4 ms·

Now. This is a policy change that was a direct result of the Cambridge Analytica leak. Cambridge explicitly used the cross-site and cross-app tracking to build

Now. This is a policy change that was a direct result of the Cambridge Analytica leak. Cambridge explicitly used the cross-site and cross-app tracking to build the models that they sold to people/companies/governments.

p_j_w 4y ago
>Now. Now is where we all live. The fact that it wasn't like that before doesn't matter THAT much.
- nicolashahn 4y ago
  Meta has swung hard in the other direction. Now privacy reviews are so comprehensive that development speed is significantly hampered. Some teams say they're half as productive as they were before the privacy-first changes. Meta seriously does not want to make the same mistake again. Source: I'm an engineer at Meta.
  - dkonofalski 4y ago
    That's good to hear but it doesn't undo the reputational damage from the past. Even if Meta says they're privacy-conscious, I already don't trust them because they were willing to exploit it for gain and recently at that.
- dkonofalski 4y ago
  This is not true at all. It matters from both a principle standpoint and also a data availability standpoint. If I tell you that I won't sell your location info to people starting today but I was selling it in the past, how difficult do you think it would be for someone to use that past information along with current information to figure out what your favorite restaurant is or where you work? It matters very much that a company only stops selling or tracking your info because they got caught or had a data breach. Look at Google right now. They're being sued by several states for tracking location info for people and then selling it to advertisers without those users' consent. It matters very much to me if Google is suddenly claiming that they're privacy conscious because their actions explicitly speak to the fact that they're not.
  - p_j_w 4y ago
    Companies don't have principles.
nicolashahn 4y ago
Facebook was not selling data then either. Users gave their explicit consent to Cambridge Analytica to use the data in the surveys. The mistake Facebook made was giving Cambridge Analytica access to those users' friends data, which qualifies it as a data breach. Again, Facebook never sold data to third parties.
- dkonofalski 4y ago
  That's not accurate. Facebook sold the data to Cambridge Analytica. You're right that users gave consent for their data to be used but the data bundle sold to Cambridge Analytica included data that was not collected in the surveys. The entire issue wasn't just that FB gave CA access to those users' friends data. It's that they sold it to CA insomuch that CA was paying FB for that additional data. >"We have to seriously challenge the claim by Facebook that they are not selling user data," commented Damian Collins MP, chair of the UK Parliament's Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee. >"They may not be letting people take it away by the bucket load, but they do reward companies with access to data that others are denied, if they place a high value on the business they do together. This is just another form of selling."
  - dollarplus 4y ago
    Did Cambridge Analytica pay for access though? IIRC they just created an app that utilized the "Login with Facebook" feature which then gives the developer some metadata. I've looked around but couldn't find any sources on whether or not Cambridge Analytica actually paid for this access.

p_j_w 4y ago

>Now. Now is where we all live. The fact that it wasn't like that before doesn't matter THAT much.

nicolashahn 4y ago
Meta has swung hard in the other direction. Now privacy reviews are so comprehensive that development speed is significantly hampered. Some teams say they're half as productive as they were before the privacy-first changes. Meta seriously does not want to make the same mistake again. Source: I'm an engineer at Meta.
- dkonofalski 4y ago
  That's good to hear but it doesn't undo the reputational damage from the past. Even if Meta says they're privacy-conscious, I already don't trust them because they were willing to exploit it for gain and recently at that.
dkonofalski 4y ago
This is not true at all. It matters from both a principle standpoint and also a data availability standpoint. If I tell you that I won't sell your location info to people starting today but I was selling it in the past, how difficult do you think it would be for someone to use that past information along with current information to figure out what your favorite restaurant is or where you work? It matters very much that a company only stops selling or tracking your info because they got caught or had a data breach. Look at Google right now. They're being sued by several states for tracking location info for people and then selling it to advertisers without those users' consent. It matters very much to me if Google is suddenly claiming that they're privacy conscious because their actions explicitly speak to the fact that they're not.
- p_j_w 4y ago
  Companies don't have principles.

nicolashahn 4y ago

Facebook was not selling data then either. Users gave their explicit consent to Cambridge Analytica to use the data in the surveys. The mistake Facebook made was giving Cambridge Analytica access to those users' friends data, which qualifies it as a data breach. Again, Facebook never sold data to third parties.

dkonofalski 4y ago
That's not accurate. Facebook sold the data to Cambridge Analytica. You're right that users gave consent for their data to be used but the data bundle sold to Cambridge Analytica included data that was not collected in the surveys. The entire issue wasn't just that FB gave CA access to those users' friends data. It's that they sold it to CA insomuch that CA was paying FB for that additional data. >"We have to seriously challenge the claim by Facebook that they are not selling user data," commented Damian Collins MP, chair of the UK Parliament's Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee. >"They may not be letting people take it away by the bucket load, but they do reward companies with access to data that others are denied, if they place a high value on the business they do together. This is just another form of selling."
- dollarplus 4y ago
  Did Cambridge Analytica pay for access though? IIRC they just created an app that utilized the "Login with Facebook" feature which then gives the developer some metadata. I've looked around but couldn't find any sources on whether or not Cambridge Analytica actually paid for this access.