5 ms·

I think the idea that Facebook is putting democracy in peril is a bit farfetched.

Mortiffer 9y ago
while Cambridge Analytica is clearly a horrible company the idea of gathering data and building some models to better target advertisement to them is something totally normal happening all over the place. And i don't think we can really dismantel the core of online advertising because of one shady company
- pyjammas 9y ago
  I remember not thinking much of the whole CA story back when I read about it (few years ago?), but what makes me less certain about this is that they might have vastly more data to work with than I initially thought. I'm not a data scientist though, so I'd really like to hear why that is/isn't a problem. Basically: assuming one has massive datasets that can be combined, how dangerous can even basic analysis be?
- kerkeslager 9y ago
  One? Have you been not been paying attention to the last decade of internet advertising?
- mfringel 9y ago
  Dynamite is only interesting because it burns very quickly, in an energetic reaction. Things burn all the time, so I don't see why dynamite is all that interesting. Evaluating something based on its known external traits without discussing the context in which they're used is an incomplete assessment.
- Tassels 9y ago
  It's not that CA is just gathering data and using that data to target ads. That's normal. But they've also been using fake news, spy operations, honeypots, and other tactics in order to manipulate people. They've even boasted about their ability to manufacture sex scandals by sending prostitutes to a political opponent. That goes above and beyond what is "totally normal happening all over the place".
w0utert 9y ago
>> I think the idea that Facebook is putting democracy in peril is a bit farfetched. Why? History has proven at least a few times that he who controls information can control people, and it never ends well. Even if Facebook is not deliberately trying to implant any ideas or spread misinformation and fake news, its platform can be (and has been, demonstrably) used for this purpose.
- dictum 9y ago
  There's some irony in the fact that the ongoing scandal is about Facebook partially relinquishing control of information to a third-party (in fact, all third parties), and that the implied remedy was for Facebook to keep total control of information to itself.
  - alex_duf 9y ago
    Yeah I agree I noticed that myself. Any other social media can be abused in roughly the same way. Twitter has its bot problems, and I'm sure given enough popularity mastodon will face the same issues too.
  - atomi 9y ago
    A friend and I in highschool discussed the possibility of governments archiving and recording telephone calls and then using that data to figure out what people's political leanings were to tailor a manchurian candidate. This was years before social media. Now people gladly give up their data for fame/notoriety.
- zerostar07 9y ago
  history also shows that people shoot the messengers.
jdpigeon 9y ago
The fact that Donald Trump is the President of the United States should be evidence enough that democracy is in serious danger.
- burner8309 9y ago
  That is democracy working as intended. We have just realized that democracy and widespread, instant communication are incompatible.
  - Mononokay 9y ago
    > We have just realized that democracy and widespread, instant communication are incompatible. I'd say that's absolutely not true - it's a demonstration that the republic system is broken. He lost the popular vote, yet still won. That's anti-democratic, whilst being pro-republic. True democracy would still work fine if done pragmatically - have people, when registering to vote, be given a PGP key. Have them send in a cryptographically signed email with their vote - verify that it's from the right person. Maybe package it in a very simple GUI. Instantly, everything impractical and or wrong about the current "democracy" we have is gone, and actual democracy can start taking place.
    - bittercynic 9y ago
      Not sure if you forgot the '/s' tag. Please consider how widely PGP is used, and how capable someone in the bottom decile of technical savvy would be of doing that. I think it is important that our elections use systems that are readily comprehensible to laypeople.
      - Mononokay 9y ago
        Cryptography is, at its core, easy to explain to the layman. (PBS explained it fairly well on a kids' show a while back, I believe.) A GUI wrapper made to send secure emails isn't a particularly difficult thing for your average user, either. You could make it as simple as downloading an app, going to get you physically registered, having the govt. official input relevant keys into the app, and then: Type In Your Preferred Candidate Here: [INPUT BOX] [SEND BUTTON] With an automatic reply saying "Thank you for voting!" at the end of it.
rvail2 9y ago
Completely agree. Just another example of people over reacting. The other fun part is people trying to explain how it was okay back in '12, but now it's a tragedy.
zerostar07 9y ago
There will probably be something else to blame after facebook, until people realize there is an inherent problem with majoritocracy that just cant be solved. As the elites are unlikely to go back to authoritarian regimes, it will probably drag things towards libertarianism.
baq 9y ago
i guess that depends what do you think democracy should look like. it was plenty broken before zuck was admitted to harvard.

while Cambridge Analytica is clearly a horrible company the idea of gathering data and building some models to better target advertisement to them is something totally normal happening all over the place. And i don't think we can really dismantel the core of online advertising because of one shady company

pyjammas 9y ago
I remember not thinking much of the whole CA story back when I read about it (few years ago?), but what makes me less certain about this is that they might have vastly more data to work with than I initially thought. I'm not a data scientist though, so I'd really like to hear why that is/isn't a problem. Basically: assuming one has massive datasets that can be combined, how dangerous can even basic analysis be?
kerkeslager 9y ago
One? Have you been not been paying attention to the last decade of internet advertising?
mfringel 9y ago
Dynamite is only interesting because it burns very quickly, in an energetic reaction. Things burn all the time, so I don't see why dynamite is all that interesting. Evaluating something based on its known external traits without discussing the context in which they're used is an incomplete assessment.
Tassels 9y ago
It's not that CA is just gathering data and using that data to target ads. That's normal. But they've also been using fake news, spy operations, honeypots, and other tactics in order to manipulate people. They've even boasted about their ability to manufacture sex scandals by sending prostitutes to a political opponent. That goes above and beyond what is "totally normal happening all over the place".

w0utert 9y ago

>> I think the idea that Facebook is putting democracy in peril is a bit farfetched. Why? History has proven at least a few times that he who controls information can control people, and it never ends well. Even if Facebook is not deliberately trying to implant any ideas or spread misinformation and fake news, its platform can be (and has been, demonstrably) used for this purpose.

dictum 9y ago
There's some irony in the fact that the ongoing scandal is about Facebook partially relinquishing control of information to a third-party (in fact, all third parties), and that the implied remedy was for Facebook to keep total control of information to itself.
- alex_duf 9y ago
  Yeah I agree I noticed that myself. Any other social media can be abused in roughly the same way. Twitter has its bot problems, and I'm sure given enough popularity mastodon will face the same issues too.
- atomi 9y ago
  A friend and I in highschool discussed the possibility of governments archiving and recording telephone calls and then using that data to figure out what people's political leanings were to tailor a manchurian candidate. This was years before social media. Now people gladly give up their data for fame/notoriety.
zerostar07 9y ago
history also shows that people shoot the messengers.

jdpigeon 9y ago

The fact that Donald Trump is the President of the United States should be evidence enough that democracy is in serious danger.

burner8309 9y ago
That is democracy working as intended. We have just realized that democracy and widespread, instant communication are incompatible.
- Mononokay 9y ago
  > We have just realized that democracy and widespread, instant communication are incompatible. I'd say that's absolutely not true - it's a demonstration that the republic system is broken. He lost the popular vote, yet still won. That's anti-democratic, whilst being pro-republic. True democracy would still work fine if done pragmatically - have people, when registering to vote, be given a PGP key. Have them send in a cryptographically signed email with their vote - verify that it's from the right person. Maybe package it in a very simple GUI. Instantly, everything impractical and or wrong about the current "democracy" we have is gone, and actual democracy can start taking place.
  - bittercynic 9y ago
    Not sure if you forgot the '/s' tag. Please consider how widely PGP is used, and how capable someone in the bottom decile of technical savvy would be of doing that. I think it is important that our elections use systems that are readily comprehensible to laypeople.
    - Mononokay 9y ago
      Cryptography is, at its core, easy to explain to the layman. (PBS explained it fairly well on a kids' show a while back, I believe.) A GUI wrapper made to send secure emails isn't a particularly difficult thing for your average user, either. You could make it as simple as downloading an app, going to get you physically registered, having the govt. official input relevant keys into the app, and then: Type In Your Preferred Candidate Here: [INPUT BOX] [SEND BUTTON] With an automatic reply saying "Thank you for voting!" at the end of it.

rvail2 9y ago

Completely agree. Just another example of people over reacting. The other fun part is people trying to explain how it was okay back in '12, but now it's a tragedy.

zerostar07 9y ago

There will probably be something else to blame after facebook, until people realize there is an inherent problem with majoritocracy that just cant be solved. As the elites are unlikely to go back to authoritarian regimes, it will probably drag things towards libertarianism.

baq 9y ago

i guess that depends what do you think democracy should look like. it was plenty broken before zuck was admitted to harvard.