50 million Facebook profiles harvested for firm linked to former Trump adviser

[Charles]

So what? If it wasn't wrong when Obama used identical tactics then why is it wrong for Trump?

And this assumes that any of this had a meaningful impact on the election, which is not a given when you consider that very few people even saw the ads before the election, and the majority of ad buys were AFTER the election.

So you don't blame Obama at all? You find it right if he did the same thing with your data? Please answer "yes" or "no". For me this is rather easy. If the exact same method was used it was just as wrong.

Whether it had an impact or not does nothing to justify the method if the method is illegal or morally wrong. I guess you will agree with that, so why are you trying to change focus. I am finding it rahter absurd to see so many in hear trying to point to the "there is no evidence it had an impact" and other methods in order to avoid having to consider the method and consider whether we should really allow for this to happen.

[rogue06]

So what? If it wasn't wrong when Obama used identical tactics then why is it wrong for Trump?

00000000000000ars10.jpg

By now the answer is obvious.

Because Trump did it. That automatically wrong -- at least wrt him. Trump could cure cancer and the MSM/left would complain that he's caused a population explosion. OTOH Obama could bite off the head of a dog and they would fall all over themselves gushing about how he's made the world safer for cats.

[Mountain Man]

And yet it does not show that the information was gathered "in legitimate way and through the proper channels". Tassman said you were wrong in claiming so. Then you pointed to stuff you had already written which does not prove your statement.

Facebook itself said that it was legitimate and proper, and they've been allowing this sort of thing to happen for years, including by Obama who was slavishly praised as a "genius" for leveraging social media. But it appears to have only become a "problem" after Trump won the election.

[Mountain Man]

So you don't blame Obama at all? You find it right if he did the same thing with your data? Please answer "yes" or "no". For me this is rather easy. If the exact same method was used it was just as wrong.

I would love to see just one high profile story in the mainstream media retroactively condemning Obama for what Trump is being condemned for now.

As for my feelings on the matter, no, I really don't have a problem with it because these "data mining" operations are doing nothing more than collecting information that people have willingly made freely accessible. If these "data miners" were cracking Facebook's servers to get the data then that's a problem, but when people leave their digital front door wide open with a flashing sign that reads, "Come on in, y'all!" Well, that's on them.

[Charles]

Facebook itself said that it was legitimate and proper, and they've been allowing this sort of thing to happen for years, including by Obama who was slavishly praised as a "genius" for leveraging social media. But it appears to have only become a "problem" after Trump won the election.

https://www.theguardian.com/news/201...ce-us-election

[Charles]

I would love to see just one high profile story in the mainstream media retroactively condemning Obama for what Trump is being condemned for now.

As for my feelings on the matter, no, I really don't have a problem with it because these "data mining" operations are doing nothing more than collecting information that people have willingly made freely accessible. If these "data miners" were cracking Facebook's servers to get the data then that's a problem, but when people leave their digital front door wide open with a flashing sign that reads, "Come on in, y'all!" Well, that's on them.

Another easy one:

https://www.theguardian.com/news/201...ce-us-election

[Mountain Man]

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/0...t-masses-data/

[rogue06]

So they repeatedly and knowingly let Obama break the rules that they are now in a lather about Trump breaking. In my book Facebook essentially made a multi-million dollar donation to the Obama campaign that was never declared.

[Charles]

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/0...t-masses-data/

The fact that Facebook allows its data to be used in one context does not allow those who gain acces to data for that purpose to sell or share the information with others. It's not that difficult at all. The data was legitimately collected by another company than Cambridge Analytica and for other purposes than the ones Cambridge Analytica had. Cambridge Analytica's collection and use of the data was not legitimate.

[Mountain Man]

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/0...e-at-facebook/

[Mountain Man]

So they repeatedly and knowingly let Obama break the rules that they are now in a lather about Trump breaking. In my book Facebook essentially made a multi-million dollar donation to the Obama campaign that was never declared.

Not just the Obama campaign but who knows how many other companies. There's a reason Mark Zuckerberg has been trying to get in front of this, because if Facebook is held accountable for every similar "beach" in the past then that could be the end of his company.

[Mountain Man]

The fact that Facebook allows its data to be used in one context does not allow those who gain acces to data for that purpose to sell or share the information with others. It's not that difficult at all. The data was legitimately collected by another company than Cambridge Analytica and for other purposes than the ones Cambridge Analytica had. Cambridge Analytica's collection and use of the data was not legitimate.

Spin like that could make even a test pilot dizzy.

[Charles]

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/0...e-at-facebook/

[Charles]

Spin like that could make even a test pilot dizzy.

In this case it is the truth that makes you dizzy. Or it would seem it is rather your need to find your way around the truth than the truth in itself that makes you dizzy, because it is a very simple fact.

[Charles]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]27076[/ATTACH]

By now the answer is obvious.

Because Trump did it. That automatically wrong -- at least wrt him. Trump could cure cancer and the MSM/left would complain that he's caused a population explosion. OTOH Obama could bite off the head of a dog and they would fall all over themselves gushing about how he's made the world safer for cats.

I like the examples used in these cases. "Trump could cure cancer".... Give it a second thought and I am sure you will get it if you did not see it at the time of posting.