Facebook Dating Cleared for Launch in EU
November 6, 2020
Facebook has cleared a regulatory hurdle in Europe, meaning it will soon launch its dating service in 32 more countries over a year after going live in the US. An opt-in option within the Facebook app, the service is currently available in 20 countries. Voice of America reports the development in, “Facebook Launches Dating Service in Europe.” The brief write-up reveals:
“The social media company had postponed the rollout of Facebook Dating in Europe in February after concerns were raised by Ireland’s Data Protection Commissioner (DPC), the main regulator in the European Union for a number of the world’s biggest technology firms, including Facebook. The DPC had said it was told about the Feb. 13 launch date on Feb. 3 and was very concerned about being given such short notice. It also said it was not given documentation regarding data protection impact assessments or decision-making processes that had been undertaken by Facebook.”
Facebook Dating’s product manager Kate Orseth assures us that users who create a dating profile can delete it whenever they want without deleting their entire Facebook profile. The service grabs first names and ages from users’ Facebook profiles and does not allow users to edit them. Last names are not displayed, but one can choose to share other personal information right from the main profile. How many users understand how easily AI tech could be used to correlate that information and pinpoint their identities? We advise caution for anyone who chooses to use Facebook Dating, whatever continent one lives on.
Cynthia Murrell, November 6, 2020
Facebook: High School Science Club Management Faces Modest Challenge
November 4, 2020
Imagine running an elite high school for really smart people. Now think about having almost half of the people in school think you are a dork. Sound cool?
According to “49% Facebook Employees Don’t Believe It Had Positive Impact On World” seems to suggest that the senior management of ever lovable Facebook has this hurdle to surmount, crawl around, tunnel under, or leap over. The write up states:
Facebook released the results of its internal half-yearly “Pulse survey.” One of the key findings reported by Buzzfeed is that only 51% of employees believe that Facebook is having a positive impact on the world. The survey was taken by 49,000 Facebook employees in a period of two weeks in October.
How does one manage this “half don’t get with the program” issue? The write up does not consider this management question. But we learn:
Recently, the company has been working on various issues with the platform. The company first got rid of anti-vax content, then aimed to remove misinformation about the holocaust. The social media giant also took two good initiatives for flu shots and making U.S. citizens aware of voting. While those are all good things, the issues run deeper.
The challenge, however, is not limited to employees. If “Most Americans Think Social Media Has a Negative Effect on the US” presents accurate data, Facebook faces a larger management task.
Even more intriguing is Facebook’s growth runway. “Facebook Makes More Money per User Than Rivals, But It’s Running Out of Growth Options” asserts that Snap and Pinterest seems to be in “double digit year-over-year growth in users, revenue, and average revenue per user.” The reason? Advertising strategies.
“Move fast and break things” may apply to running a company in an manner that keeps half of the employees in a happy place. Maybe if management buys lunch, more people will feel good about the company’s innovative approach to making the world closer together. Maybe?
Stephen E Arnold, November 4, 2020
Facebook: Be a Good Neighbor
October 27, 2020
Engadget published “Facebook Is Testing a Nextdoor-Like Neighborhoods Feature in Canada.” The write up reports:
Facebook is testing a feature called Neighborhoods that would allow users to join community-based groups, much as you can with Nextdoor.
The article says:
Facebook’s Neighborhoods feature could allow the social network to display hyper-local ads and gather more data on users, judging by the screenshots seen so far.
At the end of the write up, the author reminds me that Facebook is under investigation.
What’s interesting is that the Facebook “innovation,” if the article is accurate, is a good example of me-too; that is, a smaller company figures out a service, attracts users, and, on the surface at least, is successful.
Could the business tactics playbook for an outfit like Facebook contain this tactic: Copy and crush?
Worth watching as the country of Facebook confronts those next door. Now the music for “Won’t You Be My Neighbor” are echoing:
It’s a beautiful day in this neighborhood,
A beautiful day for a neighbor.
Would you be mine?
Could you be mine?…
Stephen E Arnold, October 27, 2020
Algorithm Tuning: Zeros and Ones Plus Human Judgment
October 23, 2020
This is the Korg OT-120 Orchestral Tuner. You can buy it on Amazon for $53. It is a chromatic tuner with an eight octave detection range that supports band and orchestra instruments. Physics tune pianos, organs, and other instruments. Science!
This is the traditional piano tuner’s kit.
You will need ears, judgment, and patience. Richard Feynman wrote a letter to a piano tuner. The interesting point in Dr. Feynman’s note was information about the non-zero stiffness of piano strings affects tuning. The implication? A piano tuner may have to factor in the harmonics of the human ear.
The Korg does hertz; the piano tuner does squishy human, wetware, and subjective things.
I thought about the boundary between algorithms and judgment in terms of piano tuning as I read “Facebook Manipulated the News You See to Appease Republicans, Insiders Say”, published by Mother Jones, an information service not happy with the notes generated by the Facebook really big organ. The main idea is that human judgment adjusted zeros, ones, and numerical recipes to obtain desirable results.
The write up reports:
In late 2017, Zuckerberg told his engineers and data scientists to design algorithmic “ranking changes” that would dial down the temperature.
Piano tuners fool around to deliver the “sound” judged “right” for the venue, the score, and the musician. Facebook seems to be grabbing the old-fashioned tuner’s kit, not the nifty zeros and ones gizmos.
The article adds:
The code was tweaked, and executives were given a new presentation showing less impact on these conservative sites and more harm to progressive-leaning publishers
What happened?
We learn:
for more than two years, the news diets of Facebook audiences have been spiked with hyper conservative content—content that would have reached far fewer people had the company not deliberately tweaked the dials to keep it coming, even as it throttled independent journalism. For the former employee, the episode was emblematic of the false equivalencies and anti-democratic impulses that have characterized Facebook’s actions in the age of Trump, and it became “one of the many reasons I left Facebook.”
The specific impact on Mother Jones was, according to the article:
Average traffic from Facebook to our content decreased 37 percent between the six months prior to the change and the six months after.
Human judgment about tool use reveal that information issues once sorted slowly by numerous gatekeepers can be done more efficiently. The ones and zeros, however, resolve to what a human decides. With a big information lever like Facebook, the effort for change may be slight, but the impact significant. The problem is not ones and zeros; the problem is human judgment, intent, and understanding of context. Get it wrong and people’s teeth are set on edge. Unpleasant. Some maestros throw tantrums and seek another tuner.
Stephen E Arnold, October 23, 2020
Amusing, That Facebook: Born to Curate
October 22, 2020
Facebook loves it when users share news, photos, and opinions, unless they speak ill of the social media platform. Vice explains how Facebook limits free speech in: “Facebook Just Forced Its Most Powerful Critics Offline.”
Facebook does not like the Real Facebook Oversight Board, a group founded in September 2020 when the social media company failed to run its own oversight board in time for the US presidential election. Because Facebook did not like the Real Facebook Oversight Board, they used their legal clout to force the group offline. Facebook wrote the group’s ISP to remove its Web site and succeeded.
What is the Real Facebook Oversight Board?
“The group is made up of dozens of prominent academics, activists, lawyers, and journalists whose goal is to hold Facebook accountable in the run-up to the election next month. Facebook’s own Oversight Board, which was announced 13 months ago, will not meet for the first time until later this month, and won’t consider any issues related to the election.”
Facebook complained the Real Facebook Oversight Board was involved in phishing scams. Usually when a request to remove a Web site reaches an ISP, there is a despite resolution process that takes months and ultimately a court order must be obtained to terminate the site. Facebook had another Web site owned by the Real Facebook Oversight Board removed in the past.
Facebook denied responsibility stating the Real Facebook Oversight Board’s Web site was taken offline because it contained the word “facebook” and violated copyright. Email documentation from Facebook proves otherwise. The company is shaping reality in order to protect its public image and troll its critics. Is Facebook’s editorial process veering away from bright, white lines?
Whitney Grace, October 22, 2020
Journalists Do More Than Report: The Covid Determination
October 17, 2020
One of the DarkCyber research team alerted me to “Facebook Greatest Source of Covid-19 Disinformation, Journalists Say.” That’s the factoid, according to the “real” journalists at a British newspaper.
The main point of the write up may be an interesting way to send this message, “Hey, we are not to blame for erroneous Rona info.” I hear the message.
The write up states:
The majority of journalists covering the pandemic say Facebook is the biggest spreader of disinformation, outstripping elected officials who are also a top source, according to an international survey of journalism and Covid-19.
The survey prompted another Guardian article in August 2020.
Let’s assume Facebook and the other social media high pressure data hoses are responsible for bad, weaponized, or just incorrect Rona info. Furthermore, let’s accept these assertions:
Journalism is one of the worst affected industries during the pandemic as hundreds of jobs have been lost and outlets closed in Australia alone. Ninety per cent of journalists surveyed said their media company had implemented austerity measures including job losses, salary cuts and outlet closures.
The impression the write up creates in the malleable Play-doh of my mind is that journalists are no longer reporting the news. “Real” journalists are making the news, and it is about time!
The sample probably reflects the respondents reaction to the questions on the survey, which remain unknown to me. The survey itself may have been structured as a dark pattern. What better way to explain that bad things are happening to “real” journalists.
What’s interesting is that “real” journalists know that Facebook and other social media systems are bad.
One question, “How long has it taken “real” journalists to figure out the harsh realities of digital streams of users unfettered by internal or external constraints.
Maybe the news is: “It is too late.” Maybe the working hypothesis is that “better late than never”?
Stephen E Arnold, October 17, 2020
Facebook: Interesting Data If Accurate
October 16, 2020
DarkCyber spotted a factoid of interest to law enforcement professionals in “Facebook Responsible for 94% of 69 Million Child Sex Abuse Images Reported by US Tech Firms.”
Facebook has previously announced plans to fully encrypt communications in its Messenger app, as well as its Instagram Direct service – on top of WhatsApp, which is already encrypted – meaning no one apart from the sender and recipient can read or modify messages.
Now about Facebook’s content curation procedures? End-to-end encryption of ad supported private messaging services appears to benefit bad actors.
Stephen E Arnold, October 16, 2020
Avaaz Facebook Report: Another Road Map for Bad Actors?
October 14, 2020
DarkCyber is intrigued by research reports which try to alert the public to an issue. Often the reports provide a road map for bad actors who are looking for a new method or angle to practice their dark arts. “Facebook’s Algorithm: A Major Threat to Public Health” may be a recent example of doing right going wrong.
Avaaz is, according to the organization’s Web site:
a global web movement to bring people-powered politics to decision-making everywhere.
A 33-page study, published in late August 2020, is available without charge at this link. The publication covers health misinformation through the lens of Facebook’s apparently flawed content curation mechanisms.
For bad actors (real or would be), the document explains:
- The relationship between Web pages with “disinformation” and Facebook sites
- The amplification function of content generators
- Utility of a message output in multiple languages
- The role of backlinks
- A list of “gaps in Facebook’s” content curation method.
Interesting report and one which may help some individuals operate more effectively. Facebook’s content curation has some flaws. The company flagged a photograph of onions as salacious. No, really.
Stephen E Arnold, October 14, 2020
Facebook: Merging Apps Before the Call to Break It Up
October 7, 2020
DarkCyber noted “Facebook Is Merging Messenger into Instagram.” The write up explains:
…Facebook is starting to unify its messaging platforms across apps. They will start including more of Messenger’s features into Instagram’s direct messaging chat platform. It will also add the ability to send messages across the two apps.
DarkCyber believes that unified messaging may have some downstream consequences. On one hand, certain government requests for data may be more helpful if Facebook provides the requested information. On the other hand, breaking up the company could become more difficult.
Stephen E Arnold, October 7, 2020
Facebook Is Nothing If Not Charming
October 5, 2020
Facebook spies on its users by collecting their personal information from hobbies, birthdays, relationships, and vacation spots. Facebook users voluntarily share this information publicly and/or privately. As a result, the company sells that information to advertisers. Facebook also spies on its competitors, but it does so in a more sophisticated way says the BBC article “Facebook Security App Used To ‘Spy’ On Competitors.”
Facebook apparently used its cross-party Onavo VPN to collect information on its competitors knowingly and in violation of anti-piracy laws. The Commons Committee discussed the incident in a report that is more than one hundred pages. Here is the gist of the report:
“The Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee wrote that through the use of Onavo, which was billed as a way to give users an extra layer of security, Facebook could ‘collect app usage data from its customers to assess not only how many people had downloaded apps, but how often they used them”.
The report added:
‘This knowledge helped them to decide which companies were performing well and therefore gave them invaluable data on possible competitors. They could then acquire those companies, or shut down those they judged to be a threat.”
Even more alarming are the details about ways Facebook could shut down services it provides to its competition. Twitter’s video sharing app Vine is an example of how Facebook destroyed a competitor. Twitter wanted Vine users to find friends via their Facebook accounts, but Zuckerberg nixed that idea. Vine shuttered in 2016.
Facebook does something equally nefarious with a white list of approved apps that are allowed to use Facebook user data. Among the 5,000 approved apps are Netflix, Airbnb, and Lyft. These app companies supposedly spend $250,000 on Facebook advertising to keep their coveted position.
Zuckerburg wrote in an email:
“I think we leak info to developers, but I just can’t think of any instances where that data has leaked from developer to developer and caused a real issue for us.”
There was the Cambridge Analytica scandal where voter information was collected through a personality quiz. The data of users and their friends was stolen and it profiled 82 million Americans, then that information was sold to the Cambridge Analytica company. The United Kingdom fined Facebook 500,000 pounds and the company apologized.
It will not be the first time Facebook steals and sells user information. We wonder how their competition spies on users and sells their data.
Whitney Grace, October 5, 2020
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
