4 ms·

> If somebody accesses a Facebook account; and uses it to view intentionally-shared information on 500 people connected to that person; is that Facebook's fault

> If somebody accesses a Facebook account; and uses it to view intentionally-shared information on 500 people connected to that person; is that Facebook's fault for having that feature? I am amazed at the depth of confusion data causes. And the amount of blame deflection that goes on. Here is a medicine for clarity - imagine data is money, because it is. It’s your money, and someone is holding it for you, someone like a bank. So the scenario is - a hacker fakes identity of 14,000 people and empties out the bank accounts. Bank does nothing to stop suspicious activity of a single customer pretending to be 14,000 and has poor authentication. whose fault is that?

NikolaNovak 3y ago
>>imagine data is money, because it is. It’s your money, and someone is holding it for you, someone like a bank. But it is not. I'm not saying it SHOULD NOT be. But it is not, and such sentences perpetuate confusion rather than reduce it. Data is not "money" in general, and definitely not in this case in particular. Banks have extreme regulatory framework within which they conduct their operations. There are checks (hah!) and balances and accountability and industry standard processes. This regulatory framework, and the formal backing and assurance by the government, is what gives me confidence to put my money there. Note some people's risk threshold is different and they go for cash or bitcoin instead - fair enough. (Even so, there are situations even in banking where explicitly you are responsible for your data/money. E.g. a lot of wire services, if you grant somebody permission or you wire the wrong entity your money, that's on you.) 23andme does not fall under the same regulatory framework that banks do. It just, doesn't. I might want and like it to be. Let's campaign for that change together! But it is not. People have given their data to a random new startup with limited regulatory and privacy framework, they have explicitly given that startup permissions to that data, and they have explicitly chosen to share that data with strangers on the quasi-social-network. Bluntly - I love my dad, but I definitely blame him for sending his data to this company despite my urge not to. This was the most predictable outcome in the world along long time scale. If we are saying that it's 23andme's fault for existing and providing that service, and such services should be regulated, sure, I'll agree :). But I also believe most news on this are also in the "depth of confusion" when it comes to the 7 million number and the chain of dependency/fault.

NikolaNovak 3y ago

>>imagine data is money, because it is. It’s your money, and someone is holding it for you, someone like a bank. But it is not. I'm not saying it SHOULD NOT be. But it is not, and such sentences perpetuate confusion rather than reduce it. Data is not "money" in general, and definitely not in this case in particular. Banks have extreme regulatory framework within which they conduct their operations. There are checks (hah!) and balances and accountability and industry standard processes. This regulatory framework, and the formal backing and assurance by the government, is what gives me confidence to put my money there. Note some people's risk threshold is different and they go for cash or bitcoin instead - fair enough. (Even so, there are situations even in banking where explicitly you are responsible for your data/money. E.g. a lot of wire services, if you grant somebody permission or you wire the wrong entity your money, that's on you.) 23andme does not fall under the same regulatory framework that banks do. It just, doesn't. I might want and like it to be. Let's campaign for that change together! But it is not. People have given their data to a random new startup with limited regulatory and privacy framework, they have explicitly given that startup permissions to that data, and they have explicitly chosen to share that data with strangers on the quasi-social-network. Bluntly - I love my dad, but I definitely blame him for sending his data to this company despite my urge not to. This was the most predictable outcome in the world along long time scale. If we are saying that it's 23andme's fault for existing and providing that service, and such services should be regulated, sure, I'll agree :). But I also believe most news on this are also in the "depth of confusion" when it comes to the 7 million number and the chain of dependency/fault.