You posted your life online, and now you're angry that someone read it.

[lindysalsagal]

Honestly, I don't get it. What did you think was going to happen?

What does the fine print in the acceptance clause say? They own it all, right???

[Flaleftist]

1. I think its more about the data being used to

target individuals with propaganda, which may have been enough to swing the election that people are upset about.

But yes, no one should really be surprised that it happened.

[backtoblue]

2. I think it's deeper than that

The data collected was used by a company specializing in psychological warfare. The personal data that they gathered was used to target the emotions of people, with false or misleading information.

[bdamomma]

53. Sounds like

a tactic Russia would use.

[maxsolomon]

3. DU Blame The Victim, Part 1,000

"Anyone with a FB Account should have known better, like I did."

What are you saying in this OP that hasn't been said already 50 times on DU today?

[ret5hd]

33. Hey! Stop that! We all know things sound better from our own mouths...

and it feels better too!

[leftstreet]

4. So retailers, banks, etc don't target FBers with ads?

I don't get this whole thing, just don't get it

[emulatorloo]

50. Watch the channel 4 report. They targeted people based on their fears and paranoia, feeding

them and exploiting them psychologically with targeted fake news.

[JHB]

81. ...which, let's not forget, is something conservatives have been doing for 40 years...

The scale and scope is bigger now, but collecting data, analyzing it, and targeting people based on their fear and paranoia has been conservative Standard Operating Procedure since the 1970s, when Richard Viguerie's application of his direct mail/advertising expertise to political fundraising and agenda-pushing started gaining real traction.

[fescuerescue]

90. That's advertising 101

Hell that's been standard since advertising wasn't invented.

[berni_mccoy]

5. FB violated their own privacy agreement with users.

[Me.]

6. !. They Weaponized The Info

and then glommed onto your friends and family through you and weaponized their info too. And despite the fine print, weren't users supposed to be asked before their info was passed along?

[Squinch]

14. The whistleblower said they could profile you so they knew you better than any friend. And

they specifically looked for "neurotic" and "paranoid" vulnerability areas. THEN they dropped the things most likely to frighten, anger you or make you anxious into your feed. They had already figured where to put it so that you were most likely to find it and into the format you were most likely to respond to.

[Me.]

41. Precisely

It was propaganda...I heard one man say they made ads they knew would frighten/affect you even if you didn't...they were looking for an I didn't know that scared/bothered/frightened me end result.

[msongs]

7. FB clearly indicates it will use your preferences to provide information they think you might like.

[blogslut]

8. It wasn't just that the survey collected data from those who opted-in.

The algorithm went further and collected the data of persons on those user's friend's lists.

Here are some basic things most people include in the FB profiles:

1. Their phone number
2. Their employer
3. Their city
4. Their high school and college

[VOX]

9. Dont blame the victims (users) for having their data weaponized in an attack on our democracy.

I don’t think such activity is covered, even in its fine print.

[backtoblue]

15. Interesting interview

[VOX]

25. *Its about lifestyle information, tut-tut.*

Bullshit sounds better when delivered with a Brit accent.

Interesting, indeed. Thanks for posting!

[poboy2]

39. Pure manipulative mind-fuckery. Thank you. -nt

[octoberlib]

10. It's about a professor posting a questionnaire through an app he posted on FB that he said

was for a psychological research project and then passing the information he'd gathered to a 3rd party to be used to target voters. This is illegal in the UK under their privacy laws and it ought to be here, too. Regardless, it was a violation of FB's TOS and they should have banned them 2 years ago when they found out about it. Wyden is calling for Zuckerberg to appear before the Senate.

[Squinch]

19. They then took all the responders to that questionnaire and used them to access the

accounts of everyone the responders knew. So if you answer the questionnaire and I am your friend, now they have ALL my data through no action of my own. And then they psychologically profile me to find my fears, paranoia and anxieties.

And ALL that information was passed on to the trump campaign.

[octoberlib]

22. I forgot to mention that. Thanks!

[milestogo]

11. I hope people will finally stop saying "We're all on Facebook"

and organizations will stop depending on Facebook for everything.

Some of us have never been on Facebook, and for good reason.

[lindysalsagal]

20. Amen.

[hatrack]

23. I'm not, didn't really want to be on FB, and now will never sign up .. .

Fuck Zuckerberg and fuck Facebook - may it become (at best) the next Myspace.

[DinahMoeHum]

26. I've never had a Facebook or Twitter account.

I don't swim in dirty water.

[defacto7]

31. You've got that right.

I was into Internet security for a time, long enough to see what was happening. Never had FB, never will.

[Skittles]

71. THANK YOU

[Dave Starsky]

85. I was on Facebook for about two weeks.

I thought it was creepy as fuck, but I couldn't put my finger on why. Maybe it was the constant "friend" requests from people I'd either never heard of or whom I disliked intensely. Maybe it was the incessant pleas to join ridiculous games like Mafia Wars that I had no time for. Maybe it was the barrage of ads for Republican candidates and anything having to do with the Mormon Church. (It always baffled me why they seemed to be convinced that I was a Mormon Republican--an idea that is laughable, to anyone who knows me. NOW I get it.)

[malaise]

97. +1,000

Never signed up - never will

[rainin]

12. It's deeper than that. There are privacy settings which allow you to restrict

access to your information to whomever you choose. I am very restrictive so my public profile looks pretty skimpy. The reason this is a story is CA hacked data from millions of people without their permission.

[bdamomma]

56. Yes I have my privacy

settings on limited also. But I don't put my life story on FB.

[Girard442]

13. Any data that can be collected and retained will be and any database than can be abused will be.

This is your mantra for the 21st century.

[Squinch]

16. Check out this video. It's a lot worse than that.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=10381610

[onecaliberal]

17. They did not tell people they would sell it to the highest bidder for psychological evaluation

[Cha]

73. Did Zuckerman sell the data?

[ck4829]

18. That's why I've got a parody account.

Full of bizarre contradictory likes and other weird stuff.

[Hortensis]

21. Lindysalsagal, your post suggests you haven't thought about this,

much less thought it through.

When you walk on any floor surface, you do it with the reasonable expectation that it's fit for foot traffic. If 4 out of 5 people who do then fall due to a dangerously slippery surface, you and they know that it cannot meet regulations and have the expectation that the surface must be replaced and any medical and other expenses resulting from its deficient nature be reimbursed.

I choose this example because I slipped and crashed to the floor the first two times I walked on a newly installed restaurant flooring across from my office, the only 2 such falls in my entire life. Due to my background in commercial property and casualty insurance, I got to explain to the clueless owner his rights and responsibilities in this case (I wasn't the only one who fell on this astonishing floor), and the flooring was covered with temporary carpet that very day--ordered and paid for by his insurer, who then went after the flooring company.

In any case, if society is to have this technology, and we should, society NEEDS to be able to trust it, and the law in this respect was extremely well established before our nation was even born.

This failure of our systems, due to Republicans in congress blocking adequate action for decades, and due to underestimating just how big the threat is, will force the regulations most of us knew all along were needed (if not just how MUCH).

[lindysalsagal]

24. I thought far enough to know I don't want to be on it, for exactly these reasons, among others.

And so I'm not.

[Hortensis]

28. Yes, well you're probably a college-level mentality

among high-school average minds in a college-level world, or perhaps just an internet version of the kind of person who won't take prescription medicines because they distrust "big pharm." But most people do NOT have college-level brains, and most are accustomed to life in an advanced nation where this kind intensive attack on consumers is simply not allowed. For important reasons.

One can say "should" all day long, but how many people meet that standard? That's why we have regulations on business. Regulations are limits we set on their ability to hurt people. We have them to provide a fairly level field for everyone to live their lives on, without having to consult an attorney before registering a warranty for a new refrigerator or signing up for a social media membership.

Btw, Peter Thiel, Robert Spencer, and the Koch brothers all agree that it's YOUR personal responsibility to protect yourself from them and that government regulations should all be repealed. And if you don't know how to use the legal system to protect yourself, well, just pull out your checkbook and hire a team who do. Like they do.

[lostnfound]

86. Well isnt that special. (Church lady voice). So youre smarter? Predictive? Or less pressured..

By one favorite relative who armtwisted you into it a few years ago when you were generally skeptical of it but finally went along with it because people use it for their creative outlet not just kid pics, and a favorite beloved relative was just so disappointed you weren’t looking.

Since YOU were smarter, this isn’t your problem so why would you bother to poke others in the eye over it?
Just curious.

I personally resisted, resisted, resisted and then caved. Said “f it, were all going to die anyway”or something equally fatalistic.

[lindysalsagal]

35. Nobody has to put personal information on any social media platform. End of discussion.

A floor is not a logical comparison. The floor is not designed to steal your information.

[bettyellen]

42. Nobody had to do more than innocuous conversations with friends to be targeted-

And have that information illegally sold to be paired w voter reg data, sales data from stores, cookies from browsers. They have a file on you whether you FB or not- if you ever vote and or use a credit card, they know enough to stick you in one of their buckets developed by tricking others into taking the survey.

[Hortensis]

82. Excellent important points, and briefly stated too. :)

[bettyellen]

94. And it appears they breached private messages, probably here too.

I know my email got into some trolls hands at DU, and that poster and I exchanged phone numbers here. Probably all part of the file. I get that it’s going to be harder for many Dems to believe becasue we were not the swing voters targeted. I have some woo woo lefty friend who definitely were- probably just to spread and normalize the fake news. Their votes weren’t going to help but they were effective Hillary advocacy suppressors.

[Hortensis]

95. Oh, my to that. I have no trouble at all believing

professional agents are very busy on DU targeting vulnerable possible swingers, seducing the vulnerable away from Democrats who can defeat Republicans to weak wedge candidates who can't. Of course, discouraging them into not voting at all is the highest goal.

How could it be otherwise? Besides our large core of principled Democrats, DU peculiarly also attracts more of the "passionately disaffected" and just disaffected, wanting an anti-establishment hero to follow, than I've seen in one place since the 1960s. They just have nowhere else to go that has the size and vitality of DU's community. They should be safe among friends here, but these are not safe times.

[dalton99a]

27. How they did it:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/mar/17/facebook-cambridge-analytica-kogan-data-algorithm

How Cambridge Analytica turned Facebook ‘likes’ into a lucrative political tool
The algorithm used in the Facebook data breach trawled though personal data for information on sexual orientation, race, gender – and even intelligence and childhood trauma
Carole Cadwalladr and Emma Graham-Harrison
Sat 17 Mar 2018 09.02 EDT

...

The academic (Aleksandr Kogan) had developed a Facebook app which featured a personality quiz, and Cambridge Analytica paid for people to take it, advertising on platforms such as Amazon’s Mechanical Turk.

The app recorded the results of each quiz, collected data from the taker’s Facebook account – and, crucially, extracted the data of their Facebook friends as well.

The scale of the data collection Cambridge Analytica paid for was so large it triggered an automatic shutdown of the app’s ability to harvest profiles. But Kogan told a colleague he “spoke with an engineer” to get the restriction lifted and, within a day or two, work resumed.

Within months, Kogan and Cambridge Analytica had a database of millions of US voters that had its own algorithm to scan them, identifying likely political persuasions and personality traits. They could then decide who to target and craft their messages that was likely to appeal to them – a political approach known as “micro-targeting”.

[Squinch]

30. Great graphic. But I would disagree with the "highly personalized advertising."

Christopher wylie, one of the developers and a whistleblower, said they made detailed psychological profiles that included areas of vulnerability, including fears, anxieties, neuroses and paranoia that the user didn't necessarily even know he or she possessed.

Then they figured out how each user best absorbed information: blogs, friends, ads, social media sites etc. They created blogs and sites and ads and friend posts and made sure the user then got maximum exposure to information that exploited their own vulnerabilities to change their opinions and voting behavior.

[backtoblue]

44. Exploitation

Of childhood trauma!? This is so fucked up. I'm having a hard time e trying to get this point across to my family.

[Squinch]

45. I know. Everyone is calling it a data breach. If a data breach is a clogged sink, this is Lake Erie.

[Tatiana]

48. This explains why Russia hacked our voter rolls.

They were trying to match up the voting data with the profile information gleaned from Facebook.

[mythology]

29. Before you get too smug

I hope you don't visit any page with a Facebook social media button. If you have, Facebook is tracking you as well.

In the medical community there is a debate about what informed consent means. We need that conversation around EULAs. But we also need an higher authority to enforce privacy options as these companies have no incentives to do.

[lindysalsagal]

36. I have not posted one speck of information about myself online.

There's nothing to follow.

[bettyellen]

43. You have here, and if you have TV, a credit card, are registered to vote they have a great file on

you already. Probably better than mine, I get zero political ads on FB. Probably because they know I’m a dedicated liberal Dem and a waste of their time.

[cwydro]

47. Youve posted information about yourself right here.

I’ve read it.

[unc70]

62. Every web page you view posts information about you online

A huge amount of information is made available to any web site you visit. Even if you browse in “private” mode. (I sometimes browse with a primitive text-only browser, w3m, to limit what info is exposed.)

The default browser identity info alone is enough to establish a unique digital “signature” to consolidate all the browser history for you across web sites. A slightly malicious program script embedded in an ad can cleverly retrieve your private info from your phone or PC.

Another type of problem with Facebook, et al is that your friends or family routinely post pictures and information linked to your name, email, or phone.

[meadowlander]

66. You mean except that you're a woman interested in dance

who supports unions and votes for democrats?

And that's without bothering to search your posting history.

[cwydro]

75. And who works in education.

I seem to remember a post referencing that.

[pnwmom]

70. That's what you think. Do you have friends who know your email address

and are on FB themselves? How do you know they haven't shared your info with FB?

https://boingboing.net/2017/11/08/involuntary-profiling.html

Facebook is well understood as being a major customer of third-party data-brokers, who compile huge dossiers on people based on their spending, internet and phone usage, employment history and so on. In addition, Facebook encourages users to upload their entire address books to the system to "find your friends," and users generally don't appreciate that they may be leaking sensitive information, including nicknames, private numbers, and connections to the system.

Facebook mines this data to create "shadow profiles" of its billions of users. These are profiles that are filled with data about you that you have never consciously provided to the system -- data mined from third parties, including your friends, but also those spooky data-brokers. Facebook's shadow profile system was first confirmed in 2013 when it accidentally leaked users' shadow profiles to them along with their own data, something the company says it will never do again out of (ironic) respect for the privacy of the people who provided the data that goes into your shadow profile.

Facebook's shadow profiles are involuntary and there's no opt-out. Facebook has shadow profiles on people who don't use the service. For example, even though I'm not a Facebook user, multiple people have uploaded their address books containing my email and phone number to the system, allowing Facebook to create a profile of my contacts by looking at who lists me as a contact.

[Lars39]

74. And facial recognition too

If one of your friends uploads an identified group photo, you are tagged.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

91. You're funny.

If you are serious, you have no clue how the internet works. Short version: the only way there is no information about you online is if you have never gone on the internet.

[LeftInTX]

100. Your voting record contains much more information about you than FB!!

Any campaign can access your voting record.

Campaigns often look at "swing voters" to target. Swing voters can be determined by voting records, but it isn't easy work. It often requires follow up with the voter.

Maybe CA thought their surveys were cheaper and easier than poring over voter records/and or canvassing looking for swing voters?

[mr_lebowski]

103. They cannot see who you voted for ... only that you voted ...

Let's not freak people out unnecessarily here ...

[LeftInTX]

105. No, but they know whether you vote in Democratic or Republican primaries

They know how often you vote, whether you vote in mid-terms etc.

For instance, if someone votes in Democratic primaries in mid-terms and presidential elections over a long period of time, one can assume they are a strong Democrat. Same with Republicans.

Some who voted in the Democratic Primary in 2008 and again in 2016, but not in 2012 is probably someone who prefers Democratic presidents.

A swing voter could be someone who doesn't vote in primaries. But even then, you can tell a bit about them from their voting habits. Do they only vote in presidential years etc? Do they only vote when a race is competitive?

Your address and often your phone number is in your voting record.

[IronLionZion]

89. The more smug people

are more unaware of how much of their data has been collected without their knowledge or consent and used for who knows what. Often by seemingly innocent methods. It's so much more than Facebook.

Ignorance is bliss

[Tipperary]

93. Yes indeed.

[Skittles]

32. yup

jeez, who could IMAGINE this could happen?

[lindysalsagal]

37. Exactly.

[pnwmom]

34. No. You are supposed to be determining which data is public and which is private.

And some people approved the release of data to apps and some didn't -- but they "scraped" the data of even people who had NOT approved its release.

[Blue_Adept]

38. I love the holier than thou brigade

Sounds a lot like the anti-Apple brigade around these parts as well.

[Skittles]

49. and yet....they are right

[blake2012]

40. That is a completely unfair statement

You are posting this m a message board with advertisers. This means youth go to other websites as well. That information should not be sold illicitly to target political campaigns without your consent.

[Lee-Lee]

46. There is a lesson here- call me holier than thou if it makes you feel better

The moment you put any of your data on anyone else’s system you have lost control of that data.

At best you are trusting them to be honest when they say it won’t be shared any also to have competent security to avoid it being misused.

And in the real world you can’t count on any of that.

There is a market for data. For your data. And there are people that will only gather it legally, there are people who will be less than legal.

If you think what CA is doing was bad, you will hate what the even blacker hat types are doing to steal your data and sell it.

This is just reality. If you put it on Facebook or twitter or a forum or even in an email you are no longer in control of it and should assume it will be compromised, either because the company you trusted it with intentionally did or because the people you trusted with it didn’t secure it well enough.

All your online activity should be done with this in mind.

I do a lot of my job checking out the online profiles of people for background checks. If I am checking you I dig into your online presence. I see what you post and who your friends are and your patterns. I can analyze who your friends are and who you interact with in posts to see who your social circle is and what kind of company you keep.

And it’s all out there because you put it there.

Hell, the number of crimes I’ve come across and reported in the years I have been doing this is astounding. From human trafficking to firearms violations to poaching to theft to vehicle title fraud. People breaking the law and bragging about it.

First rule of online is don’t be stupid. Second rule of online is assume anything you post can be seen by anyone.

[lindysalsagal]

59. Only post what you would put on a billboard on the side of a road. Seriously.

That's how I think of it. But it's a billboard that will never, ever totally go away.

[Lee-Lee]

77. Exactly. One day your great grandkids will see everything you posted

I have a Facebook account for my personal stuff.

It’s not using my real last name and never has.

It has no pictures of my face, and I don’t allow people to tag me.

It’s where I do connect with friends and family and say what’s on my mind, to a degree.

I have another one that has my name. It has my picture. I have a few friends and family on it. It is my “public page”. No politics, no personal info. I share some stupid memes to keep it active and it’s the page you will see if you look me up.

[meadowlander]

64. If I forget my cell phone in the bathroom and someone steals it

that doesn't make theft not a crime.

Just because the victim doesn't exercise all possible diligence doesn't mean either that a crime was not committed against them or that they deserved it.

[Lee-Lee]

76. Nobody said it was not a crime

What I am saying is that it is common and likely, so act accordingly.

People need to accept a certain level of responsibility for safeguarding their own data just like everything else, like locking their home or car. Leaving your cell phone in a bathroom is a one time slip, throwing all your personal info out on unsecured platforms you don’t control online is more like leaving your cell phone out on the street in a bad part of town every night when you sleep and then acting astounded and like you have no responsibility for what happens when it gets taken one day.

Would it be a crime for someone to steal it? Absolutely. Would you still be an idiot if you didn’t expect it to be stolen when you left it sitting there like that? Yes, you would.

[emulatorloo]

51. They didnt just read it. They stole information and psychological profiled you and fucked

W your mind based on your deepest fears and paranoia.

[greymattermom]

52. So I knew this

and when I wanted to see pictures of the beach, I looked for beaches on facebook. It was just my entertainment. I have a fake name and fake city too. They could figure it out if they really wanted to, but I only post photographs of scenery and say hi to my grandkids. I'm amused by the ads. They always guess wrong about who I am.

[TubbersUK]

54. The company collecting the data was not authorized to share it with a 3rd party n/t

[dhol82]

55. I have a FB account

All the information they wanted from me is fake.
Who would actually list all of their personal data?

[Abu Pepe]

57. If you havent read this, then do

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_Popular_Delusions_and_the_Madness_of_Crowds

It was written in 1840 and reads like it could have been written today if a chapter for triumph of exhibitionism over privicy this century were added.

[Lithos]

58. That statement shows your lack of understanding of exactly what happened

it is almost like blaming the victim for wearing the wrong clothes and being in the wrong place.

CA essentially used various loopholes to gain access and misuse data to an extent without user's permission or understanding.

What happened is the equivalent of a data breech like what happened to Equifax. Equifax thru pure incompetence bordering on criminal negligence failed to prevent access and misuse of data which was trusted with them. Similarly, Facebook thru incompetence bordering on criminal negligence did the same.

And the comparison continues - both Equifax and Facebook purposefully have created an opaque and confusing system which makes it impossible for all but the most tech savvy of users from understanding exactly what happens in terms of data collection, data usage and data algorithms which are used. And as much as you may think you've limited your exposure by not being a member of Facebook or Equifax, they still will collect data on you thru the related Social and Knowledge Graphs of your connections and relationships which you can not control.

L-

[lindysalsagal]

60. No one knows exactly what is happening to posted information: This is the tip of the iceberg.

I can't know. I'll never know. No one knows.

That's why I'm not online.

They know what I buy online. So, I'm careful only to buy innocuous, meaningless things, like sweaters.

I do not bank online, I don't post my bank account to anywhere, I never type my ss number, ever.

I have no followers and I only follow a few public figures and I never post anything.

There's no there there, and it's going to stay that way.

[Lithos]

61. i would say you're very naive about your digital trail

Last edited Tue Mar 20, 2018, 12:32 AM - Edit history (1)

Do not take this as an attack, just a comment about how easy it is for companies to trace you.

Do you use a VPN and/or use TOR?
Do you avoid cookies and have a firewall which prevents unknown access to other sites? (Ad blockers do not count)
Do you avoid any/all use of a mobile phone?
Do you avoid any public WiFi or public access - Libraries, Work, etc.
Have you never used a form of digital payment - Paypal, Payment Card, etc.?
Have you never entered your real name - anywhere?
Do you prevent anyone from accessing your computer? Are you the only user? Are you sure you're the only user? (Work systems do not count)
Do you use Linux or Free BSD (ideally one of the distros with a Security focus - Ubuntu, Red Hat, Mint, do not qualify)
Have you successfully prevented your friends, acquaintances, total strangers from tagging you online?

If you can't answer "yes" truthfully, then you *might* have a clean digital history.

Note: For ultimate paranoia - it's fairly trivial for a company or anyone with access to your system to compromise it.

The fact you're posting here means someone *can* figure out who you are.

[cwydro]

92. Exactly.

Very naive.

[pnwmom]

68. Congrats. But I bet you have a cell phone.

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-43465968

You can of course, simply leave Facebook, but the campaign group Privacy International warns that privacy concerns extend beyond the social network.

"The current focus is on protecting your data being exploited by third parties, but your data is being exploited all the time," said a spokeswoman.

"Many apps on your phone will have permission to access location data, your entire phone book and so on. It is just the tip of the iceberg."

[LeftInTX]

98. Not the same...

As private citizen, I can go and get the profile of any of my friends or public figures. I can't get Ted Cruz' birthday from Equifax.

[Lithos]

99. Exactly the same

As a private citizen you can't get profiles for 50 million people. BTW, these profiles do include PII (Personally identifiable information) such as email, age, gender, relationships (and status), education, job and income, shopping habits, and likes/dislikes. It also includes tracking information including articles read, pages visited, time spent on each page, etc.

And even more, you get both the public and private side of such people. Secrets your friends have not told you are known by Facebook making their knowledge more detailed and revealing of the true self.

Combine this with Bayes Theorem and a few other algorithms, it's fairly easy to classify and target specific people.

L-

[JI7]

63. i don't think people are upset that someone read it but how it was used to manipulate people with

with lies .

[meadowlander]

65. If Facebook did nothing wrong,

why did they initially try to deny that Russia purchased any ads at all and then tried to deny that they had staff embedded at Cambridge Analytica?

They know they are in for some massive legal exposure here.

[continentalop2]

67. I think you misunderstand how this all works

I saw where you mentioned that you're not a facebook user and haven't posted any personal info online. But guess what, Facebook still likely has a profile created for you! They're called shadow profiles. Let's say even one of your friends, family members or acquaintances registered on Facebook and gave FB access to their contacts. Whatever info your friend had saved in their contacts under your name is now connected to a a "shadow profile" of you whether or not you even have a FB account. They likely have your name, address, email address, phone number and any other info that a friend may have saved in their contacts.

I've seen people mention that they signed up for FB under a fake name, or use multiple accounts, as though FB can't track your IP and figure out who you are anyway. Every website you visit is tracking you, and every purchase you make using credit cards, store loyalty cards, or coupons on an app on your phone is being tracked. Other apps you may have installed might be tracking your location. All of this information is being sold to data mining companies and can be correlated with other data to create a more complete picture of who you are.

You can sign up for FB with a fake name, make friends, and never post anything, and people can figure out who you are based on your network of friends. A few friends from your hometown who all went to the same high school together plus maybe a cluster of friends from college, and that's enough information to pinpoint who you are. This method has been used to catch Anonymous hackers.

BTW, there's all of this talk about the psychological profiles that Cambridge Analytica created, and I would assume that people who avoid facebook, use fake names, or never post any personal info can probably be associated with a particular psychological profile as well.

[pnwmom]

69. Thanks for the info, continentalop2. And welcome to DU!

[mr_lebowski]

104. One can keep a website like FB from knowing your IP if you use a VPN ...

Also, most cell phone networks randomly assign IP's to the phones on them, you don't 'have an ip' on your phone ... i mean you DO but not for long.

Most home internet connections also don't have an assigned 'static' IP's ... however they typically stay the same for fairly long periods so you may be identifiable for long periods, then suddenly become 'not ID'able' at least not until you log onto your account on the Website, using your newly assigned IP.

In theory FB should not have access to the mapping that ISP maintains between your currently assigned IP and your name/account info. If they do, that's totally messed up and it should be made ILLEGAL for ISP's to provide 'names' with "IPs", at least for residential accounts at a minimum.

[The_jackalope]

72. I encountered the Web in 1995, and realized instantly that privacy was a thing of the past

I had to come to terms with the idea that if I didn't want a piece of information to be available to the entire world, I could never, ever post it online, anywhere. Since then, from usenet to Facebook, I've never lost any sleep over it.

[ehrnst]

78. It appears they used and collected data in a way that they did not disclose. (nt)

[Alpeduez21]

79. You wore 'risque' clothing, and now you're angry that someone assualted you.

Honestly, I don't get it. What did you think was going to happen?

What does society say about dressing sexy? You're asking for it, right???

[pansypoo53219]

80. the onion did say it was part of the FBI. all i have is pics + political stuff.

can't stand facebook.

[Kilgore]

83. My point exactly

Why would anyone put the details of their lives on public, or semi public display?? I'm no Luddite, but neither a believer that all technology is good.

Would you post all the details of your finances on a billboard for all to see? Well that's essentially what happens when posting on social media.

In fairness, I have never understood the point of Facebook, don't use it, and probably never will. But I also don't understand the outrage of those that do because their data was harvested. You posted it. You gave them permission to take it. You agreed to do so in the fine print when you signed up.

[aikoaiko]

84. The only thing that concerns me is if FB violates their own policies.

Targeting me. I don’t care.
Understanding my hopes and fears. I dont care.
“Weaponizing” info or propoganda. I dont care.

The term “Weaponing info” is itself a scare tactic often used by the left that I find tedious.

I am interested generally in how data mining works and how it can be used for certain info distribution purposes, but not about me specifically.

[WhiteTara]

87. That's why everything I wrote about me was a lie

I get calls from people who wish me happy birthday on not my birthday that sort of thing.

The old adage, if you aren't paying for the product, you are the product, rings true here.

[Tipperary]

96. I have to wonder though, why bother? I mean are you messing with your friends or what?

I do not get the posters here bragging about their “fake” fb profiles. What is the point?

[WhiteTara]

102. My real friends know about me and don't send me birthday messages

in the middle of winter. I'm not bragging, simply stating that didn't feel the need to give out true personal information.

[IronLionZion]

88. You feel smart by thinking others are stupid

Honestly, I get it. And that's how they get you. By appealing to that bias. Because it feels good to look down on those other idiots.

You might not use Facebook, but there is a data about you on other sites and controlled by other companies that you might not know about. You don't know what your own browser and ISP are tracking, or how much spyware you have installed that was missed by spyware removers, or how many tracking cookies are following you around the internet.

We need regulations on what data companies can collect, how they collect it, and what they can do with it. The industry knows it's coming. That's why it's not just Facebook that got selloffs in the stock market yesterday.

[riverwalker]

101. Anyone who hasnt deleted Facebook, but complains about Trump

has some serious cognitive dissonance. Delete it, take away their power. You have texts, emails, telephone to “keep in touch”. Write a darn letter. No need for Facebook.