Whoever is still investing in Facebook are complicit in aiding criminal activity, e.g. aiding unfair competition.
Facebook's seized files published by MPs
481–490 of 507 posts
Re: Facebook's seized files published by MPs
#482Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's really striking is how user-hostile this conversation is. Forget about whether the user wants to share their data or not - it's all about what Facebook wants to do. In this case, that's snuffing competition by denying access, in the case of Cambridge Analytica, it's sharing data for purposes of shady data "research".
There's nothing that Facebook did here than any other company, in tech or otherwise, wouldn't have done. And for the record, Facebook did not "share data with Cambridge Analytica for shady research purposes". A rogue third party developer created one of those shitty quiz apps for Facebook, and then proceed to get users to signup for it; several million did, which allowed said developer to harvest data thanks to the v…
That's not true man. Some companies were "allowed" to use/get the data even after it was shutdown and the API was created in the first place to entice the masses.
Re: Facebook's seized files published by MPs
#483I worked at Facebook for 5 years on Workplace and Internal Tools. I am typically very critical of the company nowadays, but even so find the discussion here difficult to digest. People are complex. They are more complex than an action, or even a group of actions. To take a person and alias them into being "good" or "bad" based on an action or a series of actions is to explicitly dehumanize them for the sake of making…
Over humanizing people is also a bad way to look at these things as it diminishes their contribution towards a more problematic group and class structure. While yes, most billionares are probably fine people by many individual metrics, the billionaire class can only exist by extracting value off the backs of others. Facebook as an entity might be run by great people who love their families and support their communiti…
> and anyone who willingly or knowingly takes a part within that, especially for personal benefit is responsible for the actions of the group as a whole.
And that is on top of "The Responsibility of Intellectuals"
Re: Facebook's seized files published by MPs
#484Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's getting hilarious to see people more offended by FB's information being exfiltrated than the exfiltration of everybody's data that FB aided and promoted. Ah, but those are just your fellow people, not the money man.
The potential problem I have here is abuse of power by government. I’d be pretty upset if Congress subpoenaed user data from Facebook and then selectively published embarrassing info on their political enemies. Even if I hated those people.
I’d be pretty upset if Congress subpoenaed user data from Facebook and then selectively published embarrassing info on their political enemies. Even if I hated those people.
I think it's more like this, which if you've been paying attention has been going on for a long time. If you want to bet that the US hasn't snatched data they want when they know someone is in the country even temporarily, I'll take that bet.
https://www.zdnet.com/article/warrantless-phone-laptop-searc...
Among people who have a problem with the Six4Three situation, I feel like the issue is really just that we found out about it. The powers are already there, waiting to be used.
Re: Facebook's seized files published by MPs
#485I worked at Facebook for 5 years on Workplace and Internal Tools. I am typically very critical of the company nowadays, but even so find the discussion here difficult to digest. People are complex. They are more complex than an action, or even a group of actions. To take a person and alias them into being "good" or "bad" based on an action or a series of actions is to explicitly dehumanize them for the sake of making…
Do you own Facebook stock?
Re: Facebook's seized files published by MPs
#486Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it's going to boil down to whether a good person going to work at a bad company is actively working to change it for the better. In my experience, people who do this don't tend to last long. If there are people who've found a good strategy for changing companies for the better without being exceptionally senior, i'd love to hear about it.
Not sure if I'd have the courage to do it, but whistle-blowing. You could even do that a while after you've left, and there are options such as media outlets with anonymous communication methods, or foreign governments/data protection authorities.
Whistle-blowing is fine for actual illegal activities (and many industries have legal protection for whistle-blowers), but for unethical acts (where ethics aren't protected by law) you don't really have the same options.
Re: Facebook's seized files published by MPs
#487Earlier quoted context omitted.
The potential problem I have here is abuse of power by government. I’d be pretty upset if Congress subpoenaed user data from Facebook and then selectively published embarrassing info on their political enemies. Even if I hated those people.
I’d be pretty upset if Congress subpoenaed user data from Facebook and then selectively published embarrassing info on their political enemies. Even if I hated those people. I think it's more like this, which if you've been paying attention has been going on for a long time. If you want to bet that the US hasn't snatched data they want when they know someone is in the country even temporarily, I'll take that bet. htt…
The government is invading our privacy with surveillance and border searches, agreed. No defense or denial of that here.
But I don’t see stories where some congressperson is then publishing some of the fruits of that surveillance or searches just to embarrass political rivals. That would be especially beyond the pale.
Re: Facebook's seized files published by MPs
#488Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's really striking is how user-hostile this conversation is. Forget about whether the user wants to share their data or not - it's all about what Facebook wants to do. In this case, that's snuffing competition by denying access, in the case of Cambridge Analytica, it's sharing data for purposes of shady data "research".
There's nothing that Facebook did here than any other company, in tech or otherwise, wouldn't have done. And for the record, Facebook did not "share data with Cambridge Analytica for shady research purposes". A rogue third party developer created one of those shitty quiz apps for Facebook, and then proceed to get users to signup for it; several million did, which allowed said developer to harvest data thanks to the v…
Maybe the problem is profit-driven companies...
Re: Facebook's seized files published by MPs
#489Earlier quoted context omitted.
And what precedent is that? The idea that companies aren't above the law? That's a precedent I wish was more enforced. I'm proud of my parliament today (and it's not often I can say that), even if in other parts they're tearing themselves apart.
What laws did Facebook break that warranted seizing and publishing internal documents?
[deleted]