Jump to content

Cambridge Analytica


Stive Pesley

Recommended Posts

Maybe a bit heavy for a Monday morning but this is equal parts fascinating and terrifying.

It really shows the dark side of the glorious social media revolution that we've all embraced. Every single think we like and share is retained and there are powerful data analytic tools out there that can take all that data and make sense of it. Of course that could be used for good things, but when it's used to swing elections/referendums it starts to feel a lot more sinister

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/17/data-war-whistleblower-christopher-wylie-faceook-nix-bannon-trump

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 41
  • Created
  • Last Reply
30 minutes ago, David said:

Is this the same Guardian that ran a story of a link between hating body odour and having right wing views?

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/feb/28/hate-body-odour-youre-more-likely-to-have-rightwing-views

Exactly - so find the data of everyone of Facebook who has complained about other people's hygiene and then push right-wing content at them that further validates their political views. It's the covert nature of it that seems so sinister though. Literally secret mind-control experiments

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, StivePesley said:

Exactly - so find the data of everyone of Facebook who has complained about other people's hygiene and then push right-wing content at them that further validates their political views. It's the covert nature of it that seems so sinister though. Literally secret mind-control experiments

That's not mind control then is it, that's personalised content to suit your tastes. Now if they were tracking left wing views through those that have no issues their mates stink, then keep shoving right wing content in their faces I can see your point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, StivePesley said:

......Every single think we like and share is retained and there are powerful data analytic tools out there that can take all that data and make sense of it......

That's why I randomly vote in online polls - for example I voted for the Stones in the poll, but it may just be that I prefer the Beatles - or is it in fact a double-bluff? - big brother can get stuffed if they think they can predict my views....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Gaspode said:

That's why I randomly vote in online polls - for example I voted for the Stones in the poll, but it may just be that I prefer the Beatles - or is it in fact a double-bluff? - big brother can get stuffed if they think they can predict my views....

I always do that with Facebook. "You recently visited Xxx."

Yep, I'm not playing your data collection games. Send fake data. Up yours Zuckerberg. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Gaspode said:

That's why I randomly vote in online polls - for example I voted for the Stones in the poll, but it may just be that I prefer the Beatles - or is it in fact a double-bluff? - big brother can get stuffed if they think they can predict my views....

So it’s you rating our performances 10/10 every week!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, David said:

That's not mind control then is it, that's personalised content to suit your tastes. Now if they were tracking left wing views through those that have no issues their mates stink, then keep shoving right wing content in their faces I can see your point.

With respect I don't think you're really understanding the enormity of it. It's not about being personalised to suit your tastes. Facebook advertising does that anyway - and whilst I don't especially like that idea, i get that it's their business model. This wasn't selling anything though - and it wasn't legal. You see the difference between selling someone something and secretly subverting democracy to suit the purposes of the powerful?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first problem is that if we get another Cambridge Analytica scenario it's only uncovered when it is too late and any potential damage has been done, or the purpose of the data has been served.

The second problem is that a lot (probably most) of the users on Facebook don't read privacy statements or permission requests that pop up when they decide to take a funny quiz, or play a daft game. This is where the main problem lies. If people actually read those requests and statements chances are nobody would ever accept them. This provides data collection companies and Facebook themselves with enough legal leeway (even in cases where there appears to have been illicit data collection) to wriggle out of situations like this because legally the users accepted the permission requests and privacy statements and ticked a box that said they understood that fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta said:

The first problem is that if we get another Cambridge Analytica scenario it's only uncovered when it is too late and any potential damage has been done, or the purpose of the data has been served.

The second problem is that a lot (probably most) of the users on Facebook don't read privacy statements or permission requests that pop up when they decide to take a funny quiz, or play a daft game. This is where the main problem lies. If people actually read those requests and statements chances are nobody would ever accept them. This provides data collection companies and Facebook themselves with enough legal leeway (even in cases where there appears to have been illicit data collection) to wriggle out of situations like this because legally the users accepted the permission requests and privacy statements and ticked a box that said they understood that fact.

I would say the first problem is with people believing every word they see on the internet. My missus is horrendous with it, she once told me Titanic 2 was coming out with a great big smile on her face, I asked her what she believed the storyline would be and her answer was a new boat. She saw it on Facebook. 

There was also another time I woke up to be told World War 3 had started, bit odd I thought, hasn't been anything in the news that would suggest so, this was before Korean Kim was all over the news with his nukes. Did you see this on Facebook? Yes, have you put the news channel on TV, she does so and they were talking about some random crap. Strange that. 

People are far too gullible, take this place as well, in the summer @footballtransfers273636 tweet that Derby are looking to Albert McDuck from Albatross FC and within half hour his Wiki page is being edited to say his current club is Derby County, even a full on debate on why he would/wouldn't fit in the team to the point where personal insults are being thrown around as one thinks they know more than the other!

This is the first problem, not the data miners or the likes of Facebook, it's those that are accessing websites. 

Funny thing is we have thousands of kids at school today probably looking at their phones on Facebook under the desk whilst the teacher is trying to educate them on a mythical bloke that turned water into wine and walked on water. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta said:

The second problem is that a lot (probably most) of the users on Facebook don't read privacy statements or permission requests that pop up when they decide to take a funny quiz, or play a daft game. This is where the main problem lies. If people actually read those requests and statements chances are nobody would ever accept them. This provides data collection companies and Facebook themselves with enough legal leeway (even in cases where there appears to have been illicit data collection) to wriggle out of situations like this because legally the users accepted the permission requests and privacy statements and ticked a box that said they understood that fact.

Yep - and the app they mention had hidden in the privacy statement that they not only agreed to give access to their own profile, but also all their friends

Quote

Kogan’s app, called thisismydigitallife, gave him permission to access their Facebook profiles. And not just theirs, but their friends’ too. On average, each “seeder” – the people who had taken the personality test, around 320,000 in total – unwittingly gave access to at least 160 other people’s profiles, none of whom would have known or had reason to suspect.

So they are saying that if 320,000 people each had an average of 160 friends- that's over 50 million users data being mined...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, David said:

I would say the first problem is with people believing every word they see on the internet.

People are far too gullible

This is the first problem, not the data miners or the likes of Facebook, it's those that are accessing websites. 

Absolutely!

That's the whole point of the article - that gigantic societal weakness is being secretly exploited by the powerful to meet their own agendas.

They target the fake news at those who you know are the most likely to believe it and the most likely to share it to other people who will also believe it.

It's not conspiracy theory - the guy who developed it and watched it happen is now lifting the lid and explaining exactly what they did. Unsurprisingly he feels quite guilty!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, StivePesley said:

Absolutely!

That's the whole point of the article - that gigantic societal weakness is being secretly exploited by the powerful to meet their own agendas.

They target the fake news at those who you know are the most likely to believe it and the most likely to share it to other people who will also believe it.

It's not conspiracy theory - the guy who developed it and watched it happen is now lifting the lid and explaining exactly what they did. Unsurprisingly he feels quite guilty!

 

The problem is, then, that people only ever see posts that reinforce their view and make them believe everyone else feels the same way, and it is normal. They never get an opportunity to see the other side of the story. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, TigerTedd said:

The problem is, then, that people only ever see posts that reinforce their view and make them believe everyone else feels the same way, and it is normal. They never get an opportunity to see the other side of the story. 

Yep - he makes a good point about agency. If you know it's happening to you then that would probably be more acceptable, but when people don't realise that their online experience is  being deliberately manufactured and tailored to exploit them -  instead they think it is naturally occurring that's when it starts to undermine democracy, as you can build belief and support in ideas that are simply untrue

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saw some weird fake news sites during EU ref and US elections. Outrageous claims like "Blair says leave voters should be locked up" for one memorable headline. Still shared on Facebook. 

And @David if your other half believed that Titanic 2 trailer then God help you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Lambchop said:

So, is Albert McDuck any good...?

 

4 minutes ago, TigerTedd said:

He’s the Jonny Russel replacement. 

Works his ass off for the team but some of his decision making and end product will drive you quackers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...