It is up to the likes of Twitter and Facebook to verify these news stories if they start going viral imo.

(11-22-2016, 07:12 PM)Francis Begbie Wrote:

I really don't know much about the internet of things (which makes me warnock every time I see it written down btw; they really couldn't be arsed thinking of something catchy that day in the lab, could they? ), but have heard of it. I was laughing at the fact it was casually dropped in there as a buzz phrase, despite the fact there is not a chance in hell he has the first clue about it  Dat word salad

The desperation in this post to let everyone know.

(11-22-2016, 07:37 PM)Roger H. Sterling Wrote: Well, now, actually. I've studied it, I've got the qualifications, Internet security is just a boring subject. There's this thing called Encryption you see, I won't bore you with how it works, you won't understand. Any important data is encrypted, intercepting it is useless. Every household router has a firewall. Almost all devices have their own too. Anyone wanting to hack into your toaster would have to really really want to mess with your breakfast.

Internet security is something none of us should worry about. Not on a personal level anyway. That's another person's concern.


My thoughts exactly.

Is Shaun's fear not also about what happens when the hackers get in - your toaster won't work and you can wash your pants. Viz. The great talk hertz hack 2k16.

I suppose the other thing about the internet of things is the capacity for human fuck ups. Our big printer/copier/scanner at work is leased from a company who've just been bought over. We scan a shit load of stuff to save all incoming mail to our system, send loads of outgoing letters by email and also use efax so we need to scan all day. Some goon at the new owners deleted everything on the server for the existing company and turns out all scans for all clients are fucked. Has caused us chaos so can imagine the effect for everyone.

Anyway cool story bro, just I imagine that as much as the internet of things will be (is?) fucking great, when we're all connected there will be absolute bedlam when systems go down.

(11-22-2016, 09:36 PM)Alan Partridge Wrote: It is up to the likes of Twitter and Facebook to verify these news stories if they start going viral imo.

How though? They spread so quickly now it's almost impossible to keep on top of them.

The internet of things.

No-one let Dexter anywhere near the server. Imagine losing all the socks you'd washed since April.

(11-22-2016, 09:36 PM)Alan Partridge Wrote: It is up to the likes of Twitter and Facebook to verify these news stories if they start going viral imo.

No it's not.

How on earth are they meant to do that!?

(11-22-2016, 10:17 PM)TheMaganator2.0 Wrote: No it's not.

How on earth are they meant to do that!?

Yes it is.

Zuckerberg is working on potential solutions including fact checking organisations.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/...ing-on-it/

(11-22-2016, 10:20 PM)Alan Partridge Wrote: Yes it is.

Zuckerberg is working on potential solutions including fact checking organisations.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/...ing-on-it/

No it is not.

Facebook may now be looking to do something about it because of negative publicity - it isn't their responsibility though.

I wouldn't mind a 'report as fake button' attached to an internet link and that 'fake score' being displayed - but I don't think it should be up to some Facebook employee in whatever guise to tell me a story isn't correct.

If you know better than the founder of Facebook then fair enough bud.

The key here is obviously finding the right balance, but when Facebook are providing a significant amount of people (I've seen 60% of Americans stats kicking about) with their news, they have to do something, and it seems like Zukerberg agrees.

Facebook don't provide people with news. People post news and stories on Facebook.

Unless you're talking about sponsored links which Facebook do have a duty over.

I'll be interested to see what they come up with. But I'd think that by the time a story has gone viral the damage has been done.

Anyway, how do you expect to win an independence referendum if Yes supporters have their shitey stories called out?

(11-22-2016, 10:31 PM)TheMaganator2.0 Wrote: No it is not.

Facebook may now be looking to do something about it because of negative publicity - it isn't their responsibility though.

I wouldn't mind a 'report as fake button' attached to an internet link and that 'fake score' being displayed - but I don't think it should be up to some Facebook employee in whatever guise to tell me a story isn't correct.

Report as fake button would be good on here.

(11-22-2016, 10:41 PM)TheMaganator2.0 Wrote: Facebook don't provide people with news. People post news and stories on Facebook.

Do Facebook not have a trending newsfeed? I remember they had to sack employees who were deliberately putting certain stories into the feed.

(11-22-2016, 10:17 PM)TheMaganator2.0 Wrote: No it's not.

How on earth are they meant to do that!?

Yes it is. Civil society requires gatekeepers, otherwise all hell breaks loose. And the argument that "it's impossible" rather falls down when we consider Facebook have developed specific tools to suppress and block posts from appearing from news feeds in places like Russia, Pakistan and Turkey; and will be using these tools to persuade the Chinese to let them in there too. Cos profit.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/22/techno...china.html



Meanwhile, in other news, the Director of the University of Michigan Center for Computer Security and Society, who is nobody's idea of a sensationalist, believes that the election machines were hacked in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. But y'know, tinfoil. Roger says everything's fine, so go take a lie down Shaun, obviously.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/201...sults.html

(11-22-2016, 11:55 PM)shaun.lawson Wrote: Civil society requires gatekeepers, otherwise all hell breaks loose.

(11-22-2016, 11:55 PM)shaun.lawson Wrote: Yes it is. Civil society requires gatekeepers, otherwise all hell breaks loose. And the argument that "it's impossible" rather falls down when we consider Facebook have developed specific tools to suppress and block posts from appearing from news feeds in places like Russia, Pakistan and Turkey; and will be using these tools to persuade the Chinese to let them in there too. Cos profit.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/22/techno...china.html



Meanwhile, in other news, the Director of the University of Michigan Center for Computer Security and Society, who is nobody's idea of a sensationalist, believes that the election machines were hacked in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. But y'know, tinfoil. Roger says everything's fine, so go take a lie down Shaun, obviously.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/201...sults.html

I'm sure Facebook has the tools to block what it wants. But logistically how would this work? What stories would be blocked in the west and why?

Blocked stories that contain lies? What about posts that contain lies? And lies about what?

You were saying the other day that people can get to the bottom of false claims easily themselves - now you're arguing that Facebook should do it for them?

(11-22-2016, 11:55 PM)shaun.lawson Wrote: Yes it is. Civil society requires gatekeepers, otherwise all hell breaks loose. And the argument that "it's impossible" rather falls down when we consider Facebook have developed specific tools to suppress and block posts from appearing from news feeds in places like Russia, Pakistan and Turkey; and will be using these tools to persuade the Chinese to let them in there too. Cos profit.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/22/techno...china.html



Meanwhile, in other news, the Director of the University of Michigan Center for Computer Security and Society, who is nobody's idea of a sensationalist, believes that the election machines were hacked in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. But y'know, tinfoil. Roger says everything's fine, so go take a lie down Shaun, obviously.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/201...sults.html

This story is quite amusing given the amount of Chinese people who access social media via VPNs. That fucks up geo-targeting algorithms and the ability to sell advertising space. It's an irrelevant sop to the Chinese state.

I'm so sick of the word 'meanwhile'.

Just the £1.5 trillion then.

http://uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/idUKKBN13H05C?

(11-23-2016, 08:16 AM)Walter Sobchak Wrote: Just the £1.5 trillion then.

http://uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/idUKKBN13H05C?

Oh noes. Paper millionaires have less purchasing power in USD.