Cambridge Analytica got their data through a paid quiz that didn't fully disclose to the user what their friends and own data were going to be used for.
> If that was true, why did his university send him a warning letter that essentially confirms his concerns? He consulted a lawyer on the matter, he confirmed them as well.
The Canadian Bar Association which represents over 37,000 lawyers, judges, notaries, law associates, law professors and students across Canada says this is a good thing and not the freedom of speech slippery slope that its been made out to be.
The pro-NN crowd have turned this complex debate over an imperfect policy to a good-versus-evil battle over flipping a single legal switch and Ajit Pai is completely fueling that.
Title II is an 80 year old telephone rule that was stretched and deformed to fit the internet. Congress needs to pass real legislation that's specific to the needs of the internet.
"But the offer alarmed Swedish media companies, which warned that the deal gave Facebook an advantage over competitors, and Telia an edge over other telecom operators."
ISP's have a million and one other ways to be anti-competitive. Example, in New Zealand, one of the major ISP's runs 'Lightbox' a streaming competitor. If you sign up to any of their plans, you get free Lightbox.
This incentives the customer to not use other streaming services. You can talk about zero-rating all day long but no amount of neutrality regulation will prevent something like the example above from happening. What happens if Comcast decides that Hulu Plus will be free with their broadband? It has the same effect as if Comcast decided to zero-rate Hulu on their network.
For their to be real changes in the American ISP market, you need competition.
Just installed. Everything seems to be stable enough. A few little niggles, on Android, the OPML export is a bit finnicky. I was using Pocket Casts and it pops up a Share menu for you to export so I had to export to my file manager first before then selecting it. The app's interface is functional but could do with some polishing, for example, you can't rearrange your set of favorite podcasts.
Biggest annoyance for me thus far is loading speed. It always takes at least a second or so to load up a page. Seems like a small thing but it has an impact overall.
It was such a stupid decision for them to combine their opinion and editorial section with Comment Is Free. The latter being pretty trashy most of the time.
> It isn't news. It's propaganda. NYTimes and WaPo have been spearheading a political/propaganda campaign against social media ( fb, reddit, youtube, etc ) to reign them in. Traditional media has been trying to get social media to fall in line for nearly a decade.
This gives these media companies way too much credit. If they had this much self-awareness and intelligence they wouldn't have been caught out by the rise of social media in the first place.
"Traditional media" has had hundreds of years to get it's business model down and comfortably integrated into society, so of course new media is having the lion's share of the problems which is being reported on. This should all be totally obvious and expected - it's not really a massive conspiracy - it's innovative business models forcing new problems into the open. Facebook, YouTube and Twitter have been in the public consciousness for less than 15 years.
I'm still curious as to how this system works. Don't institutions have logs that would show someone researching topics wildly outside of their field of study?
"The idea behind the Explore Feed is to help Facebook users discover more content across the social network, beyond posts from friends and Pages you already follow. Instead, this feed surfaces recommended content it thinks you might find interesting."
And what the author of the Medium post says:
"All posts by pages are moved from News Feed to Explore Feed. In main News Feed are now just friend and sponsored posts."
If the first is true, then eh. Another useless tab I won't ever use. If the latter is true, then this is a gamechanger. Facebook has turned into the literal feed of news for many people for many years at this point.
If it's reduced back down into what it was in 2010, it's going to outrage a lot of older people who use it for more than a friend feed.
YouTube isn't going to get replaced. Google still aren't still aren't really making any money from it. For the majority of YouTube's life, it's run at a loss for it's owner. Think about it; YouTube offers free, unlimited, original quality video storage. In fact, they're such a charity, they'll even compress down your original quality video down to a manageable size where thousands of people can be accessing it from across the globe at the same time with no bandwidth issues. If web video standards improve such as to allow 60fps playback, YouTube will automatically re-encode and re-compress your original file to match.
YouTube isn't great. As a community, it's a pretty bad caretaker. But it's the best that anyone will get. It almost seems like people have forgotten the pre-YouTube times where ebaumsworld was still the dominant video site and where they were actual gatekeepers to content.
The only way it gets replaced is if they upset the majority of their users. Which at this point, still isn't happening. The YouTube drama crowd isn't the majority of the site. The reason why late night clips get sent to the top of trending most often isn't because YouTube is in conspiracy cahootz with ABC. It's because that's what an 'average' YouTube viewer is most likely to want to watch and would most likely produce a predictable return.
For a successful YouTube competitor, it's going to take a large company with real balls to want to compete with Google and YouTube.
It almost certainly broke EU data laws, and CA referred to their data operations as 'propaganda' when speaking to clients. https://www.engadget.com/2018/03/19/cambridge-analytica-chan...