2. The article describes the Cambridge Analytica database in particular being available "to verified researchers" but someone threw credentials onto GitHub where anyone could have borrowed them
>Like other quiz apps, it requested consent to access the user’s profile (friends’ data was not collected)
If we want our industry to take privacy seriously, we need people to take a principled stand. Making them aware of, and outraged over, flagrant violations of your privacy, and trust, is the easiest way to do that.
But why would the government intervene in a private decision that citizens have made?
We talk at the phone, we chat, we take pictures together
If you don't mind about your privacy you're probably hurting someone else's
people and washington are bemoaning what happens at Google, Facebook, and the like, yet totally ignoring all the information readily available to the public for anyone to take from government itself.
Example, if you know a street address or owner's name in Cobb County Georgia will allow you to search. The amount of information available there is and the type is far more dangerous than what was discovered via a facebook quiz.
The actual problem here is not that Cambridge Analytica got the data. But that they created a site where this data was made readily available:
> Academics at the University of Cambridge distributed the data from the personality quiz app myPersonality to hundreds of researchers via a website with insufficient security provisions, which led to it being left vulnerable to access for four years. Gaining access illicitly was relatively easy.
>Though “Cambridge” is in the name, there’s no real connection to Cambridge Analytica, just a very tenuous one through Aleksandr Kogan, which is explained below.