Politics
Politics
Out of context: Reply #29569
- Started
- Last post
- 33,467 Responses
- Bluejam1
- Stopped watching after I saw pink trans hair... Fake news, IT companies have been doing this for years...robotron3k
- ^ And now for a rousing game of 'Spot the Homo-/Trans-phobe'!Continuity
- Yeah, and the rich have been exploiting the poor for years. Fake news. Nothing burger. Just do as the rich command! MAGA!!!mandomafioso
- ^ But is he lying?Maaku
- @cont. - tbf I automatically judge people with KrazYKolour hair, but that's simply due to my experience and has nothing to do with perceived sexuality.detritus
- oh, hold on - i missed 'trans' in robo's post.detritus
- -formers?
-Am?
-action?
-tastic?detritus - Transylvanian?Fax_Benson
- Robo has zero tolerance of Romanian Eurofags.Fax_Benson
- I think the robotic ladyboy doth protest too muchdetritus
- isn't this pretty standard marketing techniques? this is why FB, Tw, IG... are 'free' to useGnash
- @gnash - http://www.bbc.co.uk…fadein11
- ya, I still on't see what's unusual here. anyone who thinks this isn't standard fare is pretty naiveGnash
- Facebooks share price would say otherwise.fadein11
- hedge fund managers aren't arbiters of truthGnash
- "routine"
https://www.theguard…Gnash - only diff this time is that the 'bad' guys used itGnash
- have you even read about this? it has nothing to do with standard marketing practices. Not looking for an argument here.fadein11
- Not the best source but a decent summary of why this is differentfadein11
- http://digg.com/2018…fadein11
- yes "routine" covert data harvesting. Against the privacy policy we all agree to. Covert gnash, covert.fadein11
- I am amazed you are cool with this.fadein11
- "harvested data from over 50 million Facebook profiles without users' permission to create targetable personality profiles for campaign advertisements"fadein11
- what did people think Facebook / twitter / instagram... were doing with the data? lolGnash
- nothing new here. bigger fish to fryGnash
- it's only different because the nazis got caught using it.Gnash
- I think permission is the keyword.fadein11
- "hundreds of thousands of Facebook users took personality tests with the app. In doing so, users consented to their data being collected for academic use.fadein11
- Its use was to prove anything but academic."fadein11
- this had nothing to do with the standard terms/privacy policy everyone agrees to on facebook.fadein11
- Anyway, not looking for yet another argument. Just trying to explain why this is different. Hopefully it will help improve Facebook's misuse of our data.fadein11
- I neve ruse those silly viral app things on facebook but I would be a little bit annoyed if I did a personality test (agreed under the pretense that it wasfadein11
- for an academic study) but in doing so the academic gained full access to my entire profile (the personality test was a front) and then passed my data on to befadein11
- used in influencing an election. hmmmm. And this was done on millions of users.fadein11
- https://pbs.twimg.co…Gnash
- of course it's illegal, but no diff than what's been happening for years. wrong guys got caught, this time.Gnash
- people didn't hand over their data to Cambridge Analytica though. And that's the point.fadein11
- Agreed it's been happening for years though. This time Facebook got caught and its doing serious damage.
Orig Cambridge Analytica story is well over a year oldfadein11 - I'm clearly not making you see the difference between data you agree to hand over to help sell you stuff (standard marketing practices as you said) andfadein11
- data stolen to help influence an election. And data that was easily stolen due to Facebooks lack of care for its users.fadein11
- it wasn't'stolen. Facebook 'sold' it to them, like they have to myriad other companiesGnash
- and It was used to influence an election, so what? that's what advertising does, as well.Gnash
- Politicians have been using the internet, with various degrees of success, to influence elections since they figured out it's powerGnash
- Of course they should be charged, because it seems they did it illegally. But the over-reaction ivy people and the media is pure bullshit.Gnash
- Facebook's share price is as high as it is precisely because 'business types' know precisely what it is doing and is capable of = $$$detritus
- It's sure as fuck not solely because 2Bn credulous consumers don't have any clue of how much value they're pumping into the thing and eyeball ads.detritus
- ^ exactlyGnash
- have you read a single link I have sent... in this instance facebook did not sell the data. it was stolen by an academic using a spoof app and then he handed itfadein11
- all over to Cambridge Analytica. Of course I know the value of facebook data for marketing. And yes we all sign over our data when we agree to the terms.fadein11
- This was a completely different situation to that. Hence why its hit the news lol. Everyone knew about Cambridge Analytica 2 years ago and everyone knowsfadein11
- Facebook sell your data. But they didn't here, it was a breach due to lax care on Facebooks part. Jeez, read the links lolfadein11
- The data was taken 'covertly' without 'permission' using a spoof app. Its a totally different story. Read the links.fadein11
- there is zero chance Facebook did not know. and zero chance that they weren't compensated.Gnash
- No I've not read anything you've linked, fadein, because you've added nothing beyond what I've already read on the subject.detritus
- CA's 'use' of FB's API to eke 3rd and 4th party info out of an FB App was known a year ago—the only news here is the fallout from C4's follow-up investigation.detritus
- None of this is new, none of this is novel - norms MIGHT start caring now that a non-fringe news entity's investigated things, but this is all known knowns.detritus
- or, if not acutely, speciifcally and exactly not known knowns, then very much suspected knowns. hence corporate love for FB and its share valuationdetritus
- Top story across all media, share price plummets, facebook under investigation and its not news. Ok det. If you bothered to read anything i saidfadein11
- You would see that i have already said that cambridge analytica was well reported 2 years ago... Sigh. Lets see how it pans out eh.fadein11
- @gnash. yes they likely did know, hence why its a worldwide news story. Nope they were not paid for it, it was covertly taken also hence why its a worldwidefadein11
- new story.fadein11
- and if they were paid for it it's an even bigger news story lol.fadein11
- they certainly knew soon after as their 3rd party API was updated/locked downfadein11