Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg summoned by UK lawmakers to give evidence on Cambridge Analytica

a reply to: vinifalou

Zuckerberg needs to nip this in the bud asap-the company has already lost 35 billion dollars already and if he doesn't address the issue internally and externally advertising agencies might head for the nearest life rafts.

a reply to: Thecakeisalie

It would be a net win for humanity.

Without anonymity, user data can be weaponized. With anonymity, you make folks have to work to figure out who you are, and keep more analysis in the metadata level.

I could easily become anonymized online again. But why bother? I'd also be isolated because the people i want to connect with don't understand the importance of anonymity. So my second bet is to just try to be smart enough to not fall for lies, and realize when im being manipulated. Im pretty good at it, but far from fool proof.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

I have CNBC on right now and Facebook Fallout is all they're talking about.

My opinion may be a bit extreme, but considering 1) the awesome quantity of data that Facebook has accumulated and 2) the extent to which they are apparently incapable of protecting user's data, I for one would suggest its past time to consider the need to nationalize Facebook.

Actually, I was going to do an OP to that effect to see how ATS membership thinks about that, but I guess that ship has sailed.

Drop facebook, why do people insist on exposing their lives in such minute detail anyway, should we really give a # what others did that day? It's all ego driven.
Don't feed the enemy.

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

The problem is that Facebook apparently violated its privacy policies, and shared data it wasn't supposed to.

And that's why I've concluded the only solution is for the US Government to step in and Nationalize Facebook! Take it over, secure the data, sequester the data and put the entire platform under the aegis of either the NSA or DHS.

Further, as a platform administered by the US Federal Government, it would serve as a very important tool for administering other services of the US Government and it could provide real time monitoring of potential terrorist activity.

Many would then, of course, attempt to abandon the Facebook platform, but if the Federal Government moved to end anonymity on the Internet by requiring each internet user acquire a digital ID Key issued by and through Facebook in order to access any and all of the Internet, people would be forced to register a Facebook Account in order to get the Internet Access Digital ID Key.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I know what you mean-I was thinking of posting a photo of a bowl of frozen pumpkin soup and passing it off as yellow cake Uranium as an April fools joke on facebook, but if I did that the fuzz would be all over me. But then again I would be in handcuffs and then I could say 'how do you know about this? isn't this a breach of privacy?'

originally posted by: Fermy
Drop facebook, why do people insist on exposing their lives in such minute detail anyway, should we really give a # what others did that day? It's all ego driven.
Don't feed the enemy.

I don't think that is how facebook is used by most people. at least, not folks above the age of 30 who have real stuff to deal with.

Its a great tool for support. I know many junkies who use it like that. Local buy/sell/trade...great use of Facebook. You can sell your ps4 games without paying a premium/consignment. Im a member of quite a few animal rescue networks, and we find placement for animals who are scheduled to be put to death. Saving doggo's and puppers is a great cause.

My favorite facebook page is VetRanch. He is a vet that takes donations and monetizes a YouTube page so he can do expensive and life saving surgeries on stray dogs. He's like this wonderful angel sent to live among us.

I don't know why people are surprised by this. When you sign up for Facebook and Google, and their ilk, you "tick the box" and your data is theirs. That's how they make their money. Nothing's free.

While the focus is on Trump, you have to cast a side-look at the Labour party who exploited social media expertly in the recent UK election. They may be different circumstances, but which one is right/wrong?

a reply to: TonyS

I have CNBC on right now and Facebook Fallout is all they're talking about.

My opinion may be a bit extreme, but considering 1) the awesome quantity of data that Facebook has accumulated and 2) the extent to which they are apparently incapable of protecting user's data, I for one would suggest its past time to consider the need to nationalize Facebook.

Actually, I was going to do an OP to that effect to see how ATS membership thinks about that, but I guess that ship has sailed.

Facebook users voluntarily sign up for the service, essentially signing away their privacy. Personally I would much rather have marketing companies and political campaigns sifting through my data than any government, so I am opposed to any nationalization on principle. Thankfully I never got on the facebook train.

originally posted by: Thecakeisalie
a reply to: vinifalou

the company has already lost 35 billion dollars

Good.

'They were on our side': Obama campaign director reveals Facebook ALLOWED them to mine American users' profiles in 2012 because they were supportive of the Democrats

Facebook allowed the Obama campaign to access the personal data of users during the 2012 campaign because they supported the Democratic candidate according to a high ranking staffer.

Carol Davidsen, who worked as the media director at Obama for America and has spoken about this in the past, explained on Twitter that she and her team were able to ingest massive amounts of information from the social network after getting permission from Facebook users to access their list of friends.

'Facebook was surprised we were able to suck out the whole social graph, but they didn't stop us once they realized that was what we were doing,' wrote Davidsen.

click link for article.

a reply to: paraphi

you have to cast a side-look at the Labour party who exploited social media expertly in the recent UK election

So what's your point?

Have the Labour Party done anything illegal when it comes to using social media, or are you just trying to political point score.

If you want something to chew over, The Tories where in talks with Cambridge Analytica during 2016.

As to show no bias on my part, the link is from a favourite right wing rag who some on ATS admire.

www.dailymail.co.uk...

Breaking News - Cambridge Analytica suspends CEO amid Facebook data scandal

Cambridge Analytica has suspended its chief executive amid claims the firm harvested personal data from up to 50 million Facebook users.

It comes after secret recordings captured Alexander Nix boasting about the company’s pivotal role in securing Donald Trump‘s election victory.

In the recordings, captured by a Channel 4 journalist, Mr Nix claims his firm ran “all” the elements of the Trump campaign.

He says: ”We did all the research, all the data, all the analytics, all the targeting, we ran all the digital campaign, the television campaign and our data informed all the strategy.”

click link for article...

originally posted by: alldaylong
Have the Labour Party done anything illegal when it comes to using social media, or are you just trying to political point score.

Calm down. My point was that political parties exploit social media. That exploitation will become increasingly intrusive based on profiling and the use/abuse of data. Facebook will exploit personal data where there is a demand and a finanicial benefit, either through adverting or direct marketing. All the 1.1M people who "liked" Corbyn's posts are now exploitable data points. Oh, so are the 400K people who "liked" May's posts.

originally posted by: TonyS
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

I have CNBC on right now and Facebook Fallout is all they're talking about.

My opinion may be a bit extreme, but considering 1) the awesome quantity of data that Facebook has accumulated and 2) the extent to which they are apparently incapable of protecting user's data, I for one would suggest its past time to consider the need to nationalize Facebook.

Actually, I was going to do an OP to that effect to see how ATS membership thinks about that, but I guess that ship has sailed.

You should do a thread. It would be a fun discussion. There's a lot of good and bad about Facebook... well.. more bad than good. I'll participate.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
I think the UK government is mostly upset that they don't have a monopoly on big data. I suspect the US government will become upset by it as well...but we will likely just hack it or render it moot rather than haul them in front of congress.

Silicon Valley got arrogant. There was a startup saying "to seek permission, is to seek denial". So they would just do something and wait for people to complain. Set up a company like peapod.com to do online deliveries of food, or scanpost.com to convert snail-mail letters into digital scans to eliminate the costs of delivery and secure shredding.
There was a company called getgooey.com that would allow you to add overlays on top of other websites, so people could add their own comments. Marketing and sales people freaked out over this.

Then they thought they could influence public opinion by silently dropping tweets/posts/comments and selecting articles and viewpoints to promote. That worked so long as they kept to the tech and local issues, but then they entered the realm of national and international politics. Now that has the career politicians wanting an explanation.