Cambridge Analytica

[Babb'sBurstNad]

For some reason, every time I skim read a headline with "Cambridge Analytica", my brain reads it as "Captain America".

 

That is all I have to add to the discussion.

[Spy Bee]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43474760

 

 

Cambridge Analytica: Mark Zuckerberg asked to appear before MPs

Facebook boss Mark Zuckerberg has been called on by a parliamentary committee to give evidence about the use of personal data by Cambridge Analytica.

The UK-based political consulting firm is accused of using the data of 50 million Facebook members to influence the 2016 US presidential election.

Damian Collins, the chairman of the Commons inquiry into fake news, accused Facebook of "misleading" the committee.

London-based firm Cambridge Analytica denies any wrongdoing.

Mr Collins said earlier in the week that he wanted to hear from Mr Zuckerberg but has now put the request into writing.

In the letter, he says: "It is now time to hear from a senior Facebook executive with the sufficient authority to give an accurate account of this catastrophic failure of process."

It comes after the UK's Information Commissioner Elizabeth Denham said she would be applying to court for a warrant to search the offices of Cambridge Analytica.

The firm insists it followed the correct procedures in obtaining and using data, but it was suspended from Facebook last week.

• Cambridge Analytica: The story so far
• Facebook data sharing - time to act?
• Zuckerberg pressed to face breach concerns

Facebook shares fell by a further 3% on Tuesday, following a 6.7% drop on Monday which wiped almost $37bn from its market value.

The company will hold an open meeting with its employees later to discuss the matter, tech news website The Verge is reporting... continues

[Section_31]

Jedi mind tricks for the weak minded, but if you're so swayed by internet adverts and fake news you're probably a fucking spaz anyway.

[Juniper]

Jedi mind tricks for the weak minded, but if you're so swayed by internet adverts and fake news you're probably a fucking spaz anyway.

Very much my thoughts too.

 

In all honesty I’m really not that arsed. People who collect my data from Facebook are probably just as sick of my music posts as my friends.

 

Have some of that, Facebook!

[Pidge]

Jedi mind tricks for the weak minded, but if you're so swayed by internet adverts and fake news you're probably a fucking spaz anyway.

Yeah, it's not like a widespread campaign that affects everyone regardless of whether someone is personally susceptible, is it...

 

For me the issue is that analysing people to locate the most neurotic demos among us and then specifically targeting them with "fear-based" content to coerce them into voting a certain way is - at best - obscenely cynical, regardless of how much of a "spaz" those people are.

 

It's not news to me that this goes on, but while it's in the news I'd like to see people get more informed about these systems.

 

Personally I'm especially interested to see which campaigns have used CA and how those elections fared in marginal areas. How does it correlate to populist results and how much has it been used to favour the right at the exclusion (or misrepresentation) of the left.

[VladimirIlyich]

Yeah, it's not like a widespread campaign that affects everyone regardless of whether someone is personally susceptible, is it...

 

For me the issue is that analysing people to locate the most neurotic demos among us and then specifically targeting them with "fear-based" content to coerce them into voting a certain way is - at best - obscenely cynical, regardless of how much of a "spaz" those people are.

 

It's not news to me that this goes on, but while it's in the news I'd like to see people get more informed about these systems.

 

Personally I'm especially interested to see which campaigns have used CA and how those elections fared in marginal areas. How does it correlate to populist results and how much has it been used to favour the right at the exclusion (or misrepresentation) of the left.

It may have worked for Brexit and Trump but it seems they have actually helped Comrade Corbyn too.

[Spy Bee]

Jedi mind tricks for the weak minded, but if you're so swayed by internet adverts and fake news you're probably a fucking spaz anyway.

I suspect you might be slightly more susceptible to this type of psychological game play than you think. This is the very same reason that subliminal marketing is illegal or regulated against.

 

You're not suddenly going to turn me into a Blue, but many swing voters will have their fears manipulated (for example) in order to influence them... it might be immigration, gun control, taxes, crime and punishment or gun control, depending on where you live. They were talking about 5000 data points per individual.

[Pidge]

It may have worked for Brexit and Trump but it seems they have actually helped Comrade Corbyn too.

 

Yeah, it might well have and similarly may raise questions over the funding of left-minded writers as well (although I've never seen that case made in such a clear or cogent way as this CA story).  It would have been better of me to state that in the context of an increasingly polarised political debate, these methods of division, analysing and reinforcing bias via SM can be hugely disruptive to a constructive national discourse. 

 

As someone who favours the idea of a purely administrative state (or as close as practically possible), it's a notion that naturally perturbs me.

 

One thing I haven't seen mentioned about this, which is particularly snide, is how these approaches turn the most susceptible into an evangelical force.  Identifying who is likely to share stories they agree with and who they know that will be influenced by stories shared by a familiar source, rather than directly from a media outlet or the marketing itself.  It's interesting to think how a firm like Breitbart would have been able to reinforce and focus on the messages planted by CA.  Using the confirmation bias of their base to spread the message to more people, increasing credibility the more people see these views restated as fact.

[Pidge]

I suspect you might be slightly more susceptible to this type of psychological game play than you think. This is the very same reason that subliminal marketing is illegal or regulated against.

 

You're not suddenly going to turn me into a Blue, but many swing voters will have their fears manipulated (for example) in order to influence them... it might be immigration, gun control, taxes, crime and punishment or gun control, depending on where you live. They were talking about 5000 data points per individual.

 

It's also the reason why we have regulations on campaign funding, the ability to make a message ubiquitous provides an advantage.  The idea that one advert sent to the right person will turn them to vote differently is a bit of a red herring, but as part of a sustained campaign to control the perception of the debate itself I absolutely think it will affect people, even if just in terms laying the groundwork by spreading associations that the candidate can then capitalise on.

[Anubis]

Alexander Nix has been suspended. It looks like we have our sacraficial lamb.

 

"In the view of the board Mr Nix's recent comments secretly recorded by @Channel4News do not represent the values or operations of the firm."

 

 

Quite.

[Pidge]

Yep, have to say Murdoch's mate Mercer and the desiccated American slug seem to be conspicuously absent from a lot of coverage.

[Anubis]

Chamnel 4 just now from the US - "If you are Cambridge Analytica touting for business here in the last three days, you have all the appeal of a nerve agent."

 

Can see a few complaints going in there.

[Spy Bee]

It's also the reason why we have regulations on campaign funding, the ability to make a message ubiquitous provides an advantage.  The idea that one advert sent to the right person will turn them to vote differently is a bit of a red herring, but as part of a sustained campaign to control the perception of the debate itself I absolutely think it will affect people, even if just in terms laying the groundwork by spreading associations that the candidate can then capitalise on.

These adverts were often outright lies too. It didn't matter what it did, it was whether it worked that was the only factor.

[Dr Arthur De Sabre]

Is this really anything new? I mean, if I look at something online, a jacket or a pair of trainers or something, it’s always advertised on my timeline the next day. It’s a bit weird but surely it’s not a surprise.

 

Anyway, I’ve made some changes to my profile to combat the bastards. I’m now a 72 year old Mexican woman and I’ll be spending the rest of the week looking at taco recipes and browsing The Cancun Way.

Stick DuckDuckGo in yer browser, and also get the app on yer phone. Tracks nothing, no adverts, and you can burn your history.

 

Apologies for linking quora but it’s a good explanatory piece:

 

https://www.quora.com/Why-should-I-use-DuckDuckGo-instead-of-Google

[Dr Arthur De Sabre]

Jedi mind tricks for the weak minded, but if you're so swayed by internet adverts and fake news you're probably a fucking spaz anyway.

All you need is to change the minds of the more easily led swing voters, and you are in, part of the reason politics is so fucked. People believe the lies and believe they are making educated decisions on who or what to vote for. The corruption of the system, the lack of integrity amongst press and politics, and the lack of enough to support those who push for integrity - such as Corbyn, due to partisan politics and apathy Ensures the status quo will remain.

[Section_31]

I suspect you might be slightly more susceptible to this type of psychological game play than you think. This is the very same reason that subliminal marketing is illegal or regulated against.

 

You're not suddenly going to turn me into a Blue, but many swing voters will have their fears manipulated (for example) in order to influence them... it might be immigration, gun control, taxes, crime and punishment or gun control, depending on where you live. They were talking about 5000 data points per individual.

 

Agreed and to be honest I was semi taking the piss a bit originally, it's out of order but it's part of a much bigger problem - a society that reads headlines and not stories. 

[Anubis]

Here's another information scandal brewing. Potentially more serious as well.

 

 

https://www.byline.com/column/67/article/1891

 

 

 

Privacy International are arguing in a secret hearing of the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT) that UK intelligence services are actively sharing huge datasets with third parties, without “sufficient controls on how the data will be used.”

 

Following the number of concerns raised over big data profiling being used illicitly in both the Brexit vote and Trump elections, with access being granted to Russian Intelligence Services, it transpires GCHQ have been unaccountably sharing one of the world's largest datasets with third parties, without an audit process.

 

The spies have been sharing their data with other agencies including HMRC, who were not only hacked but have also 'lost' data previously.

 

They have also been sharing their data with universities, who have also been consistently targeted with hacking operations aimed at data theft. Bristol University has full access to GCHQ's systems data.

 

GCHQ work particularly closely with external third parties, including BAE Systems, who have previously seen scandal involving the sale of secrets arising from their dealings with the security services.

 

BAE have also been selling a surveillance system which looks very much like GCHQ's own system to repressive regimes for profit.

 

Another third party known to work with the British defence services is controversial SCL Group, the parent of Cambridge Analytica - from 2010 they were paid £150,000 for the “Procurement of Target Audience Analysis” and training.

 

Since working for the Trump Administration they have been angling for Pentagon contracts. It is unknown if SCL or its affiliates have had direct access to GCHQ's data, but due to the lack of audit trail and SCL's links it is more than probable.

 

A further concern regarding third party access arises from the developing scandal around loss of NSA secrets by a contractor who had Kremlin monitoring software Kaspersky installed on his personal network.

 

MI6, our foreign security services arm dealing with threats outside of the UK, relies heavily on GCHQ’s bulk interception of communications and both MI6 and MI5 (the domestic security service) utilise GCHQ’s systems to obtain personal travel data.

 

UK Security Service data-sharing now extends well beyond Five Eyes too.

 

While mostly classified, it is known sharing now takes place with up to 40 foreign intelligence services and what happens once the data leaves the UK is completely unregulated.

 

This position has been officially confirmed in one 2015 report, with the Intelligence and Security Committee writing controls: “Do not apply to overseas partners with whom the agencies may share datasets.”

 

In short, GCHQ have been sharing huge amounts of information, gathered illegally, with no security around what happens to that data afterwards domestically and internationally.

 

David Anderson, the man charged with an independent review of terrorism legislation wrote in one report: “Bulk powers, by definition, involve potential access by the state to the data of large numbers of people whom there is not the slightest reason to suspect of threatening national security or engaging in serious crime. Any abuse of those powers could thus have particularly wide-ranging effects on the innocent.”

 

The Investigatory Powers Commissioner’s Office (IPCO) also raised raised the alarm over a safeguards around the misuse of systems by private contractors. This centres around third parties who are granted “administrator” privileges to the information.

 

In fact, IPCO only found out about this through the Privacy International legal challenge to GCHQ.

 

https://privacyinternational.org/sites/default/files/6h%29%20Letter%20from%20the%20Investigatory%20Powers%20Commissioner%E2%80%99s%20Office%20to%20the%20Investigatory%20Powers%20Tribunal.pdf

 

“Neither ISCom [The Intelligence Services Commissioner’s Office] nor IOCCO [The Interception of Communications Commissioners Office] were previously informed by GCHQ that the sharing of BPD/BCD with industry partners, as described in the statement of the GCHQ witness…had occurred,” IPCO responded in writing during September 2017.

 

According to Computer Weekly, whose reporting of this case is second to none: “Privacy International said that the government had failed to provide evidence that there were sufficient safeguards in place to protect the use and security of sensitive data once it had been shared with others. A foreign government, for example, could use the data to support an unlawful detention or torture programme, or use it to identify the target for a lethal operation.”

 

Ben Jaffey, a lawyer for Privacy International said: "once the data set is provided outside the agency then control has been lost. For example a foreign partner could hand it on to another foreign partner that the UK would not pass it to, or be used for operations for which the UK would not approve."

 

Graham Wood of Privacy International added: “After three years of litigation, just before the court hearing we learn not only are safeguards for sharing our sensitive data non-existent, but the government has databases with our social media information and is potentially sharing access to this information with foreign governments. The risks associated with these activities are painfully obvious.”

 

GCHQ has confirmed that it shares entire databases of “raw sigint” (signals intelligence) data with industry partners, “contracted to develop new systems and capabilities for GCHQ”.

 

In 2016, the Investigatory Powers Tribunal ruled UK intelligence agencies had been unlawfully collecting the population’s mobile phone and internet data for 17 years.

[TheHowieLama]

Neither Privacy International or Cambridge Analytica are the smartest fellas in the room -- if they can get it - everyone who really wants it already has it.

 

And no one should be surprised.

[neko]

Is this really anything new? I mean, if I look at something online, a jacket or a pair of trainers or something, it’s always advertised on my timeline the next day. It’s a bit weird but surely it’s not a surprise.

 

Anyway, I’ve made some changes to my profile to combat the bastards. I’m now a 72 year old Mexican woman and I’ll be spending the rest of the week looking at taco recipes and browsing The Cancun Way.

 

I'd be keen to make friendship.

[Section_31]

I think it makes sense to keep your profile reasonably vague. I deleted facebook in 2014 and my new account is just basically my name. It's weird though because when you sign up Facebook loses its shit if you don't input all the fields, it starts going through your friends list asking you if you live in the same city/work in the same company as they do. 

[Spy Bee]

Really good explanation of this whole thing here: https://twitter.com/saradannerdukic/status/976125179049988097

[Spy Bee]

[sir roger]

'My information is that we don't hold any current contracts with them'. That's not even close to what you were being asked is it , Mrs May ?

[TheHowieLama]

Really good explanation of this whole thing here: https://twitter.com/saradannerdukic/status/976125179049988097

 

Good read -- in keeping with the current state of the GF -- Sara whats her face - would.

[SasaS]

Good read -- in keeping with the current state of the GF -- Sara whats her face - would.

 

 

You can learn more about the classically trained Sara and then make your move.

 

https://marieforleobschool.com/review/sara-danner-dukic/