Then he shouldn't have any problem testifying as such. I don't see a problem here.
Zuckerberg finally speaks
- Thread starter super-heated plasma
- Start date
Lol, clicking the Disable Platform button is doing absolutely nothing. Nice.
Only a guess, but there are very strict legal definitions around calling something a "data breach", and how you represent a story to make sure you are not bending facts. While we don't know for sure, my guess is Facebook engaged the publications to ask them not to misrepresent any facts, which both are known to create scandalous or sensational headlines that drive clicks. Then they can scream "FACEBOOK IS THREATENING TO SUE US!".
Absolutely they should have. A series of bad decisions almost certainly led them to believe they did not have to as they had the situation "handled". Part of the pledge in Zuckerberg's post is to warn people moving forward if they actively identify any misuse, and to put privacy controls front and center on the news feed.
To me, the most horrifying part of all this is Kogan acting like some kind of blameless victim in misusing and selling data he harvested from users under the guise of academic research. I have no idea why so many people are drawing sympathy -- this dude was not just a cog in a bigger system, he was a bad actor that knowingly misused the data and sold it for profit whilst he represented his app as an academic tool.
Yeah, that part is fair.
I will add, nothing against your explaination, that they may have saved themselves a bit of trouble if they instead reached out to Cooperate with the story, as to make it clear they don't support the actions, instead of threatening legal action to "keep them quiet," though I'll admit I may be a bit naive in assuming that it would've been a better outcome, or a possible option.
FB has evolved into a data collection company over the last decade. The fact that people didn't realize it and continued to give their information over willingly isn't FB's fault. Hopefully this ordeal will make people wise up. You don't have to delete your account, but you should absolutely turn on the highest possible privacy settings. Apparently people with those on weren't effected by this whole thing because the API access doesn't scrub those accounts. It was entirely the people who have a completely open profile, and sadly might not realize it.
Yup. Not holding my breath for anything useful. Maybe the questions were already pre screened or something.
yeah who the hell is treating Kogan like that, its a bit insane they lied and broke a lot of trust and unwritten rules when it came to things. They stole data. I would love to see zuckerberg take on the mercers over this shit. They could single handedly fuck up what he built.
I mean if I was in his position im going after not only CA but the people who all were apart of this. Hes one of the few people in the world with the money to take on the mercers.
FB should anonymise it's data for research purposes, and only provide requested data, not let researchers pick and choose. They want a dataset of 20 thousand millennial women from California? FB randomly grabs the data of 20k people that match that, and strips out any identifying data that's not in scope of the research.
Smells like bullshit to me?
If CA provided 'certification' (what does that even mean?) they deleted the data but then it turned out they hadn't, why isn't Facebook taking legal action against them?
And why is Facebook taking legal action against the Guardian/C4 for exposing this data leak?
Get fucked zuck.
If CA provided 'certification' (what does that even mean?) they deleted the data but then it turned out they hadn't, why isn't Facebook taking legal action against them?
And why is Facebook taking legal action against the Guardian/C4 for exposing this data leak?
Get fucked zuck.
seriously the toast thing has me convinced that this "guy" is an ET visiting us from deep space
Except Facebook does not ever provide data in this manner, anonymized or not. The data was collected by users granting permission to an app to access their FB data, which, at the time, but not since 2014, also permitted accessing friend data. If someone wants Facebook data for research purposes, Facebook will tell them to get fucked and get their own data. If an academic wants to create an app that will ask people permission to access Facebook data and collect it that way, they may do so by becoming a developer on Facebook's platform and getting permission from users who would like to participate.
Who's saying they are not taking legal action against CA/Kogan? Time will tell.
Nothing has been reported on them taking legal action against Guardian or C4, do you have a source for these allegations?
Your opinion of Zuckerberg is your own. I don't care for him one way or the other, but I do care about facts.
Did you read the post, or? It pretty clearly outlined tangible, concrete actions being taken moving forward that do not include "have faith in the system". I'm not sure what else they could have said.
That would be the quickest way, but it wouldn't serve people too well. The only reason so many people are still stuck on FB is because they don't really have an alternative for contacting relatives and friends.
What people don't want to see is a measured PR response to try to save face and reign in people's mistrust. FB has grown into a monster they don't really have control over. I've been fairly convinced that FB has no idea what it's doing with its platform. You can't simply plead the problems of incompetence away.
"Faith in the system" is why we're here in the first place. So a call for more faith in them is pretty ineffective. He should resign.
1. They were aware of this issue for years, and didn't do anything about it
2. They threatened to sue journalists about this story
3. He's not apologizing in the post. No apology from Sandberg either
4. There's stuff about tools for limiting access to your data, but there's nothing about limiting how much Facebook collects about you.
Regulate them. Punish them. Burn it all down.
2. They threatened to sue journalists about this story
3. He's not apologizing in the post. No apology from Sandberg either
4. There's stuff about tools for limiting access to your data, but there's nothing about limiting how much Facebook collects about you.
Regulate them. Punish them. Burn it all down.
That's the correct translation.
Or more precisely, "I'm very sorry it affected the value of MY shares."
Friend of mine just posted an idea that if Facebook wants to sell your data, there should be an opt-in for it and they give you a little bit of money for whatever they take.
What the hell are you talking about? Do you think that senator is shorting FB stock?
1. They changed the way their app API worked in 2014 to prevent it from scraping data from a user's friends.
2. Likely because they were worried about their part in this scandal being misconstrued (as seems to be happening).
3. He admits they made mistakes and need to do better.
4. Facebook will always collect data on their users so they can serve them relevant ads. That is their business model.
This is what he says every time there's a big privacy blow up with Facebook. They never seem to do better.
Yes, and the bottom line is "trust us, we will do what's right here" when this has been a known issue on their end for years. Everything they have proposed today in 2018 should have been done in 2014. It's begging us for continued faith in them, when they continue to fuck up.
haha
The opt-in is your use of their platform, without your data you are of no value to Facebook.
But this breach was from 2013, and he claims they already did do better in 2014.
They already ended the type of developer data access that caused this in 2013, in 2014. Hindsight is 20/20.
FB should change how they operate. They clearly like to allow academic researchers to use their APIs to gather data. FB is a billion-dollar company. Instead of letting third parties into their systems to cull data that is not outside facing, and relying on ToS agreements to protect private data, FB should have an in-house arm that interacts with researchers and provides them anonymised data so that FB's user data never leaves their systems.
Look at how public information is handled. If you want to read up on all the internal memos written during the Kennedy administration, the government doesn't just let you into a file-room and say, "have at it." You have to request memos relating to an area of interest, and they will look over the memos and redact sensitive information.
Oh, uh... good!
So you don't know, but you choose to believe a contrived scenario which ascribes the best motives to a faceless corporation? Why?
Last edited:
Not according to today's PBS Newshour special on "Facebook, Cambridge Analytica and your privacy settings."
"Hari Sreenivasan discussed how you can check your Facebook privacy settings and talked to Sam Lester of the EPIC - Electronic Privacy Information Center about the recent news involving Cambridge Analytica and the data of 50 million Facebook users." (Video Link)
I love how they incessantly try to avoid taking responsibility for this act of gross negligence (at the very least).
They ain't going to change shit. The resistance to change is coming from the top (Zuckerberg and Sandberg).
They ain't going to change shit. The resistance to change is coming from the top (Zuckerberg and Sandberg).
Exactly. People somehow think that Zuckerberg has matured over the years. He's the same manipulative, predatory piece of shit that founded Facebook at Harvard.
"Our likes and shares are with the victims at this terrible time"
