Exposing undemocratic disinformation tactics, Cambridge Analytica etc. data mining

[Llevron]

40 minutes ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

 

We learned all of that from this? Aside from using stolen data (which CA did and I have not been shown Trump team knew yet) I don't see any of those other connections from this recent CA stuff.

 

Again, I am probably missing something. 

 

Right. All of that hasn't been proven to be connected to Trump yet but as messy as they are we are going to find out about it in about 2 months. 

 

The connections are clear, but they ain't proven. Yet. 

[LD0506]

22 minutes ago, Springfield said:

 

Keep in mind that the left uses misinformation as well.

 

Yup, legit point, everyone does but it doesn't mean we gotta like it or that something ought not be done.

 

 

Here's the problem, "data mining" is a con, it doesn't work because of the underlying statistical fallacies. Even if you reach 99% purity, accurate data processed and assessed in a timely fashion, that 1% still screws you up. A million data points will have 10,000 false returns, a billion has 10 million, etc., etc., and in the grand scheme of things that is enough that you can never genuinely predict anything other than broad outlines. It has the inherent accuracy of horoscopes.

 

Now on the other hand, if you do have this massive data crunching capability, you can use it manipulate things, ie. buy a stock and THEN make it rise, float a story and THEN make people believe it, track people's messages and movements and THEN use it for blackmail, etc.

 

Mercer et. al. got into it initially to try and game the stock market and lost their balls, it didn't work and they bled money finding that out. "Predictive analysis" is a pipedream in the exact same way that no matter how hard anyone tries that can't accurately forecast the weather more than 72 hours out, and even then **** happens they didn't see coming. On the other hand, if you sold Florida oranges short and then stood offshore in the Gulf of Mexico and generated a hurricane to wreck crops, you could make a fortune. Of course you'd get caught trying that. The market is far more opaque, politics/social discourse even moreso.

 

That's why this all matters.

 

[Llevron]

Yea the **** goes a step further than misinformation. It's manipulation of information and the people receiving it that makes this so bad. 

[SoulSkin]

Flashback a few months. Nothing really new, but still relevant. I've actually seen her speak, and met Caroline Orr at the March for Truth in Richmond (one of two 'Marches' that I've ever participated in). I almost always listen and trust what she has to say on these matters. She's all about methodology and facts. She will call out people very quickly if she detects any weirdness in their 'reporting' on this stuff. Louise Mensch and Mike Farb are two people that immediately come to mind. 

 

 

 

[Llevron]

I have been telling anyone who will listen about this ****. Even the smartest amount them just don't care. It's crazy. 

 

What ****s me up most is that this isn't going to stop now that we have proof that it works so well. People are going to find a way to do it without getting caught and use it as a weapon. And most dgaf

[LD0506]

2 hours ago, Llevron said:

t's manipulation of information and the people receiving it that makes this so bad.

 

It isn't simply manipulation, they manufacture it. They generate "product", then place it, support it, retweet it, quote it, etc., to build an entire life for it. This is beyond mere slant or spin, this is overt intentional info control in a way we really haven't seen before.

[Cooked Crack]

 

 

Butt covering.

[Bozo the kKklown]

 

Great thread, if you want to read it as an article, here:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/976125179049988097.html

Part 2

 

[Bozo the kKklown]

 

[NoCalMike]

The people being confronted with the fact that they have been consuming and sharing complete b*llsh*t usually respond with "Fake News, you liberal snowflake" It is so deeply embedded and reinforced that they refuse to accept actual facts for what they are.

[Spaceman Spiff]

I don't have an issue with what CA did as far as mining information and making target campaigns.  There are a few companies I work with in SF and the surrounding Bay Area that do data analytics and reporting.  These companies provide big brands that you and I use every day for more information about us.  Of course Starbucks trying to figure out how many mochas you order per month is way less sinister than Donald Trump trying to win an election.  I don't care that this company came up with campaigns to sway opinions and come up with stuff like "Crooked Hillary" that were campaign mantras for Trump.  That's what these companies do, take your habits and figure out ways to keep brands in front of you and try to coerce you into coming back for more.  Trump is a brand.   

 

I don't care that people download dumb apps on facebook and allow themselves to part with their information so freely.  I don't think it's a smart thing to do, but that's just me. 

 

I do care about privacy and I think where this gets really dirty is where facebook allowed this app to not only mine information from the dolts who downloaded it but to reach into their network of unknowing friends to access their information as well.  THAT is ****ed up.  Because some girl I went to junior high with needs to know what My Little Pony character she most resembles or some dumb **** like that, I might have given my information away.  They could have gained access to my private messages.  Granted, I don't spend much time on facebook and wouldn't think to put anything really sensitive on there, but still.  Throw in goons like Bannon, rich billionaires that people hate because they're rich and Republican, uppity Brits and a pink-haired Canadian with an ax to grind and all of a sudden this is a giant fiasco.  

 

Zuckerberg is a coward.  Always has been.  He's always been able to dodge, duck, dip dive and dodge his way out of things before.  He's a computer geek that stole an idea and made it really big because he wanted to get rich.  And in this way, he's the dog that caught the car.  I'm hoping that this is the moment that brings him to his knees.  I'd really like to see him sweat like he did a few years ago when he was taken to task on privacy issues before.  

 

 

[FanboyOf91]

 

[visionary]

 

[Going Commando]

That's the first time I've actually looked at a picture of Rebekah Mercer.  She has the grotesque cranium of a cartoon villain.

[Llevron]

@Spaceman Spiff so you are pointing a finger at the people who provided the means....sort of.....but are totally cool with the people who used it against you and your country for profit? That's a bit off, to me. 

 

I don't think you understand what you are talking about, to be honest. 

[SoulSkin]

 

This makes it sound to me sounds like there may not actually be much legally that can be done about any of this. Any lawyers wanna chime in?

[Spaceman Spiff]

14 hours ago, Llevron said:

@Spaceman Spiff so you are pointing a finger at the people who provided the means....sort of.....but are totally cool with the people who used it against you and your country for profit? That's a bit off, to me. 

 

I don't think you understand what you are talking about, to be honest. 

 

Facebook provided the means.  It was their API setups that allowed CA to do what they did, the article SoulSkin just posted says as much. 

 

Quote

As Ben Thompson notes, an old Facebook developer page shows that their API would allow developers to access not only to user account information, but also huge amounts of friend account information—things like “friends_interests,” “friends_religion_politics” and much more:

 

Quote

Expect this developer page to come up again in potential litigation and legislative hearings. It shows that Kogan did not need to get Facebook data through the back door, because he could waltz in through the front door—the door Facebook built for developers. This was not a breach of Facebook’s network. But it was a breach of users’ trust, general expectations and perhaps also Facebook’s terms of service. (Indeed, Facebook’s deputy general counsel, Paul Grewal, has posted that the firm takes the position that Kogan’s sharing the data with Cambridge Analytica did violate the site’s platform policies.)

 

That's why we're on the 4th day of this, Facebooks stock is plummeting and Zuckerberg is pretty much in hiding.  He knows his company ****ed up and doesn't have the balls to admit it.  CA is shady to be sure, but from what I understand they didn't do anything that Facebook didn't allow them to do with their existing API setups.  Facebook doesn't even seem to have their terms of services and API policies lined up to prevent with what Kogan and CA did.  If Facebook takes their TOS to heart and abides by it, then CA shouldn't have been able to do what they did.

 

I don't run a multi billion dollar social media platform but I think it's ridiculous that if someone on my network downloads and takes a quiz, my data, likes and interests is up for grabs.  Seems to me that a very basic security tenet would be that if you download a quiz, only your responses to the quiz get stored and that's the only data being looked at.  

 

[visionary]

 

 

 

[Springfield]

I do think this is a Facebook thing as much as it is a Trump thing.  They need to pay for willfully allowing the spread of propaganda to specifically targeted audiences.

[Llevron]

5 minutes ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

 

Facebook provided the means.  It was their API setups that allowed CA to do what they did, the article SoulSkin just posted say that. 

 

 

Right and I understand exactly where you are coming from. I guess I was just mad you don't put more angst into what CA and the Trump campaign did. I don't really feel that way, anymore to be honest so I won't belabor the point. 

 

I get that FB provided the means and they should be punished severely for it. I think someone mentioned forced re org. I think that's totally appropriate and short of legal action a bit lenient. 

 

I think we really really need to look at CA though. Thier goal was to use this information (Facebook allowed them to steal) to change the culture in America. And it worked. Tell me you are happy with the way people are acting since this election? You can't be and it is literally exactly what thier goal was. They need to be at the point of your sword. Thats how i feel atleast. 

 

Sorry I said you didn't know what you were talking about dude. 

[Spaceman Spiff]

3 minutes ago, Springfield said:

I do think this is a Facebook thing as much as it is a Trump thing.  They need to pay for willfully allowing the spread of propaganda to specifically targeted audiences.

 

Right.

 

You can also bet that CA wasn't the first to do this.  If this API was that accessible I am sure there are other companies out there doing similar things.  Of course no one's going to get up in arms whether or not Pizza Hut knows what toppings you enjoy through a survey filled out by a friend because everyone loves pizza.  Everyone hates Trump, Bannon, etc, politics are more serious and that's why this is (rightfully) big news.  

[Llevron]

6 minutes ago, visionary said:

 

 

 

 

This right here is what I mean. 

[LadySkinsFan]

Congress should pass privacy law similar to UK. 

 

The question, will they have the balls to restrict corporations' use of people's personal data for profit?

[Spaceman Spiff]

Just now, Llevron said:

 

Right and I understand exactly where you are coming from. I guess I was just mad you don't put more angst into what CA and the Trump campaign did. I don't really feel that way, anymore to be honest so I won't belabor the point. 

 

I get that FB provided the means and they should be punished severely for it. I think someone mentioned forced re org. I think that's totally appropriate and short of legal action a bit lenient. 

 

I think we really really need to look at CA though. Thier goal was to use this information (Facebook allowed them to steal) to change the culture in America. And it worked. Tell me you are happy with the way people are acting since this election? You can't be and it is literally exactly what thier goal was. They need to be at the point of your sword. Thats how i feel atleast. 

 

Sorry I said you didn't know what you were talking about dude. 

 

It's all good, I guess I wasn't clear enough in my initial response.  And for the record, no I don't like how people are acting since the election.

 

I don't put more angst towards CA and Trump because I wouldn't be surprised if Hillary or another person that was in the primaries did something similar.  Data analytics, like what CA does, is a huge, huge business.  Every time you log on to an app on your phone, your every move is being recorded and stored somewhere for a companies marketing department to understand how long you spent on the app, what you searched for, how much you spent, etc.  

 

I worked with a company recently that provides a free email app for your phone.  It's basically a way to re-organize your inbox and it's free for anyone.  So why's it free?  Because YOUR response to email campaigns is being recorded and then that big data is being sold to big brands who want a better understanding of how their email campaigns are performing.  

 

Again, no one cares when you get an email from Tide asking which laundry detergent you prefer.  But this data mining takes place all the time, it's not a shock that a political candidate used it.  And it makes it super serious all of a sudden.  I don't blame you for the way you feel, I don't really like it myself.  I guess I rank FB as the main culprit, with CA being a distant second.  To me, CA did what they did and didn't have to hack anything to do it.  Had they actually HACKED FB, I'd say they'd be worse.  

 

Now the guy running CA seems like an arrogant ****, I don't like him one bit either.  Bragging about how it was going to change the culture in America was a silly thing to do.  But I'd also argue that those feelings and sentiments were brewing beneath the surface here the entire time.  Anyway, that's another argument for another thread.

[SoulSkin]

What's really crazy to me is that they had the messaging all lined up and ready to go based on how they used the data they collected. Regardless of whether Trump was the nominee or not, they figured out that. "Build the wall", Drain the swamp, "Deep State", etc. were going to be very effective at targeting one subset of individuals. Imagine how diverse, and subtlety to drastically different the message targeting probably became as it focused away from that subset, all the way to the opposite end of the spectrum.