Live data from Hacker News

50M Facebook profiles harvested for Cambridge Analytica in major data breach

theguardian.com

251–260 of 271 posts

Re: 50M Facebook profiles harvested for Cambridge Analytica in major data breach

#251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've heard all sorts of the juicy details, it makes a great story there's no doubt. What I'm looking for is some substantial, verifiable evidence to overcome my suspicions at how perfect of a story it is, as well as some of the inconsistencies. For example: > Presumably Mueller used that subpoena on Facebook and internet providers and the Russians didn't try to hide very hard and used mostly Russian ip addresses . So…

> Russians didn't try to hide very hard and used mostly Russian ip addresses. This is incorrect. The indictment explains it. They routed their connections through US-based VPNs to appear as if they were American users.

As they should, but I read another Authoritative Proof that many people assured me I should take Very Seriously that used the posting of pro-Russian propaganda as the proof that Twitter bots that interfered with the election were Russian.

I don't doubt at all that there is a government sponsored organization in Russia that promotes Russian interests via cyber operations, as I'm sure there is in the United States. I'm looking for proof that:

a) this isn't a 3rd party posing as Russians

b) The harm or danger of this meddling is proportional to the airtime and Very Serious Tones of Voice we've been subjected to 24x7 for the last year.

Do you know of any compelling (and verifiable by a civilian) evidence that could help me with that?

Re: 50M Facebook profiles harvested for Cambridge Analytica in major data breach

#252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FB has known all of this since it happened two years ago and only admitted it when a journalist asked them about it.

Yes. But the method that was used to siphon the data out of Facebook is no longer available.

Correct, and we now know the issue is that someone who had legit access sold the data.

Re: 50M Facebook profiles harvested for Cambridge Analytica in major data breach

#253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How - the special counsel Mueller has subpoena authority. First link from indictments in list form. The one I saw on TV was that guy with Hillary in a cage in parades - he was paid by Russians to make it. I also remember reading about the pro and anti gun rallies at that Texas state park - the Russians made the Facebook page for both sides in that little incident. https://mashable.com/2018/02/16/indictment-russian-tr…

I've heard all sorts of the juicy details, it makes a great story there's no doubt. What I'm looking for is some substantial, verifiable evidence to overcome my suspicions at how perfect of a story it is, as well as some of the inconsistencies. For example: > Presumably Mueller used that subpoena on Facebook and internet providers and the Russians didn't try to hide very hard and used mostly Russian ip addresses . So…

They have some of the Russians who worked for the RIA interviewed for newspapers and admitting what they did, which kind of blew my mind. I guess one could claim those were faked, like the moon landing conspiracy theorists.

From your own example which I presume is about the Iraq war, there is nothing that an ordinary citizen can do to prove that powers in the US, UK, and Kuwaiti governments (and Iraqi agents working in favor of an attack on Iraq) falsified the evidence they presented to the public for a compelling argument for invading Iraq without relying on sources that cannot be verified by an ordinary citizen without access to the journalists/non proliferation experts/government agents responsible and nothing an ordinary citizen can do to prove US claims that Iraq had an active WMD program and mistreated Kuwaiti babies as claimed at the time (by what we know now was a state actor who lied for Kuwait) in congressional testimony after the Iraq invasion of Kuwait. Even the New York Times and that one reporter famously lied flat out about Iraqi weapons programs and abuses in the build up to the war. But there were plenty of people who were investigating the claims of Iraqi WMD who said there was nothing there and that led to a lot of people protesting against the war. I don't see any investigators for the FBI or NSA coming out and being a whistle blower and saying this Russian thing is faked, on the contrary, the only whistle blower who came out so far, actually showed the internal NSA documents that said the USA elections was under cyberattack by Russia. The most reputable guy who came out for the Iraq WMD was possibly Colin Powell. Less well know is that he was also the first US Army investigator who looked into the My Lai massacre and he found that nothing was done wrong, so he was kind of used to this type of thing by then. It took a second Army investigator to reveal what happened there.

Or more contemporaneously there is nothing a citizen can do to prove that the recent Russian spy who was released to the UK and attacked was poisoned with a Russian only sourced nerve agent. And if it was the Russian nerve agent (that the Russians offically proclaimed to have destroyed all stockpiles of), there's no way for a citizen to prove it was Russian government behind it or that some other power was responsible for usage of it. I didn't vote either way on your comment, it just seems like an impossible standard.

Re: 50M Facebook profiles harvested for Cambridge Analytica in major data breach

#254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct, doesn't make it right (and Hillary did some of this as well)

I agree. So why keep up this naive and demonstrably false act that 2016 was the year persuasion and behavioral psychology was put to practical use in politics to manipulate voters. Every presidential election cycle I can remember was full of rhetoric and outright lies persuade voters. Does no one remember all of the hilariously terrible chain letters from past elections that claimed all sorts of nonsense? I just don'…

The difference is a lot of people never imagined Trump could be elected and many people for the first time are shocked to see what the other half of the country thinks. Imagining that they were manipulated by superior technology not previously available lets people hold to the idea that half the country really didn't vote for trump deep down - if only they hadn't been duped and knew what he really was.

Re: 50M Facebook profiles harvested for Cambridge Analytica in major data breach

#255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you not read the article? Millions of users took a personality test that had nothing to do with politics, and that data was sold to the Trump campaign for targeting. When did Obama’s campaign ever do that?

270.000 users.

... and all of their ‘friends’, totaling over 50 million

Re: 50M Facebook profiles harvested for Cambridge Analytica in major data breach

#256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've heard all sorts of the juicy details, it makes a great story there's no doubt. What I'm looking for is some substantial, verifiable evidence to overcome my suspicions at how perfect of a story it is, as well as some of the inconsistencies. For example: > Presumably Mueller used that subpoena on Facebook and internet providers and the Russians didn't try to hide very hard and used mostly Russian ip addresses . So…

They have some of the Russians who worked for the RIA interviewed for newspapers and admitting what they did, which kind of blew my mind. I guess one could claim those were faked, like the moon landing conspiracy theorists. From your own example which I presume is about the Iraq war, there is nothing that an ordinary citizen can do to prove that powers in the US, UK, and Kuwaiti governments (and Iraqi agents working…

I honestly don't think wanting to see verifiable evidence before forming a decisive opinion on something is anything near an impossible standard, especially since as you've noted, our governments and newspapers are known to lie to citizens. Anyone who's done any reading on the topic outside of the mainstream knows what you see on TV in the west is a slanted version of the truth at best. And yet, look how absolutely certain people are about their beliefs, but when asked to provide some of the hard-factual content they read to form this rock solid opinion, almost no one has anything other than a downvote. To me, this looks like some sort of a classic mania, and it's quite concerning.

Re: 50M Facebook profiles harvested for Cambridge Analytica in major data breach

#257
post #176

I remember when the Obama campaign hired data scientists and used targeted social networking tools to pursuade voters who were on the fence and it was heralded as brilliant and the future of politics. I worked for a company crawling Facebook data by creating viral apps the year the original API came out. By now I am sure this is done by many companies. Why is any of this news? My understanding is that companies harve…

They harvested personal info of people. Something against FB policy and against the law. That is why it is news.

I understand that Hacker News has been accused of turning into reddit since reddit became a thing, but when the top most comment is from a guy who didn't even bother to read the article linked, there is a very little in the way distinction between the two sites.

Re: 50M Facebook profiles harvested for Cambridge Analytica in major data breach

#259
post #176

I remember when the Obama campaign hired data scientists and used targeted social networking tools to pursuade voters who were on the fence and it was heralded as brilliant and the future of politics. I worked for a company crawling Facebook data by creating viral apps the year the original API came out. By now I am sure this is done by many companies. Why is any of this news? My understanding is that companies harve…

Did you not read the article? Millions of users took a personality test that had nothing to do with politics, and that data was sold to the Trump campaign for targeting. When did Obama’s campaign ever do that?

>Did you not read the article?

No he didn't. On purpose

Re: 50M Facebook profiles harvested for Cambridge Analytica in major data breach

#260

This is hardly news... Facebook ads cannot target specific users , they only target audience segments . It's actually far easier to create ads targeted at segments with likely political beliefs, and Marketers have access to aggregate numbers of niche segments today. There's no need to scrape people's profiles or get down to the individual level.

EDIT: As more is revealed about Cambridge Analytica, this clearly is "news" that requires more investigation.

My original comment was more in response to user vs segment level targeting.

Post reply on HN