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

Facebook’s Data Deals Are Under Criminal Investigation

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 248 posts

Re: Facebook’s Data Deals Are Under Criminal Investigation

#221

Post by ionised »

hackinthebochs wrote: post #210
navigatesol wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but even greater would be to put Facebook's exces behind bars. What is with this place wanting to throw everyone in prison? Is there some thrill you get from seeing executives in an orange jumper? Fines can be far more beneficial to society. Make them pay in a way that actually helps other people.

Moral indignation is the new chic

Better to just let people get away with whatever they want, right?

I mean, as long as the crime made a lot of money, it can't really be a crime, surely?

Re: Facebook’s Data Deals Are Under Criminal Investigation

#222

Post by bryan_w »

untog wrote: post #83
makomk wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You see the scary descriptions and illustrations of how much information was shared with the Blackberry Hub app in the previous New York Times article about this at https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/06/03/technology/fa... ? Well, their reporters got that information by sniffing the network traffic from the app. They knew exactly where the data was going, and clearly they didn't see it going to Blackberry's ser…

Presumably Blackberry is using an access token to fetch that data, I can't see any reason why they couldn't also store that access token server side and query data without it ever appearing in device logs.

The same could be said for mail.app sending your Gmail password to Apple, but it would be rather unlikely.

Re: Facebook’s Data Deals Are Under Criminal Investigation

#223

Post by hackinthebochs »

ionised wrote: post #221
hackinthebochs wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Moral indignation is the new chic

Better to just let people get away with whatever they want, right? I mean, as long as the crime made a lot of money, it can't really be a crime, surely?

It's better to be rational about creating the right incentives to prevent socially damaging behavior rather than stoking moral indignation disconnected from any semblance of benefit to society. How the left became the torch-bearers for unreflective moral indignation and retributivism is beyond me.

Re: Facebook’s Data Deals Are Under Criminal Investigation

#224

Post by sonnyblarney »

corebit wrote: post #196
sonnyblarney wrote: post #92

I was personally involved in a leadership role in one of these key strategic deals while at a major handset maker. To be clear, we built the 'Facebook experience' for our device because only we really could. During this era, APIs were a disaster of a mess, moreover, the special API that made the device so special was not available to the public. Ironically it was our internal APIs that were making the special sauce!…

I'm so glad you wrote this. It's mind-bogglingly stupid what people are saying about the nefarious purposes this stuff was put to when that's obviously so far from the case and EVERYBODY involved in working on this stuff 10 years ago understands it.

I should add that it's possible there were some loose ends in some other scenarios. I don't think we deeply considered our situation, to the point wherein there might have been some loopholes with caches etc..

At the time, nobody considered the issue to be hugely problematic, it was 'info on a site' and we treated it responsibly, but not like top secret data.

Also, we had no reason to want user data. Today, companies may or may not be able to use such data, but they all seem to be in the game of collecting user information as a systematic impetus. I think this will evolve.

Re: Facebook’s Data Deals Are Under Criminal Investigation

#225

Post by gotocake »

artificial wrote: post #129
gotocake wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you hold yourself to the same legal and social standards as actual accredited engineers, of the type who build things like airplanes, you’ll be in a better position. Right now the software works wants the benefits of the unregulated Wild West, without the consequences. Such a scenario simply cannot last, and in the absence of self regulation and setting of standards, the legal system will step in. It’s slow, it’…

Quality software exists and is written by talented engineers. Its written in specific languages and is tested on specific hardware configurations and verifiable. These things cost a bit more. I’m sure if the mass market were willing to bear an enormous cost this would already be solved. Unfortunately I doubt you or your cohorts are willing to pony up $2,999,999 USD a seat (Minimum order 500).

In your fantasy, why does a “seat” cost orders of magnitude more than a first class round trip to Australia in an actual seat? On that note, in the same way that I prefer a more expensive seat on a plane that was designed in accordance with professional and legal standards, yes I’d do the same for software.

Maybe there would even be less cruft and bloatware when externalities were accounted for.

Re: Facebook’s Data Deals Are Under Criminal Investigation

#226

Post by gnud »

hackinthebochs wrote: post #223
ionised wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Better to just let people get away with whatever they want, right? I mean, as long as the crime made a lot of money, it can't really be a crime, surely?

It's better to be rational about creating the right incentives to prevent socially damaging behavior rather than stoking moral indignation disconnected from any semblance of benefit to society. How the left became the torch-bearers for unreflective moral indignation and retributivism is beyond me.

I think it's not only moral indignation. It's a feeling that fines are not working. Since fines are not working, maybe prison would.

If you make the fine large enough to actually matter, it would probably affect people working at the company who had nothing to do with the illegal activity. So maybe you should figure out who said 'OK' to the stuff, and who implemented it, and then put them in prison. Maybe then other companies won't do similar things.

I don't know if it would work, but the sentiment doesn't necessarily come from moral indignation or "retributivism".

Re: Facebook’s Data Deals Are Under Criminal Investigation

#227

Post by r00fus »

_underfl0w_ wrote: post #174

Did anybody else catch this? > Apple was able to hide from Facebook users all indicators that its devices were even asking for data. I've seen a lot of discourse here seem to favor Apple over the big "G" but... this seems pretty shady. Anyone else know anything about this practice or what specifically they might've been referring to?

It was opt-in. And hardly used.

Re: Facebook’s Data Deals Are Under Criminal Investigation

#228

Post by hackinthebochs »

gnud wrote: post #226
hackinthebochs wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's better to be rational about creating the right incentives to prevent socially damaging behavior rather than stoking moral indignation disconnected from any semblance of benefit to society. How the left became the torch-bearers for unreflective moral indignation and retributivism is beyond me.

I think it's not only moral indignation. It's a feeling that fines are not working. Since fines are not working, maybe prison would. If you make the fine large enough to actually matter, it would probably affect people working at the company who had nothing to do with the illegal activity. So maybe you should figure out who said 'OK' to the stuff, and who implemented it, and then put them in prison. Maybe then other…

There's plenty of glee in this thread at the prospect of MZ facing jail time. That's the retributivism I'm referring to.

As far as fines being incentives, if the fine is large enough it will work. Make it so shareholders feel the pain and the board will hold the executives accountable. Then you'll get the necessary feedback to curb these actions.

Re: Facebook’s Data Deals Are Under Criminal Investigation

#229

Post by lithos »

foamflower wrote: post #168
8bitsrule wrote: post #136

IANAL. But this: "reports last June and December that Facebook had given business partners — including makers of smartphones, tablets and other devices — deep access to users’ personal information, letting some companies effectively override users’ privacy settings." suggests breach-of-contract. Just by creating those privacy settings, the company is 'saying' to (promising) the customer who elects to use them that it…

IANAL either, but two things stand out. First, breach of contract is not a criminal wrong, only a civil one. Second, it would be a big stretch to say that the relationship between users and Facebook (or any nominally free service) is a contract, as valid contracts must follow certain requirements like consideration or a meeting of the minds. This is partly why things like the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act that e.g. Aa…

Read the article. This discusses violations of an agreement between Facebook and the FTC. Not an agreement or ToS between users and Facebook.

Re: Facebook’s Data Deals Are Under Criminal Investigation

#230

Post by FussyZeus »

rhn_mk1 wrote: post #216
dwighttk wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

iOS device with iOS 11 or newer (current devices are on iOS 12)... or don't log into Facebook on an older device. This isn't Apple cynically hiding selling your data behind your back. Back when they had Facebook integrated it was so that you could share stuff easier with your friends. Yes it was a security risk because of how Facebook used the information. That is part of the reason Apple removed the integration.

> This isn't Apple cynically hiding selling your data behind your back. It's just both a grave security mistake and a breach of trust to treat Facebook preferentially without letting the user know. To me, it's indistinguishable from cynically handing over the user to Facebook.

> It's just both a grave security mistake and a breach of trust to treat Facebook preferentially without letting the user know.

The user knew. The user asked for it. People were howling for Facebook integrations. This was back before Facebook's privacy transgressions were as widely known.

It's also worth noting that the integration was designed to allow posting to Facebook from iOS. Facebook then took advantage of that opening to get additional data from the device. That's why Apple slammed the door shut.

Post reply on HN