201–210 of 331 posts
Seems like they should add another 0 to the fine after the recent hat trick: 1) Prompting users to give Facebook their email passwords.[0] 2) Using that email access to "inadvertently" upload the information of their email contacts.[1] 3) Storing said passwords and others in plaintext. [2] It's pretty impressive that a company could do something so brazenly malevolent and be confident that they will escape with no mo…
If they wanted to show proper contrition, they'd not only delete that information from their systems, they'd also remove all links in the social graphs that can be in any way a result of that information. They'd also take 100% of their revenue that was even slightly influenced/generated by the inappropriately gather data and send it out to the users whose data was copied without permission.
Also they should probably put together a legal team who will be ready to start handling the $150,000 per copied item that they didn't have the right to copy. :lol
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm ashamed to say that up until now, when I saw Facebook (or similar) acting evil I thought about the quote, "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity". Well, fuck that and fuck me, those people are not idiots, they're criminals.
Not to contradict your overall sentiment, but people often focus on intention with these issues. I think that's wrong. Like, if someone treads dog poo into my house on their shoes, it doesn't really matter if they did it by mistake, or spent ages walking around town trying to find some dog poo to step in before coming to my house; the effect is that there is now dog poo on my carpet. We need to be more dispassionate…
Have to disagree with this; I am much more forgiving of accidental harm than intentional harm. And speaking of dogs, pretty sure my dog understands this as well, since there's barking if he thinks I did something on purpose but accidentally stepping on him doesn't elicit the same response.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In other words, market rewards Facebook for being fined only $5 billion by increasing their market cap $20 billion. Unreal.
as it so turns out, you can't rely on capitalism to even have any morality, much less enforce one
It seems beside the "the bug bounty is far less than it would have sold for in the dark market" another meme has taken hold of HN. No matter how significant the fine is, there always be people clamoring how trivial it is compared to their revenues. It could have been $10B and you would hear the same thing. The only fine, then, worth slapping is one that bankrupts the entire company. Facebook made ~$7B net income in 2…
What about ethically?
How much do you think Facebook would have earned if it acted responsibly?
Once you add punitive damages, I don't understand how you could possibly think $5 billion is anything less than an order of magnitude off.
> Every insider I've spoken to said any FTC fine on Facebook under $10 billion would be seen as a massive win, showing firm won't face serious consequences for privacy violations. Wall St. seems to agree in response to news of $3-$5b settlement [$FB up 4% after hours] https://twitter.com/lhfang/status/1121148735818358784
In other words, market rewards Facebook for being fined only $5 billion by increasing their market cap $20 billion. Unreal.
They should take that $5 billion and use it to fund an alternative to Facebook. (and one that is smart as to how to approach it, given Facebook's network monopoly. I.e. it should allow you to "use Facebook" in the same way I "use Yahoo mail" when I communicate with a Yahoo mail user from my Gmail account)
I want a government run Facebook as much as I want a Facebook run Facebook.
You're using an internet that came from government funding, btw.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The passwords in plaintext wasn't a breach or a leak. If you punish Facebook for it, they would be less inclined to share such information in the future.
There might not have been a large-scale public data dump of passwords, but if 20,000[1] employees had access to logs with plaintext passwords, there is no guarantee I could ever accept that zero of them read or used customer passwords for personal purposes. What's to stop a malicious ex-lover from grabbing a FB password and reading that person's private messages? If FB didn't even know there were passwords in plainte…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ah yes, the single, non-distributed, file-backed log Facebook uses.
You have no problem with the create_user function? Obviously it's pseudocode my point is there are a finite number of log locations and checking for an instance of a known string among them isn't difficult.