5 ms·

"It's okay because you weren't personally affected" is so obviously wrong. It's so obviously against the spirit of the law and of society. I find it hard to ima

by bllguo 9y ago

"It's okay because you weren't personally affected" is so obviously wrong. It's so obviously against the spirit of the law and of society. I find it hard to imagine you're arguing in good faith. But how about this, then, since you're so intent on making this political? How about we fix this so that no future politicians can benefit from this kind of targeted advertising - both liberal and conservative?

xienze 9y ago
> How about we fix this so that no future politicians can benefit from this kind of targeted advertising - both liberal and conservative? I’d be fine with it, but the first step is admitting that yes, Obama benefited from harvested social media data as well. No one wants to do that, this is all a Trump thing as far as the media, and therefore the general public, is concerned.
- frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago
  No but seriously why is the first step admitting that Obama benefitted? People are up in arms that their data was misused, why do you care whether they're politically motivated or not?
  - wmeredith 9y ago
    > No but seriously why is the first step admitting that Obama benefitted? Because whataboutism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism What Obama did was unethical as far as I'm concerned, as is most modern marketing. (I will say one campaign was selling hope and progressive change while the other was fear mongering and spreading divisiveness. So I think there is a difference.) Having said that, I don't know that it matters. Granting these powers to people we happen to like doesn't mean they won't be abused by people we don't. Modern mass marketing is gross. It's the grand scale manipulation of people by exploiting individual human weakness/bias. I'd like to see some smart regulation around it, but I'm skeptical that will happen.
    - parthdesai 9y ago
      >Because whataboutism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism Ah, the current flavour of the year on reddit when it comes to debates. It's not whataboutism. It's calling out hypocrisy among the reaction of journalists and general public who either ignored or in fact went on to rave about ingenious use of ads. In fact fb personally went on to remove api rate-limiters for one of the apps used by Obama's campaign. Suddenly now that it's someone that left/liberals don't like is in power, these very same practices are being questioned.
      - xienze 9y ago
        > It's calling out hypocrisy among the reaction of journalists and general public who either ignored or in fact went on to rave about ingenious use of ads. And more specifically, it's calling out the fact that the whole CA thing could have been prevented if, instead of fawning over the Obama campaign's use of targeted advertising in 2012, the media instead collectively asked, "wait, you did _what_ with our data?"
      - dragonwriter 9y ago
        > It's not whataboutism. It's calling out hypocrisy So, it's exactly Whataboutism: “Whataboutism (also known as whataboutery) is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument, [...]” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
        parthdesai 9y ago
        In a way, aren't you deflecting the argument as well by labelling it instead of actually providing a logical answer of Why did everyone ignore or rave about Obama's use of over-reaching fb ads? And calling out hypocrisy isn't wrong thing to do in this matter. I'm not saying what trump's campaign did was the right thing to do. What i find appalling is the so called "literate/educated" class of people completely ignored and continue to ignore or in fact praised the very same thing Obama did. Heck, i'm neither a citizen of USA nor a resident and could frankly care less who is in power.
  - xienze 9y ago
    > People are up in arms that their data was misused, why do you care whether they're politically motivated or not? Because the forthcoming regulations will inevitably target conservatives if we allow the public discourse on this issue to be dominated by "muh Russia, muh Trump."
    - frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago
      >the forthcoming regulations will inevitably target conservatives The forthcoming regulations are going to have to make it through a republican house, a republican senate and a republican president and not get challenged in our republican courts. Rest assured you're safe.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- rickycook 9y ago
  the big difference being that the obama data was harvested via an app branded by obama campaign with the specific purpose being to help the obama campaign... vs a quiz app unrelated to politics where participants were paid small amounts to use, and thus pull data on their social network the first is explicitly political; the second is actively hiding their intentions *edit: also they used the data very differently. obama used it to push people’s hopes and dreams; trump used it to push people’s fears. overall, obamas campaign was FAR more positive than trumps
  - zeth___ 9y ago
    A distinction without a difference. By their own words the Obama Campaign ingested the whole social graph because the single person they targeted could bring in the information of all their friends: Facebook 2012 election had the ability for people to opt in the Obama campaign like rocked this right we got people to opt in and the privacy policies at that time on Facebook were that if they opted in they could tell us who all their friends were [...] but we were actually able to ingest the entire social network social network of the US that's on Facebook which is most people most people where this gets complicated is that freaks Facebook out right so they shut off the feature well the Republicans never built an app to do that so the data is out there you can't take it back right so the Democrats have this information so when they look at a voter file and someone comes to them they can immediately be like oh here are all the other people that they know and here are people that they can help us persuade because they're really good friends with this person the Republicans do not have that information and will not get that information https://youtu.be/g0c-OSVQcAA?t=19m15s https://youtu.be/g0c-OSVQcAA?t=19m15s

by bllguo 9y ago

xienze 9y ago

> How about we fix this so that no future politicians can benefit from this kind of targeted advertising - both liberal and conservative? I’d be fine with it, but the first step is admitting that yes, Obama benefited from harvested social media data as well. No one wants to do that, this is all a Trump thing as far as the media, and therefore the general public, is concerned.

frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago
No but seriously why is the first step admitting that Obama benefitted? People are up in arms that their data was misused, why do you care whether they're politically motivated or not?
- wmeredith 9y ago
  > No but seriously why is the first step admitting that Obama benefitted? Because whataboutism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism What Obama did was unethical as far as I'm concerned, as is most modern marketing. (I will say one campaign was selling hope and progressive change while the other was fear mongering and spreading divisiveness. So I think there is a difference.) Having said that, I don't know that it matters. Granting these powers to people we happen to like doesn't mean they won't be abused by people we don't. Modern mass marketing is gross. It's the grand scale manipulation of people by exploiting individual human weakness/bias. I'd like to see some smart regulation around it, but I'm skeptical that will happen.
  - parthdesai 9y ago
    >Because whataboutism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism Ah, the current flavour of the year on reddit when it comes to debates. It's not whataboutism. It's calling out hypocrisy among the reaction of journalists and general public who either ignored or in fact went on to rave about ingenious use of ads. In fact fb personally went on to remove api rate-limiters for one of the apps used by Obama's campaign. Suddenly now that it's someone that left/liberals don't like is in power, these very same practices are being questioned.
    - xienze 9y ago
      > It's calling out hypocrisy among the reaction of journalists and general public who either ignored or in fact went on to rave about ingenious use of ads. And more specifically, it's calling out the fact that the whole CA thing could have been prevented if, instead of fawning over the Obama campaign's use of targeted advertising in 2012, the media instead collectively asked, "wait, you did _what_ with our data?"
    - dragonwriter 9y ago
      > It's not whataboutism. It's calling out hypocrisy So, it's exactly Whataboutism: “Whataboutism (also known as whataboutery) is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument, [...]” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
      - parthdesai 9y ago
        In a way, aren't you deflecting the argument as well by labelling it instead of actually providing a logical answer of Why did everyone ignore or rave about Obama's use of over-reaching fb ads? And calling out hypocrisy isn't wrong thing to do in this matter. I'm not saying what trump's campaign did was the right thing to do. What i find appalling is the so called "literate/educated" class of people completely ignored and continue to ignore or in fact praised the very same thing Obama did. Heck, i'm neither a citizen of USA nor a resident and could frankly care less who is in power.
- xienze 9y ago
  > People are up in arms that their data was misused, why do you care whether they're politically motivated or not? Because the forthcoming regulations will inevitably target conservatives if we allow the public discourse on this issue to be dominated by "muh Russia, muh Trump."
  - frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago
    >the forthcoming regulations will inevitably target conservatives The forthcoming regulations are going to have to make it through a republican house, a republican senate and a republican president and not get challenged in our republican courts. Rest assured you're safe.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
rickycook 9y ago
the big difference being that the obama data was harvested via an app branded by obama campaign with the specific purpose being to help the obama campaign... vs a quiz app unrelated to politics where participants were paid small amounts to use, and thus pull data on their social network the first is explicitly political; the second is actively hiding their intentions *edit: also they used the data very differently. obama used it to push people’s hopes and dreams; trump used it to push people’s fears. overall, obamas campaign was FAR more positive than trumps
- zeth___ 9y ago
  A distinction without a difference. By their own words the Obama Campaign ingested the whole social graph because the single person they targeted could bring in the information of all their friends: Facebook 2012 election had the ability for people to opt in the Obama campaign like rocked this right we got people to opt in and the privacy policies at that time on Facebook were that if they opted in they could tell us who all their friends were [...] but we were actually able to ingest the entire social network social network of the US that's on Facebook which is most people most people where this gets complicated is that freaks Facebook out right so they shut off the feature well the Republicans never built an app to do that so the data is out there you can't take it back right so the Democrats have this information so when they look at a voter file and someone comes to them they can immediately be like oh here are all the other people that they know and here are people that they can help us persuade because they're really good friends with this person the Republicans do not have that information and will not get that information https://youtu.be/g0c-OSVQcAA?t=19m15s https://youtu.be/g0c-OSVQcAA?t=19m15s