111–120 of 274 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is pretty easy to call for resignation as an outsider. This is not an elected position, i do not think people get to call this.
As a shareholder I do, this kid works for me and it is time to take full responsibility and go home...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Zuck has full control of the company by design, those shares you bought are participation options with no control.
He should donate his shares and resign... this is how he can help humanity...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nah. In a week all of this will be forgotten (do you still remember the helicopter in the river, and the bridge that collapsed?). You and me and a few more people will remember, but we all already know that everything that is posted privately on Facebook will be leaked sooner or later. I even expect to see a few angry post from people that decided to delete their account now, and when they tried to undelete the accou…
I thought the same a week ago. Nearly bought some FB calls even. But this controversy has surprised me with its staying power. The real sizzle comes not from the emotional outrage but the calls for government inquiry and potential regulation, which would do structural damage to all of Silicon Valley. This has been a stunningly bipartisan effort, the left supporting it ostensibly because they like regulating big busin…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You'd think so, but most companies have pretty strict internal controls for this sort of thing. Access is also carefully logged so a leaker is pretty much guaranteed to get caught at which point they'd immediately lose their job and likely face criminal prosecution. With so much to lose and so little to gain internal leaks of this sort are extremely rare.
Who watches the watchers? #1 - There's always a back door. I did some medical records stuff for a while. I looked myself up, just to confirm for myself how trivial it was to do. Yup, there I was. Which is why I insist that all data at rest is encrypted. (I have yet to win this argument.) #2 - Our "portal" product had access logs for auditing. Plus permissions, consent trees, delegation. The usual features. Alas. We a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You'd think so, but most companies have pretty strict internal controls for this sort of thing. Access is also carefully logged so a leaker is pretty much guaranteed to get caught at which point they'd immediately lose their job and likely face criminal prosecution. With so much to lose and so little to gain internal leaks of this sort are extremely rare.
most companies have pretty strict internal controls for this sort of thing This does not ring true to me at all.
There were few effective internal controls. The obstacles to lookups were
1 - all info keyed by cookie. Which users can clear, and is very difficult to get identified. That is, to look you up, I need the cookie from your machine.
1a - most devs are not allowed to run the cluster jobs to look up data. Only on the appropriate teams.
2 - but what about stapling? We required partners to pass us blind uids. Certainly nothing like emails.
3 - no data export. The business is to run ads on the customer's behalf, so there's no way built to export data except targeting lists to the exchanges.
Can someone explain to me why the Cambridge Analytica story is making people so much angrier than the later revelation that Facebook was scraping call+text info? That seems to be the larger problem to me. Somewhere at Facebook there is a team of people who wrote software to scrape, store and analyze the personal call+text data that users didn't explicitly mean to give to Facebook. The data that Cambridge Analytica at…
Personally: I don't care what facebook does with my data - there's nothing very exciting and I have ad blockers so don't even see the ads. It doesn't effect me. However the Analytica stuff is about conning the masses into voting for Trump and Brexit and that effects me big time and pisses me off somewhat. In face worse that conning - more initing the mob to hatred through lies and bullshit. See for example the Hillar…
I feel like someone should also give Zuckerberg the memo that it's only a matter of time before an insider also goes rogue and abuses data access (edit: or otherwise; see below). Facebook fundamentally seems to trust itself way too much, and it worries me that it thinks the only threats are external entities... to me, this is another silently ticking time bomb. EDIT: And don't forget that going rogue is just one scen…
You'd think so, but most companies have pretty strict internal controls for this sort of thing. Access is also carefully logged so a leaker is pretty much guaranteed to get caught at which point they'd immediately lose their job and likely face criminal prosecution. With so much to lose and so little to gain internal leaks of this sort are extremely rare.
companies that move fast and break things don't give a shit.
I want more companies of the first type and less of the second.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You request access, and justify it with something like "I need it to debug issue #123". Someone manually oks/disallows it, and there's asynchronous reviews of these requests to double check. My guess is the intern lied about what they're using it for. OK so an insider can just lie and access whatever they want. Heck, they can even tell the truth! Just find a bug that's exhibited in a particular profile and use that…
So, you don't know how google handles this, but you are suggesting everybody should do what google does. Are you trolling?
The real education from this story is far deeper than just Facebook. It is that Facebook employees, and Google employees, and all humans in general are susceptible to this very same "kompromat" concept, and are all susceptible to various forms of influence to greater degrees than our arrogance allows us to admit.
Human beings are attack vectors. Human beings are too self centered to do much about this in any meaningful sense. They can laugh the very idea away too easily.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Personally: I don't care what facebook does with my data - there's nothing very exciting and I have ad blockers so don't even see the ads. It doesn't effect me. However the Analytica stuff is about conning the masses into voting for Trump and Brexit and that effects me big time and pisses me off somewhat. In face worse that conning - more initing the mob to hatred through lies and bullshit. See for example the Hillar…
By giving access to your data, you are saying it's ok to take that data and pander to your psyche in some fashion. You may not see direct advertising in your browser, but it leads back to how strategists decide to engage your physical community. And even if you block ads, your friends may not. Friends will influence you through your feed, based on the ads they see, based on your data.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> FWIW, as a Facebook engineer you have a ton of trainings on how to handle data privacy. And not only is every place where you can touch data actively logged/audited/monitored (this includes DB reads from code, admin tools, etc.), but to access any data you have to explicitly request permission for that specific data. Really? So are stories like [1] complete lies? Or does someone inside just blindly grant these "exp…
You request access, and justify it with something like "I need it to debug issue #123". Someone manually oks/disallows it, and there's asynchronous reviews of these requests to double check. My guess is the intern lied about what they're using it for. How else would you suggest to do privacy checks like these?