A couple of years or more I was posting on Facebook regarding Cambridge Analytica's practices and was considered a tin foil hat and crazy.
No the reason I was able to shed some light at the time was I knew exactly how we could utilize the Facebook API back then to elicit the kind of data we are talking about, and completely legally. Nobody needed to circumvent FB API policies, it was yours for the taking.
I didn't do it although I did put together multiple PoC's from 2011 to 2014 to see what was possible and it was bad.
Another thing we should remember is that Cambridge Analytica is just one small tip of a fractal iceberg whose body is Facebook and the big five, your internet connection and certainly your smartphone themselves.
Google, Apple and Amazon are no less culpable in this regard.
The question now becomes which side of history we want to be on.
Another question is we assume we want to take our privacy back and how we do that with consent and assurance.
I don't have a Facebook account anymore but I'm still tracked as we all are. My mother doesn't like me not being there but a small price to pay. I can contact her elsewhere and do.
Surely enough is enough?
I think it is time to look for broad scale technologies that are better both in the real world and in our private world.
In early 2011, the minimum buy price on the platform was $500K. By midyear, $300K. By early 2012, $100K. Early 2013? $50 (no K missing, just fifty bucks).
Specifically it isn't necessarily about advertisers it regards surveillance.
Advertising revenue can be completely offset by Governmental tracking.
As I said in the other post we can't prove the positive but it certainly is a feasible option.
I know I could do it given the charter.
On the other hand I'd refer you to Bletchley Park.
Turing et al knew the decrypted Enigma messages but the Government were unable to act.
For good reason.
Secrecy is a thing
I do think it's important to note that I have not seen direct evidence of them abusing that data, but we've seen plenty of companies/governments/organizations doing bad things for years without direct evidence.
As for zero-knowlege encryption, iCloud Keychain is although the rest isn’t, you’re right there. Hopefully they’ll move in that direction.
But that's irrelevant to the point. The point is that Apple prevents users from understanding or controlling how the user's data is being used. Just because we understand why they won't fix it doesn't make it any less true that they could fix it, but choose not to.
And that's what I mean by "putting their money where their mouth is". They talk a big talk about protecting their users, but their actions are different than their speech.
We can't be seen to pick on Facebook or CA here since there is a bigger picture.
It's not about picking on anyone, it's about a line being crossed and bringing it back home.
Thank you for your comment.
But let’s not pretend that this fiction is true. Only one campaign hired this company. And if they are bragging to journalists now that they are willing to entrap politicians with hired prostitutes, I’m fairly certain they would have had some things in their sales pitch two years ago that would raise red flags in an ethical campaign.
The people you hire are a reflection of your character. And if they end up arrested one after another, it becomes less and less likely to just be bad luck.