Jump to content
Hugo Stiglitz

Facebook AKA “Hydra” Thread

Recommended Posts

38 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

 

that guy behind the zuck just realized what the lady put in his chair before he sat down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Mueller has interviewed people from Facebook but not Zuck

It'd portend better for Zuck if he had.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Facebook was warned five years ago that the “reverse-lookup” feature in its search engine could be used to harvest names, profiles, and phone numbers for virtually all its users. But the company ignored the red flags until last week, after it happened.

In prepared testimony to Congress released Monday, Mark Zuckerbergacknowledged that malefactors had used the reverse-lookup “to link people’s public Facebook information to a phone number,” he wrote (PDF). “When we found out about the abuse, we shut this feature down.” He said that Facebook only discovered the incidents two weeks ago.

 

https://www.thedailybeast.com/facebook-knew-people-were-stealing-your-phone-number-in-2013

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, PittsburghTiger said:

Nothing is going to come from this. Dog & Pony Show.

 I’ve already learned several things I didn’t know, so that’s something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 I’ve already learned several things I didn’t know, so that’s something.

Nothing of substance will happen. These guys and gals take campaign $$ from Facebook. They will not anger their purchaser.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Zuckenburg could’ve walked into a senior center and gotten the same if not better questions."

“Mr. Zuckerberg, a magazine i recently opened came with a floppy disk offering me 30 free hours of something called America On-Line. Is that the same as Facebook?”-Grassley

https://twitter.com/ditzkoff/status/983789531257294848

Edited by Mapache

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, PittsburghTiger said:

The right regulation

At least they didn't ask him to help them regulate his company one question later.

Pretty sure every industry wants smart regulations and for some reason helps congress write toothless regulations. Pretty good system we have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I figure if I've got Billions With a B Dollars, I get lots of nice regulations that I can afford, and those upstart meddling kids cannot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zuckerberg has got to be screaming inside having to explain shit to these old's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, F250 said:

Zuckerberg has got to be screaming inside having to explain shit to these old's.

These questions were written by millennial staffers. 

The purpose of this hearing is to inform the average American consumer about what Facebook has been doing so these basic questions are necessary IMO.

ETA; you’re right though, Zuck is probably frustrated AF

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

This is from 2014

-------------------

https://consumerist.com/2014/06/12/facebook-is-now-selling-your-web-browsing-data-to-advertisers/

You know how it’s really creepy when you go looking for a new TV online and then go to Facebook and the ad spaces that you typically ignore are now populated with advertising for the very brands of TV you just checked out? Until now, they’ve been the product of third-party ad networks and creepy data aggregators like Acxiom while Facebook itself had kept its hands clean by not selling the data it had acquired about your Web browsing habits. But in an effort to bring you even creepier, more targeted ads, Facebook will now be making more info about you available to advertisers.

“When we ask people about our ads, one of the top things they tell us is that they want to see ads that are more relevant to their interests,” reads an actual sentence presumably written by a human being at Facebook and not some automated copy-bot intended to mimic human speech. 

Unless we’ve completely misjudged the entire human race, we doubt the first thing that pops into most folks’ heads when asked about Facebook advertising is “Please make the ads eerily specific to things that I was just browsing online!”

More likely the real top response to questions about Facebook ads is “For the love of god, please give me a way to block them and not have them track my every movement.”

“Starting soon in the US, we will also include information from some of the websites and apps you use,” continues the Facebook statement, which we hear in the voice of the HAL 9000, or maybe the woman who narrates House Hunters on HGTV. “This is a type of interest-based advertising, and many companies already do this.”

Facebook has long been following you around the Web, quietly snickering at you for the music you buy and silently cocking an eyebrow for thinking you can still fit into the same size jeans you wore in college. But until now, it had tracked users under the pretense of security. This morning’s announcement shows the site’s true intentions.

The company is making a big deal of users’ ability to opt out. 

“If you don’t want us to use the websites and apps you use to show you more relevant ads, we won’t,” explains Facebook. “You can opt out of this type of ad targeting in your web browser using the industry-standard Digital Advertising Alliance opt out, and on your mobile devices using the controls that iOS and Android provide.”

However, the Alliance opt out doesn’t always work and is only specific to the browser you’re using when you make the opt-out requests. So if you go to Facebook using different computers, you’d need to go through the opt-out procedure on each computer you use. And clearing that browser’s cookies could reset your preferences, allowing you to be tracked all over again.

Additionally, while you may be able to opt out of having Facebook track you, some of the networks that place targeted ads on Facebook require separate steps to opt out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blumenthal's hanging soulless zuckerburg out to dry.  "we've seen these apology tours before"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd love to know why this guy is still working at Facebook

------------

March 18, 2018

The co-director of a company that harvested data from tens of millions of Facebook users before selling it to the controversial data analytics firms Cambridge Analytica is currently working for the tech giant as an in-house psychologist.

Joseph Chancellor was one of two founding directors of Global Science Research (GSR), the company that harvested Facebook data using a personality app under the guise of academic research and later shared the data with Cambridge Analytica.

He was hired to work at Facebook as a quantitative social psychologist around November 2015, roughly two months after leaving GSR, which had by then acquired data on millions of Facebook users.

Chancellor is still working as a researcher at Facebook’s Menlo Park headquarters in California, where psychologists frequently conduct research and experiments using the company’s vast trove of data on more than 2 billion users.

It is not known how much Chancellor knew of the operation to harvest the data of more than 50 million Facebook users and pass their information on to the company that went on to run data analytics for Donald Trump’s presidential campaign.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/18/facebook-cambridge-analytica-joseph-chancellor-gsr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Ted Cruz grilling Facebook about political bias is hypocrisy at it’s finest 

he was clearly getting a little frustrated there though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, plimon said:

Listening to Cruz is a beating.

 

Very much so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mark Zuckerberg testified Facebook did not notify the FTC of the Cambridge Analytica data leak years ago because the social media giant "considered it a closed case." 

The Facebook founder and CEO spoke at a joint hearing of the Senate Judiciary and Commerce committees Tuesday, the first of two congressional hearings this week.

Watch the live stream of Zuckerberg's testimony here. 

The company is facing questions following reports that research firm Cambridge Analytica improperly gained access to the personal data of as many as 87 million Facebook users.

Facebook has said it first learned of the leak in 2015 and demanded Cambridge Analytica delete the data then. Executives have since said it was a mistake to trust that the research firm had done so. 

"We considered it a closed case. In retrospect that was clearly a mistake. We shouldn't have taken their word for it," Zuckerberg said Tuesday.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/10/mark-zuckerberg-says-facebook-didnt-notify-ftc-of-leak.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Get over it, Senators. Opt-in, as an initial choice, is not going to happen.

Correction: Unless you pass it as legislation.

Edited by LonghornJudas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, PittsburghTiger said:

good question asking him to define hate speech.

Why is it up to MZ to define that?

Hate speech is a dangerous precedent anyway. It's too close to thought policing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sen. Heller: Do you believe you're more capable of handling user's private data than the federal government?

Zuckerberg: <long ass pause> YES!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

Zuckerberg says Facebook is working with special counsel Mueller in probe

-> Zuckerberg answered in the affirmative re Subpoena

-> answered in the affirmative re employees being interviewed

-> answered in the affirmative Facebook is working with the Special Counsel’s office

He also retracted the subpoena comment. "I have to clarify that I'm not sure that there are subpoenas, there may be," he said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Buzzrock said:

Why is it up to MZ to define that?

Hate speech is a dangerous precedent anyway. It's too close to thought policing.

It's a good question because they are in the business of eradicating Hate Speech off of their platform. Is it differing opinions that will be eradicated? Is one side of an issue Hate Speech? That's an important issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

After trying to deflect Kamala Harris , Zuck admits there was an internal conversation, and decision made not to inform users that their data was breached in Cambridge Analytica fiasco.

I want to hear more about this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dolemite said:

Senate grilling FaceBook while the intelligence agencies spies on us all.

Oh but see, the Senate is going to pass a privacy bill of rights and its all going to be on the up and up moving forward. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mpu


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Recruiting ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Help ... For Sale ... Politics ... Board Discussion
×
×
  • Create New...