5 ms·

It doesn't contain the list of people I am friend with on Facebook, and people I'm very likely to be friend with, while I'm not friend on Facebook. It doesn't

It doesn't contain the list of people I am friend with on Facebook, and people I'm very likely to be friend with, while I'm not friend on Facebook. It doesn't contain my GPS coordinates over years. It doesn't contain the list of my interests, based on my likes and the tracking of my web browsing. It doesn't contain an analysis of the conversations with my friends and family. It doesn't contain the pictures of my weekends and holidays, uploaded by other people. It doesn't contain my face. However it's still quite bad and such dataset shouldn't be available like this.

Lammy 6y ago
Well, it probably does _now_. Cambridge Analytica was nowhere near alone in their cross-aggregation of data.
- makomk 6y ago
  Quite possibly. For example, the Obama campaign in 2012 used friendship and interaction data from Facebook in order to figure out which of his supporters could most effectively convince specific undecided voters they were friends with to vote for him and instructed them to do so, effectively turning your own friends into instruments of the advertising algorithm. The New York Times ran a glowing article about how clever this was and the new commercial advertising organisation they were using their techniques in: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/23/magazine/the-obama-campaigns-digital-masterminds-cash-in.html https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/23/magazine/the-obama-campai...
  - addicted 6y ago
    Turning your friends into political advertisements is just a long way of saying “traditional campaigning”. Which is nothing like using Facebook data to peddle false information through ads. Facebook shouldn’t be allowing access to that kind of data in both cases, but that doesn’t mean what was done with the data is the same thing.
cm2012 6y ago
Facebook doesn't sell that data to anyone though, they just use it to target ads. Anyone can buy that other info from Infogroup.
- HenryBemis 6y ago
  With the 'minor exception' of Cambridge Analytica (and whoever else was given access and FB managed to put a lid on it). So yes, FB does sell (your) data. Perhaps the trade is not "$5 per account" but they don't "just sell ads".
  - cm2012 6y ago
    CA data was not sold, nor was it likely to be valuable to anyone, contrary to public opinion.
  - verst 6y ago
    People really need to pay attention to the permissions they grant apps to their Facebook accounts. What happened was people installing a quiz app or game which requested unnecessary data access but collected profile data and then (against Terms of Service) provided this data to a third party. I don't consider this Facebook selling data. And auditing this kind of behavior is incredibly difficult. Don't install apps that request access to your data, especially if you don't understand who owns the app and what their motivations are.
    - speedgoose 6y ago
      What if a friend install such an app? It's what happened. What if a quiz app could not require so much knowledge about privacy by design? Facebook is responsible.
    - HenryBemis 6y ago
      This is why I mentioned that the sale is not (e.g.) $5 per user. But if someone has access to 1000 users' data and pays $5000 for that access, well, it's kinda the same thing. Auditing such process is a joke. No such audit will ever exist, as the results would be documented and leave a trail of misappropriation and abuse (of data). The only audits 'allowed' by the business would me the innocuous ITGCs. I invite anyone from FB with audit related experience to comment (please use a TA account and be as vague as you can to prevent tracing).
Aperocky 6y ago
tbh, there's an upper cap on how much information an individual is worth. Say a pretty basic personal information (address, income etc) cost a dime each person, it can get deeper and deeper until it is no longer worth any extra. 10 political opinion from this person? Interesting. Full reddit history? Maybe worth 2x the former. Facebook images? probably worthless. The point is that it quickly gets to the point where all of these information are noise and essentially worthless to an advertiser. It is completely another story when you have people with authoritarian intentions coming in though.
- cm2012 6y ago
  The government goes straight to the ISP 90% of the time anyway for things like internet history, and to the cell phone companies for location.
  - novok 6y ago
    Centralized internet properties are probably good for foreign intelligence, but then the risk of that to people is also far less.
- roenxi 6y ago
  > It is completely another story when you have people with authoritarian intentions coming in though. The Nazi party went from ~2-3% of the vote to 37% of the vote in 4 years [0]. 5 years from 2-3% to the last election they had to contend with. If the strategy is to wait for people with authoritarian intentions to come though before getting worried about privacy it will be far to late; things can go south extremely quickly. It is advised to stop the databases being developed before it becomes obvious that someone is abusing them. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_Party#Ascension_and_consolidation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_Party#Ascension_and_conso...

Lammy 6y ago

Well, it probably does _now_. Cambridge Analytica was nowhere near alone in their cross-aggregation of data.

makomk 6y ago
Quite possibly. For example, the Obama campaign in 2012 used friendship and interaction data from Facebook in order to figure out which of his supporters could most effectively convince specific undecided voters they were friends with to vote for him and instructed them to do so, effectively turning your own friends into instruments of the advertising algorithm. The New York Times ran a glowing article about how clever this was and the new commercial advertising organisation they were using their techniques in: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/23/magazine/the-obama-campaigns-digital-masterminds-cash-in.html https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/23/magazine/the-obama-campai...
- addicted 6y ago
  Turning your friends into political advertisements is just a long way of saying “traditional campaigning”. Which is nothing like using Facebook data to peddle false information through ads. Facebook shouldn’t be allowing access to that kind of data in both cases, but that doesn’t mean what was done with the data is the same thing.

cm2012 6y ago

Facebook doesn't sell that data to anyone though, they just use it to target ads. Anyone can buy that other info from Infogroup.

HenryBemis 6y ago
With the 'minor exception' of Cambridge Analytica (and whoever else was given access and FB managed to put a lid on it). So yes, FB does sell (your) data. Perhaps the trade is not "$5 per account" but they don't "just sell ads".
- cm2012 6y ago
  CA data was not sold, nor was it likely to be valuable to anyone, contrary to public opinion.
- verst 6y ago
  People really need to pay attention to the permissions they grant apps to their Facebook accounts. What happened was people installing a quiz app or game which requested unnecessary data access but collected profile data and then (against Terms of Service) provided this data to a third party. I don't consider this Facebook selling data. And auditing this kind of behavior is incredibly difficult. Don't install apps that request access to your data, especially if you don't understand who owns the app and what their motivations are.
  - speedgoose 6y ago
    What if a friend install such an app? It's what happened. What if a quiz app could not require so much knowledge about privacy by design? Facebook is responsible.
  - HenryBemis 6y ago
    This is why I mentioned that the sale is not (e.g.) $5 per user. But if someone has access to 1000 users' data and pays $5000 for that access, well, it's kinda the same thing. Auditing such process is a joke. No such audit will ever exist, as the results would be documented and leave a trail of misappropriation and abuse (of data). The only audits 'allowed' by the business would me the innocuous ITGCs. I invite anyone from FB with audit related experience to comment (please use a TA account and be as vague as you can to prevent tracing).

Aperocky 6y ago

tbh, there's an upper cap on how much information an individual is worth. Say a pretty basic personal information (address, income etc) cost a dime each person, it can get deeper and deeper until it is no longer worth any extra. 10 political opinion from this person? Interesting. Full reddit history? Maybe worth 2x the former. Facebook images? probably worthless. The point is that it quickly gets to the point where all of these information are noise and essentially worthless to an advertiser. It is completely another story when you have people with authoritarian intentions coming in though.

cm2012 6y ago
The government goes straight to the ISP 90% of the time anyway for things like internet history, and to the cell phone companies for location.
- novok 6y ago
  Centralized internet properties are probably good for foreign intelligence, but then the risk of that to people is also far less.
roenxi 6y ago
> It is completely another story when you have people with authoritarian intentions coming in though. The Nazi party went from ~2-3% of the vote to 37% of the vote in 4 years [0]. 5 years from 2-3% to the last election they had to contend with. If the strategy is to wait for people with authoritarian intentions to come though before getting worried about privacy it will be far to late; things can go south extremely quickly. It is advised to stop the databases being developed before it becomes obvious that someone is abusing them. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_Party#Ascension_and_consolidation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_Party#Ascension_and_conso...