3 ms·

> the Cambridge Analytica story is unraveling I assume you are referring to stories like this[0] where the UK's Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) recentl

> the Cambridge Analytica story is unraveling I assume you are referring to stories like this[0] where the UK's Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) recently found that "Cambridge Analytica models were exaggerated and ineffective". Presumably you don't think that there could be any bias in the ICO's investigation, despite the UK government now being run by Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and Dominic Cummings, all senior members of the Vote Leave campaign group. Regardless of any bias, there is the question of whether the ICO had the data it needed to judge CA's models sufficiently. We have a whistleblower claiming that Vote Leave "attempted to destroy evidence"[1] and photographic proof that "Storage crates were removed from Cambridge Analytica's London headquarters today (pictured) but it is not yet known who has ordered them to be taken away"[2]. In fact, CA were given at least a week's notice to prepare for the search warrant[3], a privilege not afforded to most criminal suspects. You might think that there is nothing suspicious about all this, and that even a fair examination of CA's practices would clear them of any influence over the outcome of the referendum (and you may also think that all online advertising is a waste of money, because it can't influence people's decisions and opinions), but please do not glibly state without a citation that the story about them is "unravelling". [0] https://www.itpro.co.uk/policy-legislation/data-protection/357367/cambridge-analytica-project-was-ineffective-ico-claims https://www.itpro.co.uk/policy-legislation/data-protection/3... [1] https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/26/the-cambridge-analytica-files-the-story-so-far https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/26/the-cambridge-a... [2] https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5521893/Warrant-sought-search-Cambridge-Analytica-offices.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5521893/Warrant-sou... [3] https://eandt.theiet.org/content/articles/2018/03/information-commissioner-has-still-not-obtained-warrant-to-search-cambridge-analyticas-offices/ https://eandt.theiet.org/content/articles/2018/03/informatio...

jeffreyrogers 6y ago
> You might think that there is nothing suspicious about all this, and that even a fair examination of CA's practices would clear them of any influence over the outcome of the referendum (and you may also think that all online advertising is a waste of money, because it can't influence people's decisions and opinions) I think that you should stick to factual claims rather than trying to infer my mental state from my comments.
- dane-pgp 6y ago
  I'm sorry if it sounded like I was trying to put words into your mouth, I was merely trying to account for any possible objection. Hopefully my point would have worked just as well if phrased: "Even if you think that there is nothing suspicious about all this... (and even if you think that all online advertising is a waste of money...) I think that a claim of the story unravelling requires at least a citation". My aim was for people on different sides of this issue to have a chance to present their cases, so that we didn't give the impression that this was a settled matter that everyone agreed on. If you do think there is something suspicious about CA's actions, and/or you think that online advertising can influence the way people vote, then I'm pleased that we agree on some premises at least.
dingaling 6y ago
90% of the ICO's funding comes from companies paying the Data Protection Fee. Accusing them of being beholden to government is a hollow and unsubstantiated cheap-shot.
- dane-pgp 6y ago
  I don't think that the source of the ICO's funding is particularly relevant. The office is subordinate to the government, and the role of Information Commissioner is one that is appointed by the Crown, which in practice means the executive (i.e. senior figures from Vote Leave). It just so happens that the current Information Commissioner was appointed in July 2016, just one month after the June 2016 EU referendum. Perhaps pointing out that strange coincidence is a cheap-shot too.
Tycho 6y ago
the whistleblower had pink hair

jeffreyrogers 6y ago

> You might think that there is nothing suspicious about all this, and that even a fair examination of CA's practices would clear them of any influence over the outcome of the referendum (and you may also think that all online advertising is a waste of money, because it can't influence people's decisions and opinions) I think that you should stick to factual claims rather than trying to infer my mental state from my comments.

dane-pgp 6y ago
I'm sorry if it sounded like I was trying to put words into your mouth, I was merely trying to account for any possible objection. Hopefully my point would have worked just as well if phrased: "Even if you think that there is nothing suspicious about all this... (and even if you think that all online advertising is a waste of money...) I think that a claim of the story unravelling requires at least a citation". My aim was for people on different sides of this issue to have a chance to present their cases, so that we didn't give the impression that this was a settled matter that everyone agreed on. If you do think there is something suspicious about CA's actions, and/or you think that online advertising can influence the way people vote, then I'm pleased that we agree on some premises at least.

dingaling 6y ago

90% of the ICO's funding comes from companies paying the Data Protection Fee. Accusing them of being beholden to government is a hollow and unsubstantiated cheap-shot.

dane-pgp 6y ago
I don't think that the source of the ICO's funding is particularly relevant. The office is subordinate to the government, and the role of Information Commissioner is one that is appointed by the Crown, which in practice means the executive (i.e. senior figures from Vote Leave). It just so happens that the current Information Commissioner was appointed in July 2016, just one month after the June 2016 EU referendum. Perhaps pointing out that strange coincidence is a cheap-shot too.

Tycho 6y ago

the whistleblower had pink hair