"Where is Cambridge Analytica side? Why didn’t Channel 4 interview them to get their side of the story"[?] Channel 4 quoted Cambridge Analytica's brief statement in the report you've just commenting on...
Good reporting. The next thing you need to do is to investigate the WHOLE big data industry. Companies combine the information Facebook has with information from other companies of the likes of i360, that includes consumer reporting information like your purchase history drawn from checking, savings and credit cards. This further gets rolled up with public records like deeds, titles to property, credit history, google searches and god knows what else. Investigate this please! Maybe we can make some real change and pass some laws.
I did not mention a political party, it seems I may have triggered that kind of response. I am saying that this has been going on for a while now and is getting worse. It is wrong no matter what political party does it and it is not just political parties. This industry needs to be investigated so the average individual can understand what is going on. Read my posts again please.
@numbersix - CA didn't exist in 2012 or the run up to the 2012 election, so that is demonstrably false information. This specific project to harvest facebook data, and 'nudge' the collective was set up specifically for the 2016 election. The funding for that facebook harvesting project, and part ownership of the parent company SCL, and backing for the new CA (emerdata) comes from the Robert Mercer and his family, which are long time republican supporters. So, please, stop your blatantly false whataboutism and ill-researched attempts at blame shifting.
John Mulligan No, it’s nothing like that. You say you want humans to completely stop using technology but you are using technology to write that comment. Insisting on less corporate profits does not equate to not making money at all, it equates to making less money. However, what you said is absolute: “I don’t want technology”. People like you fucking sicken me. I depend on technology to survive. 50 years ago, I’d have died in childhood. Take your bullshit elsewhere and get off the technology you hate so much.
They might have deleted the data but not the product of that data. The algorithms, the product, they think they own. It is based off our data that was taken from an app on Facebook and shared with said company by the app creator. They processed the data and the results is what they hold now. They probably deleted the original data but the results is still in the hands of this company.
Presumably "the data" are the mass of 'likes' and 'actions' etc. on FB and similar sites (like err TH-cam?), whereas the personality profiles, individual identification and location etc. are their 'derived products', information produced by processing that vast mass of raw data through sophisticated programmes using their massive computer power.
The data was used in an algorithm to produce profiles that could be sold. The results of the data received from FB and other sources produced new data that is set in a profile. The company itself has no commodity other then the profiles which they used in the elections and add campaigns sold on FB and the likes. The results are still out in the wild and this company should be punished and dismantled to keep it from being used in such a way again. It is good this is being investigated and my hope is that this company and group of companies gets disbanded and policies put in place for this to not happen again. Most of the data was not initially procured in a legit fashion and breached FB policies. FB dropped the ball and is in recovery mode trying to get back it's respect for it's base of users. Until FB takes this company to court to ruin it the profiles will still exist. FB needs to be the one who states that the company was in breach of their policies and remove all data that was spawned from the breach.
So they are guilty of being good at there jobs? because that is what they are paid for, to convince people to vote for a party who hires them. How is this a crime?
Hushed, i think it's more a change in our attitude. from don't believe everything you hear to don't believe anything you hear. or take it with a brick of salt.
That feels disingenuous and not comparing like for like. When you take a census, you are explicitly consenting that information to be used to form the census. You have an awareness of the information you're putting out there and the purpose they're used for. When you use your loyalty cards or credit card, you are aware that your shopping habits are studied to tailor offers for you and/or to entice you to shop somewhere. You know it's happening, you know the purpose. That's not the case here. There was no genuine consent for the data to be taken. There was no awareness and consent for the data to be used in a particular way. When you're unaware of targeting, your general defence against it is far lower and you're consequently a lot more susceptible to it. That lack of consent or user awareness is the troubling bit, not just the consequence. That doesn't apply to either of the cases you mentioned.
@6:55 "I find it disturbing... because that's personal information". If you put it on social media, free email, or cloud storage... it's not personal anymore.
I just don't click things and don't allow cookies and ads. When facebook initiated the use of other icons for likes, it was to measure the user's response to target them, so I only ever used like or just didn't click. I've never used the love option or any of the others. I never use my phone for facebook or other online activity either.
It never really has been. It's just that now you have been allowed to find about it. But just wait for it.... this is just another step of the overall agenda which won't become apparent to us until ... we are allowed to find out.
Here in Colorado, very interested to learn more about CA-assisted GOP manipulation in 2014 election that gave us evil Gardner over less-bad Udall. Thank you, Channel 4, for your international pursuit of this huge story.
If this such a concern to channel 4 then why on their own website are they using cookies to collect data to share with their "trusted partners"? Who are these trusted partners? Why are you collecting data? What information are you remotely storing on my devices?
That's why I have never had any Facebook account. If the only way for a company to make money is to sell users' personal information, it will happen despite all assurances about privacy.
This isnt any different then having higher car insurance because your a 16 y/o male. Why? Because DATA ANALYSIS says that that demographic is more likely to get in a car accident.
70 to 80 year old legislators in the USA have been arguing about abortion for 50 years while this situation developed. With the development of the information age, few privacy provisions have been carved out for consumers because there is no money in that. Pass a law that requires all companies to delete all digital data on consumers older than 6 months and make it illegal to share that data with anyone.
Ch4 should do a video explaining why this is different from what Obama's campaign did. And it explain it very slowly, maybe draw some little pictures so they understand.
You know, if it were not for one personality trait, all of this information would be useless, and companies like Cambridge Analytica would lose their entire business model... "Easily swayed by advertising."
That tie is amazing 😻 I felt like an alien until that last lady. I assumed that my activity was already being harvested and use the internet as a whole accordingly. While disappointing, it really seems like Facebook is falling on the sword because we forgot how the internet works and thought the platform was some magical private place. Cambridge Analytica is the problem. They broke the rules. But users as products is nothing new.
He started a dating site, it branched out to include families, they couldn't keep up and got busted by being involvrd with Cambridge Analytica. They are in fact responsible. Cambridge Analytica is responsible. The State AGs need to get involved.
Looks like Mark Zuckerberg is giving live lecture: Privacy Breach 101 for future CEO of a new sosmed platform. As long we cling so *tight* into our phablet with bunch of sosmed apps, our privacy is also theirs...
This is an important story but Ch 4 is ginning it up for drama. The take away here is that cambridge analyica and like companies can place custom ads into your brain: the data that they get from FB is equivalent to GPS coordinates and the ads are laser targeted bombs that will fall down your chimney. In reality, the data they get from FB is more like compass headings (NNE or SW), and the ads are shot in a blunderbuss. CH4 use of scrolling code in the graphics is meant to make you think that this stuff is hyper technical and scientific: it's presented as a scene from a militaristic high-testosterone action thriller. You almost expect a seal team to emerge from hiding and bag'n'tag a target. Sure there is lots of data and this data is used to generate profiles of people, but these profiles are about as accurate as horoscopes. They group people into categories-- sometimes they are 7 'types' of people or maybe even 50-- but precise they are not. As smart and articulate and believable as Chris Wylie is, he has another message to sell, which we accept as an axiom, that is that the algorithms that he and others device are accurate; they are not. People hear algorithm and they think ' whoa, this sh*t is too complicated for me, it must be real). An algorithm is an equation. 1+1=2 is an algorithm. You can make that equation as complicated as you want and throw in tons of variables and weight them and all sorts of voodoo, but they are equations. The job of FB, YT and Google is to keep you clicking and the basic algorithm they use is if you clicked on this, you are probably interested in that. Try this, if you are logged into your youtube account click on something stupid that you have no interest in and watch the video, then click on the 'suggestions for you' button. You're going to see that video or others very similar offered to you as a suggestion, in spite of the fact that you have never shown any interest in or searched for that subject before. The algorithm doesn't know you, it only knows what you clicked and maybe what your friends clicked, and if you are what you click, I feel sorry for you. Fb sucks and as Zuck said 'they "trust me", dumb f*cks', but using this data to profile people-- accurate or not-- is not the story here. The story is the messages that were sent. The Obama campaigned did the same thing that CA did, and they were lauded for it, but the message that Obama sent out was benign (basically 'we need your vote', 'go out and vote'). The message CA sent out was targeted at the 'gullible' (compass heading: west) and meant to spread fear and confusion. That's the story. CH4 stop with the spooky graphics and ominous editing, focus on the story.
What do you expect from a company that gives you their platform for free? Facebook and Google. Do you think they are doing it out of goodness? Ok, Google gives you free maps and a search tool, Google Docs and Drive. A free photo app. Nothing’s free...
So if they never shared any information with any third parties- why would third parties also need to delete that information.......... Such bullshit I hate the official narrative garbage
News flash , what people like or comment to on facebook isn’t for many people what they really think. I don’t think they’ve developed mind reading software YET !!
Have you looked at YOUR Facebook data? They show all of your phone calls, all of your text messages...even missed calls. You're ok with that? Download your facebook data and see what they have on you. It may change your mind.
Maybe not on a one-to-one basis, but they work with large populations and look at correlations, all that matters is that on the whole these hold up, have reasonable predictive value.
yep, most people even say things they dont really believe in and say they will do things and dont act on what they say. especially online where there are behavior shift like trolling and lots more sarcasm. even quizzes lot of people answer a bunch of things just to laugh at what the results will be
You’ve never thought about buying something, never saying it out loud or without googling it, and received an ad for that item? You must be living under a rock woman
Most people are average in any of those personnality traits. There are only a few people who are very skewed towards one trait over the opposing one. I have yet to see how an advertising message can make me change my mind on something. I guess I'm not like most westerners as I ACTIVELY DO MY OWN RESEARCH on stuff I see/read/watch. People are so lazy
Cambridge Analytica are part of the UK defence establishment and the US defence establishment. Channel 4 are majority owned by the UK Government Arts Culture and Sport. Do you think you have an unbiased report here?
Police are biased against criminals, we should discard all evidence gathered by the police. Appeal to motive is a logical fallacy, a type of circumstantial ad hominem. Attack the claims based on their merits. You didn't think you'd learn something new on TH-cam, but here you are.
CA used their government connection to get in the door, obtain the data, then sell it to the highest bidder. You are exactly right, the U.K. and US needs to stop working to the degree they do with private subcontractors. Enough of this blackwater bullshit
Hey channel four if you are so concerned about this do some deep dive reporting on the reality of smart grid, 5G tech, what are the real ramifications. I though channel four once claimed to have that monicker of being known for investigative reportage of controversial issues but of late you became the guardian in moving images and that is no compliment.
I'm having trouble understanding why people are taking such an issue with a company having personality data on you? Knowing that somebody is easily persuaded or scared, who cares? I've made targeted ads on facebook that were extremely successful. What's the issue? (side note but maybe not: i bet google has TONS more data than facebook...)
If you care about democracy then you will care. Imagine a situation where billionaires (foreign and local) would pay a company like CA to manipulate voters into voting for issues that favor them. That's not democracy.
My issue with it is it seems like (with both Google and Facebook and TH-cam) it decides what you like and then feeds you more based on that. Which would be fine if wasn't an iterative process that seemed to amplify whatever tendencies it started off with, so that once you went to a few nutritional snake oil sites, because you were dieting or whatever, it was hard to not end up at those same sorts of sites whenever you put any kind of health-related topic. Or if you click on a video on a topic the suggested videos want to take you down a rabbit-hole of more extreme content.
Exactly the same stuff Obama used in 2012 his campaign chief is talking about it on vids on u tube but they have stopped me posting the link, got something to hide channel 4🤔
More people are becoming aware of it now. I'm posting the links everywhere, too. Obama campaign chief said they took MORE than Cambridge Analytical. If some people are too intellectually lazy to fact check and just blindly believe what they here on the news, leave them behind. We need proactive people, not sheep.
Except the obama campaign took their data WITH CONSENT from users. The CA data was from a third party app that was ilegally sold to cambridge analytica
It's not your profile on Facebook, it's Facebook's profile on you.
She is so right. Now money means more than privacy, decency and even following the law.
privacy has always been a bargain. i wanted to buy a laptop at pcworld . i still have to give significant data. ads are piling up on my front door
🐂💨⬅𝐇𝐈𝐋𝐋𝐀𝐑𝐘 𝐒𝐌𝐄𝐋𝐋 𝐓𝐇𝐈𝐒
Money has written a lot of law, Mohammad Hussain.
They have been caught in some public lies so I would be skeptical of their side of the story, which would be interesting to hear, wakaisgood.
"Where is Cambridge Analytica side? Why didn’t Channel 4 interview them to get their side of the story"[?]
Channel 4 quoted Cambridge Analytica's brief statement in the report you've just commenting on...
So where did Channel 4 get the data? I'd like to get a copy myself... for research.
Trust me Cambridge Analytica did not delete all the data.
Good reporting. The next thing you need to do is to investigate the WHOLE big data industry. Companies combine the information Facebook has with information from other companies of the likes of i360, that includes consumer reporting information like your purchase history drawn from checking, savings and credit cards. This further gets rolled up with public records like deeds, titles to property, credit history, google searches and god knows what else. Investigate this please! Maybe we can make some real change and pass some laws.
Jason Kelley it’s fake news! Obama had all these FB and CA services in 2012 but they didn’t mention that😡
Nah, I think they're just looking to feed into the "election was stolen" narrative. That's what's driving this.
...they don't actually care that much about data protection.
I did not mention a political party, it seems I may have triggered that kind of response. I am saying that this has been going on for a while now and is getting worse. It is wrong no matter what political party does it and it is not just political parties. This industry needs to be investigated so the average individual can understand what is going on. Read my posts again please.
@numbersix - CA didn't exist in 2012 or the run up to the 2012 election, so that is demonstrably false information. This specific project to harvest facebook data, and 'nudge' the collective was set up specifically for the 2016 election. The funding for that facebook harvesting project, and part ownership of the parent company SCL, and backing for the new CA (emerdata) comes from the Robert Mercer and his family, which are long time republican supporters. So, please, stop your blatantly false whataboutism and ill-researched attempts at blame shifting.
Fair play to ch4 doing some real journalism a rare breed these days
We need a complete reboot of technological society.
John Mulligan do you want to get back to the Stone Age?
John Mulligan Then how about you lead by example and destroy that computer or phone you’re using to type that comment?
John Mulligan 50 years ago is not a world I would want to live in
John Mulligan No, you haven’t proven your point. You’re a hypocrite because you still use the technology you want to get rid of.
John Mulligan No, it’s nothing like that.
You say you want humans to completely stop using technology but you are using technology to write that comment.
Insisting on less corporate profits does not equate to not making money at all, it equates to making less money.
However, what you said is absolute: “I don’t want technology”.
People like you fucking sicken me. I depend on technology to survive. 50 years ago, I’d have died in childhood. Take your bullshit elsewhere and get off the technology you hate so much.
isn't TH-cam another source that CA would have harvested data from?
They might have deleted the data but not the product of that data. The algorithms, the product, they think they own. It is based off our data that was taken from an app on Facebook and shared with said company by the app creator. They processed the data and the results is what they hold now. They probably deleted the original data but the results is still in the hands of this company.
Presumably "the data" are the mass of 'likes' and 'actions' etc. on FB and similar sites (like err TH-cam?), whereas the personality profiles, individual identification and location etc. are their 'derived products', information produced by processing that vast mass of raw data through sophisticated programmes using their massive computer power.
The data was used in an algorithm to produce profiles that could be sold. The results of the data received from FB and other sources produced new data that is set in a profile. The company itself has no commodity other then the profiles which they used in the elections and add campaigns sold on FB and the likes. The results are still out in the wild and this company should be punished and dismantled to keep it from being used in such a way again.
It is good this is being investigated and my hope is that this company and group of companies gets disbanded and policies put in place for this to not happen again.
Most of the data was not initially procured in a legit fashion and breached FB policies. FB dropped the ball and is in recovery mode trying to get back it's respect for it's base of users. Until FB takes this company to court to ruin it the profiles will still exist. FB needs to be the one who states that the company was in breach of their policies and remove all data that was spawned from the breach.
Why should they be punished? what did they do wrong?
Really? Subverting democracy means little to you huh? Go back and continue your day trading, mindless drone.
So they are guilty of being good at there jobs? because that is what they are paid for, to convince people to vote for a party who hires them. How is this a crime?
Thank you for your honorable reporting Channel 4.
Nothing wrong being an introvert the richest,warmest,civil people on this planet are introverts....
some of the best, most relevant journalism. technically nothing will change. but as far as people knowing the truth...10/10.
census and american express cards had that same exact purpose, where is the truth exposé on that?
Hushed, i think it's more a change in our attitude. from don't believe everything you hear to don't believe anything you hear. or take it with a brick of salt.
That feels disingenuous and not comparing like for like. When you take a census, you are explicitly consenting that information to be used to form the census. You have an awareness of the information you're putting out there and the purpose they're used for.
When you use your loyalty cards or credit card, you are aware that your shopping habits are studied to tailor offers for you and/or to entice you to shop somewhere. You know it's happening, you know the purpose.
That's not the case here. There was no genuine consent for the data to be taken. There was no awareness and consent for the data to be used in a particular way. When you're unaware of targeting, your general defence against it is far lower and you're consequently a lot more susceptible to it. That lack of consent or user awareness is the troubling bit, not just the consequence. That doesn't apply to either of the cases you mentioned.
wakaisgood: They don't talk to the press about this.
wakaisgood 10/10
@6:55 "I find it disturbing... because that's personal information". If you put it on social media, free email, or cloud storage... it's not personal anymore.
I wonder how much corporations can tell about us from our youtube likes. I've never been on facebook, so at least they can't get to me that way.
These companies share data. As long as you are on the internet they will always find a way to get you.
Barbara is of some special personality. I am impressed Mam.
Thank you so much for a great news article. Definitely opens peoples eyes.
I just don't click things and don't allow cookies and ads. When facebook initiated the use of other icons for likes, it was to measure the user's response to target them, so I only ever used like or just didn't click. I've never used the love option or any of the others. I never use my phone for facebook or other online activity either.
All due credit to Channel 4 for its sensible approach to this depravity and filth.
Open? She lets a channel 4 journalist in her house to pore through her own metadata. Of course she's open..
Mrs. Janice made a beautifully concise about the "Data Society". Just listen to her from 2:42.
I have never used social media. After seeing about it on the news I am convinced that I will never ever ever be curious about it.
Dave Stambaugh want to buy a bridge?
"I'm not neurotic. I simply get peace by believing in an imaginary omnipotent father in the sky." Hmmm.
The first womens comments are spot on. The second woman is not all there.
CannyBill CB th-cam.com/video/BYuLe9URJyM/w-d-xo.html
everyone's freaking out and they didn't even collect decent data
My privacy is no longer mine.
It never really has been. It's just that now you have been allowed to find about it. But just wait for it.... this is just another step of the overall agenda which won't become apparent to us until ... we are allowed to find out.
When was this first aired. I have a feeling I saw it a way while back.
It’s not been sorry, Mr. Z should be sleeping in jail waiting for judgement and no one is even talking about it.
anyone have access to that kinda soft ware? which help to gather data of a profile and show graphically
Thinking about deleting my account
Just do it. You won't miss it.
Of course you are. That's part of the whole behavior manipulation agenda.
Why does a person need 1000 friends?????
Here in Colorado, very interested to learn more about CA-assisted GOP manipulation in 2014 election that gave us evil Gardner over less-bad Udall.
Thank you, Channel 4, for your international pursuit of this huge story.
If this such a concern to channel 4 then why on their own website are they using cookies to collect data to share with their "trusted partners"? Who are these trusted partners? Why are you collecting data? What information are you remotely storing on my devices?
I don't understand what they did wrong? They collected data from people on Facebook? Why is that a problem?
It's just demoliberals trying to accuse Trump of winning election by manipulating voters via Facebook, nothing more.
Vae victis.
That's why I have never had any Facebook account. If the only way for a company to make money is to sell users' personal information, it will happen despite all assurances about privacy.
Think about what Google's data about you it will be far more accurate than Facebook's data
Uh oh, I just clicked on like and now creating this comment. I wonder where and how this info TH-cam will someday use against me😳
This isnt any different then having higher car insurance because your a 16 y/o male. Why? Because DATA ANALYSIS says that that demographic is more likely to get in a car accident.
70 to 80 year old legislators in the USA have been arguing about abortion for 50 years while this situation developed. With the development of the information age, few privacy provisions have been carved out for consumers because there is no money in that. Pass a law that requires all companies to delete all digital data on consumers older than 6 months and make it illegal to share that data with anyone.
Cambridge Analytica didn't pass the data to external parties, yet they made sure all third parties deleted the data. This sounds about right...
DARTA!
Darta, dayta, dayta, darta - let's call the whole thing off! ;-)
My DARTA ANALYTICS is saying you like Pigeons, I must be stopped for this insane DARTA breach.
you'll never get your hands on me DARTA!
There is no way they can prove that the 50 million profiles doesn't still exists in a database where it should not be.
Then people should close their account.
Ch4 should do a video explaining why this is different from what Obama's campaign did. And it explain it very slowly, maybe draw some little pictures so they understand.
40,000 $ per violation of privacy law breach... Your personal information is Gold $$$
$FB needs to be legally charged before they will change anything
You know, if it were not for one personality trait, all of this information would be useless, and companies like Cambridge Analytica would lose their entire business model...
"Easily swayed by advertising."
When will the Police arrest anyone for this crime.
That tie is amazing 😻
I felt like an alien until that last lady. I assumed that my activity was already being harvested and use the internet as a whole accordingly. While disappointing, it really seems like Facebook is falling on the sword because we forgot how the internet works and thought the platform was some magical private place. Cambridge Analytica is the problem. They broke the rules. But users as products is nothing new.
He started a dating site, it branched out to include families, they couldn't keep up and got busted by being involvrd with Cambridge Analytica. They are in fact responsible. Cambridge Analytica is responsible. The State AGs need to get involved.
was the details used on these people by the reporter leaked to her by the police investigating ,how did she get that information ?
why would you expect any privacy on facebook?
Is channel 4 going to post this information for every body to see?
within a week people will forget it 😐
And of course none of these are trending.
Looks like Mark Zuckerberg is giving live lecture: Privacy Breach 101 for future CEO of a new sosmed platform. As long we cling so *tight* into our phablet with bunch of sosmed apps, our privacy is also theirs...
#deletefacebook
"ipsa scientia potestas est" ('knowledge itself is power') : by Francis Bacon, written in "Meditationes Sacrae" (1597).
This is an important story but Ch 4 is ginning it up for drama. The take away here is that cambridge analyica and like companies can place custom ads into your brain: the data that they get from FB is equivalent to GPS coordinates and the ads are laser targeted bombs that will fall down your chimney. In reality, the data they get from FB is more like compass headings (NNE or SW), and the ads are shot in a blunderbuss. CH4 use of scrolling code in the graphics is meant to make you think that this stuff is hyper technical and scientific: it's presented as a scene from a militaristic high-testosterone action thriller. You almost expect a seal team to emerge from hiding and bag'n'tag a target.
Sure there is lots of data and this data is used to generate profiles of people, but these profiles are about as accurate as horoscopes. They group people into categories-- sometimes they are 7 'types' of people or maybe even 50-- but precise they are not. As smart and articulate and believable as Chris Wylie is, he has another message to sell, which we accept as an axiom, that is that the algorithms that he and others device are accurate; they are not. People hear algorithm and they think ' whoa, this sh*t is too complicated for me, it must be real). An algorithm is an equation. 1+1=2 is an algorithm. You can make that equation as complicated as you want and throw in tons of variables and weight them and all sorts of voodoo, but they are equations.
The job of FB, YT and Google is to keep you clicking and the basic algorithm they use is if you clicked on this, you are probably interested in that. Try this, if you are logged into your youtube account click on something stupid that you have no interest in and watch the video, then click on the 'suggestions for you' button. You're going to see that video or others very similar offered to you as a suggestion, in spite of the fact that you have never shown any interest in or searched for that subject before. The algorithm doesn't know you, it only knows what you clicked and maybe what your friends clicked, and if you are what you click, I feel sorry for you.
Fb sucks and as Zuck said 'they "trust me", dumb f*cks', but using this data to profile people-- accurate or not-- is not the story here. The story is the messages that were sent. The Obama campaigned did the same thing that CA did, and they were lauded for it, but the message that Obama sent out was benign (basically 'we need your vote', 'go out and vote'). The message CA sent out was targeted at the 'gullible' (compass heading: west) and meant to spread fear and confusion. That's the story. CH4 stop with the spooky graphics and ominous editing, focus on the story.
What do you expect from a company that gives you their platform for free? Facebook and Google. Do you think they are doing it out of goodness? Ok, Google gives you free maps and a search tool, Google Docs and Drive. A free photo app. Nothing’s free...
So if they never shared any information with any third parties- why would third parties also need to delete that information..........
Such bullshit I hate the official narrative garbage
News flash , what people like or comment to on facebook isn’t for many people what they really think. I don’t think they’ve developed mind reading software YET !!
How do you know what people "really think"?
Have you looked at YOUR Facebook data? They show all of your phone calls, all of your text messages...even missed calls. You're ok with that? Download your facebook data and see what they have on you. It may change your mind.
Maybe not on a one-to-one basis, but they work with large populations and look at correlations, all that matters is that on the whole these hold up, have reasonable predictive value.
yep, most people even say things they dont really believe in and say they will do things and dont act on what they say. especially online where there are behavior shift like trolling and lots more sarcasm. even quizzes lot of people answer a bunch of things just to laugh at what the results will be
You’ve never thought about buying something, never saying it out loud or without googling it, and received an ad for that item? You must be living under a rock woman
#DeleteFacebook
Darta?
Suckenburg needs to shut down Facebook--oh the govt. will do that.
I don't vote so they are wasting there time looking at my profile.
But you communicat with someone that do.
If you think it's only politicians that are trying to manipulating us you better do a bit more research and critical thinking.
Lets not say Cambridge, lets say steve Bannon /Trump
If only Zuckerberg could be held legally responsible. The reason hs is not is quite simple.
Most people are average in any of those personnality traits. There are only a few people who are very skewed towards one trait over the opposing one. I have yet to see how an advertising message can make me change my mind on something. I guess I'm not like most westerners as I ACTIVELY DO MY OWN RESEARCH on stuff I see/read/watch. People are so lazy
Stop saying "daaatah"
NO click on facebook! Better delete it! Suckerbug you will pay this breaching dearly!!
The machines are taking over......
Its odvios why they paid so much for wats app
If you expect me to believe you Zukie Then the earth is flat
NawHsiHsi
Cambridge Analytica are part of the UK defence establishment and the US defence establishment. Channel 4 are majority owned by the UK Government Arts Culture and Sport. Do you think you have an unbiased report here?
Police are biased against criminals, we should discard all evidence gathered by the police.
Appeal to motive is a logical fallacy, a type of circumstantial ad hominem.
Attack the claims based on their merits.
You didn't think you'd learn something new on TH-cam, but here you are.
CA used their government connection to get in the door, obtain the data, then sell it to the highest bidder. You are exactly right, the U.K. and US needs to stop working to the degree they do with private subcontractors. Enough of this blackwater bullshit
Victor: I see no bias in this Channel 4 report in favor of Cambridge Analytica.
Hey channel four if you are so concerned about this do some deep dive reporting on the reality of smart grid, 5G tech, what are the real ramifications.
I though channel four once claimed to have that monicker of being known for investigative reportage of controversial issues but of late you became the guardian in moving images and that is no compliment.
th-cam.com/video/RXahey-aTQw/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/RrURSa1_vNg/w-d-xo.html
I'm having trouble understanding why people are taking such an issue with a company having personality data on you? Knowing that somebody is easily persuaded or scared, who cares? I've made targeted ads on facebook that were extremely successful. What's the issue? (side note but maybe not: i bet google has TONS more data than facebook...)
MisterTwister55 bot. And people do care scumbag, especially when someone illegally obtains it.
i can assure you i'm not a bot. you offered no explanations to the premise of my comment. please try again
If you care about democracy then you will care. Imagine a situation where billionaires (foreign and local) would pay a company like CA to manipulate voters into voting for issues that favor them. That's not democracy.
Hey fuckface how about you quit calling people names over a simple opinion they may have!
My issue with it is it seems like (with both Google and Facebook and TH-cam) it decides what you like and then feeds you more based on that. Which would be fine if wasn't an iterative process that seemed to amplify whatever tendencies it started off with, so that once you went to a few nutritional snake oil sites, because you were dieting or whatever, it was hard to not end up at those same sorts of sites whenever you put any kind of health-related topic. Or if you click on a video on a topic the suggested videos want to take you down a rabbit-hole of more extreme content.
Cambridge Analytica DID NOTHING WRONG
Exactly the same stuff Obama used in 2012 his campaign chief is talking about it on vids on u tube but they have stopped me posting the link, got something to hide channel 4🤔
More people are becoming aware of it now. I'm posting the links everywhere, too. Obama campaign chief said they took MORE than Cambridge Analytical. If some people are too intellectually lazy to fact check and just blindly believe what they here on the news, leave them behind. We need proactive people, not sheep.
th-cam.com/video/yMa1LOFlT2w/w-d-xo.html
Her quote " We were able to ingest the ENTIRE NETWORK of the US that's on facebook"
Except the obama campaign took their data WITH CONSENT from users. The CA data was from a third party app that was ilegally sold to cambridge analytica
So you are saying that the right are not only criminal but incompetent criminals who can't keep their incompetence and criminality secret?