The thing is, none of this stuff is new. It's almost like a dam broke and every privacy doomsayer is finally being taken seriously by the media.
About time, IMHO. I think it was really easy for Facebook to brush off accusations of data collection overreach before because the media was not doing a good job of reporting on its consequences.
Pretty sure this is a coordinated attack by media, similar to media attacking Trump.
The fact is, you're right, most of this has been known for years. It's interesting because four years ago, I actually used the same technique as CA to get access to peoples social network(s) for identifying probable interests. This was recommended to me by an app developer still in college.
I really don't understand how this can be news if it was pretty much common knowledge in the tech spheres. Or rather, how they couldn't have known about it earlier. Short answer, they had to have known. Long answer, there has to be a reason they are throwing a fit now - which personally I don't know.
If we add that up with the lack of control from governments and Facebook attempts to solve the issue, we have a ticking time bomb. The only positive, Galup says, is that services like the ones on offer from Cambridge Analytica are prohibitively expensive for most political parties in Latin America.
In this case, the only thing saving elections in the region from outside corrupting influences may be the greed of those same corrupting influences.
Jesus, that’s rough. We’ve been screwing with elections South of our border for generations, and now we’ve de facto privatized it! We have a talent for cultivating blowback, and I really hope that FB doesn’t become the new face of that story. I guess Bosworth would just shrug and point out that this is all good, and if Americans are subject to potentially lethal backlash it’s just growing pains for FB.
> We’ve been screwing with elections South of our border for generations now we’ve de facto privatized it!
I think it's very interesting to think of Facebook in that context. However, it was privatized long ago. Companies have been buying political influence for a long time, and when that hasn't worked, U.S. security forces sometimes have been deployed. I don't know about private security forces, but I'd be surprised if that didn't play some part.
Facebook effectively plays the role of the private security agency; they provide an election manipulation service that others can utilize. It's different because those private armies exist solely for that purpose, but let's not pretend that Facebook learned about all these things in the last month - they knew what was going on better than anyone.
[+] [-] jumelles|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] AlexandrB|8 years ago|reply
About time, IMHO. I think it was really easy for Facebook to brush off accusations of data collection overreach before because the media was not doing a good job of reporting on its consequences.
[+] [-] ReverseCold|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] citilife|8 years ago|reply
The fact is, you're right, most of this has been known for years. It's interesting because four years ago, I actually used the same technique as CA to get access to peoples social network(s) for identifying probable interests. This was recommended to me by an app developer still in college.
I really don't understand how this can be news if it was pretty much common knowledge in the tech spheres. Or rather, how they couldn't have known about it earlier. Short answer, they had to have known. Long answer, there has to be a reason they are throwing a fit now - which personally I don't know.
[+] [-] otempomores|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] otempomores|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] cowpig|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jnmandal|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] woliveirajr|8 years ago|reply
An election that began and is being discussed exactly from the day the last election was over, 4 years ago.
[+] [-] bitumen|8 years ago|reply
In this case, the only thing saving elections in the region from outside corrupting influences may be the greed of those same corrupting influences.
Jesus, that’s rough. We’ve been screwing with elections South of our border for generations, and now we’ve de facto privatized it! We have a talent for cultivating blowback, and I really hope that FB doesn’t become the new face of that story. I guess Bosworth would just shrug and point out that this is all good, and if Americans are subject to potentially lethal backlash it’s just growing pains for FB.
[+] [-] forapurpose|8 years ago|reply
I think it's very interesting to think of Facebook in that context. However, it was privatized long ago. Companies have been buying political influence for a long time, and when that hasn't worked, U.S. security forces sometimes have been deployed. I don't know about private security forces, but I'd be surprised if that didn't play some part.
Facebook effectively plays the role of the private security agency; they provide an election manipulation service that others can utilize. It's different because those private armies exist solely for that purpose, but let's not pretend that Facebook learned about all these things in the last month - they knew what was going on better than anyone.