4 ms·

So users "explicitly consent" (as signaled by continued use of Instagram) to all of Instagram/Facebook's data collection, as well as to letting random third par

by MikeUt 6y ago

So users "explicitly consent" (as signaled by continued use of Instagram) to all of Instagram/Facebook's data collection, as well as to letting random third parties read their posts, as long as those random third parties don't automate that reading? That would be a step too far in privacy invasion? How convenient Facebook cares about privacy exactly when it's in their financial interest, and even more convenient all their users draw the exact same line.

nemothekid 6y ago
Yes, if you remember, this is exactly the scandal that was Cambridge Analytica. The user also consents that their data is used in a certain way. For example, if you scraped tinder profiles and published a map of all tinder users in a city most would agree that’s a privacy invasion.
- OriolRoda 6y ago
  We were checking how many followers had each of our own followers. This is available information in their profile. Only that going over 37,000 manually is not feasible
  - msh 6y ago
    But why would you be allowed to store that data?
hctaw 6y ago
That's a good example actually. Instagram/FB don't let third parties have access to your posts more than you allow publicly, and don't let you use automated tools to scrape them. If you wanted to glean anything from those posts you need to buy the anonymized data from Facebook. The only way to balance the desire of users to make some data public and prevent anyone from grabbing all of it forever is to ban people from using automated tools.