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

Meta accessed women's health data from Flo app without consent, says court

malwarebytes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 236 posts

Re: Meta accessed women's health data from Flo app without consent, says court

#121

Post by toast0 »

aboringusername wrote: post #80

Another aspect of this is why Apple/Google let this happen in the first place. GrapheneOS is the only mobile OS I can think of that lets you disable networking on an per-app level. Why does a period tracking app need to send data to meta (why does it even need networking access at all )? Why is there no affordance of user-level choice/control that allows users to explicitly see the exact packets of data being sent of…

> Why does a period tracking app need to send data to meta (why does it even need networking access at all)?

In case you want to sync between multiple devices, networking is the least hassle way.

> Why is there no affordance of user-level choice/control that allows users to explicitly see the exact packets of data being sent off device? It would be trival for apps to have to present a list of allowed IPs/hostnames, and users to consent/not otherwise the app is not allowed on the play store.

I don't know that it ends up being useful, because wherever the data is sent to can also send the data further on.

Re: Meta accessed women's health data from Flo app without consent, says court

#122

Post by pc86 »

Espressosaurus wrote: post #119
changoplatanero wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish there was information about who at Facebook received this information and “used” it. I suspect it was mixed in with 9 million other sources of information and no human at Facebook was even aware it was there.

So they shouldn’t be punished because they were negligent? Is that your argument?

I think their argument is that FB has a pipeline that processes whatever data you give it and the idea that a human being made the conscious decision to use this data is almost certainly not what happened.

"This data processing pipeline processed the data we put in the pipeline" is not necessarily negligence unless you just hate Facebook and couldn't possibly imagine any scenario where they're not all mustache-twirling villains.

Re: Meta accessed women's health data from Flo app without consent, says court

#123

Post by xnorswap »

changoplatanero wrote: post #114
prasadjoglekar wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Flo shouldn't have sent those data to FB. That's true. Which is why they settled. But FB, having received this info proceeded to use it and mix it with other signals it gets. Which is what the complaint against FB alleged.

I wish there was information about who at Facebook received this information and “used” it. I suspect it was mixed in with 9 million other sources of information and no human at Facebook was even aware it was there.

Is your argument that it's fine to just collect so much information that you can't possibly responsibly handle it all?

In my opinion, that isn't something that should be allowed or encouraged.

Re: Meta accessed women's health data from Flo app without consent, says court

#124

Post by willsmith72 »

zahlman wrote: post #105
HeavyStorm wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why in these cases you'd prefer a judgment without a jury. Technical cases like this will always confuse jurors, who can't be expected to understand details about sdk, data sharing, APIs etc. On the other hand, in a number of highprofile tech cases, you can see judges learning and discussing engineering in a deeper level.

> Technical cases like this will always confuse jurors... On the other hand, in a number of highprofile tech cases, you can see judges learning and discussing engineering in a deeper level. Not to be ageist, but I find this highly counterintuitive.

how exactly? you expect the average joe to have a better technical understanding, and more importantly ability to learn, than a judge? that is bizarre to me

Re: Meta accessed women's health data from Flo app without consent, says court

#125

Post by pc86 »

zahlman wrote: post #105
HeavyStorm wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why in these cases you'd prefer a judgment without a jury. Technical cases like this will always confuse jurors, who can't be expected to understand details about sdk, data sharing, APIs etc. On the other hand, in a number of highprofile tech cases, you can see judges learning and discussing engineering in a deeper level.

> Technical cases like this will always confuse jurors... On the other hand, in a number of highprofile tech cases, you can see judges learning and discussing engineering in a deeper level. Not to be ageist, but I find this highly counterintuitive.

Judges aren't necessarily brilliant, but they do spend their entire careers reading, listening to, and dissecting arguments. A large part of this requires learning new information at least well enough to make sense of arguments on both sides of the issue. So you do end up probably self-selecting for older folks able to do this better than the mean for their age, and likely for the population at large.

Let's just say with a full jury you're almost guaranteed to get someone on the other side of the spectrum, regardless of age.

Re: Meta accessed women's health data from Flo app without consent, says court

#126

Post by qwertylicious »

pc86 wrote: post #122
Espressosaurus wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So they shouldn’t be punished because they were negligent? Is that your argument?

I think their argument is that FB has a pipeline that processes whatever data you give it and the idea that a human being made the conscious decision to use this data is almost certainly not what happened. "This data processing pipeline processed the data we put in the pipeline" is not necessarily negligence unless you just hate Facebook and couldn't possibly imagine any scenario where they're not all mustache-twirli…

Yeah, sorry, no, I have to disagree.

We're seeing this broad trend in tech where we just want to shrug and say "gee wiz, the machine did it all on its own, who could've guessed that would happen, it's not really our fault, right?"

LLMs sharing dangerous false information, ATS systems disqualifying women at higher rates than men, black people getting falsely flagged by facial recognition systems. The list goes on and on.

Humans built these systems. Humans are responsible for governing those systems and building adequate safeguards to ensure they're neither misused nor misbehave. Companies should not be allowed to tech-wash their irresponsible or illegal behaviour.

If Facebook did indeed built a data pipeline and targeting advertising system that could blindly accept and monetize illegally acquired without any human oversight, then Facebook should absolutely be held accountable for that negligence.

Re: Meta accessed women's health data from Flo app without consent, says court

#127

Post by pc86 »

qwertylicious wrote: post #126
pc86 wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think their argument is that FB has a pipeline that processes whatever data you give it and the idea that a human being made the conscious decision to use this data is almost certainly not what happened. "This data processing pipeline processed the data we put in the pipeline" is not necessarily negligence unless you just hate Facebook and couldn't possibly imagine any scenario where they're not all mustache-twirli…

Yeah, sorry, no, I have to disagree. We're seeing this broad trend in tech where we just want to shrug and say "gee wiz, the machine did it all on its own, who could've guessed that would happen, it's not really our fault, right?" LLMs sharing dangerous false information, ATS systems disqualifying women at higher rates than men, black people getting falsely flagged by facial recognition systems. The list goes on and…

What does the system look like where a human being individually verifies every pieces of data fed into an advertising system? Even taking the human out of the loop, how do you verify the "legality" of one piece of data vs. another coming from the same publisher?

None of your example have anything to do with the thing we're talking about, and are just meant to inflame emotional opinions rather than engender rational discussion about this issue.

Re: Meta accessed women's health data from Flo app without consent, says court

#128

Post by qwertylicious »

pc86 wrote: post #127
qwertylicious wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, sorry, no, I have to disagree. We're seeing this broad trend in tech where we just want to shrug and say "gee wiz, the machine did it all on its own, who could've guessed that would happen, it's not really our fault, right?" LLMs sharing dangerous false information, ATS systems disqualifying women at higher rates than men, black people getting falsely flagged by facial recognition systems. The list goes on and…

What does the system look like where a human being individually verifies every pieces of data fed into an advertising system? Even taking the human out of the loop, how do you verify the "legality" of one piece of data vs. another coming from the same publisher? None of your example have anything to do with the thing we're talking about, and are just meant to inflame emotional opinions rather than engender rational d…

That's not my problem to solve?

If Facebook chooses to build a system that can ingest massive amounts of third party data, and cannot simultaneously develop a system to vet that data to determine if it's been illegally acquired, then they shouldn't build that system.

You're running under the assumption that the technology must exist, and therefore we must live with the consequences. I don't accept that premise.

Edit: By the way, I'm presenting this as an all-or-nothing proposition, which is certainly unreasonable, and I recognize that. KYC rules in finance aren't a panacea. Financial crimes still happen even with them in place. But they represent a best effort, if imperfect, attempt to acknowledge and mitigate those risks, and based on what we've seen from tech companies over the last thirty years, I think it's reasonable to assume Facebook didn't attempt similar diligence, particularly given a jury trial found them guilty of misbehaviour.

> None of your example have anything to do with the thing we're talking about, and are just meant to inflame emotional opinions rather than engender rational discussion about this issue.

Not at all. I'm placing this specific example in the broader context of the tech industry failing to a) consider the consequences of their actions, and b) escaping accountability.

That context matters.

Re: Meta accessed women's health data from Flo app without consent, says court

#129

Post by zahlman »

willsmith72 wrote: post #124
zahlman wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Technical cases like this will always confuse jurors... On the other hand, in a number of highprofile tech cases, you can see judges learning and discussing engineering in a deeper level. Not to be ageist, but I find this highly counterintuitive.

how exactly? you expect the average joe to have a better technical understanding, and more importantly ability to learn, than a judge? that is bizarre to me

I expect the average joe to use technology much more than a judge.

Re: Meta accessed women's health data from Flo app without consent, says court

#130

Post by BobaFloutist »

zahlman wrote: post #105
HeavyStorm wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why in these cases you'd prefer a judgment without a jury. Technical cases like this will always confuse jurors, who can't be expected to understand details about sdk, data sharing, APIs etc. On the other hand, in a number of highprofile tech cases, you can see judges learning and discussing engineering in a deeper level.

> Technical cases like this will always confuse jurors... On the other hand, in a number of highprofile tech cases, you can see judges learning and discussing engineering in a deeper level. Not to be ageist, but I find this highly counterintuitive.

The judge is at their job. The jury is conscripts that are often paying a financial penalty to be present.
Post reply on HN