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

As Facebook Raised a Privacy Wall, It Carved an Opening for Tech Giants

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 205 posts

Re: As Facebook Raised a Privacy Wall, It Carved an Opening for Tech Giants

#191

Post by SilasX »

a_bonobo wrote: post #105
rock_hard wrote: post #101

After reading facebooks response I am once again disappointed by the art of journalism we have to deal with these days :( Turns out NYT either doesn’t understand the technical details or doesn’t want to https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2018/12/facebooks-partners/

Not sure what you're talking about, Facebook explicitly confirms what NYT writes??? >Did partners get access to messages? >Yes. But people had to explicitly sign in to Facebook first to use a partner’s messaging feature. Take Spotify for example. After signing in to your Facebook account in Spotify’s desktop app, you could then send and receive messages without ever leaving the app. Our API provided partners with acc…

I don't know on what planet that's supposed to be reassuring. They thought that sending FB messages within Spotify was such a whizbang feature that they gave Spotify unrestricted access to FB PMs? "But it's okay, they had to be signed in to FB"?

If they wanted to do this, couldn't they have done some plugin, where all interaction with FB features is within that plugin but inaccessible to to the broader app? Because otherwise, they have to effectively assume that this partner has gotten full access to the PMs. In crypto terms, a "total break" for that user.

I'm not even sure how this makes sense from a greedy megaglobocorp perspective. FB should be guarding that data tightly against other companies having it; their exclusive access is valuable.

Help?

Re: As Facebook Raised a Privacy Wall, It Carved an Opening for Tech Giants

#192

Post by munchbunny »

NelsonMinar wrote: post #140

I always wonder about the engineers at Facebook who implemented a feature like this. Someone like me, more or less. Did they stop to wonder why they were being told to bypass user privacy preferences? Did they raise any internal questions about ethics? Did any of them consider becoming a whistleblower? Or perhaps everyone who works for Facebook is convinced this kind of data sharing is OK?

I think it's easier to understand how this happens as an aggregate effect instead of "one engineer looked the other way".

As a hypothetical example:

- Some engineer implements the Like/Share buttons to push more users onto Facebook.

- Some engineer working on the ads product realizes that the Like button is a great Trojan horse to gather info about a user's browsing habits. Thinks of it in terms of analytics - "understanding who the users are." Harmless enough, but now we're over the ethical hurdle of collecting that data.

- Another engineer working on the ads product realizes that using this data to target ads could get advertisers to pay more for the same ads. Now you're just using data we already have, right?

- Facebook signs a bespoke advertising deal with some companies which includes access non-anonymous data. Facebook already collects and uses it and users sign it over in terms of service, so... what's the problem with using it in a way that's still advertising, just specific to some new partners?

None of the steps look that bad if you don't look too closely. No engineer had to think too hard about the specific ethical problems, but the aggregate effect is the travesty we have today. If any decision maker along this path stopped to really think about it and cared enough to stop it, this might not have happened, but market competition and general indifference meant nobody really took a long, hard look at this chain of events as it was happening.

Re: As Facebook Raised a Privacy Wall, It Carved an Opening for Tech Giants

#193

Post by 18pfsmt »

pmarreck wrote: post #176
randomacct3847 wrote: post #91

It’s crazy that there ever is/was an endpoint to read a user’s private messages. What exactly would ever be a good use case for that where a user would knowingly agree to it.

Did you know that every single email you've ever sent was readable by every single mail delivery agent in between?

It is possible this random person on HN was using PGP, so I don't think it's fair to use "every single" verbiage as it is clearly hyperbole.

Re: As Facebook Raised a Privacy Wall, It Carved an Opening for Tech Giants

#194

Post by 18pfsmt »

pmarreck wrote: post #175
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Would MZ ever face criminal charges? He's lied to Congress. He's lied to half of Europe. (Or blown them off.) He's knowingly directed the violation of a federal consent decree and several EU directives. He presides over a platform profiting from mass atrocities in multiple countries. There's plenty to go after him with. The only things protecting him are his standing and lack of unexpected criminality.

Evidence that he's lied to those entities?

There is no evidence, just innuendo, raw emotion, and pure discounting of personal responsibility. Many seem to want all the perceived benefits of FB, but none of the costs. Just to be clear, I don't use, nor like FB.

Re: As Facebook Raised a Privacy Wall, It Carved an Opening for Tech Giants

#195

Post by rhizome »

wtmt wrote: post #134
rhizome wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If worse comes to worst, they can become a credit rating agency. There should be a CFAA for personal information.

Slightly related: The Chinese government is already working on a social credit rating system using mass surveillance. I shudder to even imagine living in such a world.

They may merely be one step ahead.

Re: As Facebook Raised a Privacy Wall, It Carved an Opening for Tech Giants

#196

Post by elliekelly »

pvg wrote: post #51
AlexandrB wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re kidding, right? If I send a “private” message, but everybody from law enforcement to my bank has access to it, it’s not private. It’s public knowledge as far as any background checks or loan applications are concerned. By contrast, if my bank worked out a deal with Bell where they get to record my all phone conversations they would still be committing a felony in almost all jurisdictions, NDA or not. That’s a…

It’s public knowledge as far as any background checks or loan applications are concerned. You give permission for those and the data accessed is often not public. There are degrees of privacy - what you're trying to do make up your own definition of 'public' and then have message board fights about it. It's not really a sensible position, let alone interesting conversation.

> You give permission for those and the data accessed is often not public.

I'm not sure this was always the case with Facebook though. Let's say my friend John gives RBC access to his messages and I message him asking to loan me $50 because I'm struggling with money. Down the road if I apply for a loan from RBC they now have access to my "private" message, without my permission and can ostensibly then use that information when determining my creditworthiness. All without my knowledge or consent.

Re: As Facebook Raised a Privacy Wall, It Carved an Opening for Tech Giants

#197

Post by jackvalentine »

Puer wrote: post #142
jackvalentine wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this reply meant to be for me? It doesn't seem specifically relevant.

Facebook isn't tapping your phones microphone 24/7. It's a nice little dystopian theory that's been disproven time and again. A far more probable and less exciting explanation is that your credit card provider (or the store you bought the wine from) is selling your information and Facebook happens to be one of the buyers. Furthermore, people grossly overestimate how unique they are. At any given point in time you're…

Well that's my point - however they're doing the targeting is so good as to be creepy and so I wish there was a way for me to force them to show me why I'm seeing a particular ad.

Re: As Facebook Raised a Privacy Wall, It Carved an Opening for Tech Giants

#198

Post by elliekelly »

raydev wrote: post #178
squish78 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most likely why they aggressively hire college grads and keep the developer workforce young. I doubt they teach corporate ethics in any comp sci program.

Most of the young people getting hired by FAANG are grads from big name schools so they've most definitely taken one or two ethics courses. I think we're just seeing 22 year olds' ethics are collapsing when they're given $150k/year straight out of school.

It's one thing to understand right from wrong. It's another thing entirely to expect a 22-year old, struggling to get on their feet, to look their boss or a VP in the eye and say "this is not ethical." You're asking them to risk everything: their job, their income, their reputation when they've only just begun.

That's a big ask even for someone who has taken hundreds of ethics courses.

Post reply on HN