5 ms·

I’d rather have a generally applicable law in place. If we think massive data collection shouldn’t be allowed then ban that.

by yibg 5y ago

cortesoft 5y ago
How would you ban data collection happening in a foreign country?
- echelon 5y ago
  Require servers to be hosted domestically. This doesn't prevent exfiltration, but it can be more closely regulated and inspected. Many countries ask this of US companies, so there's no reason we shouldn't adopt a similar stance.
- angio 5y ago
  Introduce general data protection rules, then forbid data transfers to countries that cannot guarantee protection of users' data. That what's happening in the EU with US-based software.
- yibg 5y ago
  You can’t. But you can ban apps that don’t comply to these laws. Similarly to how China band google and Facebook for not complying with their laws.
ethbr0 5y ago
It feels like debate is a generation behind practice here. The greatest danger isn't from data collection, but from algorithmic recommendation. The data collection horse is out of the barn, has legitimate uses, and is an incredibly thorny issue to legislate appropriately. And will be adjusted for the next 20+ years. What needs to be done now is to say that (1) at a certain user count ("too big to democratically ignore") then (2) production recommendation algorithms must be auditable. Allow the details of audits to be kept secret from public record, but the DoJ should be able to go to Google, Facebook, Netflix, or TikTok and say "Show me how this works, now." It's burying your head in the sand to suggest this doesn't have a clear impact on democracy and is currently solely in control of private companies and completely opaque. And it's the opaqueness that's the biggest danger. Fundamentally, modern media/social is different from everything that came before because of the economic feasibility of microtargeting. Newspapers couldn't afford to track their customers individually & print a unique paper for each of them, which resulted in an auditable public record. All of the companies above can do exactly that, without leaving any public record.
- npx13 5y ago
  Completely agree. Just like we have financial audits for a reason, we also need some form of algorithm audit process. Present day algorithms optimised for engagement and ad revenue growth are a clear and present danger to democracy as we have known it.
- zerocrates 5y ago
  Auditable for what, though? What would you find there that you would have the government ban?
  - echelon 5y ago
    Preferential treatment of anti-democratic messages and rhetoric or anti-US sentiment. This should be measurable.
    - zerocrates 5y ago
      But can the government legally restrict that kind of activity? It would be pretty cut-and-dried viewpoint discrimination triggering the most severe First Amendment scrutiny. Beyond that, I'm not sure how easy it would really be to detect. Seems like the method for that kind of thing would more likely be to have networks of users/bots/whatever that take advantage of facially neutral recommendation algorithms. So would you catch that by auditing the algorithm?
      - hillbillydilly 5y ago
        yea these convos really make me think 'all hope is lost' when you get some decent idea fleshed out re: adtech algorithm auditing and your first thought is: yea lets root out anti american sentiment in the algo. facepalm strong fox news vibes around here these days
        echelon 5y ago
        > lets root out anti american sentiment in the algo. facepalm strong fox news vibes around here these days I said measure. We need to understand if we're being manipulated, and if so, figure out what an appropriate response should be. Maybe it's as simple as releasing a report and letting the media talk about it. Knowing gives us the ability to develop a response. Filter bubbles are relatively new, and it's not yet clear the extent to which they can be used to shape a democratic society.
jonny_eh 5y ago
It's common trade policy to block imports in response to another country blocking our exports. Although in reality it's usually a matter of leveraging tariffs. One doesn't need a general policy to respond in kind.
wolverine876 5y ago
I agree, but for everyone, including Facebook, etc. Why focus on TikTok?

I’d rather have a generally applicable law in place. If we think massive data collection shouldn’t be allowed then ban that.

by yibg 5y ago

I’d rather have a generally applicable law in place. If we think massive data collection shouldn’t be allowed then ban that.

cortesoft 5y ago

How would you ban data collection happening in a foreign country?

echelon 5y ago
Require servers to be hosted domestically. This doesn't prevent exfiltration, but it can be more closely regulated and inspected. Many countries ask this of US companies, so there's no reason we shouldn't adopt a similar stance.
angio 5y ago
Introduce general data protection rules, then forbid data transfers to countries that cannot guarantee protection of users' data. That what's happening in the EU with US-based software.
yibg 5y ago
You can’t. But you can ban apps that don’t comply to these laws. Similarly to how China band google and Facebook for not complying with their laws.

ethbr0 5y ago

It feels like debate is a generation behind practice here. The greatest danger isn't from data collection, but from algorithmic recommendation. The data collection horse is out of the barn, has legitimate uses, and is an incredibly thorny issue to legislate appropriately. And will be adjusted for the next 20+ years. What needs to be done now is to say that (1) at a certain user count ("too big to democratically ignore") then (2) production recommendation algorithms must be auditable. Allow the details of audits to be kept secret from public record, but the DoJ should be able to go to Google, Facebook, Netflix, or TikTok and say "Show me how this works, now." It's burying your head in the sand to suggest this doesn't have a clear impact on democracy and is currently solely in control of private companies and completely opaque. And it's the opaqueness that's the biggest danger. Fundamentally, modern media/social is different from everything that came before because of the economic feasibility of microtargeting. Newspapers couldn't afford to track their customers individually & print a unique paper for each of them, which resulted in an auditable public record. All of the companies above can do exactly that, without leaving any public record.

npx13 5y ago
Completely agree. Just like we have financial audits for a reason, we also need some form of algorithm audit process. Present day algorithms optimised for engagement and ad revenue growth are a clear and present danger to democracy as we have known it.
zerocrates 5y ago
Auditable for what, though? What would you find there that you would have the government ban?
- echelon 5y ago
  Preferential treatment of anti-democratic messages and rhetoric or anti-US sentiment. This should be measurable.
  - zerocrates 5y ago
    But can the government legally restrict that kind of activity? It would be pretty cut-and-dried viewpoint discrimination triggering the most severe First Amendment scrutiny. Beyond that, I'm not sure how easy it would really be to detect. Seems like the method for that kind of thing would more likely be to have networks of users/bots/whatever that take advantage of facially neutral recommendation algorithms. So would you catch that by auditing the algorithm?
    - hillbillydilly 5y ago
      yea these convos really make me think 'all hope is lost' when you get some decent idea fleshed out re: adtech algorithm auditing and your first thought is: yea lets root out anti american sentiment in the algo. facepalm strong fox news vibes around here these days
      - echelon 5y ago
        > lets root out anti american sentiment in the algo. facepalm strong fox news vibes around here these days I said measure. We need to understand if we're being manipulated, and if so, figure out what an appropriate response should be. Maybe it's as simple as releasing a report and letting the media talk about it. Knowing gives us the ability to develop a response. Filter bubbles are relatively new, and it's not yet clear the extent to which they can be used to shape a democratic society.

jonny_eh 5y ago

It's common trade policy to block imports in response to another country blocking our exports. Although in reality it's usually a matter of leveraging tariffs. One doesn't need a general policy to respond in kind.

wolverine876 5y ago

I agree, but for everyone, including Facebook, etc. Why focus on TikTok?