5 ms·

> isnt that close to how Cambridge Analytica happened? Yes, its exactly this. "Facebook changes based on past scandal for the better, and this is bad. here is

> isnt that close to how Cambridge Analytica happened? Yes, its exactly this. "Facebook changes based on past scandal for the better, and this is bad. here is my 9th grade essay with no research just feeling" Facebook _should_ be held to account. I personally don't think that the advertising is actually that much of a problem. It all has paper trails because they have to pay. Advertising is not the worst part of facebook is its users. for that to change facebook needs to understand that "freedom of expression" disappears when you sign the terms and agreements, which specifically limit your freedom of expression. If they actually enforced their community standards properly, the place would be much better. Instead they carve out exceptions for celebs, based on precedence that not even employees can find.

intricatedetail 6y ago
Isn't how human nature works? Exceptions, greed, gossip, deception? You can't leave that to a company to enforce with T&C.
ClumsyPilot 6y ago
> "I personally don't think that the advertising is actually that much of a problem" Facebook was used to illegally infuence elections in Uk and break spending rules and because of their closed nature, nobody realised untill a whistleblower stepped forwards. Its a massive problem, and maybe we would not have Brexit without it. www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-44856992 A TV ad, by comparison, is aired publically and you can see it and ask who paid for it.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
  The question is the degree to which advertising actually influences behavior. It must have some effect, I’d agree, but was Cambridge Analytica’s ad targeting so powerful that a 1.3 million vote margin was entirely their doing? I’m pretty skeptical.
  - Fnoord 6y ago
    It was highly targeted advertising on targets which were highly susceptible to be turned. Whatever they were turned by, doesn't matter whether it was factual or not (cause that is the low standard for advertising). We have Edward Bernays standard of advertising coupled with the power of Facebook available for everyone, including people who lie through their teeth to get what they wanted. Furthermore, there is evidence Russian trolls influenced the Brexit campaign, and if that isn't enough: it was a moment in polls where leavers indeed won, but before and after the referendum it was more votes for stay and for leave. I'm actually glad The Netherlands quit with referendum. Elections are very tough nowadays because of how easy people are influenced.
    - cambalache 6y ago
      > Elections are very tough nowadays because of how easy people (WHO VOTE AGAINST MY POLITICAL ORIENTATION) are influenced. Let's be honest, none of this were a scandal if Cambridge Analytica would have worked for Hilary or the remain campaign. I dont deny all this stuff influence people, it clearly does, but that is the price you have to pay for having a society with freedom of speech and universal vote. If you want to get rid of, either you have to take more draconian censorship laws or you eliminate universal voting for adults, both cornerstones of a modern democracy.
      - Fnoord 6y ago
        Brexit is just an example. Manipulation of citizens is of all time. The danger lies in how precise the targeting nowadays is, together with internet being world-wide and advanced. Its the price we all paid for some of us having a dishonest ML data hoarder. I'm involved in the integrity of elections in The Netherlands. I have a political preference, but I am able to leave that out when I manually count votes. I also am aware of ways which undermine our democracy: electronic voting, strategic voting, and abused ML. I believe a high integrity on elections benefits society on the long term. However given the international forecast of our societies (ie. what used to be called globalization 20 years ago), and difference in population and cheap labour, a country like Russia or China can heavily influence our society. In this case with the help of an American behemoth, but there is no reason other sources cannot be abused. I don't have the solution to this problem. It warrants further investigation though. Hopefully before it is too late.
- annadane 6y ago
  Said whistleblower (assuming you're talking about Christopher Wylie) got banned from fb. That's my issue with all this. Did the Russians or Cambridge Analytica do bad stuff? Probably yes. Is Facebook also incredibly hypocritical and self serving? Yes
- KaiserPro 6y ago
  >Facebook was used to illegally influence elections yes, the electoral commission found that. sadly its only able to issue a tiny fine. Not only that its being eroded by populists from both sides of the political spectrum. Its not really a facebook problem but an EC one. This transgression was found by going over the accounts, not by leaks. > A TV ad, by comparison, is aired publically and you can see it and ask who paid for it. political TV ads are illegal in the UK. Long may it continue. We are also supposing that facebook adverts are actually effective. They have the power to somehow corrupt a morally "good" person into someone that votes for the "other side". This is plainly nonsense. The real issue is that facebook is a warped mirror of society. without rules and order, chaos and bad actors reign. This means "censorship" or if it were treated as the press, editorial standards.
- fsociety 6y ago
  That is not true, according to an investigation ran by a third-party https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-politics-54457407 https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-politics-54457407 Do you trust the third-party investigation, or a couple of whistleblowers one of which designed the entire system and another of whom sold the system. No doubt CA is a wake-up call for data security and privacy.. but a sales person telling you how freakin’ powerful the system is and how they can control the world with their ML models. Well we’ve all heard that. By the way it’s not just TV ads to consider. Mail is a huge part especially for political campaigns and NO one has visibility to that. You can’t just cherry-pick one distribution model of advertisements.

intricatedetail 6y ago

Isn't how human nature works? Exceptions, greed, gossip, deception? You can't leave that to a company to enforce with T&C.

ClumsyPilot 6y ago

> "I personally don't think that the advertising is actually that much of a problem" Facebook was used to illegally infuence elections in Uk and break spending rules and because of their closed nature, nobody realised untill a whistleblower stepped forwards. Its a massive problem, and maybe we would not have Brexit without it. www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-44856992 A TV ad, by comparison, is aired publically and you can see it and ask who paid for it.

SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
The question is the degree to which advertising actually influences behavior. It must have some effect, I’d agree, but was Cambridge Analytica’s ad targeting so powerful that a 1.3 million vote margin was entirely their doing? I’m pretty skeptical.
- Fnoord 6y ago
  It was highly targeted advertising on targets which were highly susceptible to be turned. Whatever they were turned by, doesn't matter whether it was factual or not (cause that is the low standard for advertising). We have Edward Bernays standard of advertising coupled with the power of Facebook available for everyone, including people who lie through their teeth to get what they wanted. Furthermore, there is evidence Russian trolls influenced the Brexit campaign, and if that isn't enough: it was a moment in polls where leavers indeed won, but before and after the referendum it was more votes for stay and for leave. I'm actually glad The Netherlands quit with referendum. Elections are very tough nowadays because of how easy people are influenced.
  - cambalache 6y ago
    > Elections are very tough nowadays because of how easy people (WHO VOTE AGAINST MY POLITICAL ORIENTATION) are influenced. Let's be honest, none of this were a scandal if Cambridge Analytica would have worked for Hilary or the remain campaign. I dont deny all this stuff influence people, it clearly does, but that is the price you have to pay for having a society with freedom of speech and universal vote. If you want to get rid of, either you have to take more draconian censorship laws or you eliminate universal voting for adults, both cornerstones of a modern democracy.
    - Fnoord 6y ago
      Brexit is just an example. Manipulation of citizens is of all time. The danger lies in how precise the targeting nowadays is, together with internet being world-wide and advanced. Its the price we all paid for some of us having a dishonest ML data hoarder. I'm involved in the integrity of elections in The Netherlands. I have a political preference, but I am able to leave that out when I manually count votes. I also am aware of ways which undermine our democracy: electronic voting, strategic voting, and abused ML. I believe a high integrity on elections benefits society on the long term. However given the international forecast of our societies (ie. what used to be called globalization 20 years ago), and difference in population and cheap labour, a country like Russia or China can heavily influence our society. In this case with the help of an American behemoth, but there is no reason other sources cannot be abused. I don't have the solution to this problem. It warrants further investigation though. Hopefully before it is too late.
annadane 6y ago
Said whistleblower (assuming you're talking about Christopher Wylie) got banned from fb. That's my issue with all this. Did the Russians or Cambridge Analytica do bad stuff? Probably yes. Is Facebook also incredibly hypocritical and self serving? Yes
KaiserPro 6y ago
>Facebook was used to illegally influence elections yes, the electoral commission found that. sadly its only able to issue a tiny fine. Not only that its being eroded by populists from both sides of the political spectrum. Its not really a facebook problem but an EC one. This transgression was found by going over the accounts, not by leaks. > A TV ad, by comparison, is aired publically and you can see it and ask who paid for it. political TV ads are illegal in the UK. Long may it continue. We are also supposing that facebook adverts are actually effective. They have the power to somehow corrupt a morally "good" person into someone that votes for the "other side". This is plainly nonsense. The real issue is that facebook is a warped mirror of society. without rules and order, chaos and bad actors reign. This means "censorship" or if it were treated as the press, editorial standards.
fsociety 6y ago
That is not true, according to an investigation ran by a third-party https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-politics-54457407 https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-politics-54457407 Do you trust the third-party investigation, or a couple of whistleblowers one of which designed the entire system and another of whom sold the system. No doubt CA is a wake-up call for data security and privacy.. but a sales person telling you how freakin’ powerful the system is and how they can control the world with their ML models. Well we’ve all heard that. By the way it’s not just TV ads to consider. Mail is a huge part especially for political campaigns and NO one has visibility to that. You can’t just cherry-pick one distribution model of advertisements.