Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

FPOWorld t1_iscisx3 wrote

Reply to comment by iamchairs in Meta’s VR Headset Harvests Personal Data Right Off Your Face - Cameras inside the device that track eye and face movements can make an avatar’s expressions more realistic, but they raise new privacy questions. by speckz

Like they knew about Cambridge Analytica?

2

iamchairs t1_iscr9qw wrote

In your own words can you tell me how the CA scandal was conducted? I'll wait

1

FPOWorld t1_iscsj1l wrote

You’ll be waiting a long time because that sentence makes little sense.

1

iamchairs t1_isct193 wrote

In what way does it not make sense? Tell me how the CA scandal worked. Do you know?

1

FPOWorld t1_isctjiy wrote

Yes. I’m a computer engineer.

1

iamchairs t1_isctw68 wrote

Good, and so am I. You could sum this up in a couple sentences then. But instead you are deflecting?

1

FPOWorld t1_iscuq1v wrote

CA jacked a bunch of data illegally, Facebook knew for years and didn’t disclose what happened until after that data was used to jack the election for Trump.

Edit: if you can call it a disclosure after it only came out via whistleblower complaint

0

iamchairs t1_iscvjbk wrote

Yeah pretty good. So as a response to that, Meta changed a lot of policies internally, and created a strong culture around privacy/security, has active 3rd party oversight, and strict guidelines from the FTC on how it can interact with 3rd parties on user data.

1

FPOWorld t1_iscywk2 wrote

NOW we can trust them? This is after they secretly ran psychological experiments on users without their consent (among many other scandals). They didn’t even suspend CA from using Facebook until after the whistleblower. They knew CA broke the law and covered it up for years. They didn’t follow their own policies, were an accessory to one of the greatest crimes of my lifetime, did nothing to stop what CA did with the data, and now we can trust they’re going to start following the rules?

The rot is at the top. There’s no fixing that as long as Zuck the conqueror is running the show. I won’t give meta a goddamn dollar or a click.

1

iamchairs t1_isczj4y wrote

Secret psychological experiments... You mean AB tests?

> one of the greatest crimes of my lifetime

I was going to say you must be young then but even then that doesn't make sense given everything that has happened since then... You sure you got the right scandal?

2

FPOWorld t1_isd0ql2 wrote

No, I mean where they did an experiment to manipulate users’ emotions: https://amp.theguardian.com/technology/2014/oct/02/facebook-sorry-secret-psychological-experiment-users

Stealing a US presidential election that led to the outlawing of abortion, nationwide voter suppression, and the community spread of Covid and a million dead Americans is right up there with anything I can think of.

1

iamchairs t1_isd2855 wrote

Yeah so this is called an AB test. These are happening all the time. Even here on Reddit did you know your version of Reddit may be slightly different than everyone else's? It's to test to see what a tweak to the system (UI or Feed) has on your behavior. In the article you linked, the article says Facebook was tweaking the percentage of positive/negative sentiment items it let through to your feed.

Yes through the Facebook platform Trump was able to get elected when maybe he wouldn't have otherwise. But the world is too complicated to say "everything happened because of X and only X". What about the following 4 years when the republicans blocked 2 impeachments? What about all of the existing levers used by those in power? Facebook was the shiny new lever. A big one- I'm not downplaying the significance- but one of many.

1

FPOWorld t1_isd33r1 wrote

Do you work for Facebook?

I’m well aware of what A/B testing is, as I mentioned, I’m a computer engineer. Why did they apologize for an A/B test, which as you know is almost an industry standard practice? Finding which widget gets the most clicks is an A/B test, not inflicting sadness on users as part of a psy op.

Sure this was not the only factor, but it’s hard to argue that it wasn’t a critical one. It’s especially egregious as it was done in the process of committing a crime that FB covered up. They deserve 0 trust.

0

iamchairs t1_isd4u7y wrote

Because they thought it was the best way to address it most likely. Schrep says in that article that they should have used a different method to conduct the same research, not that the research itself was wrong.

1