4 ms·
>> "zero safeguarding of data to ensure it wasn't sold by app creators/devs" > bullshit, they stopped this is 2015. But I agree, the way it worked before was r
by frankzinger 9y ago
>> "zero safeguarding of data to ensure it wasn't sold by app creators/devs"
> bullshit, they stopped this is 2015. But I agree, the way it worked before was really broken and asked for this to happen.
> I've never worked at a company that takes data protection as seriously as FB
Before or after 2015? Because a couple of years does not quite make up for the preceding period starting in 2007 (if I recall correctly) during which FB clearly didn't care.
- Maro 9y agoI worked there in 2016-2017. I was a Data Engineer so I was pretty close to this. It was taken very seriously, to the point it was annoying (tables with PII get anonymized, which then means extra work, etc). Also, the sheer amount of effort that went into this [the tooling/infra that was already there for this when I arrived] was impressive. I'm not claiming FB couldn't have / can't do a better job, you can always do a better job, hire even more people for this, etc. But it was definitely taken very seriously, much more seriously than you'd think from all this bad press. And if you go and work there, you'll be impressed, I guarantee that. However, what I'm talking about is data protection, the problem here was that app permissions were explicitly too loose [until 2015]. As I said, I also think this was a bad policy, and people are rightly upset. But there's way too much generalization happening in this thread.