Slashdot Mirror


A UK Commons Committee Chair Says He's Seen Evidence a Facebook Engineer Flagged Russian Entities Pulling Billions of Points of Data Every Day in 2014 (buzzfeed.com)

A UK Commons committee chair claims a seized trove of Facebook documents reveals that a company engineer flagged Russian "entities" were using a Pinterest API to pull billions of points of Facebook data every day in 2014. From a report: Damian Collins appeared to use parliamentary privilege to outline the detail from the sealed documents, during a fiery session of questioning of Facebook executive Richard Allan before the first sitting of the "international grand committee on disinformation and fake news" in London on Tuesday. The most contentious moment came during an exchange between Allan and the chair of the committee over what's alleged to be in a set of documents that are subject to the protective order of a California court.

During the questioning of Allan on Tuesday, Collins said the emails would not be released. But he did outline details from an alleged incident which, if true, would raise further questions about how Facebook responded to learning about data being taken from the platform. "An engineer at Facebook notified the company in October 2014 that entities with Russian IP addresses have been using a Pinterest API key to pull over 3 billion data points a day," Collins said. "Now was that reported to any external body at the time?" Allan dismissed the claim by focusing on the source of the information, Six4Three, labelling it a "hostile litigant."
Further reading: Facebook Exec Admits Zuckerberg Not Appearing Before UK Parliament Doesn't Look Great (CNBC); 'The Problem is Facebook,' Lawmakers From Nine Countries Tell Zuckerberg's Accountability Stand-in (TechCrunch); and "When You Get That Wealthy, You Start to Buy Your Own Bullshit": The Miseducation of Sheryl Sandberg (VanityFair).

127 comments

  1. So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The only way to really stop Russia from using social media for their state interests is to crack down on free speech. We don't need more censorship, even when it appears to further our interests. People need to stop being so naive and start to understand that the content they consume is biased and sometimes outright false. If people were more skeptical of propaganda and could start to think for themselves, this wouldn't be an issue. Until then, society will be vulnerable to manipulation by malicious actors. No, Facebook cannot be trusted, and that should also be readily apparent to anyone with a clue.

    Let's support free speech and focus on educating our citizens about propaganda and trolling by malicious actors rather than censoring free speech. Slashdot used to be a bastion of free speech, but it seems like that's being thrown out the window. Deletion of comments once amounted to sacrilege here, yet many threads have disappeared in recent days and have obviously been deleted. That's a damn shame.

    Perhaps, instead of worrying about the Russian trolls, content distributors should change their AI-curated news feeds. Instead of showing users they will agree with to maximize "engagement", show content that represents a variety of views. If users aren't in echo chambers and get to see a variety of views, they will probably be less susceptible to manipulation by propaganda.

    1. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      People need to stop being so naive and start to understand that the content they consume is biased and sometimes outright false. If people were more skeptical of propaganda and could start to think for themselves, this wouldn't be an issue. Until then, society will be vulnerable to manipulation by malicious actors.

      Exactly... people as a whole are obviously not going to wise up to this game any time soon, and corporations will continue to walk over them, gathering and reselling their intimate details until it's too late for people to revoke that from them. We need regulation to prevent this. But preventing foreign state actors from spewing limitless propaganda on global platforms is not censorship, it's basic moderation.

    2. Re:So what? by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Or unplug their internet.

    3. Re: So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I see the problem here. Facebook has American centric rules

    4. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Deletion of comments once amounted to sacrilege here, yet many threads have disappeared in recent days and have obviously been deleted.

      This only ever happened during the Scientology debacle. It was a single comment, and the admins were at the business end of a bunch of bloodthirsty lawyers. The more likely answer is you're too stupid to navigate Slashdot to find the threads (which would explain the rest of your moronic post).

    5. Re:So what? by BradMajors · · Score: 1

      Britain's propaganda machine:

      https://www.wired.co.uk/articl...

      "a UK-based psyop to create a "large-scale information secret service" in Europe in order to combat "Russian propaganda" - which has been blamed for everything from Brexit to US President Trump winning the 2016 US election"

      https://www.zerohedge.com/news...

    6. Re:So what? by Hylandr · · Score: 1

      Personally I see this as a kind of Darwin thing. If they are going to be like that they deserve what they get.

      --
      ~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
    7. Re:So what? by DivineKnight · · Score: 1

      Tempting, but that would just contribute to destroying the Internet as a whole. Like we don't have enough problems to worry about...Comcast...*shudders*

    8. Re: So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree completely, and am looking forward to you cheering me on as I bilk your addle-brained parents for every last dime.

    9. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is that the misinformed will continue to look for misinformation if it supports their points of view. We need critical thinking to be reinstated in our schools. Unfortunately neither of the 2 dominant political parties will pay for it as it is merely public education and not what they consider important or desirable. Remember, the more ignorant we are the better they look as leaders.

    10. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Attempting to pass off ZeroHedge as a "news source" merits nothing but derision.

  2. Facebook users don't care. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If Facebook users cared about the privacy of their data or communications.... they woudn't be Facebook users.

    The rest of us - few as we may be - moved on. Let their world burn down in front of their eyes. Maybe eventually they'll wake up.

    1. Re:Facebook users don't care. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      like totally, because their world is not my world yeah!!! burn baby

    2. Re:Facebook users don't care. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      like totally, because their world is not my world yeah!!! burn baby

      It would be better, surely, if it didn't have to be like that. Yet people appear to show no ability to learn until they are faced with overwhelming consequences (and sometimes, not even then).

      If they don't want their world to burn, they are free to make choices that do not lead to it burning. I'm not saying I want it to burn, I'm saying they are burning it themselves, and at some point trying to save them from themselves is a fools errand.

    3. Re:Facebook users don't care. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're advocating for standing on the sideline commenting while the world burns as a solution to what?

    4. Re:Facebook users don't care. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To the people who are setting the place on fire learning not to do that, because it's harmful.

      If you take a small child and armor them up with knee pads and arm guards and a helmet and shin guards and a mouth guard ... merely for walking around the house, they will never learn the kind of care and coordination required to be a functional adult in the real world.

  3. Excitement by SuperKendall · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    This Red Scare 2.0 is lit!

    The unfortunate thing is, with all of the Kabuki theater going on about Russia, everyone is totally ignoring China pretty much...

    I mean, if you want presidential ties to another country to examine there is all kinds of fun stuff on China, while there is hardly anything to do with Russia and most U.S. actions have been working directly against Russia so far (can you say hundreds of dead Russia mercenaries in Syria...).

    Yes Russia got ahold of a lot of data but to no effect. What Russia was doing was like throwing a lit match into an already raging bonfire. The people that think they are stoking anything are delusional.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Excitement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're going to have to tapdance a distraction better than that, lady. Show the GOP incels some leg, let it all hang out you breathless FUD peddling shit.

    2. Re:Excitement by AlwinBarni · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This Red Scare 2.0 is lit!

      The unfortunate thing is, with all of the Kabuki theater going on about Russia, everyone is totally ignoring China pretty much...

      Diverting discussion away from the topic? We're not talking about China but about Russia's meddling here. Will there be any other leak, we'll discuss it.

      ... stuff on China, ... hardly anything to do with Russia ...

      OK, still diverting, kind of start to have suspicions about the source of this post.

      The people that think they are stoking anything are delusional.

      Quite to contrary, the people claiming Russia' meddling have evidence of this happening, seems like not only during 2016 elections, but also during UK brexit referendum.

    3. Re:Excitement by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 0

      This Red Scare 2.0 is lit!

      Clearly, you don't know what you are talking about: "A "Red Scare" is promotion of widespread fear by a society or state about a potential rise of communism, anarchism, or radical leftism."

      Nobody thinks they are communists, anarchists, or radical leftists. We do however think Russia is meddling in foreign elections.

      The unfortunate thing is, with all of the Kabuki theater going on about Russia, everyone is totally ignoring China pretty much...

      I'm sorry but hard facts a Kabuki theater does not make.

      I mean, if you want presidential ties to another country to examine there is all kinds of...

      We are perfectly capable of doing multiple things at once. Whataboutism doesn't change what Russia has done, it just makes you pro-Russia.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    4. Re:Excitement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're an idiot. Or a Russian. Or both.

    5. Re:Excitement by MrTester · · Score: 1

      Are you saying there is evidence of China meddling that is being ignored? Give me a source.

      Whether or not Russia succeeded with their meddling isn't the point. The point is they TRIED. and that is a Bad Thing (tm)
      We have lots of evidence of this. Thats not Kabuki theater.

    6. Re:Excitement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Quite to contrary, the people claiming Russia' meddling have evidence of this happening"

      No they don't and you know it.

    7. Re:Excitement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not sure people have been taken in by it. There is a trick in politics that consists of accusing your opponent of EXACTLY what you are doing. Wikileaks releases / Snowden releases show us that this is very much the case. The ones doing the most disinformation and control of the internet are US/UK five eyes who get through so much of it they outsource the damn stuff. This includes groups dedicated to controlling internet discussion and comments.

    8. Re:Excitement by grep+-v+'.*'+* · · Score: 3, Insightful

      people claiming Russia' meddling have evidence of this happening

      I'm sorry, not to downplay this (and I'm in the US), but: we've supposedly occasionally been interfering with other (smaller usually) government elections for decades, and probably attempted for our larger enemies. WHY ON EARTH would we think we'd be completely immune from this to start with?

      Now there are different levels of tampering: you directly change the vote count by ballot tampering (changing / adding ballots), losing boxes, changing computer collection results, all that.

      Or get people to change their votes: pay them directly, misleading news articles, direct / deflect attention to / from something real OR imagined (how does it go: hide a lie in the midths of a truth), or somehow form a popular movement that does what you want.

      So there's hacking the election mechanics proper, where the vote count doesn't match what was truly "done", vs hack the people to vote the way you want. We've been doing it to ourselves for years (vote my way because ... KIDS!), why would you think foreign entities would be any different?

      Evidence of interference? I'd be shocked if you COULDN'T find any interference. Now like antibodies it needs to be defended against and unless we're going retroactive it needs to be fixed going forward, but ... I am shocked -- SHOCKED -- to find that gambling is going on in here!

      --
      If the universe is someone's simulation -- does that mean the stars are just stuck pixels?
    9. Re:Excitement by ceoyoyo · · Score: 2

      You're forgetting a few options. There's always outright overthrowing an elected government and installing a puppet dictator.

    10. Re: Excitement by Type44Q · · Score: 1
      The Russians are accused of revealing that the Plantation Party rigged the primary.

      "OMG, an entire whistleblowing nation... better nuke 'em."

    11. Re:Excitement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      everyone is totally ignoring China pretty much...

      There have been reports of gullible European company workers extorted and intimidated in a Chinese controlled island for intelligence gathering purposes by the Chinese officials. I don't remember reading about such behaviour in general from the Russians here in the West, even during the Cold War. People don't ignore China even if they are not the topic of nightly news.

    12. Re:Excitement by shilly · · Score: 2

      Ohhhhhh, the Daily Mail, the Sun, the Express, the Times and the Telegraph were all pro-Remain were they?

      Do they not count as "the national media" in your weird world?

    13. Re:Excitement by coofercat · · Score: 1

      You're right, there has always been interference. However, this sort is a new phenomenon.

      Once upon a time, to influence another country, you dropped leaflets from aeroplanes, you had agents put up posters or you transmitted radio stations from outside the country. All these mechanisms fail in so much as the only people influenced are the ones that were on your side already (or maybe moderately on your side but somewhat undecided).

      Then you put agents into that country and had them work at Universities and whatnot to try an influence people directly. You had people working in companies and whatnot to try to influence people via those means too. You also set up 'clubs' which like-minded people could join and hopefully spread the word. These mechanisms actually do work, but they take an awful lot of investment and take a very long time. Further, the loss of one 'agent' takes out a large proportion of your efforts.

      Now you've got social media. At very low cost to yourself, you get to influence just about everyone, and get to do it in a "trusted relationship" way, rather than be treated with suspicion. That is, is a friend of a friend says "X is Y", then you're naturally more likely to believe it than "random joe on the Internet said it" (or indeed "leaflet dropped by a plane says so").

      So yes, influence was always there, but now it's much harder to ignore, is much more effective and hits up a very large proportion of your population, regardless of their previous views on any given subject. In that sense, it's worth looking into - not because we expect no influence, but because we need to find ways to understand what we're reading in more detail than we do currently.

    14. Re:Excitement by mrclevesque · · Score: 1

      "but now it's much harder to ignore, is much more effective and hits up a very large proportion of your population, regardless of their previous views on any given subject."

      Sure targeted social media advertising has influence but is it really "harder to ignore" than things like what the US is trying to do in Syria or Iran.

    15. Re:Excitement by strikethree · · Score: 1

      The only problem I have with ANY of this is that this shit has been going since the dawn of history. Why is it suddenly a big deal now? Why is there no discussion of what the CIA is doing to the Russians, Chinese, Germans, etc? The United States is meddling just as much, if not more, than the other countries. Hell, even Israel tries to influence our elections and they receive lots of aid/support from America.

      So why is Russia fucking about with a commercial service such a big interest? If they were effective, then why aren't the two parties using the same tools to have an even more profound effect than an external entity could possibly have?

      There is something going on here, but what is being talked about is NOT what is important. Everything that has been revealed so far has been... boring. External entities have always been mucking about in the internal politics of others. What exactly is different this time? And why the hypocrisy surrounding it?

      My best guess is that The Powers That Be are either unbelievably stupid (possible but unlikely) or they are trying to keep the masses from seeing reality (whatever that is). The only question now is: What is being hidden behind these claims of *"Russian Interference"?

      * Russian Interference has already been established as has interference from almost every other political entity on this planet. The interference is not in question, the sudden (supposed) effectiveness of the interference is what is suspect.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
    16. Re:Excitement by shilly · · Score: 1

      I wasn't claiming there were no pro-Remain voices in the media, was I?

      I was responding to your specific claim that there was a "massive onslaught of Remain propaganda across all platforms, including the national media". That claim implies that no pro-Brexit voices could really be heard in the national media, which is ridiculous hyperbole, and you should be ashamed of it. So is the use of the word propaganda, unless you are willing to use the same word to describe pro-Brexit opinion. The truth is, there was plenty of very vociferous pro-Brexit campaigning in the national media, and there was plenty of vociferous anti-Brexit campaigning too.

      And by the way, on the topic of propaganda, I challenge you to find an equally vile front page headline as "Enemies of the people" and its vile deployment -- with photos -- against three judges who made a decision that the Mail disagreed with as favouring Remain. It has no equivalent in any Remain-supporting newspaper.

  4. No Collusion lol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When will the MSM report on what TRUMP wants us all to think instead of this "reporting" crap? Can I get a Hammity on Rye with a side of trailing off Zuck denials?

  5. URL broken by gigne · · Score: 1

    "Facebook Exec Admits Zuckerberg Not Appearing Before UK Parliament Doesn't Look Great (CNBC);"
    The link is broken

    --
    Signature v3.0, now with 42% less memory usage.
  6. Remember, kids... by fortythirteen · · Score: 2

    If you want to get away with cybercrime in 2018, VPN out through Russia and nobody will want to dig any deeper.

    1. Re:Remember, kids... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More like : If you want to get away with cybercrime, target FB and make it so embarrassing that they incompetently try to pretend it never happened UNDER OATH BEFORE CONGRESS LOL? Morons!

  7. Spineless lying toad Ken Doll again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/26/us/politics/mueller-paul-manafort-cooperation.html Super? Ken Doll can't handle the truth, that Trump is a liar, that Manafort is a liar, and that their frauds constitute an attack on our Democracy?

    Of course you can't, you're a spineless little toad.

    1. Re: Spineless lying toad Ken Doll again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you done harassing Kendall? You even created a fake Super Kendall account to post swastikas. Grow up.

      It's obvious that the Russians tried to meddle in US elections. Kendall is right that it's not clear that they were successful. They were trying to meddle the entire time and there's no good way to separate out their impact in the polling data. It's much easier to evaluate the impact of a discrete event like James Comey saying he reopened his investigation into Hillary Clinton days before the election. That's what Nate Silver concluded, and I don't see any reason why he would be wrong.

      AI-curated news feeds might be able to mitigate the effects of propaganda, and that's where Facebook might be able to help. Instead of trying to determine a user's interests and showing them targeted content, it would be better to show people a diverse range of content. This actually provides an edge over traditional media like TV where someone can just watch Fox News or MSNBC all day and never see anything else. If users see a variety of positions, they'll be less vulnerable to manipulation by propaganda. However, that is contrary to Facebook's business model and how they target content for users.

    2. Re: Spineless lying toad Ken Doll again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ken Doll anonymously comes to her own defense, how quaint. Grow up is right apologist trash, KEN DOLL HAS DENIED ANY OF THIS HAPPENED FOR YEARS NOW.

      He's a liar. Pure, simple, factually demonstrated DOZENS/HUNDREDS OF TIMES A LIAR. We DO know that Russia DID have some success in spreading bullshit that both FB and Trump denied they knew about, but have been proven.

      You want to apologize for fraud, treason, that's your business, but making a FUD PEDDLING KNOWN LIAR like Ken Doll the "real victim" here is a bridge too far, comrade. Fuck off back to the Gulag with you.

    3. Re: Spineless lying toad Ken Doll again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AND if Zuckerberg and Trump and Manafort and the rest of these PROVEN LIARS hadn't been CAUGHT SO MANY TIMES ALREADY? Then your bullshit naive defense of this might have a half-thick veneer of plausibility.

      FUCK. YOU. APOLOGIST. TRAITOR.

    4. Re: Spineless lying toad Ken Doll again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is inconclusive that Russia had a significant impact on the outcome of the 2016 election. Here's Nate Silver's analysis: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-much-did-russian-interference-affect-the-2016-election/. Sure, Russia spewed lots of trolling on social media. It's far less clear that it impacted the outcome of the election.

      By the way, it's possible that Trump or those in his family and/or campaign might have engaged in fraud, espionage, sedition, or conspiracy. However, they are not guilty of treason, which is defined by federal law:

      Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

      Simply put, conspiring with Russian operatives against the United States doesn't satisfy the legal definition of treason. If you want to appear like anything other than a clueless troll, you should stop posting that. You certainly are persistent, so I wonder who might be paying you to post your comments on Slashdot.

      As long as people trust propaganda and are shown content that reinforces their beliefs, society will be vulnerable to manipulation by malicious actors. Like I said, Facebook could address this by showing people a range of content rather than the news feed functioning as an echo chamber. People also need to be less trusting of content, otherwise they will be vulnerable to manipulation. As long as people are willing to trust propaganda, they'll be vulnerable to manipulation.

    5. Re: Spineless lying toad Ken Doll again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It is inconclusive that Russia had a significant impact on the outcome of the 2016 election." - In which 70,000 votes in 3 states all heavily targeted by Russian operations won the election, inconclusive? In YOUR naive brain?

      NATE SILVER DIDN'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THIS AT THE TIME OF HIS ANALYSIS BASED ON THE INFO HE HAD.

      Trying to obfuscate this fact as if he compared the two is where you go from being naive to behind dumb and dishonest at once.

    6. Re: Spineless lying toad Ken Doll again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " conspiring with Russian operatives against the United States doesn't satisfy the legal definition of treason." THE ONLY REASON THAT IS TRUE IS BECAUSE WE AREN'T AT DECLARED WAR. THAT'S THE ONLY REASON.

      When you understand that, you either continue apologizing for "90% treason" or you acknowledge that fact and stop being a cowardly mealy mouthed traitor in defense of a known fraud and a known conspiracy to lie about it.

      If you're not an American and have no stake in the viability of our country or Democracy, then I maybe understand your bullshit from that perspective more. If you ARE American, you need to grow a pair and get with Jesus.

      The truth is Trump is a fucking traitor and his campaign is the culmination of hundreds of frauds. This is proven already. Dither as you need to traitor apologist.

    7. Re: Spineless lying toad Ken Doll again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So John Kerry going to Iran last month and negotiating a deal with them against the wishes of the elected administration is treason?
      So Nancy Pelosi going to Syria to negotiate after being denied permission by the State department while Bush was president is treason?
      So Ted Kennedy going to the USSR to negotiate them to work against the US while Regan was president is treason?

      Sounds like there is a political party full of traitors to your left.

    8. Re: Spineless lying toad Ken Doll again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whataboutism doesn't change what Russia has done, it just makes you pro-Russia, traitor.

      You're confusing the Hatch Act with treason because you're a willful moron trying to continue to obfuscate and pretend Russia didn't collude with Trump on this, when all evidence points directly at that fact.

  8. Facebook by beep54 · · Score: 1

    Kill it. Kill it with fire. From space.

    1. Re:Facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe the appropriate phrase is: "Nuke the entire site from orbit--it's the only way to be sure."

  9. The FBI, CIA, DOD, DNI, NSA, SS, all "delusional" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    According to Mr. Stable Genius Ken Doll here? Gee.

  10. I'm Shocked, shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who would have thought that a California court order has no legitimacy outside the USA ?

  11. Corporate death penalty by sinij · · Score: 1

    So they knew and didn't care for many years. It is clear to me that Facebook deserves corporate death penalty. Break it up and sell off assets.

    1. Re:Corporate death penalty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Zuckenstein and Sand-borg might have ACTUALLY perjured themselves before Congress. Break one off in those asses! Anyone caught lying about this in 2019 should get the full hob nail boot treatment at ADX.

    2. Re:Corporate death penalty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How will Europe get their money for socialist programs? It makes more sense to fine them which was what they were going to do all along.

    3. Re:Corporate death penalty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Europe's "socialist programs" are actually self-sustaining, which would be quite a contrast with Trump's economic agenda, if you haven't noticed...

    4. Re:Corporate death penalty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As opposed to the US system where they give out billions directly to the corporations if they set up a 2nd HQ in their city, give even MORE money to compensate farmers for the US loosing the trade war, and even MORE!!! billions to arms manufacturers which you then fund by borrowing MORE money from China.

    5. Re:Corporate death penalty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Under what law, exactly? Even if the state granting the corporate charter yanked it, the company would simply re-charter in another.

      Wake me up when a such thing as a corporate death penalty, especially for a publicly traded corporation, actually exists.

  12. How this probably went by jbmartin6 · · Score: 1

    here is how the business execs heard the conversation Engineer: A customer is using the services we sold to them. Exec: Great!

    --
    This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
  13. Public API by Amigori · · Score: 2
    Is the Pinterest API available publicly? If so, this is not a story.

    If anything, it may be a violation of the TOS and FB would have otherwise been paid for commercial access to the same data.

    But you know... The $bad_guys did it!! In this case, $bad_guys = Russians.

    --
    "The quality of life is determined by its activites."--Aristotle
    1. Re: Public API by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is not so much Russia as FB knowing data leaking and did nothing

    2. Re: Public API by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > FB knowing data leaking

      Somehow you just ignored the point. If it's a public API, it's not a leak (as in escaping from a container/contained environment).
      Generate your own FB API key, for free, and you get access to the same information. If you don't understand how that works, you really aren't participating in the discussion. Take the noise back to reddit.

    3. Re: Public API by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The issue is the amount of US voter information Russia was after in 2014, not whether the API was open or not. Even an open API needs monitoring for abuse, especially with public/private crossover databases, idiot.

    4. Re: Public API by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > The issue is ... whether the API was open or not

      That's the issue.

      > "the amount of US voter information Russia was after in 2014, not"

      You making up a new issue doesn't change that. Again, no leak. Take your noise back to wherever you came from, idiot.

    5. Re:Public API by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, this newly revealed massive exploitation of unwitting user data is the perfect occasion to do zero reflection on the social media status quo and do nothing because probably no laws were broken and FB can just ban that users if they violate TOS.

    6. Re: Public API by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The article is about the amount of voter data Russia was accessing in 2014, how FB was notified and did nothing and then denied it. You can't read, but that doesn't change things here for everyone else, good luck in life.

    7. Re:Public API by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As we know from the Cambridge Analystica debacle Facebook APIs are not very secure. CA was able to pull a lot of data they were not supposed to have access to, and even when Facebook discovered it they didn't cut it off immediately.

      It looks like the same thing happened here. They knew and did fuck all about it because they were getting paid. In Europe this is a massive violation of privacy laws at the very least, and possible other crimes due to the fact that the breech allowed our enemies to screw with our democracy.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  14. Re:How much of this is Russia or just Russians... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and no other countries/citizens did this because they only got paid if they were russians?

  15. Foreign Agents and Bots should be Labelled. by bit+trollent · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If Russia wants to plaster its name all over Facebook ads disturbingly similar to Moscow Donald's talking points that's one thing.

    That's free speech. It's treason that Donald Trump colluded with Russian influence operations, but still it's free speech.

    What Russia is doing is writing comments pretending to be American citizens, and intentionally downing out debate on our social networks with bot generated attacks.

    1. Re:Foreign Agents and Bots should be Labelled. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not only that, foreign-funded fraud != free speech anywhere under our Constitution, and especially and specifically not when it comes to election in-kind unreported "speech" help either. That's called fraud. Trump's entire life is fraud.

      Nobody should be surprised, except maybe that Zuckerberg was willing to tell Congress that none of this ever happened and try to sweep it all under an increasingly public rug. This isn't going away. Honesty was the best policy...

      What's the second best, he asks.

    2. Re:Foreign Agents and Bots should be Labelled. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > If Russia wants to plaster its name all over Facebook ads disturbingly similar to Moscow Donald's talking points that's one thing.

      Honestly, I'm fine with that, the real question is how you enforce it? Also, I want it for every other country, too. No special treatment for anyone.

      But I don't see how you can enforce such a thing very reliably and I fear it's more likely to see selective prosecution than the rules actually being followed. For example, this would seem to be the Brits interfering with US elections, as they also did with Mr. Steele's dossier. So there were literally MI-6 agents working to influence the USA's elections. Somehow that doesn't count? No, you don't get to give us any crap about how that was all "above board" or done in the open because it certainly wasn't any too up front about working for Oleg, who happens to be a Russian oligarch...

    3. Re:Foreign Agents and Bots should be Labelled. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      people Facebook biggest investor was from Russia, wake the fuck up, before faceboo kwas even on the market...

    4. Re:Foreign Agents and Bots should be Labelled. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "So there were literally MI-6 agents working to influence the USA's elections." Not only was he retired but Steele's research was all ACCOUNTED FOR in the campaign financing. Not only that, he worked for both parties.

      Whereas Trump's illegal campaign in-kind to Stormy Daniels was NOT REPORTED, = FRAUD. So that's just another example of how dishonest Trumptards can't even be trusted to evaluate basic facts, they just can't do it honestly.

      And nobody has found anything seriously contradicting any main part of the dossier, so there's that. Good luck denying it exists next, lol? Idiots.

    5. Re:Foreign Agents and Bots should be Labelled. by Hylandr · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Oh will you fuck off on bashing President Trump already?

      . JUST . FUCK . RIGHT . OFF .

      Op has valid points that have Zero to do with your BS collusion agenda.

      Here's what OP wrote again, since it's obviously not what you want people to read:

      The only way to really stop Russia from using social media for their state interests is to crack down on free speech. We don't need more censorship, even when it appears to further our interests. People need to stop being so naive and start to understand that the content they consume is biased and sometimes outright false. If people were more skeptical of propaganda and could start to think for themselves, this wouldn't be an issue. Until then, society will be vulnerable to manipulation by malicious actors. No, Facebook cannot be trusted, and that should also be readily apparent to anyone with a clue.

      Let's support free speech and focus on educating our citizens about propaganda and trolling by malicious actors rather than censoring free speech. Slashdot used to be a bastion of free speech, but it seems like that's being thrown out the window. Deletion of comments once amounted to sacrilege here, yet many threads have disappeared in recent days and have obviously been deleted. That's a damn shame.

      Perhaps, instead of worrying about the Russian trolls, content distributors should change their AI-curated news feeds. Instead of showing users they will agree with to maximize "engagement", show content that represents a variety of views. If users aren't in echo chambers and get to see a variety of views, they will probably be less susceptible to manipulation by propaganda.

      --
      ~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
    6. Re:Foreign Agents and Bots should be Labelled. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I love how you fucking idiots think someone as shrewd and accomplished as Mueller, conducting a sensitive investigation into the President, his cabinet, and his family members, is going to plaster everything he learns across billboards as quickly he learns it. It's like you learned everything you know about the law from prime time shows on CBS.

    7. Re: Foreign Agents and Bots should be Labelled. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How accomplished and shrewd do you have to be to pimp imaginary wmds to Congress?

      Ah, I see, a peddler of fraudulent chemicals for peddling fraudulent "collusion".

    8. Re: Foreign Agents and Bots should be Labelled. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Youâ(TM)re right. Trump and his cabinet are guilty of all the other things they plead guilty to except for this one thing which was totally fabricated because they were so hard up to find dirt on them. Tell me about the 50,000 sealed indictments and Hillaryâ(TM)s satanic child sex ring and how Barack has actually been locked up in GITMO all this time, you Q-tard.

    9. Re:Foreign Agents and Bots should be Labelled. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Not only was he retired but Steele's research was all ACCOUNTED FOR in the campaign financing. Not only that, he worked for both parties.

      They had to go through a Congressional investigation to find out who he worked for. That's hardly out in the open!

      > And nobody has found anything seriously contradicting any main part of the dossier, so there's that.

      Other than, say, putting the wrong person in Prague and having lots of random rumors with no corroboration? You do realize that you have to actually prove stuff, not just write a lot of rumors onto a paper and push that onto others to disprove, right?

      If you want to talk about in-kind donations, why not discuss the WaPo Party from the Wikileaks emails? We have cryptographic non-repudiation of those from Hillary's own DNS server with the DKIM keys. They were only selling party access to DNC donors, nothing to see there!

      Whatever Trump did with Stormy is disgusting, but I won't even hear that sort of hypocritical BS after you guys defended Clinton for committing perjury and being disbarred (yes, yes, he "voluntarily" surrendered it on appeal after losing, same as the settlement). With respect to Avenatti, the last I heard he was paying legal fees to Trump and getting his felony charge plead down to a misdemeanor after beating a woman, so if you're competing for who can be more disgusting, you win on that front. So spare me the hypocritical outrage, you have to have some form of morality to claim the moral high ground and I don't think you even believe they exist, except maybe when it's expedient...

    10. Re:Foreign Agents and Bots should be Labelled. by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Dip stick, from the buzzfeed (just eww, really, really fucking eww) article, "company engineer flagged Russian "entities" were using a Pinterest API to pull billions of points of Facebook data every day in 2014", they were data mining, not putting up information. Facebook obviously did not want to mention it because a bunch of others were also data mining the platform.

      Pulling down data is not putting it up and thirteen Russian trolls getting people to click on links to get them to see a for profit ad, from somewhere else is not a fucking Russian influence operation, it is a typical click bait operation as done by spammers all over the fucking globe and sure it is annoying as fuck. Only in US/UK Bullshit Alliance, is it an espionage operation, ahh American corporate main stream propaganda, don't want to talk about fiscal or foreign policy, blame Russia for something, blame white men for something, do an pro-anti-pro-anti-pro-anti SJW rant session, or lets just talk genitals and gender (full disclosure my gender is Bungil https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... and my preferred pronouns, well I am still working on them but I do want to use every single letter in the English alphabet at least once, until then cheeky bastard will do I suppose).

      American news is shite.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    11. Re:Foreign Agents and Bots should be Labelled. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You just described actions that *influenced* people to do something they wouldn't have done otherwise, then claimed it's not influence. Cognitive dissonance, anyone?

    12. Re: Foreign Agents and Bots should be Labelled. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mueller has to be very shrewd, because idiots like you will scream bloody murder when he finally shows his hand.

      The case against Trump has to be bulletproof because you only get one shot at the king. Even one as foolish and impotent as Trump.

    13. Re:Foreign Agents and Bots should be Labelled. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Collusion is not a crime. I have seen nothing that is even alleged that indicates the Trump campaign did anything remotely like treason. Before the 2016 campaign the Russians approached the US government in attempt to work out an agreement where both Russian and US foreign influence activities would be curtailed. The US rejected this because we thought we had such a lead in this area that we were unwilling to give up our political destabilization activities directed at Russia. Almost everything the Russians are accused of was allegedly done to Russia by the US before Russia did it to the US. This cold war mentality is a female dog.

  16. And the only thing Facebook cares about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is whether or not they were getting paid for the data.

  17. Democrats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At least through Trump, there will never be another "powerful database like no one has ever seen before."

    Can't wait for the Dems to try mining data again without backlash. Trump may have mined it but now the well is poisoned for all.

    I call it progress. :)

    https://youtu.be/eIA1lQBqH1s

  18. THINK MCFLY, THINK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "That's what Nate Silver concluded, and I don't see any reason why he would be wrong." -Uh, maybe because Nate Silver didn't KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT Russia's infiltration of social media, derp? Maybe that's why he didn't mention it?

  19. Informing, not diverting by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

    Diverting discussion away from the topic?

    It's still the same topic - meddling in U.S. Affairs, in fact the main slant of the supposed meddling is Russia having some kind of ties to Trump - but in fact as I said if you want to look for meddling, and presidential ties, there is a lot more evidence you should consider China...

    Look at both if you want, I just think Russia is in fact the one meant to drive discussion away from the topic - after all it worked on you so strongly that if any mention is made of China, you hard-push back to Russia. Now why would that be I wonder... hmm!

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Informing, not diverting by AlwinBarni · · Score: 2

      It's still the same topic - meddling in U.S. Affairs ...

      Except that this article is about Russia's meddling, not meddling in general.

      ... the main slant of the supposed meddling is Russia having some kind of ties to Trump ...

      If you say so, however the article is about UK and 2014.

      ...but in fact as I said if you want to look for meddling ... you should consider China ...

      That is not what you said, you said that people talking about Russia's meddling are "delusional" and that meddling has "hardly anything to do with Russia"

      Look at both if you want, ...

      Not only will but am. Will you?

      ... Russia is in fact the one meant to drive discussion away from the topic ...

      How twisted reality we're living? Kindly asking to read the article being discussed first.
      China's espionage is being discussed in detail ... when the article being discussed is about it!

  20. engineers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So they reported it to their professional reporting body?

    So they reported it to a government body?

    So they launched an internal investigation?

    Oh, wait, they did none of those things, until compelled to do so.

    Real engineers would have done all/any of these things.

    Programms just take note of interesting data, and add another easter egg.

  21. Sure here you go by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Are you saying there is evidence of China meddling that is being ignored? Give me a source.

    I'm so sorry about that accident that chopped off your legs and arms so you don't even have a stump left to access Google with!

    Otherwise you would have been about to find this in about two seconds.

    My sympathies go with you, Torso-Boy. If you need any more info please have your caretaker look it up, that's what they are paid for - I have a job and can't just paste URL's for you all day long.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  22. In this case bad_guys = Russians, CORRECT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Check out the attempt at denying the factual reality with sarcasm from the big brain on Brad! Too bad it doesn't make evidence of Trump's guilt go away though! hahaha, Leavenworth.

  23. That is a riot by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Nobody thinks they are communists

    That is a laugh! You heard it here first folks, not ever RUSSIA is True Communism, which has Never Been Tried.

    it just makes you pro-Russia.

    How am I pro-Russia? I'm the only reliable Anti-Russian around as far as I can see, most people use Russia to bash Trump and then ignore everything else Russia is actually doing. Ukraine perhaps? You didn't say a word about that you clever bastard, while you try to get us all worried about elections and data lifting.

    Not going to say you are paid by Russia, but it seems pretty likely.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re: That is a riot by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Russia never claimed to be communist, FYI. They were socialist, on the way to becoming communist. They never made it all the way.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re:That is a riot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How am I pro-Russia? I'm the only reliable Anti-Russian around as far as I can see, most people use Russia to bash Trump and then ignore everything else Russia is actually doing.

      Ain't just you. I'm a nominal conservative who has been concerned about Russia since they poisoned Yuschenko, let alone took northern Georgia. I continued to be concerned as Obama told Romney to give his foreign policy back to the '80s. I was frankly alarmed when they sent unmarked "volunteer" soldiers to annex the Donbas and Crimea. Remember when Putin gave that rambling speech on TV? Merkel shook her head and said "he's finally lost it," but he pulled it together and started picking on western elections.

      And somehow, after all this, other ostensible conservatives started defending Russia. What the hell happened?

      Okay Luckyo, flame me for all you're worth. But when they come for Finland, I hope you're fucking ready.

  24. KEN DOLL CONTINUES TO OBFUSCATE, GET A ROPE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Get out you treasonous faggot while you still can under your own power. Move to Moscow, do your faggot-distraction tapdancing there you fucking spineless little bitch. There will be consequences for your lies.

  25. Incorrect by SuperKendall · · Score: 0

    That is not what you said, you said that people talking about Russia's meddling are "delusional"

    Here's how you recognize the foreign spies kids -they have a poor grasp of the subtleties of English.

    If he was a native English speaker, he would have read what I actually wrote, which is that Russia did try to meddle, it just had no effect because the internal strife was already so great (the throwing a lit match into a raging bonfire line).

    I'll let you have the last word Mr Meddling Agent, as I have no time for foreign spies that can't even be bothered to learn to read properly. Your effect will be sadly limited until you do, if I were you I wouldn't count on much of a bonus from your paymasters.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  26. KEN DOLL CONTINUES TO OBFUSCATE, GET A ROPE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Get out you treasonous faggot while you still can under your own power. Move to Moscow, do your faggot-distraction tapdancing there you fucking spineless little bitch. There will be consequences for your lies.

  27. KEN DOLL CONTINUES TO OBFUSCATE, GET A ROPE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Get out you treasonous faggot while you still can under your own power. Move to Moscow, do your faggot-distraction tapdancing there you fucking spineless little bitch. There will be consequences for your lies

  28. FB for family updates only, never "news" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Simple, use facebook for family and friend updates only, never "news".

    Get your news from whatever slanted org you like, they are all slanted, but at least they have a track record unlike all the pumped crap on FB, twitter, insta-what, and google-dealy.

  29. So.... by fish_in_the_c · · Score: 1

    If us political PAC's right or left do this, that is ok, but not Russia? I think some people think the interweb belongs only to the U.S.A. I bet there was at least one British and one Chinese organization that tried to influence the election, probably an Israeli 1 as well. I think you kind of need to expect that.

    Groups ( or individuals) who can pretend to be 100's of people is a bit disquieting, but I'm not sure how to solve that problem. Maybe people should learn to research facts and be realistic about sources before forming opinions, but that is probably too much to ask.

    --
    âoeTolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons.
    1. Re:So.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Learn the law if you want to be talking about it. Yes, PAC's disclose their contributions and expenditures. It's illegal for a foreign state entity to contribute, and doubly if not disclosed. That's FRAUD, which Trump is going down for.

      Nobody said the US owned the internet here. Russia accessing US voter data en masse from FB in 2014 and FB denying and lying about being notified of it is a crime, once Zuck lied to Congress about it.

      Honesty is the best policy unless you're a Trumptard, in which case it's not an option for you.

    2. Re: So.... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Education is basically the only answer. The more people are aware of it, the better.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    3. Re:So.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, any day now, retard...

    4. Re: So.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's true, but ironic that someone who doesn't know Communism from Socialism would be preaching it here after trying to correct people falsely...

  30. KEN DOLL CONTINUES TO OBFUSCATE, GET A ROPE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Get out you treasonous faggot while you still can under your own power. Move to Moscow, do your faggot-distraction tapdancing there you fucking spineless little bitch. There will be consequences for your lies .

  31. Looks like it's working. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Americans are now too stupid to think when it comes to Trump, Russia, Facebook, et al. Stop fighting over bullshit and pull together or the misinformers will pull you apart. Literally.

  32. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 0

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  33. Shame on you Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Slashdot editors should be ashamed of themselves. They've been deleting APK posts today. I'm replying to a spammer who has threatened SuperKendall and, in some posts, his family. The spammer has created a bogus "Super Kendall" account with an extra space to post ASCII art swastikas. These are the same ASCII art swastikas that have been posted from several troll accounts, so it's likely that a single troll is responsible. This troll us actively evading Slashdot mechanisms to curtail abuse of anonymous posts. Threats, like what this spammer posts, are not protected by the first amendment and might be considered illegal.

    If Slashdot is going to delete posts, they need to get rid of this spam. It's shameful that they have altogether inconsistent policies on post deletion and allow this behavior to continue. The editors have allowed Slashdot to become a toxic place to the point that it's almost not worth trying to have a worthwhile discussion here. The spammer is obviously too immature to understand why his behavior is reprehensible, but the editors of this site should know better than to let this continue.

    If you're too damn lazy to curtail the spam and threats in the articles about politics, then you shouldn't post them. Between the utter incompetence of the editors posting stories such as BeauHD's misuse of the DEC logo and the toxic comments, Slashdot is a cesspool. Clean it up or people, including long-time users, will keep leaving this site.

  34. Zuckerberg is a tool of the Russkies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Which is becoming more and more evident with each successive revelation. The only difference between him and the typical traitorous stooge is that he is well paid for it. Perhaps that's what he thought would protect him.

  35. phantomfive get an education please moron. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FYI, socialism isn't an actually-practiced type of Government, they were Communist. You don't know what you're blathering about.

    1. Re: phantomfive get an education please moron. by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      It was defined by Marx.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re: phantomfive get an education please moron. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Again FYI, socialism was never an actually-practiced type of Government, Russia was Communist. You don't know what you're blathering about.

    3. Re: phantomfive get an education please moron. by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Communism is an economic system, not a government system. The Soviet Union was a totalitarian government. Here are some links, at least read them before accidentally saying something stupid again: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    4. Re: phantomfive get an education please moron. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The Soviet Union was a totalitarian government." A Communist totalitarian government, yes. Socialism is not a type of government, it's a style of governance, and one that has never been actually fully adhered to in any strict sense in the reality of any state's actual governance. READ MORE KID.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

      Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership and workers' self-management of the means of production[10] as well as the political theories and movements associated with them.[11] There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them,[12] though social rather than individual ownership is the common element shared by its various forms.

      So you're wrong. QED. Nobody expects you to correct your backwardsness, I sure as fuck don't, just know we both know you were wrong. That's enough for me.

    5. Re: phantomfive get an education please moron. by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      You didn't even read my links, as I expected you wouldn't.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  36. Upwards notification. by grep+-v+'.*'+* · · Score: 1

    An engineer at Facebook notified the company in October

    People (and companies!) tend to treat companies as cohesive wholes, instead of say ants with a queen or cells and nerves in a human going to the unconscious then conscious brain. There's a lag-time between something sensed and transmitted to "management", and even then it might not be "upper management" if something along the way NAKed the transfer. And even if it makes it, it still might be accidentally corrupted along the way. (Double-takes, anyone?)

    There is a joke I cannot find: An engineer look at a product and says, This is the largest pile of BS I've even worked on. His manager reported upwards about the s$*t problem. It went upwards talking about the c&@p. Upwards talking about the smelly excrement, and then the strong fertilizer. It kept going up until finally the CEO gave an announcement: This single project is the best and strongest one we've ever built and will power the company for years to come!

    Paraphrasing. This was also back before the internet, so reports were copied and staples together with the current synopsis on top. Anybody have the original joke?

    --
    If the universe is someone's simulation -- does that mean the stars are just stuck pixels?
    1. Re:Upwards notification. by twosat · · Score: 2

      In the Beginning was The Plan

      And then came the Assumptions

      And the Assumptions were without form

      And the Plan was completely without substance

      And the darkness was upon the face of the Workers

      And the Workers spoke amongst themselves, saying

      "It is a crock of shit, and it stinketh."

      And the Workers went unto their Supervisors and sayeth,

      "It is a pail of dung and none may abide the odor thereof."

      And the Supervisors went unto their Managers and sayeth unto them,

      "It is a container of excrement and it is very strong, such that none may abide by it."

      And the Managers went unto their Directors and sayeth,

      "It is a vessel of fertilizer, and none may abide its strength."

      And the Directors spoke among themselves, saying one to another,

      "It contains that which aids plant growth, and it is very strong."

      And the Directors went unto the Vice Presidents and sayeth unto them,

      "It promotes growth and is very powerful."

      And the Vice Presidents went unto the President and sayeth unto him,

      "This new Plan will actively promote the growth and efficiency of this Company, and in these Areas in particular."

      And the President looked upon The Plan,

      And saw that it was good, and The Plan became Policy.

      And this is how Shit Happens.

  37. FUCK YOU TRAITOR APOLOGIST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FUCK YOU TRAITOR APOLOGIST!

  38. WTF is a 'data point' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  39. Re: FUCK YOU TRAITOR APOLOGIST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stupid editors, lame as always.

  40. The question no one on here is asking by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

    The question that no one in the comments here is asking, and the one we need the answer to before asking any others, is, "And how many data points were typically pulled by other entities every day in 2014? Was there anything unusual about an entity pulling that much data?"

    --
    The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
  41. ... or just make it harder. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps it's time to null root Russia, the world would be a far better place without a belligerent Puntin throwing his weight around and stirring up trouble. Trying to make friends with the Russian bear was a huge mistake, western companies were fleeced left right and centre.

    As a website admin, practically all the hostile attacks on my sites come from Russia, with China actually far behind.

  42. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  43. No, the BBC was not pro- Remain by UpnAtom · · Score: 1

    The fact they let Leave lie about £350m was proof of that.

  44. Already Proven to be Nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The chair is an idiot. The full set of emails show that the API requests came from Pintrest's internal servers.

    https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20181128/06530041116/uk-hosts-theatrical-facebook-hearings-fake-news-undermined-creating-fake-news-itself.shtml

  45. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion