5 ms·

This is disturbing for the following reasons: 1. It alerts us to the possibility of fake political adverts. Do I (hypothetically)see an ad purporting to be a To

This is disturbing for the following reasons: 1. It alerts us to the possibility of fake political adverts. Do I (hypothetically)see an ad purporting to be a Tory ad promising something that will damage me, placed by a non-Tory actor? 2. Are unknown actors placing adverts which cause discord and dislike? 3. How do we solve this problem? Where FB is not regulated it will be impossible to knowingly audit the materials on its platform. 4. Given FB’s lobbying power, is regulation even possible?

seanhandley 8y ago
This is why I left Facebook. The feasible subversion of democracy is pretty frightening.
- nannal 8y ago
  Isn't it more an argument that you should ensure that you ensure information you act on comes from credible sources. Subversion and deception are everywhere online now and we live in a perpetual psy-ops nightmare. By which I mean leaving facebook is a start, but there's a lot more to protecting yourself against false information.
radicalbyte 8y ago
Thank goodness for adblockers :)
Gargoyle 8y ago
Fake advertising for the purpose of creating discord is as old as political advertising. I had a friend run for state legislature in the 1990s, his opponent sent people around targeted neighborhoods passing out fake flyers for my friend's campaign. They used his name and photo, but attributed positions he did not hold to him. I imagine before cheap printing, it was gossip. I'm sure it's been the case since democracy started.
- eeeuo 8y ago
  People often suggest that the Internet is a problem in terms of disinformation, but I'd argue in many cases that the Internet actually helps. In pre-Internet days, it was difficult to get someone's views in their own words, especially in real-time. All information was filtered through various sources before being passed onto the consumer. Now, it's straightforward to check their website, or their twitter, or their youtube. This, of course, is not perfect and requires a root-of-trust involving Google and DNS, but I'd certainly take that tradeoff versus Guy On The Street asserting things.
  - r00fus 8y ago
    Exactly. This is a Facebook and ad tech problem, not an "Internet" problem. Solution: run ad blockers and noscript while they're still legal. Install them on all family members devices.
  - y4mi 8y ago
    It's called agree of misinformation because it's become increasingly easy to produce convincing fake footage. It's entirely possible to fake a real-time video interview for instance using voice synthesis and mapping the face of your target upon your face. It's frighteningly convincing. I.e. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=AmUC4m6w1wo https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=AmUC4m6w1wo
    - eeeuo 8y ago
      I don't think that footage is frighteningly convincing. It's pretty good, but not difficult to tell that it's not real. The bridge between pretty good and perfect when doing this type of thing is a very, very difficult problem. It also requires substantial amounts of high quality, up close footage of the person. This may be work for major politicans, but is much more difficult for the vast majority of people. I don't disagree that it will become more of a problem in the future, and in many cases "pretty good" will be sufficient, but I think people are overstating how much of a problem it will be.
      - 8y ago
pmlnr 8y ago
> 3. How do we solve this problem It's actually very simple: ban politics from social media. Not that it's going to happen.
tomp 8y ago
> How do we solve this problem? Adblock. Every day I keep finding new reasons to use it, while I remain utterly unconvinced by any argument why not to.
tonyedgecombe 8y ago
The solution is to ban political advertising on the internet.

seanhandley 8y ago

This is why I left Facebook. The feasible subversion of democracy is pretty frightening.

nannal 8y ago
Isn't it more an argument that you should ensure that you ensure information you act on comes from credible sources. Subversion and deception are everywhere online now and we live in a perpetual psy-ops nightmare. By which I mean leaving facebook is a start, but there's a lot more to protecting yourself against false information.

radicalbyte 8y ago

Thank goodness for adblockers :)

Gargoyle 8y ago

Fake advertising for the purpose of creating discord is as old as political advertising. I had a friend run for state legislature in the 1990s, his opponent sent people around targeted neighborhoods passing out fake flyers for my friend's campaign. They used his name and photo, but attributed positions he did not hold to him. I imagine before cheap printing, it was gossip. I'm sure it's been the case since democracy started.

eeeuo 8y ago
People often suggest that the Internet is a problem in terms of disinformation, but I'd argue in many cases that the Internet actually helps. In pre-Internet days, it was difficult to get someone's views in their own words, especially in real-time. All information was filtered through various sources before being passed onto the consumer. Now, it's straightforward to check their website, or their twitter, or their youtube. This, of course, is not perfect and requires a root-of-trust involving Google and DNS, but I'd certainly take that tradeoff versus Guy On The Street asserting things.
- r00fus 8y ago
  Exactly. This is a Facebook and ad tech problem, not an "Internet" problem. Solution: run ad blockers and noscript while they're still legal. Install them on all family members devices.
- y4mi 8y ago
  It's called agree of misinformation because it's become increasingly easy to produce convincing fake footage. It's entirely possible to fake a real-time video interview for instance using voice synthesis and mapping the face of your target upon your face. It's frighteningly convincing. I.e. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=AmUC4m6w1wo https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=AmUC4m6w1wo
  - eeeuo 8y ago
    I don't think that footage is frighteningly convincing. It's pretty good, but not difficult to tell that it's not real. The bridge between pretty good and perfect when doing this type of thing is a very, very difficult problem. It also requires substantial amounts of high quality, up close footage of the person. This may be work for major politicans, but is much more difficult for the vast majority of people. I don't disagree that it will become more of a problem in the future, and in many cases "pretty good" will be sufficient, but I think people are overstating how much of a problem it will be.
    - 8y ago

pmlnr 8y ago

> 3. How do we solve this problem It's actually very simple: ban politics from social media. Not that it's going to happen.

tomp 8y ago

> How do we solve this problem? Adblock. Every day I keep finding new reasons to use it, while I remain utterly unconvinced by any argument why not to.

tonyedgecombe 8y ago

The solution is to ban political advertising on the internet.