6 ms·

I suspect they are not reasonable bounds. Facebook is telling the researchers to "trust our scrubbed data sets". This is absurd as they can provide, omit, and m

I suspect they are not reasonable bounds. Facebook is telling the researchers to "trust our scrubbed data sets". This is absurd as they can provide, omit, and modify the data as they see fit. The FB provided data sets are just free advertising for FB, and useless for research. I would expect a good researcher to say "No, I'll collect my own data, thanks."

judge2020 5y ago
They were still using the same means of gathering that info as malware would. It's like wiretapping someone's conversation with you - not illegal in most states but they don't have to play nice, even if you were trying to 'research' their behavior.
- jacobsenscott 5y ago
  It isn't like malware at all. They tell you exactly what data they collect, you need to opt in, and their code is opensource https://adobserver.org/ https://adobserver.org/ I have the right to do anything I want with the data facebook sends to my computer - including sending it to NYU researchers.
  - jcims 5y ago
    You can certainly assert that right and probably defend it successfully legally but it’s not obvious that its compatible with their terms of use. https://m.facebook.com/terms.php https://m.facebook.com/terms.php I’m no lawyer and have no idea if those terms are enforceable or even legal. Practically I think Facebook is just punching itself in the face here, but it is their platform and they do have some say in how it’s used. The point of my original post is that I’ve had experience where researchers try to use the ends to justify their means and then cry foul when they are told that this means can’t be allowed to continue. (Eg in the infosec context rather than breaking into an account they own through some vulnerability, set up automation to break into thousands of those owned by customers and download all of their data). Again I’m giving the researchers the benefit of the doubt, but i think the phenomenon still applies and in the general case is worth paying attention to when this kind of headline comes out.

judge2020 5y ago

They were still using the same means of gathering that info as malware would. It's like wiretapping someone's conversation with you - not illegal in most states but they don't have to play nice, even if you were trying to 'research' their behavior.

jacobsenscott 5y ago
It isn't like malware at all. They tell you exactly what data they collect, you need to opt in, and their code is opensource https://adobserver.org/ https://adobserver.org/ I have the right to do anything I want with the data facebook sends to my computer - including sending it to NYU researchers.
- jcims 5y ago
  You can certainly assert that right and probably defend it successfully legally but it’s not obvious that its compatible with their terms of use. https://m.facebook.com/terms.php https://m.facebook.com/terms.php I’m no lawyer and have no idea if those terms are enforceable or even legal. Practically I think Facebook is just punching itself in the face here, but it is their platform and they do have some say in how it’s used. The point of my original post is that I’ve had experience where researchers try to use the ends to justify their means and then cry foul when they are told that this means can’t be allowed to continue. (Eg in the infosec context rather than breaking into an account they own through some vulnerability, set up automation to break into thousands of those owned by customers and download all of their data). Again I’m giving the researchers the benefit of the doubt, but i think the phenomenon still applies and in the general case is worth paying attention to when this kind of headline comes out.