It was an explicit permission you could ask for. Gleaming insights from that data and then using that data for targeting on FB is/was the point. Creating an app that collected the data under false pretenses, transferring that data to another 3rd party and then claiming you never had that data makes it a different situation.
Pullling the data that your app needed for its stated functionality, exclusively for use within your app, was “fair game”. Pulling anything beyond that, and/or using it outside your app, was absolutely not allowed, ever, on the platform, even at the very beginning in 2007. Allowing it to be analyzed for targeting was never allowed, nor was it the point of the platform. You’re simply wrong.
How do I know this? I developed apps on the platform from 2007-2014 and was always reading the rules and any changes they issued because I didn’t want to violate them and have my app banned. They were exceedingly clear on this issue. Sadly, Obama’s app was allowed to violate these rules and received no ban.
Re: Zuckerberg on Cambridge Analytica situation
#524The 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…
Why can’t they hold on the data inside Facebook and ask developers to come in a VPN to a VM or Remote Desktop (which gets recorded always ) and then use analytical tools installed on it , to work on it with no internet access in a DMZ . By this way they can record everything the developer is doing with data and the worst case he can do is take screenshot. By this way no data goes out of their hands
Re: Zuckerberg on Cambridge Analytica situation
#525Earlier quoted context omitted.
That depends on the law in each individual legal region (most probably country). For example, I believe Euthanasia is legal in some European countries. Even the opposite can be true. Life saving medication may be illegal in one country but another provides it without restriction.
Kind of sums up my reply. Generally, if you know or there is enough suspicion the cure is going to harm or kill one and euthanasia is out of the picture then you are liable. That's why the whole process exists about medical trials. One nice window here is that you can in general experiment on yourself (people have and are doing that). Depends on the framework, but good point. Anyways, my point here is you can not ove…
Absolutety.
Re: Zuckerberg on Cambridge Analytica situation
#526Earlier quoted context omitted.
Stop repeating this meme. It's not productive and doesn't help drive the conversation forward in any way. He said those things when he was 19 years old and Facebook was still a random side project in college. And yes people were indeed "dumb fucks" to give a random college kid with a side project their personal information. If you went around Walmart and asked people for their SSNs with no value proposition, then the…
Exactly. He was 19, didn't have a army of PR/lawyers acting as filters between his mouth and brain. Now his words (especially crisis-time statements) are shaped by a team of professionals. I think I would pay more attention to the former to get an insight into his "real" thoughts.
Have you actually talked to a 19yr old recently? Serious question. Because you seem to lack serious perspective about how a 19yo acts, thinks, or behaves when adults aren’t around.
Also can you explain to me how people submitting personal information to a random form from a college kid is not dumb? Facebook the product didn’t even exist at that point by the way and the information collected was more like email address, nothing really more nefarious than that.
Re: Zuckerberg on Cambridge Analytica situation
#527Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pulling user data(and friend data) from the API was "fair game" pre 2014. It was an explicit permission you could ask for. Gleaming insights from that data and then using that data for targeting on FB is/was the point. Creating an app that collected the data under false pretenses, transferring that data to another 3rd party and then claiming you never had that data makes it a different situation.
Pullling the data that your app needed for its stated functionality, exclusively for use within your app , was “fair game”. Pulling anything beyond that, and/or using it outside your app, was absolutely not allowed, ever, on the platform, even at the very beginning in 2007. Allowing it to be analyzed for targeting was never allowed, nor was it the point of the platform. You’re simply wrong. How do I know this? I deve…
I'd have to dig through the TOS again to confirm my memory on some of this stuff. You definitely could create a custom audience and target your fb app users based on UID.
Unless I'm reading this interface totally wrong
http://www.jonloomer.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/create-f...
Re: Zuckerberg on Cambridge Analytica situation
#528I want to 'react' to so many comments on that post. But then again I don't know how the data from my reactions would be used. Oh, the irony.
Re: Zuckerberg on Cambridge Analytica situation
#529Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Which were the same permissions that the users of the Kogan app gave. Remember that the issue here revolves around the fact that friends of the users of either app never gave permission for their data to be used. The only difference is that Obama did this to about 4X as many people. you're still wrong but at this point, with all the evidence showing just how different the situation is, i suspect you want to be for…
What exactly am I wrong about?
It's an agency issue. If I use an attributed channel it's like meeting you and saying "hey remember your friend the CS guy? Our company is looking for someone like that. Could you pass the word along?" vs pretending to be chatting with you when all I'm looking for is relevant recruiting leads which I will then use unbeknownst to you.
For hiring this isn't as touchy a subject, but surely there's a qualitative difference in these two interactions. One is based in an above-biard interaction. The other in subterfuge and hidden motives.
Re: Zuckerberg on Cambridge Analytica situation
#530Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not taking sides here, and I could be very wrong – my assumption here is that Cambridge didn't have a "Trump Campaign App" they had some other app, then sold that data to a third party. Obama's campaign had a "campaign" app, and used the data collected from that app. We can all argue about whether facebook should even allow apps the kind of data they do, but the crux of what CA did was to re-sell data they collec…
the crux of what CA did was to re-sell data they collected from Facebook, right? No. An independent developer had an app many years ago, recorded data from that app, and then sold that data to CA years after the fact. That developer did in fact violate Facebook's developer platform policies by selling the data, but CA had nothing to do with the app or what was represented to the people using it when they installed it…
Something is off here - not in the discussion but on the larger picture.
Why didn’t Hillary win? I’m sure she had access to similar tools?
I think someone needs to take a look at the Hillary campaign and contrast it to identify exactly how effective Facebook data is