It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: xuenchen
Ya'll might want to study FB's T&C agreements 😉
Scott+Scott Attorneys at Law LLP ("Scott+Scott"), a national shareholder and consumer rights litigation firm, is investigating whether Facebook, Inc. ("Facebook" or the "Company") (NASDAQ:FB) or certain of its officers and directors violated federal securities or other laws. If you are a Facebook stockholder, you are encouraged to contact a Scott+Scott attorney at (844) 818-6982 for more information. The investigation centers around Facebook's management of user data. On March 17, 2018, The New York Times reported that voter-profiling company Cambridge Analytica ("Cambridge") "harvested private information from the Facebook profiles of more than 50 million users without their permission, according to former Cambridge employees, associates and documents, making it one of the largest data leaks in the social network's history." The next day, March 18, 2018, the Massachusetts Attorney General said her office was launching an investigation into Facebook. On March 19, 2018, European Union officials also said they would investigate.
originally posted by: Harpua
originally posted by: xuenchen
Ya'll might want to study FB's T&C agreements
Thats what I'm wondering... why were they denying that they shared the data for so long and even now are making excuses and covering their butt?
I'm wondering if there are potential legal ramifications for them.
... big snip ...
The job was research director across the SCL group, a private contractor that has both defence and elections operations.
Its defence arm was a contractor to the UK’s Ministry of Defence and the US’s Department of Defense, among others.
Its expertise was in “psychological operations” – or psyops – changing people’s minds not through persuasion but through “informational dominance”, a set of techniques that includes rumour, disinformation and fake news.
SCL Elections had used a similar suite of tools in more than 200 elections around the world, mostly in undeveloped democracies that Wylie would come to realise were unequipped to defend themselves.
There are other dramatic documents in Wylie’s stash, including a pitch made by Cambridge Analytica to Lukoil, Russia’s second biggest oil producer.
In an email dated 17 July 2014, about the US presidential primaries, Nix wrote to Wylie: “We have been asked to write a memo to Lukoil (the Russian oil and gas company) to explain to them how our services are going to apply to the petroleum business.
Nix said that “they understand behavioural microtargeting in the context of elections” but that they were “failing to make the connection between voters and their consumers”.
The work, he said, would be “shared with the CEO of the business”, a former Soviet oil minister and associate of Putin, Vagit Alekperov.
“It didn’t make any sense to me,” says Wylie. “I didn’t understand either the email or the pitch presentation we did. Why would a Russian oil company want to target information on American voters?”
In 2014, Steve Bannon – then executive chairman of the “alt-right” news network Breitbart – was Wylie’s boss.
And Robert Mercer, the secretive US hedge-fund billionaire and Republican donor, was Cambridge Analytica’s investor.
And the idea they bought into was to bring big data and social media to an established military methodology – “information operations” – then turn it on the US electorate.
When the reporter asked if Cambridge Analytica could offer investigations into the damaging secrets of rivals, Nix said it worked with former spies from Britain and Israel to look for political dirt. He also volunteered that his team were ready to go further than an investigation.
“Oh, we do a lot more than that,” he said over dinner at an exclusive hotel in London. “Deep digging is interesting, but you know equally effective can be just to go and speak to the incumbents and to offer them a deal that’s too good to be true and make sure that that’s video recorded.
“You know these sort of tactics are very effective, instantly having video evidence of corruption.”
... snip ...
The data analytics firm that worked with Donald Trump’s election team and the winning Brexit campaign harvested millions of Facebook profiles of US voters, in one of the tech giant’s biggest ever data breaches, and used them to build a powerful software program to predict and influence choices at the ballot box.
A whistleblower has revealed to the Observer how Cambridge Analytica – a company owned by the hedge fund billionaire Robert Mercer, and headed at the time by Trump’s key adviser Steve Bannon – used personal information taken without authorisation in early 2014 to build a system that could profile individual US voters, in order to target them with personalised political advertisements
..snip..
The data was collected through an app called thisisyourdigitallife, built by academic Aleksandr Kogan, separately from his work at Cambridge University. Through his company Global Science Research (GSR), in collaboration with Cambridge Analytica, hundreds of thousands of users were paid to take a personality test and agreed to have their data collected for academic use.
... snip ...
However, the app also collected the information of the test-takers’ Facebook friends, leading to the accumulation of a data pool tens of millions-strong.
Facebook’s “platform policy” allowed only collection of friends’ data to improve user experience in the app and barred it being sold on or used for advertising.
originally posted by: Harpua
originally posted by: lordcomac
originally posted by: Harpua
I believe we need a legal code of ethics for data harvesting. What say you, ATS?
We only need one- outright ban data harvesting. Make it a felony.
Problem solved.
I'm down.
Try to convince the control matrix/deep state/oligarchs/intel cabal
Won't happen
originally posted by: lordcomac
I know several people who have cut facebook out of their lives- and many more that just never got into it in the first place.
Not a one of them were the kinds of people who would have voted clinton- and we're in a decidedly blue (or wasn't it red before?) state.
Personally, from what I've seen, people who never got into social media are generally pretty intelligent people- they simply know better.
I've yet to find an obvious liberal who avoids social media.
Just my observations.