Privacy Concerns Are Jeopardizing Investigations Into Facebook Disinformation (fastcompany.com) 37
"An unprecedented investigation into disinformation on Facebook has hit turbulence over questions about how much data to release to outside researchers," reports Fast Company, "curtailing efforts to stem one of social media's most pernicious threats ahead of the 2020 elections."
Slashdot reader tedlistens writes: Social Science One, an unprecedented, Mark Zuckerberg-backed plan to open up Facebook's data to outside researchers -- with the aim of fighting disinformation and propaganda ahead of elections in 2020 -- has run up against privacy concerns at Facebook. A month after the funders' deadline, Facebook continues to work on treating the data with differential privacy techniques and says it hopes to publish more datasets soon. But researchers are frustrated and confused, and the backers are reconsidering their support. And lawmakers like Sen. Mark Warner, the vice chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, are growing impatient too.
"In Congress, we need to require greater accountability from social media platforms on everything from the transparency of political ad funding, to the legitimacy of content, to the authenticity of user accounts," Warner tells Alex Pasternack at Fast Company. "And if platforms refuse to comply, we need to be able to hold them responsible."
Slashdot reader tedlistens writes: Social Science One, an unprecedented, Mark Zuckerberg-backed plan to open up Facebook's data to outside researchers -- with the aim of fighting disinformation and propaganda ahead of elections in 2020 -- has run up against privacy concerns at Facebook. A month after the funders' deadline, Facebook continues to work on treating the data with differential privacy techniques and says it hopes to publish more datasets soon. But researchers are frustrated and confused, and the backers are reconsidering their support. And lawmakers like Sen. Mark Warner, the vice chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, are growing impatient too.
"In Congress, we need to require greater accountability from social media platforms on everything from the transparency of political ad funding, to the legitimacy of content, to the authenticity of user accounts," Warner tells Alex Pasternack at Fast Company. "And if platforms refuse to comply, we need to be able to hold them responsible."
Just pay them (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
ah but thats the problem.
fb's pr on this thing is already going to be fucked kind of, you see if they give the data then it's going to be used by "researchers" also known as advertisers.
if they don't give the data they will be said to be hiding something and if they give the data then it's just the same they did before. and anonymizing that data about who it is enough that you can't use it for targeted advertising (for say, political ads and misinformation) isn't that simple I would guess.
look the real prob
Partial-Birth Abortion Act (Score:2, Offtopic)
> usa has people who are so stupid they will believe a fake news posting about either candidate supporting 40th week abortions
167 Democrats voted against the Partial-Birth Abortion Act of 2003. The Act bans killing a baby during birth after their head or belly button comes out. That's their actual vote - they voted for killing babies that have been mostly born already.
Maybe that's so horrendous you don't want to believe anyone would think that's okay. The fact is, the Democrats officially voted it's fi
Morally? Lol (Score:2)
> feel bad for you guys, abortion is the only topic you have left where you can feel morally superior to Democrats.
Maybe you've been asleep for the last 20 years. Times have changed since the early 1990s. It's no longer okay for a Democrat to say there is such thing as morality - whatever you feel is right for you in the moment, is right. There is no morality, only your feelings and preferences at the time. That's the Democrat line these days. Nobody can tell you or me what's right or wrong for us. Ev
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Democrats are all about telling you to keep your shit to yourself when you do business with the public
Re: (Score:1)
you know, 1st Amendment and all
Re: (Score:1)
"if a mother is in labor" (Score:2)
--
If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that's what the mother and the family desired. And then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.
--
Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam, Democrat, on the bill he supports.
Your heroes are literally advocating killing babies now.
At one point do you decide that being a human, rather than a monster, is more important than rooti
Re: (Score:2)
What's amazing is (Score:2)
That if you just drop facebook and block them altogether all of those concerns just fade away
Old media (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe I'm wrong but most of the fuss seems to all point back to old media wailing about their being ousted as the gatekeepers of information flow. I'm not a twitface or booker user as such but free exchange of information is pretty hard to dislike unless you've got some vested interest in not allowing information to flow.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Social media sites have more people living in those places than old media could ever send there.
Old media journalists who spin things according to their own or their boss' agenda are outdated. That's the reason they are running campaigns against new media: they're losing influence.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
And more frauds peddling Pizza Gate
Pizza Gate began with a tweet on October 30, 2016.
Stories about Jeffery Epstein's Lolita Express ended on November 1, 2016. Google News Search, from January 2015 to December 2017 [google.com]
The press was complicit is covering up Epsteins shit, at fault for the deaths they caused, and the Democrats are constantly operating bullshit twitter accounts [theintercept.com] which is where the magic bullshit story that got people killed began.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
For that they need gatekeepers on political ads...
Re: (Score:1)
This is all about people shooting pizza parlors and telling Uranium one lies
Oh Good Lord (Score:1)
"dis"information is just information - like gossip and innuendo and even outright lies. it's not a crime to lie (except when under oath) - it's a crime to sell people things based on lies and misinformation "my snake-oil cures your psoriasis", "We moved the graveyard under your new house before building it".
https://www.washingtonpost.com... PT Barnum made a successful career out of it.
Sur
Who Says "Social Science One" is a Good Thing? (Score:3)
Social Science One implements a new type of partnership between academic researchers and the private sector to advance the goals of social science in understanding and solving society’s greatest challenges. Our mutually incentive-compatible approach enables academics to analyze and use the increasingly rich troves of information amassed by companies to address societal issues, while protecting their respective interests and ensuring the highest standards of privacy and data security.
Sounds like they're demanding access to everyone's FB data. And if you object to FB sharing your data with them, then the press will (just this once) paint you as the bad guy for "jeopardizing" their "investigations."
Re: (Score:2)
This is how you get regulated (Score:2)
Politicians who are desperate to secure their own livelihoods can become suddenly motivated to look into matters. The press is lightly regulated, mostly through elections, civil and criminal laws as well as constitutional protections. I see no reason why the owners of social media are not held to account through similar means.
Then shut it down. (Score:2)
If they cannot be a source of information without being a source of disinformation then they shouldn't exist. Let researchers do their jobs or shut down facebook.
Re: (Score:3)
People who work for the US gov? NATO? Who worked for the US gov, NATO in the past?
A think tank? NGO? Faith group? A charity? Some philanthropist who likes their side of politics?
An ad all about a politician's coughing fit is "disinformation" to another side of politics as it is such a powerful visual ad.
Ask social media not to accept the ad? Quote some political "researcher" to say the ad is wrong due to the "coughing" "only" been an allergy/pneumonia...
The go
Easy Data Solution (Score:1)
Now they're concerned about privacy (Score:2)
When they were selling out our country to the Russians privacy wasn't a big deal. Now, trying to tame foreign influence...oww, privacy!