Topic: Cambridge Analytica

[rafathegaffa83]

How well will this tweet age

Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson@BorisJohnson
Observer/C4 story utterly ludicrous, #VoteLeave won fair & square - and legally. We are leaving the EU in a year and going global #TakeBackControl #GlobalBritain

[Trada]

MoD worked with tainted company SCL Group until last month

Theresa May was accused last night of a cover up after it emerged that a data company linked to dirty tricks was working on a defence contract just a few weeks ago.

The prime minister’s spokesman said on Wednesday that the government had stopped working with Cambridge Analytica’s parent company, SCL Group, in 2015, before accusations were made that it used millions of people’s private Facebook data to manipulate elections.

However, The Times can reveal that the Ministry of Defence paid £42,000 to a branch of SCL for “data analytics” between December and February. The work was commissioned even though there have been widely reported concerns for two years about the company’s techniques.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/mod-worked-with-tainted-company-scl-group-until-last-month-mwzxpbg8q

[BabuYagu]

Looking increasingly likely that Brazilian's elections in 2014 were influenced also using similar methods to what we see in teh US. It's been a steady shit storm of corruption since then and we now have a vice president in charge who took over from the impeached president whose approval rating is a whopping 3%, which is UP from the zero percent he had at one point.

Starting to feel like there will never be a free democratic election again.

[Giono]

Looking increasingly likely that Brazilian's elections in 2014 were influenced also using similar methods to what we see in teh US. It's been a steady shit storm of corruption since then and we now have a vice president in charge who took over from the impeached president whose approval rating is a whopping 3%, which is UP from the zero percent he had at one point.

Starting to feel like there will never be a free democratic election again.

That's a shame. I was hopeful for Brasil with the resources, aerospace, agriculture there that something better could emerge.

[killer-heels]

Looking increasingly likely that Brazilian's elections in 2014 were influenced also using similar methods to what we see in teh US. It's been a steady shit storm of corruption since then and we now have a vice president in charge who took over from the impeached president whose approval rating is a whopping 3%, which is UP from the zero percent he had at one point.

Starting to feel like there will never be a free democratic election again.

Has there ever been a free, democratic election?

[BarryCrocker]

That's a shame. I was hopeful for Brasil with the resources, aerospace, agriculture there that something better could emerge.

No surprise

Brazil’s six richest men have the same wealth as poorest 50 percent of the population; around 100 million people. The country's richest 5 percent have the same income as the remaining 95 percent.

https://www.oxfam.org/en/even-it-brazil/brazil-extreme-inequality-numbers

[rafathegaffa83]

FTC officially investigating Facebook
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2018/03/statement-acting-director-ftcs-bureau-consumer-protection

[Sudden Death Draft Loser]

Has there ever been a free, democratic election?

Anywhere?

I very much doubt it.

[Corkboy]

Has there ever been a free, democratic election?

Irish general elections are pretty uncontroversial.

[conman]

Irish general elections are pretty uncontroversial.

That's because there's no choice... The presidency, mind you..

[classycarra]

Anywhere?

I very much doubt it.

So much contempt for democracy in lots of your posts lately! What do you like?

[Corkboy]

That's because there's no choice... The presidency, mind you..

In my constituency last time out, I could have chosen between FG, FF, SF, Labour, various independents, Greens, Renua, and some other collections of letters. Not sure why you would say there was no choice.

[conman]

In my constituency last time out, I could have chosen between FG, FF, SF, Labour, various independents, Greens, Renua, and some other collections of letters. Not sure why you would say there was no choice.

Righto.

[rafathegaffa83]

Zuckerberg won't testify in Britain. He's sending someone in his place
https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-43554135?

[Wilmo]

Wylie, the key CA whistleblower, is giving testimony to the Commons Culture Committee. Some utterly astonishing stuff being revealed:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2018/mar/27/tony-blair-tells-tories-to-block-brexit-if-they-want-to-avoid-corbyn-government-politics-live

[Phil M]

Wylie, the key CA whistleblower, is giving testimony to the Commons Culture Committee. Some utterly astonishing stuff being revealed:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2018/mar/27/tony-blair-tells-tories-to-block-brexit-if-they-want-to-avoid-corbyn-government-politics-live

Defo...this caught my eye...

"Wylie says he gradually became more uncomfortable working for Cambridge Analytica. There was not a single moment when he decided to blow the whistle, he says.

He stressed that Carole Cadwalladr, the Observer reporter who has published his revelations, has around 12 or 15 other sources too. He is not the only person speaking out, he says. "

[rafathegaffa83]

Zuckerberg's no show is being criticized by Watson and Collins. Good to see.

[rafathegaffa83]

Wylie, the key CA whistleblower, is giving testimony to the Commons Culture Committee. Some utterly astonishing stuff being revealed:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2018/mar/27/tony-blair-tells-tories-to-block-brexit-if-they-want-to-avoid-corbyn-government-politics-live

This is a notable admission from the Guardian feed

Wylie says his understanding is that it was “common practice” for Cambridge Analytica to use tactics like hacking.

[mallin9]

Zuckerberg's no show is being criticized by Watson and Collins. Good to see.

Can someone shed light on what leverage the UK govt has here?

[Lush is the best medicine...]

Block it?

[ghost1359]

Block it?

Facebook you mean?

What good would that do? That's far from his only business/investment.

Not to mention, you start down that road you're gonna have to block Amazon, Google....god knows how many other companies.

[killer-heels]

Not to mention, you start down that road you're gonna have to block Amazon, Google....god knows how many other companies.

Sounds good.

[Wilmo]

Block it?

You need to read up on this story. Facebook is one of many issues, I'd argue it's not even the biggest one.

[Lush is the best medicine...]

You need to read up on this story. Facebook is one of many issues, I'd argue it's not even the biggest one.

was in reference to getting him over here which he’s clearly desperate to swerve

[Lush is the best medicine...]

Facebook you mean?

What good would that do? That's far from his only business/investment.

Not to mention, you start down that road you're gonna have to block Amazon, Google....god knows how many other companies.

would more be letting him know that sending a lackey over here in his place won’t cut it and will give a lot of those tech firms who think they can take the piss and be above the law a message

[Wilmo]

was in reference to getting him over here which he’s clearly desperate to swerve

That's fair enough, I misunderstood what you were saying. Wouldn't be a bad idea to be fair. That's how you get these guys, you hit them in the pocket.

[ghost1359]

Sounds good.

I agree but it won't happen so blocking Facebook would be entirely pointless

[Wilmo]

Sounds good.

Might actually get some life in the high street again.

[ghost1359]

would more be letting him know that sending a lackey over here in his place won’t cut it and will give a lot of those tech firms who think they can take the piss and be above the law a message

Much as I understand what you're saying I really don't think that'd make any difference whatsoever, his portfolio includes Instagram and Whatsapp, are we gonna block those too?

If not there's no point.

Not to mention a lot of people seem hung up on Facebook, not the real bad guys of the piece imo.

[ghost1359]

Might actually get some life in the high street again.

Capitalism and the age of the internet has killed the high street. See also the death of any kind of culinary culture in this country. It's gone and it's not coming back.

[Elmo!]

Much as I understand what you're saying I really don't think that'd make any difference whatsoever, his portfolio includes Instagram and Whatsapp, are we gonna block those too?

If not there's no point.

Not to mention a lot of people seem hung up on Facebook, not the real bad guys of the piece imo.

Instagram only makes up about 15% of their ad revenue according to this - https://www.campaignlive.co.uk/article/facebook-ad-revenue-rockets-57-26bn/1422945 - so blocking Facebook only would have a huge impact. Not that it would happen.

[Lush is the best medicine...]

Not to mention a lot of people seem hung up on Facebook, not the real bad guys of the piece imo.

they are a significant part of the problem as they pretty much enabled the bad stuff with their piss poor data policies

That's fair enough, I misunderstood what you were saying. Wouldn't be a bad idea to be fair. That's how you get these guys, you hit them in the pocket.

dont even need to do it just make it a credible threat so they know they can’t take the piss

Capitalism and the age of the internet has killed the high street. See also the death of any kind of culinary culture in this country. It's gone and it's not coming back.

would say it’s also down to retail companies not adjusting to the internet, and in some cases too late adjusting to the shift, although it’s interesting that a few ecommerce sites have tried the bricks and mortar approach (missguided is one)

[ghost1359]

Instagram only makes up about 15% of their ad revenue according to this - https://www.campaignlive.co.uk/article/facebook-ad-revenue-rockets-57-26bn/1422945 - so blocking Facebook only would have a huge impact. Not that it would happen.

15% of their revenue currently and is that UK or platform specific? Instagram and Snapchat are the two most popular apps after Facebook, if Facebook were to be blocked in the UK I think it's a fair assumption that most of the current users would either switch over to one of those platforms or use it much more regularly in which case advertisers would follow.

I really don't think it'd make that dramatic an impact.

[ghost1359]

they are a significant part of the problem as they pretty much enabled the bad stuff with their piss poor data policies

They're complicit, for sure. I'm not defending them.

I do however feel that Facebook are taking the brunt for what's happened and the finger should be pointed much more firmly at SCL and CA. Yes, Facebook should be making sure user data is a lot more secure and yes they should have intervened when they saw what was happening but let's not forget they weren't in cahoots with SCL/CA, not that we've seen as of yet, they were exploited by them and subsequently tried to make it go away as quietly as possible.

Are they arseholes? Clearly, should they take the brunt of the blame and public derision for what's happened? In my opinion no.

[Lush is the best medicine...]

15% of their revenue currently and is that UK or platform specific? Instagram and Snapchat are the two most popular apps after Facebook, if Facebook were to be blocked in the UK I think it's a fair assumption that most of the current users would either switch over to one of those platforms or use it much more regularly in which case advertisers would follow.

I really don't think it'd make that dramatic an impact.

you don’t need to do a permanent ban more the one week type that the mods have given me over the years

[Elmo!]

15% of their revenue currently and is that UK or platform specific? Instagram and Snapchat are the two most popular apps after Facebook, if Facebook were to be blocked in the UK I think it's a fair assumption that most of the current users would either switch over to one of those platforms or use it much more regularly in which case advertisers would follow.

I really don't think it'd make that dramatic an impact.

Global but I don't imagine it will be that different.

Snapchat is not owned by Facebook so that point is moot. Though I doubt many people these days would move from Facebook to Snapchat anyway given their average demographic these days.

[Nobby Reserve]

Wylie, the key CA whistleblower, is giving testimony to the Commons Culture Committee. Some utterly astonishing stuff being revealed:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2018/mar/27/tony-blair-tells-tories-to-block-brexit-if-they-want-to-avoid-corbyn-government-politics-live

And Tory Brexiteers deploying a policy of whataboutery to derail the debate in the Commons.

[kloppismydad]

They're complicit, for sure. I'm not defending them.

I do however feel that Facebook are taking the brunt for what's happened and the finger should be pointed much more firmly at SCL and CA. Yes, Facebook should be making sure user data is a lot more secure and yes they should have intervened when they saw what was happening but let's not forget they weren't in cahoots with SCL/CA, not that we've seen as of yet, they were exploited by them and subsequently tried to make it go away as quietly as possible.

Are they arseholes? Clearly, should they take the brunt of the blame and public derision for what's happened? In my opinion no.

The issue is, Facebook seemed complicit with CA during the whole debacle. For example, you look at the data breach which happened in 2015 in which the Russian professor stole data of 50 million Facebook users. Facebook knew about this breach but chose not to go public about it. Then the Russian ads which ran on Facebook during the US presidential elections in 2016. Again, they were quiet about it during the elections and immediately after. After pressure from the media and general public, they yielded and admitted that they did indeed allowed Russian political ads to run on Facebook which might have influenced the vote.

Each time there's been a major controversy, Facebook has decided to appear ignorant instead of admitting its share of blame. My worry is, they've so far admitted to breaches which have been made public. Difficult to believe these two are the only cases where Facebook has influenced elections.

[ghost1359]

The issue is, Facebook seemed complicit with CA during the whole debacle. For example, you look at the data breach which happened in 2015 in which the Russian professor stole data of 50 million Facebook users. Facebook knew about this breach but chose not to go public about it. Then the Russian ads which ran on Facebook during the US presidential elections in 2016. Again, they were quiet about it during the elections and immediately after. After pressure from the media and general public, they yielded and admitted that they did indeed allowed Russian political ads to run on Facebook which might have influenced the vote.

Each time there's been a major controversy, Facebook has decided to appear ignorant instead of admitting its share of blame. My worry is, they've so far admitted to breaches which have been made public. Difficult to believe these two are the only cases where Facebook has influenced elections.

It wasn't a breach, this is the fundamental misunderstanding that a lot of people seem to have regarding this. They allow that kind of harvesting for research purposes which is what Dr Kogan had told Facebook he was using that data for. Where Facebook should have acted is when it became clear and obvious that the sheer volume of data he/they were harvesting was clearly way, way too much to be a research project. They also harvested data that Facebook doesn't permit for use in research.

Then, when they found out what had happened, which they did in 2015 I believe, they should have taken stronger action and let people know that their data had been abused in this way, which they didn't.

[Libertine]

Facebook has now lost $95 billion in market cap since the story broke.

Time to start taking some responsibility?