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

Cambridge Analytica raided by UK data watchdog

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–78 of 78 posts

Re: Cambridge Analytica raided by UK data watchdog

#71

Post by DanBC »

IAmEveryone wrote: post #58
adamnemecek wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Destroying evidence, however, can rather quickly result in criminal prosecution. I disagree with all your points. This would imply that no one has ever destroyed evidence. You are also implying they are acting rationally. You are also projecting US laws onto the U.K. > The only way to possibly way to square destruction of evidence with rational thinking is the possibility of CA having engaged in things worse than c…

My point is that destroying evidence may make sense if you're accused of serious crimes. It doesn't make any sense if your employer is accused of civil law violations. And I'm actually in the EU and believe my representation of the law to be mostly correct. >> The only way to possibly way to square destruction of evidence with rational thinking is the possibility of CA having engaged in things worse than currently kn…

The data protection act introduces some criminal offences. Here's a list: https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/data-protection-act-19...

Section 55(1) DPA unlawful obtaining etc. of personal data

It is an offence to knowingly or recklessly obtain, disclose or procure the disclosure of personal information without the consent of the data controller.

There are some exceptions to this for example, where such obtaining or disclosure was necessary for crime prevention/detection. Section 55(2) sets out four defences to section 55(1).

If a person has obtained personal information illegally it is an offence to offer or to sell personal information. Section 55(3) makes the contravention of section 55(1) a criminal offence.

Section 55(4) and section 55(5) DPA create offences of selling and offering to sell personal data. For the purposes of section 55(5) DPA an advertisement indicating that personal data are or may be for sale is an offer to sell the data.

When prosecuting DPA cases as per the case of R v Julian Connor (Southwark Crown Court, 19 May 2003) prosecutors should remember to adduce evidence that the individuals named in each charge were alive at the time their data was obtained, and as per R v Buckley, England, Wallace and Moore (Winchester Crown Court, September 2003), the prosecution has to prove that the information was data within the meaning of Section 2(1) of the DPA.

There are no custodial sentences in respect of DPA offences and no powers of arrest; all offences are punishable only by a fine. Search warrants are available to the Information Commissioner by virtue of section 50 and the powers outline at schedule 9 of the DPA.

---End Quote---

Re: Cambridge Analytica raided by UK data watchdog

#72

Post by Consultant32452 »

rdiddly wrote: post #50
Consultant32452 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At fault for what exactly, Trump getting elected? I still don't understand what we know today that anyone sort of paying attention didn't expect a year ago, or even five years ago.

I was thinking about the mere leakage of the data itself, but you make a good point. I pretty quickly figured out the nature of Facebook years ago and deleted mine. But all the people coming out of the woodwork now to hate on Facebook all of a sudden , you have to assume 1) they accepted all the things about Facebook that we all knew, including the use or misuse of data, and 2) what made them finally object was Faceb…

On one hand I don't want to look this gift horse too closely in the mouth, because I do support better control over my private data.

On the other hand, the broader responses by the big tech firms seems to be a heavy-handed punishment of run of the mill right wing media. While not illegal it is pretty terrifying to see so much modern day book burning.

Re: Cambridge Analytica raided by UK data watchdog

#73

Post by lostlogin »

roywiggins wrote: post #36
lostlogin wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s interesting how the collection of the same information by the likes of the five eyes is ok, yet for Facebook it isn’t.

At least in the US, there are legal prohibitions on government propaganda programs targeting Americans, whereas that's more or less entirely what Facebook is for. If the govt is caught running influence campaigns inside the US, there will be hell to pay- Congressional hearings, new legislation, etc.

They have been caught. Or are you referring to something else?

Re: Cambridge Analytica raided by UK data watchdog

#74

Post by pjc50 »

pyjammas wrote: post #66
YorkshireSeason wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I invite you to defend your claim. Start by asking yourself which non-fringe socialist/communist party was not using the Leninist model of organisation, and which was not a member of the ComIntern and its successors? Which did not receive funding and ideological schooling in the Soviet Union? You have an uphill struggle against history against you.

How would you define 'fringe', and how does this not include views that are less pro-state?

Never mind that, how do you define "left"?

> non-fringe socialist/communist party was not using the Leninist model of organisation, and which was not a member of the ComIntern and its successors?

UK Labour party? Has everyone forgotten the Fabians?

The modern Green parties tend to be "left" but not necessarily inheriting from the Marxist tradition at all, generally post-dating WW2 (although this produces endless arguments about "watermelons"). Also modern left-wing parties of almost all colours are explicitly pro-human rights, which includes not only the right to privacy but the right to property!

Again, I'm not saying that there aren't some actual pro-Stalin "tankies" around, but it gets incredibly tedious having to defend everyone to the left of the Daily Mail from automatic charges of being a Stalinist. Congratulations on your dozen posts of derailing.

Re: Cambridge Analytica raided by UK data watchdog

#75

Post by pyjammas »

pjc50 wrote: post #74
pyjammas wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would you define 'fringe', and how does this not include views that are less pro-state?

Never mind that, how do you define "left"? > non-fringe socialist/communist party was not using the Leninist model of organisation, and which was not a member of the ComIntern and its successors? UK Labour party? Has everyone forgotten the Fabians? The modern Green parties tend to be "left" but not necessarily inheriting from the Marxist tradition at all, generally post-dating WW2 (although this produces endless argu…

Apologies if I misinterpret your comment, but aren't we arguing the same thing?

Re: Cambridge Analytica raided by UK data watchdog

#76

Post by chiefalchemist »

vinay427 wrote: post #17
chiefalchemist wrote: post #7

Big Brother raids Step Brother for data provided by Little Brother. I can't imagine I'm any safer now.

The raid was conducted by the Information Commissioner's Office, which has a mission to "uphold information rights in the public interest, promoting openness by public bodies and data privacy for individuals". That doesn't seem very Big Brother to me, even if other government agencies do fit that characterization. Source: the bottom of their homepage - https://ico.org.uk

This is gov / quasi-gov agency, yes? Do they also oversea what the gov and other quasi-gov agencies collect? Or is their protection limited to what happens in the private sector?

Re: Cambridge Analytica raided by UK data watchdog

#77

Post by 46886532558 »

YorkshireSeason wrote: post #39
46886532558 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also the CCC and European hacker culture. I think in the US hacker culture is different and less political, because of the FBI suffocating its roots early on, and a general fear of leftist politics. In europe, and Germany in particular, the CCC and close structures have been really important correctives since before the internet. And they are like reeeally left wing anticapitalist idealists and antiauthoritarians, wh…

they are like reeeally left wing The historical record of the extreme left is extremely pro-state, pro surveillance. Indeed, the Marxist corrective to freewheeling capitalism was a strong socialist state (to cover the period before communism emerges and the state withers away) [1]. Many modern surveillance techniques were pioneered or refined by the likes of the OGPU [2], the NKVD [3] and their equivalents in satelli…

> fear of leftist politics...

What I said, huh?! Maybe before you throw in the Stasi Wikipedia article, you should check out the CCC's. They advocate for a strong state regulations, strong democratic structures and freedom of the individual, including privacy. Transparency for the state, privacy for the individual. Large parts of their member base are anticapitalists and anarchists, minding the collective welfare, so I figured from an American perspective that's quite far left.

You won't find advertisement or any commercial interests on their very large conferences, which are completely organized and managed by volunteers. On every level. There is absolutely no tolerance for right wing ideas, police or military.

That's why I think their political background here is important, they always been activists advocating for everyone's welfare and rights. Something rather unusual for non left wing politics.

Re: Cambridge Analytica raided by UK data watchdog

#78

Post by vinay427 »

chiefalchemist wrote: post #76
vinay427 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The raid was conducted by the Information Commissioner's Office, which has a mission to "uphold information rights in the public interest, promoting openness by public bodies and data privacy for individuals". That doesn't seem very Big Brother to me, even if other government agencies do fit that characterization. Source: the bottom of their homepage - https://ico.org.uk

This is gov / quasi-gov agency, yes? Do they also oversea what the gov and other quasi-gov agencies collect? Or is their protection limited to what happens in the private sector?

I suppose you directed this to me, so to be honest, I don't know. I'm not British and didn't know about this agency before I posted my comment. I just wanted to raise the point that the government isn't a monolithic entity that can be solely described by its actions that we disapprove of.
Post reply on HN