this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2023
603 points (98.4% liked)

Fediverse

27910 readers
1 users here now

A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).

If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to [email protected]!

Rules

Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration), Search Lemmy

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Found this post super informative as it relates to Mastodon, and thought Lemmy might also benefit from this perspective. I'm not sure I share his optimism, but his points seem sound to dampen some of the alarm bells over Meta joining the Fediverse.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 100 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

They didn't even address what will happen when Facebook starts aggregating data from instances federated with Threads:

  • Vote/Like data
  • Follow relationships
  • Text sentiment analysis
  • Behavioral patterns
  • Periods of activity
  • etc

Heck, not only did this post not address it, it seems like they tried to downplay it.

Facebook is an analytics company. Even if it's not mission critical to the function of Threads, they will scoop up data sent to Threads, they will use it to create profiles on every single non-Threads user they can, and they will sell that data.

It doesn't even matter if it violates privacy laws; the laws are toothless to companies as large as Facebook. They'll just be made to pay a fine and carry on as they are.

Yes, interoperability would be a win, but not when it comes from a company that has routinely demonstrated they abuse every crumb of data they can get their hands on.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I've posted this elsewhere in the thread so hopefully it doesn't feel spammy, but this is from their privacy policy:

"Information From Third Party Services and Users: We collect information about the Third Party Services and Third Party Users who interact with Threads. If you interact with Threads through a Third Party Service (such as by following Threads users, interacting with Threads content, or by allowing Threads users to follow you or interact with your content), we collect information about your third-party account and profile (such as your username, profile picture, IP address, and the name of the Third Party Service on which you are registered), your content (such as when you allow Threads users to follow, like, reshare, or have mentions in your posts), and your interactions (such as when you follow, like, reshare, or have mentions in Threads posts).

We use the information we collect for Threads for the purposes described in the Meta Privacy Policy, including to provide, personalize, and improve Threads and other Meta Products (including seamless personalization of your experience across Threads and Instagram), to provide measurement, analytics and other business services (including ads), to promote safety, integrity and security, to communicate with you, and to research and innovate for social good."

https://help.instagram.com/515230437301944?helpref=faq_content

[–] [email protected] 35 points 1 year ago (1 children)

to research and innovate for social good.

Oh fucking please. What a total absolute load of rat shit, my dear fucking lord.

Simple enough, based on their TOS we just block their instance and they can no longer create a profile/scrape our data. Anyone know how to go about that? If so, lemmy know

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

So Meta can gather your profile information, likes and follows, as long as you instance federate with Meta’s instance and somebody follows you? Are your likes and follows available through the public api? If they are not publicly available then the federation with Meta gives them an easy access to you information

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

What's worse their privacy policy states that they believe that being connected to their network gives them the right to monetize your data (messages, boosts, likes, and follower graph).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

jfc read the article. He addresses that.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

I am assuming you are referring to Eugene's post. The way he addresses it is actually fairly misleading. The Threads privacy policy explicitly states that they believe they have a right to monetize any data on any nodes connected to their network.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What should happen? That's all public information, they can (and probably do) scrape this already. As does all and any AI project and company.

[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 year ago (3 children)

But it's probably not legal for them to sell it. The fact that they've tricked us into thinking this is normal is part of the problem.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Meta isn't really in the data SELLING business. It'd be counterproductive to let their competitors have access to all the data they do - it's what keeps their advertising network competitive. Same goes for Google. They don't want third parties to have access to your data, they want to be THE company that sells targeted advertisements.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sell it in bulk to governments for large sums of money for which advertising isn't their interest.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Oh what makes you think governments need to pay for that? Is free if you're a big enough market.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm surprised that they pay for it. They could just demand it through all kinds of national security laws.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Oh they definitely do that stuIf but when they do they have to disclose that to the senate or whomever oversees such things. This way they can quietly buy up a shit ton of data with whatever dark budgets they have access to.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

If the fine it's less than the profit they will do it anyways.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

If it's public information why would it be illegal? If I understand correctly the only thing stopping anyone else from doing it as effectively is Meta's ability to aggregate the data and find the buyers, and perhaps morals.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Isn't all of that already available to Meta (and anyone else) via the web UI anyway? They don't need to be federated for that, they can just use a web crawler. And I assume they are.

Frankly, there are other instances out there that I'm more worried about than Threads.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why use a crawler if you could spin up some camoflaged small instances and get the info right via the regular api?
Or create accounts and get the info from the client api like apps?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

... running a crawler would be far easier than running the largest instance in the fediverse ...

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm not sure about Mastodon, but at least for Lemmy, not every piece of information is available from the API or web interface. Some of it is only sent through federation. Namely, who, specifically, voted for something, edit history, probably a few other things.

Does Mastodon just hand over a complete list of everyone who liked a post? Even if it has thousands of likes? That kind of data would be very valuable to a company like Facebook.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They already can, everything you do on Mastadon is already public.