[Kizzy]

Who understands this?

I thought the govt were shoveling money into AI....Isn't that what this is?
Voters were targeted by both parties during the election due to their comments and groups on FB ...
Now they're pleading ignorance to harvested facebook data and such :/

Theresa May has said she expects Cambridge Analytica and Facebook to “cooperate fully” with the Information Commissioner’s investigation of allegations that users’ personal data was taken without their consent.

Allegations that Facebook users’ profiles were mined for data used to produce micro-targeted political adverts without their knowledge “are clearly very concerning”, Ms May said.

“It is essential that people can have confidence that their personal data will be protected and used in an appropriate way,” the Prime Minister’s spokesman said on Monday.


https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a8263171.html

[parmnion]

Can you explain it kizzy please so i can join in.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by parmnion

Can you explain it kizzy please so i can join in.

Well no, I'm wanting someone to explain it to me!

[LeatherTrumpet]

i expect its all about mining cryptocoins

I gather that all the younger ones eat

no wonder they stay up so late

[bitontheslide]

Data protection rules are changing in europe from May. Part of these changes means that companies can only collect data for a specific purpose, for a specific duration and the person providing the information has to actively opt in to providing it, a record kept of them giving permission, and clear method of them being able to opt out

More details can be found here https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations...gulation-gdpr/

Basically, facebook weren't happy that the information collected by CA was not being subsequently re-used for other purposes

[Twosugars]

my understanding is that ca offered a personality test and the info that profiles (and address books) would be harvested for other things was buried in t&c

[Kizzy]

Youtube video

[Kizzy]

We already know that AI can be used to manipulate public opinion. Massive swarms of political bots were used in the 2017 general election in the UK to spread misinformation and fake news on social media. The same happened during the US presidential election in 2016 and several other key political elections around the world.

These bots are autonomous accounts that are programmed to aggressively spread one-sided political messages to manufacture the illusion of public support. This is an increasingly widespread tactic that attempts to shape public discourse and distort political sentiment.

Typically disguised as ordinary human accounts, bots spread misinformation and contribute to an acrimonious political climate on sites like Twitter and Facebook. They can be used to highlight negative social media messages about a candidate to a demographic group more likely to vote for them, the idea being to discourage them from turning out on election day.

http://theconversation.com/how-artif...emocracy-77675

[Kizzy]

Particularly revealing was a Sky News report on 16 May 2017 focusing on comments by Will Critchlow, chief executive of digital consultancy Distilled. Concerned about the UK’s lack of oversight on digital campaigning (for instance, parties are not required to publically record all their spending on social media), Critchlow warned about Facebook’s hyper-targeted, hyper-local messages that, due to their nature, are invisible to most people (including journalists). Other techniques are: (a) creation of fake pages to attract opponents, using this to plant cookies in their browsers and then delivering attack adverts; (b) rankslurs – namely, creating damaging websites designed to appear in Google’s search rankings for your opponents; and (c) impersonation – namely pretending to be a candidate’s aide on Twitter, then expressing plausible but damaging opinions.

Whether done by bots or human influencers, that people may be surreptitiously emotionally engaged in online debates is deeply worrying. There are precedents for such targeting of sentiment and feelings, not least the Facebook Mood study that revealed evidence of emotional contagion. This showed that exposure to a particular type of emotional content in users’ Facebook news feeds stimulates posting behaviour that reflects the emotional charge of that content. In other words, change the informational context and you can change behaviour.

http://www.electionanalysis.uk/uk-el...otions-online/

[arista]

Ch4HD news has secret filming tonight

watch on +1

[AnnieK]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

Data protection rules are changing in europe from May. Part of these changes means that companies can only collect data for a specific purpose, for a specific duration and the person providing the information has to actively opt in to providing it, a record kept of them giving permission, and clear method of them being able to opt out

More details can be found here https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations...gulation-gdpr/

Basically, facebook weren't happy that the information collected by CA was not being subsequently re-used for other purposes

Urghhh...GDPR. I have somehow "volunteered" to be data controller for my company and this is now basically the biggest headache in my job. The other major change is people now have the right to be forgotten and all information erased which a lot of companies apparently didnt used to do and retained personal information for years. The penalties are steep for breeches and so a lot of companies, organisations and even government departments are flapping to change procedures to ensure they are compliant.

[Maru]

Decentralized Web ftw. I run my own email server (although it's a serious pain) and am about to move off Twitter as well since I've been depending on it too heavily for my news. There's almost no creative or entertainment value to Twitter or social networking anymore... it's all political postings and a vast majority of it, quite tribal. Better off just running an RSS server off my cloud and keeping up my news through there. Honestly, to nuke any of those services... most people are better off without them in their lives, as the only real "net" usage is as a data collection service

I haven't had a Facebook in years. They could give two ****s about privacy. None of this is at all news... I remember when they added some privacy setting, then nuked it later on during an update... it dumped a lot of people's information onto the public-facing side of FB and exposed their data to Google cache. Was there any real pushback? Nope... people will continue their social media addiction.

Honestly, no site, no matter how well run or what perfect nuns are in charge of it can be 100% trusted for data security. Way too easy to break into them. Old PHP installs, SQL injection loopholes, lack of updated security, etc... all it takes is one little misstep and ****--the false sense of privacy is gone. I don't mind so much if it's things I intentionally in my footprint... kind of part of living at this point, everything we do is pretty much documented and recorded in some fashion. But we should be paying attention to how much we depend on tech... for example, maybe not everything should be done through tech. Some things are better to maybe deliver by hand, like particularly private details, etc... even some govt business probably gets handled this way, as digital proxies are too tasty to hackers.

Google does track quite a bit through Android. I remember when I flew from MD to TX... looked in my location history and it showed up that I took a flight, what time, etc... there's a rumor also that YT employees are using search histories as well to track certain user's postings and they flag videos/demonetize accordingly in order to clean up their service so that it fits their agenda... but yeah... that's the inevitable future, and it's their private service, so not exactly illegal... same with app permissions. People don't care what they accept, they just hit "OK"... so not exactly FB/YT/Google's fault for creating the product if people are using it without doing any sort of research into what they're actually contributing to those services...

[Maru]

Anyway the summary is, the apps that people can create on FB use their API (Application programming Interface)... when you make an app, you have to tell FB what permissions you desire in order to accommodate the full functionality of said app. Which can be whatever. I don't know if it those types of apps requires an approval process similar to Apple Store, for example, because I only use it for pulling data for use on company websites. It supposedly required a lot of permissions, but people said OK to them without really reading their requirements... and so probably granted far more than they thought they were granting.

Supposedly it paid you to participate in some kind of "survey"(??) Well, the permissions also allowed it to collect data from your friend's profile as well... so they used it to spider the site essentially, in a roundabout way, the more users that installed the app... similar to a search engine bot... whatever it could get access to.

And they used the data collected to target advertising to people as well as to influence specific elections... apparently. (edit)

(Edit)
For example... whatever your permissions are on your profile... say you have access to a 1,000 people and they let you into their darkest corners of the interwebs... just like you have permission to view their data, imagine if the code from an app said "Hey I want those permissions too" and you hit OK... it can pull with code all that data and essentially be downloaded very quickly... that's Graph API. So if I wanted to make a Facebook alternative app, or some sort of internal app that requires a huge set of permissions, kinda like Tapatalk for this forum, or Tweetdeck for Twitter... it would need all those permissions to access if it were just about me using the defacto FB site itself... well, that's essentially how this "survey" behaved on a permissions level (I would imagine) to have mined that much data so quickly...

[Kizzy]

I'm going to do something I never thought I would do...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-Election.html

[parmnion]

Is this like if you have searched for porn you get dating site adverts on fb etc?

[arista]

Ch4HD news more undercover , again


And CEO Alexander Nix has now been suspended
from Cambridge Analytica UK

[arista]

Youtube video

The Ex Worker
the young super grass that got the story going

[Cherie]

Labour used this during the 2017 GE, didn’t some people on here get Facebook messages, I think it might have been you that said it Kizzy

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-40209711

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Cherie

Labour used this during the 2017 GE, didn’t some people on here get Facebook messages, I think it might have been you that said it Kizzy

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-40209711

'The Conservative focus seemed to be sharp, paid-for attack ads. Labour's presence was much more organic, and perhaps more effective with it.

The chatter was happening in big groups - many of them filled with Jeremy Corbyn's most dedicated supporters, and closed to the general public. It was reflected in lists of most-shared stories, which were dominated by material sympathetic to Labour and hostile towards Theresa May's Conservatives.

Of course, we can't be sure of how social media shares shape actual voting - and there isn't yet any hard evidence that what people saw on Facebook or any other social network was the decisive factor that swayed huge numbers of votes. We'll have to wait days, weeks or longer for a full analysis to emerge. But what was clear online was a distinct surge in pro-Corbyn enthusiasm, in contrast with a professional and increasingly microtargeted Conservative advertising strategy.

I did see support for Corbyn on FB yes... from people, groups and organisations not bots and spam, did you even bother to read this article?

[Kizzy]

I actually feel sorry for facebook, it was invented by kids for kids... it's been exploited as much as we have.

[Cherie]

[QUOTE=Kizzy;9927572]'The Conservative focus seemed to be sharp, paid-for attack ads. Labour's presence was much more organic, and perhaps more effective with it.

The chatter was happening in big groups - many of them filled with Jeremy Corbyn's most dedicated supporters, and closed to the general public. It was reflected in lists of most-shared stories, which were dominated by material sympathetic to Labour and hostile towards Theresa May's Conservatives.

Of course, we can't be sure of how social media shares shape actual voting - and there isn't yet any hard evidence that what people saw on Facebook or any other social network was the decisive factor that swayed huge numbers of votes. We'll have to wait days, weeks or longer for a full analysis to emerge. But what was clear online was a distinct surge in pro-Corbyn enthusiasm, in contrast with a professional and increasingly microtargeted Conservative advertising strategy.

I did see support for Corbyn on FB yes... from people, groups and organisations not bots and spam, did you even bother to read this article?[/QUOTE]

No I didn't, what I don't get is why people are so surprised that their politcal leanings are being harvested and not just by one party

[arista]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

I actually feel sorry for facebook, it was invented by kids for kids... it's been exploited as much as we have.

Yes around 1 in 3
around the World on Facebook.

Of Course last night he (Mark Zuckerberg) said "Sorry"
on a interview on CNN.
(Edits shown today on every TV and radio news)
He also said No more Cambridge Analytica




https://news.sky.com/story/facebook-...gress-11299538

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Cherie

No I didn't, what I don't get is why people are so surprised that their politcal leanings are being harvested and not just by one party

Cherie you are not understanding, the methodology is different.. harvesting data via mining posts and personal information is different from setting up a facebook group to discuss your disillusionment of the current govt and support of a candidate in a GE.

[Livia]

Facebook sucks. I only have an account to sign in to other places.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Cherie you are not understanding, the methodology is different.. harvesting data via mining posts and personal information is different from setting up a facebook group to discuss your disillusionment of the current govt and support of a candidate in a GE.

what are you talking about? I never mentioned anything about facebook groups