4 ms·

I agree with your sentiment, but then if said journalist sold said data to foreign government, then how different would that be to what happened with Cambridge

I agree with your sentiment, but then if said journalist sold said data to foreign government, then how different would that be to what happened with Cambridge Analytica? Yes, being able to access your data is nice, but you also have to balance it with people trying to trick people into leaking their data for nefarious reasons. Obviously, here, it's an open source project and we can see that it's (probably) secure, but then where do you draw the line?

mc32 8y ago
First, it’s getting data about your data on your behalf —what you end up doing with your own data is kinda up to you. It’s yours. This is a great tool to shine a light on what FB knows about you. W:re CA. FB was touting and selling this service to any and all intetested parties. It’s only retroactively that FB and others are crying foul. I mean sure, FB should not have sold thet data or made it available to any interested party, but that’s their actual business model.
- ehsankia 8y ago
  > FB was touting and selling this service to any and all intetested parties. Where do you get that from? My understanding is that the API used was closed in 2014, and existing applications were given until 2015 to stop using it. That's when the data was gathered, and that data was used later in 2016 by CA. In this case, this is another API that is closed, and this application is trying to get around that. Again, I understand that this application has good intentions, and is hopefully secure, but they are still breaking the rules. If anything happens, then it's Facebook who is on the line.
csours 8y ago
Sure, if that happened that would be bad, but in this case only the user of the app could see their own PYMK data - the tool did not send data to the journalists.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
minimaxir 8y ago
Facebook closed up a lot of API endpoints after the CA incident became big (including public page post data, to my annoyance).
- ehsankia 8y ago
  And this is one of those APIs that is closed. This application is intentionally going around it, and if any data ends up leaking, all the people in this thread demanding access to data will be the first to attack Facebook for not doing a better job at guarding user data.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - freeone3000 8y ago
    It seems like they were able to get the data just fine, so they're not guarding user data now. I think the best way for facebook to protect this data is to not have it.
- Ajedi32 8y ago
  Before the CA incident became big actually. Most of the APIs used by Cambridge Analytica (in particular, the ones that let apps access data about a person's friends) were removed all the way back in 2014.
walterbell 8y ago
This tool only works with the user's personal authorization and direct consent.
mrgoldenbrown 8y ago
If the journalist was selling data about themselves, which is what this tool collects, I wouldn't mind.

mc32 8y ago

First, it’s getting data about your data on your behalf —what you end up doing with your own data is kinda up to you. It’s yours. This is a great tool to shine a light on what FB knows about you. W:re CA. FB was touting and selling this service to any and all intetested parties. It’s only retroactively that FB and others are crying foul. I mean sure, FB should not have sold thet data or made it available to any interested party, but that’s their actual business model.

ehsankia 8y ago
> FB was touting and selling this service to any and all intetested parties. Where do you get that from? My understanding is that the API used was closed in 2014, and existing applications were given until 2015 to stop using it. That's when the data was gathered, and that data was used later in 2016 by CA. In this case, this is another API that is closed, and this application is trying to get around that. Again, I understand that this application has good intentions, and is hopefully secure, but they are still breaking the rules. If anything happens, then it's Facebook who is on the line.

csours 8y ago

Sure, if that happened that would be bad, but in this case only the user of the app could see their own PYMK data - the tool did not send data to the journalists.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

minimaxir 8y ago

Facebook closed up a lot of API endpoints after the CA incident became big (including public page post data, to my annoyance).

ehsankia 8y ago
And this is one of those APIs that is closed. This application is intentionally going around it, and if any data ends up leaking, all the people in this thread demanding access to data will be the first to attack Facebook for not doing a better job at guarding user data.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- freeone3000 8y ago
  It seems like they were able to get the data just fine, so they're not guarding user data now. I think the best way for facebook to protect this data is to not have it.
Ajedi32 8y ago
Before the CA incident became big actually. Most of the APIs used by Cambridge Analytica (in particular, the ones that let apps access data about a person's friends) were removed all the way back in 2014.

walterbell 8y ago

This tool only works with the user's personal authorization and direct consent.

mrgoldenbrown 8y ago

If the journalist was selling data about themselves, which is what this tool collects, I wouldn't mind.