Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not exactly. Cambridge Analytica is *more* than just a data collection/analysis firm. Watch the UK TV video to understand why. CA top brass were filmed bragging how they can entrap candidates and blackmail them with things like sex videos.
It hasn't yet been shown that the Democrats used Cambridge Analytica's services. But, of course, that doesn't mean that they didn't or perhaps of another similarly nefarious organization.
If the DNC did use Cambridge Analytica's services (or the services of a similarly corrupt company) or bought information that originated through Cambridge Analytica that might explain some things.
For instance, some of the information in the Steele Dossier may have originated in a similar manner to what the Cambridge Analytica top brass are bragging about doing for clients on tape. After all, Steele is a UK citizen, Cambridge Analytica is a UK firm. Who's to say that there isn't some connection there?
So, if you're a die hard Trump fan, you really DO need to watch that video to understand all of the possible implications here.
"Facebook says the user data in question was initially properly gathered by a psychology professor, who then passed it to Cambridge Analytica. That breached Facebook's rules.
Cambridge Analytica says it deleted all the data in 2015 when it learned that Facebook rules had been broken. It has agreed to an inspection by Facebook-hired auditors, Facebook said Monday."
That’s what FB wants people to believe but unless we can actually see the users agreements we don’t know who is telling the truth.
I would like to see
1. What data and privacy restrictions Federal government imposed on FB in 2011 and thereafter
2. What FB’s user agreement was for those requesting data from users. What were the limitations?
3. When did FB find out 50 million profiles were mined. That’s a lot data to transfer.
4. I understand FB made some changes in 2015, why did they wait so long
5. Why CA was only stopped from accessing FB records a few days ago when the scandal went public?
6. How much money FB made throughout this years from CA. If they were not making any money FB would have denied access to CA the minute they started downloading data from 50 million profiles.
Again, if the two situations are similar, surely there is some way to illustrate those similarities.
Should be simple enough to expand on how the Democrats built their database.
Was it done solely via opt-in or did they also surreptitiously collect info on people without their active participation?
Do y'all really think it is enough to simply state that two situations are the same without any evidence?
I am perfectly willing to condemn the Democrats if the two are the same, but no one has as yet provided any reason for me to do so.
Perhaps you could offer some help in that regard?
the two things aren't similar. what the republicans did is small potatoes compared to what the democrats did.
still its in the ballpark and dems cannot have a level playing field. they sue. they entrap. they lie they use the law to put people in jail. they use the IRS to intimidate anyone who might THINK of doing what dems do.
That's YOUR SIDE> its thugary at the hightest level. its what the left IS
This entire subject - that Trump votes can only be explained via brainwashing, science fiction, nefarious plots, Dr Evil, whatever - is a projection bias gone national.
The people who passionately want to make this a partisan issue are conservatives.
I've not alleged a nefarious plot. I've not alleged anything about Trump votes.
I've alleged what appear to be the facts. 1. A researcher approached Facebook about a research project. 2. The researcher wanted Facebook's permission to solicit participants. 3. Facebook gave their permission to the researcher to do so. 4. 270,000 Facebook users agreed to be participants. 5. The researcher gathered the data on those 270,000 users. 6. The researcher then gathered the data on the friends and contacts of the 270,000 users, for which Facebook had NOT given permission and the friends and contacts had no knowledge of. 7. This amounted to personal information on 50 million Facebook users. 8. The researcher then sold this information to a group to use for political purposes. 9. The researcher did not have Facebook's permission to sell this information for any reason.
I've also asserted that what the researcher did should be criminalized, and that we need to limit access to our personal information. Consumers should know when our personal information is being used, and when it's being transferred or sold.
Privacy is necessary for freedom to exist. Eliminate privacy and you eliminate freedom.
In an election that close lots of things swung the election. As already noted Comey’s renewing the email investigation definitely led to Trump’s win. If Weiner had kept his weiner in his pants we would have a Hitlery presidency.
so here is what our leftist "friends" what you to believe.
its perfectly legal for leftist groups to get permission from someone to go get their friends data... in other words, it was utterly and completely FINE for Obamas team to take MY INFORMATION.... Information I would never EVER give a democrat and use that information.
The Obama team Got the entire social media network. they got every bit of data Google had to give. AND they sought to prevent republicans from accessing the same information.
These are the things the left wants you to believe are perfectly wonderful.
AND
They also want you to think it was utterly mindboggling illegal for some group to provide some psychological test on facebook that ended up giving this group access to a friends list.
and there isn't a liberal on this thread that looks at this and thinks they did anything wrong, or that the other side did anything right.
The people who passionately want to make this a partisan issue are conservatives.
I've not alleged a nefarious plot. I've not alleged anything about Trump votes.
I've alleged what appear to be the facts. 1. A researcher approached Facebook about a research project. 2. The researcher wanted Facebook's permission to solicit participants. 3. Facebook gave their permission to the researcher to do so. 4. 270,000 Facebook users agreed to be participants. 5. The researcher gathered the data on those 270,000 users. 6. The researcher then gathered the data on the friends and contacts of the 270,000 users, for which Facebook had NOT given permission and the friends and contacts had no knowledge of. 7. This amounted to personal information on 50 million Facebook users. 8. The researcher then sold this information to a group to use for political purposes. 9. The researcher did not have Facebook's permission to sell this information for any reason.
I've also asserted that what the researcher did should be criminalized, and that we need to limit access to our personal information. Consumers should know when our personal information is being used, and when it's being transferred or sold.
Privacy is necessary for freedom to exist. Eliminate privacy and you eliminate freedom.
Uh no. The media is making this an entire partisan issue
Wry report about this flat out said “Hillary would have won if it weren’t for this nefarious scheme”
The people who passionately want to make this a partisan issue are conservatives.
.
you at least have said something honest.
You better believe we ant to make this a partisan issue. IT IS. YOUR SIDE did far more.... taking vastly more personal data from people like me who would never in a million years give them anything more than a snarl and tell them to pound sand.
YOU DIDNT SAY A WORD.
Now that it comes to light that some group did something maybe in the ballpark on a vastly smaller scale but used that information for the right.
you are so upset. i mean that WASNT FAIR. NOW you are worried about "privacy".
and further you don't have a clue why i am upset and suggest you are a hypocrite.
so here is what our leftist "friends" what you to believe.
its perfectly legal for leftist groups to get permission from someone to go get their friends data... in other words, it was utterly and completely FINE for Obamas team to take MY INFORMATION.... Information I would never EVER give a democrat and use that information.
The Obama team Got the entire social media network. they got every bit of data Google had to give. AND they sought to prevent republicans from accessing the same information.
These are the things the left wants you to believe are perfectly wonderful.
AND
They also want you to think it was utterly mindboggling illegal for some group to provide some psychological test on facebook that ended up giving this group access to a friends list.
and there isn't a liberal on this thread that looks at this and thinks they did anything wrong, or that the other side did anything right.
This is your perspective. It's also unsupported by the posts on this thread.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
