Facebook launches bulk app removal tool amidst privacy scandal

Following the Cambridge Analytica scandal, users have flocked to their Facebook privacy situates to sever their connection to third-party apps that they no longer wanted to have access to their data. But deleting them all took forever because you had to remove them one by one. Now Facebook has released a new route to select as many apps as you want, then remove them in bulk. The feature has rolled out on mobile and desktop, and Facebook also offers the option to delete any posts those apps have made to your profile.

Facebook corroborated the launch to TechCrunch, pointing to its Newsroom and Developer News blog posts from the last few weeks that explained that” We already show people what apps their accounts are connected to and control what data they’ve permitted those apps to employ. In the coming month, we’re going to make these selections more prominent and easier to manage .” Now we know what “easier” looks like. A Facebook spokesperson told us” we have more to do and will be sharing more when we can .” The updated interface was first spotted by Matt Navarra, who had previously called on Facebook to build a bulk removal option.

Facebook stopped short of offering a “select all” button so you have to tap each individually. That could prevent more innocent, respectful developers from getting caught up in the dragnet as users panic to prune their app connects. One developer told me they’d been inundated with requests from users to delete their data acquired through Facebook and add other login alternatives, saying that the Cambridge Analytica scandal” really hurt consumer trust for all apps…even the good guys .” The developer chose to change its Words of Service to make users more comfortable.

The bulk removal tool could make it much easier for users to take control of their data and protect their identity, though the damage to Facebook’s reputation is largely done. It’s staggering how many apps piggyback off of Facebook, and that we dedicated our data without much thought. But at the least now it won’t take an hour to remove them all.

Make sure to visit: CapGeneration.com


Here are Mark Zuckerbergs notes from todays hearing

Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg pulled off a smooth appearance in a joint Senate hearing today, dodging most questions while maintaining an adequately patient vibe through five hours of varied but mostly tame questioning.

The chief executive avoided admitting that Facebook is a publisher or a monopoly, refused to commit to any meaningful legislation and respectfully addressed lawmakers over a nearly five hour marathon testimony.

Still, he did make one rookie mistake.

Zuckerberg left his hearing notes open in front of his seat for long enough for AP Photographer Andrew Harnik to snap a high resolving shoot with talking phases in plain view. Twitter users and journalists scanning photos from the courtroom as they make the wire were quick to notification, the irony of the minor privacy intrusion not lost on them.

A flaw-by-flaw guide to Facebooks new GDPR privacy changes

Facebook is about to start pushing European users to speed through dedicating permission for its new GDPR privacy law conformity changes. It will ask people to review how Facebook applies data from the web to target them with ads, and surface the sensitive profile info they share. Facebook will also enable European and Canadian users to turn on facial recognition after six years of the feature being blocked there. But with a design that encourages rapidly making the “Agree” button, a lack of granular controls, a laughably cheatable parental consent request for teens and an aesthetic overhaul of Download Your Information that doesn’t make it any easier to switch social networks, Facebook depicts it’s still hungry for your data.

The new privacy change and terms of service consent flow will appear starting the coming week to European users, though they’ll be allowed to dismiss it for now — although the May 25 th GDPR conformity deadline Facebook vowed to uphold in Europe is looming. Meanwhile, Facebook tells it will roll out the changes and permission flowing globally over the coming weeks and months with some slight regional changes. And finally, all teens worldwide that share sensitive info will have to go through the weak new parental consent flow.

Facebook brought a group of reporters to the new Building 23 at its Menlo Park headquarters to preview the changes today. But feedback was heavily critical as journalists grilled Facebook’s deputy chief privacy officer Rob Sherman. Questions centered around how Facebook makes accepting the updates much easier than reviewing or changing them, but Sherman stuck to talking points about how important it was to give users option and information.

” Trust is really important and it’s clear that we have a lot of work to do to regain the trust of people on our service” he said, devoting us deja vu about Mark Zuckerberg’s testimonies before congress.” We know that people won’t be comfortable employing Facebook if they don’t feel that their information is protected .”

Trouble at each step of Facebook’s privacy consent flow

There are a ton of small change, so we’ll lay out each with our criticisms.

Facebook’s consent flow starts well enough with the screen above offering a solid overview of why it’s inducing changes for GDPR and what you’ll be reviewing. But with merely an “X” up top to back out, it’s already training users to speed through by making that big blue button at the bottom.

Sensitive info

First up is control of your sensitive profile information, specifically your sexual preference, religion views and political opinions. As you’ll see at each step, you can made the pretty blue” Accept And Continue” button regardless of whether you’ve scrolled through the information. If you hit the ugly grey” Manage Data Setting” button, you have to go through an interstitial where Facebook stimulates its argument trying to deter you from removing the info before letting you make and save your option. It feels patently designed to get users to breeze through it by offering no resistance to continue, but friction if you want to make changes.

Facebook doesn’t let advertisers target you based on this sensitive info, which is good. The only exception is that in the U.S ., political positions alongside political Pages and Events you interact with impact your overarching personality categories that can be targeted with ads. You can opt out of being targeted by those too. But your only option here is either to remove any info you’ve shared in these categories so friends can’t see it, or allow Facebook to use it to personalize the site. There’s no option to keep this stuff on your profile but not let Facebook use it.

Facial recognition

Facebook is bringing facial recognition back to Europe and Canada. The Irish Data Protection commissioner who oversees the EU banned it there in 2012. Users in these countries will get a chance to turn it on, which is the default if they speed through. It’s a useful feature that can make sure people know about the photos of them floating around. But here the lack of granularity is concerning. Users might want to see warnings about possible impersonators utilizing their face in their profile pics, but not be suggested as someone to tag in their friends’ photos. Unfortunately, it’s all or nothing. While Facebook is right to make it simple to turn on or off totally, granular controls that unfold for those that want them would be much more empowering.

[ Update: This article has been updated to reflect that Facebook indeed can offer facial recognition in Europe and Canada .]

Data collection across the web

A major concern that’s arisen in the wake of Zuckerberg’s testimonies is how Facebook uses data collected about you from around the web to target users with ads and optimize its service. While Sherman echoed Zuckerberg in saying that users tell the company they prefer relevant ads, and that this data can help thwart hackers and scrapers, many users are unsettled by the offsite collect practises. Here, Facebook lets you block it from targeting you with ads based on data about your browsing behavior on sites that depict its Like and share buttons, conversion Pixel or Audience Network ads. The issue is that there’s no way to stop Facebook from use that data from personalizing your News Feed or optimizing other regions of its service.

New words of service

Facebook lately rewrote its terms of reference of service and data use policy to be more explicit and easy to read. It didn’t make any significant changes other than noting the policy now applies to its subsidiaries like Instagram and Messenger.[ Correction: But WhatsApp and Oculus have their own data policies .] That’s all clearly explained here, which is nice.

But the fact that the button to reject the new Terms of Service isn’t even a button, it’s a tiny” see your alternatives” hyperlink, shows how severely Facebook wants to avoid you closing your account. When Facebook’s product designer for the GDPR flow was asked if she supposed this hyperlink was the best route to present the alternative to the big” I Accept” button, she disingenuously said yes, eliciting jeerings from the room of reporters. It seems obvious that Facebook is trying to minimize the visibility of the path to account deletion rather than building it an obvious course of action if you don’t agree to its terms.

I requested Facebook actually show us what was on the other side of that tiny” see your alternatives” link and this is what we got. First, Facebook doesn’t mention its temporary deactivation alternative, merely the scary permanent delete option. Facebook recommends downloading your data before deleting your account, which you should. But the fact that you’ll have to wait( often a few hours) before you can download your data could push users to delay deletion and perhaps never resume. And only if you keep scrolling do you get to another tiny” I’m ready to delete my account” hyperlink instead of a real button.

Parental consent

GDPR also implements new regulations about how teens are treated, specifically users between the ages of 13( the minimum age required to sign up for Facebook) and 15. If users in this age range have shared their religious views, political views or sexual preference, Facebook requires them to either remove it or get parental consent to keep it. They also need permission to be targeted with ads based on data from Facebook’s partners. Without that permission, they’ll find a less personalized version of Facebook. But the organizations of the system for attaining and verifying that parental consent is a joke.

Users simply select one of their Facebook friends or enter an email address, and that person is asked to give consent for their “child” to share sensitive info. But Facebook blindly trusts that they’ve actually selected their parent or protector, even though it has a feature for users to designate who their family is, and the child could put anyone in the email field, including an alternate address they control. Sherman says Facebook is” not seeking to collect additional information” to substantiate parental consent, so it seems Facebook is happy to let teens easily bypass the checkup.

Privacy shortcuts

To keep all users abreast of their privacy situates, Facebook has redesigned its Privacy Shortcuts in a colorful format that sticks out from the rest of the site. No complaints here.

Download your information

Facebook has totally redesigned its Download Your Information tool after keeping it basically the same for the past eight years. You can now view your content and data in different categories without downloading it, which alongside the new privacy shortcuts is perhaps the only unequivocally positive and unproblematic change amidst today’s announcements.

And Facebook now lets you select certain categories of data, date ranges, JSON or HTML format and image quality to download. That could make it quicker and easier if you simply require a transcript of a certain type of content but don’t need to export all your photos and videos, for example. Thankfully, Facebook says you’ll now be able to download your media in a higher resolving than the old tool allowed.

But the big problem here was the subject of my feature piece the coming week about Facebook’s lack of data portability. The Download Your Information tool is supposed to let you take your data and go to a different social network. But it merely exports your social graph, aka your friends, as a text listing of names. There are no links, usernames or other unique identifiers unless friends opt into let you export their email or telephone number( only 4 percent of my friends do ), so good luck seeing the right John Smith on another app. The new version of Download Your Information exports the same old list of names, rather than offering any interoperable format that would let you find your friends elsewhere.

A higher standard

Overall, it seems like Facebook is complying with the letter of GDPR law, but with questionable spirit. Sure, privacy is boring to a lot of people. Too little info and they feel confused and scared. Too many options and screens and they feel overwhelmed and riled. Facebook struck the right balance in some places here. But the subtly pushy designs seem are aiming to steer people away from changing their defaults in ways that could hamper Facebook’s mission and business.

Making the choices equal in visible weight, rather than burying the ways and means of make changes in grayed-out buttons and tiny connections, would have been more fair. And it would have shown that Facebook has faith in the value it offer, such that users would stick around and leave features enabled if they truly wanted to.

When questioned about this, Sherman pointed the finger at other tech companies, “says hes” guessed Facebook was more upfront with users. Asked to clarify if he believed Facebook’s approach was ” better ,” he told ” I think that’s right .” But Facebook isn’t being judged by the industry criterion, because it’s not a standard company. It’s constructed its purpose and its business on top of our private data, and touted itself as a boon to the world. But when asked to clear a higher bar for privacy, Facebook delved into design tricks to keep from losing our data.

Make sure to visit: CapGeneration.com

Senator warns Facebook better shape up or get broken up

In the run-up to Mark Zuckerberg’s first appearance before Congress, Oregon Senator Ron Wyden issued a warning to the company about what it can expect from lawmakers if it doesn’t radically alter course.

” Mr. Zuckerberg is going to have a couple of very unpleasant days before Congress next week and that’s the place to start ,” Wyden said at the TechFestNW meeting in his home nation of Oregon on Friday.

” There are going to be people who are going to say Facebook ought to be broken up. There have been a number of proposals and ideas for doing it and I guess unless[ Zuckerberg] observes a style to honor the promise he made several years ago, he’s gonna have a law on his hands .”

The Senator added that he would support such a law.

For Wyden, concealing the truth about data sharing in the fine print is a deceptive practice that’s gone on too long.

” I think we got to establish a principle once and for all that you own your data, period ,” Wyden said.

” What does that entail in the real world? It’s not enough for a company to bury some technical lingo in their[ words of service ]… It’s not enough to have some convoluted process for opting out .”

While that might have been wishful thinking two weeks ago, the Oregon lawmaker believes that Facebook’s most recent scandal has generating the perfect opportunity for privacy reform.

” If there is a grassroots uprising about the issue of who owns user data, we can get it passed ,” Wyden said, quoting other pieces of bipartisan legislation that once seemed like a long-shot.

Wyden, one of the loudest digital privacy champions in Congress, wants the public to use Facebook’s Cambridge Analytica debacle to demand that social networks obtain” explicit permission” from users before sharing their personal data with anyone — including advertisers.

” It’s real basic. You have to give the okay for them to do anything with your data ,” Wyden said.

Zuckerberg is slated to appear before the Senate’s commerce and judiciary committees on Tuesday and the House energy and commerce committee the following day.

To date, Facebook has always successfully writhed out of watching its chief executive with his right hand raised. This time, as pressure mounted from legislators, investors, advertisers and the public alike, the company confessed. The situate of hearings is widely expected to be a milestone event in big tech’s reluctant shuffle toward get its wings clipped in Congress.

Unfortunately for Facebook, its corporate willful ignorance around protecting user data echoes other recent privacy tragedies — a context that won’t do it any favors.

” The reason that Facebook is in hot water is essentially the same reason that Equifax is in hot water ,” Wyden said.” These companies have not gotten their heads around the idea that the data they collect is more than merely their property .”

Make sure to visit: CapGeneration.com

Go find out now if Cambridge Analytica had access to your data

Facebook promised it would alert users yesterday who were impacted by the whole Cambridge Analytica mess. No doubt you’ve been waiting on that information since the whole thing traversed your radar. Well, you can either sit around and wait for a notification, or you can go find out yourself, by visiting this Facebook Help Center page.

The link will let you know if you were among the 87 million or so Facebook users who had their information compromised when you or one your friends logged into the “This is Your Digital Life” app. If so, there’s a good chance your profile, city, birthday and the pages you like is likewise shared.

If you were impacted, the page also notes that “a small number of people who logged in” may have given the service access to their “news need, timeline, posts and messages which may have included positions and messages from you.”

Of course, there’s a lot more information still to come from all off this — some of which will hopefully come to illumination when Mark Zuckerberg testifies to the Senate today.

Make sure to visit: CapGeneration.com

Zuckerberg denies knowledge of Facebook shadow profiles

The fact that Facebook probably has a profile of you whether you’re a Facebook user or not might come as a surprise to some users, though today even the company’s chief executive denied knowledge of the practice — or at least the term used to describe it.

In this morning’s hearing with the House Energy and Commerce Committee, New Mexico Representative Ben Lujan cornered Mark Zuckerberg with a question about so-called ” shadow profiles” — the term often used to refer to the data that Facebook collects on non-users and other hide data that Facebook holds but does not offer openly on the site for users to see.

In one of the handful of somewhat candid moments of the past few days, Rep. Lujan pressed Zuckerberg on the practice today 😛 TAGEND

Lujan : Facebook has detailed profiles on people who have never signed up for Facebook, yes or no?

Zuckerberg : Congressman, in general we collect data on people who have not signed up for Facebook for security purposes to prevent the kind of scraping you were just referring to[ reverse searches based on public info like phone numbers ].

Lujan : So these are called shadow profiles, is that what they’ve been referred to by some?

Zuckerberg: Congressman, I’m not, I’m not familiar with that .

Lujan : I’ll refer to them as shadow profiles for today’s hearing. On average, how many data points does Facebook have on each Facebook user?

Zuckerberg : I do not know off the top of my head.

Lujan : Do you know how many points of data Facebook has on the average non-Facebook user?

Zuckerberg : Congressman, I do not know off the top of my head but I can have our team get back to you afterward.

Lujan : It’s been admitted by Facebook that you do collect data points on non-[ Facebook users ]. My question is, can someone who does not have a Facebook account opt out of Facebook’s involuntary data collected ?

Zuckerberg : Anyone can turn off and opt out of any data collection for ads, whether they use our services or not, but in order to prevent people from scraping public information … we need to know when someone is repeatedly trying to access our services.

Lujan : It may surprise you that we’ve not “was talkin about a” this a lot today. You’ve said everyone controls their data, but you’re collecting data on people who are not even Facebook users who have never signed a consent, a privacy agreement .

And it may surprise you that on Facebook’s page when you go to” I don’t have a Facebook account and would like to request all my personal data stored by Facebook” it takes you to a kind that tells” go to your Facebook page and then on your account decideds you can download your data .”

So you’re directing people that don’t even have a Facebook page to sign up for a Facebook page to access their data … We’ve got to change that.

As TechCrunch’s Natasha Lomas explained during a 2013 Facebook privacy scandal 😛 TAGEND

Chances are someone you have corresponded with — by email or mobile phone — has let Facebook’s data spiders crawl through their correspondence, thereby allowing your contact data to be assimilated altogether without your knowledge or consent.

During that privacy breach, Facebook uncovered the email addresses and phone numbers of six million users, though it subsequently became apparent that a chunk of those accounts were never handed over to the platform directly by Facebook users. This information can be drawn into Facebook’s vast data aggregation machine through friends or friends of friends via all kinds of channels, including the” find friends” feature that allows the app to scan mobile contacts.

For all of Zuckerberg’s claims that Facebook users own their data, users — and non-users — have no way of determining the full trove of data that the company stores on an individual. As Rep. Lujan was suggesting, it’s likely that the Facebook data users are able to view on the platform is likely merely the tip of the company’s immense data iceberg.

Make sure to visit: CapGeneration.com

Zuckerberg owns or clones most of the 8 social apps he cites as competition

Mark Zuckerberg’s flimsy defense when congress requested information about a lack of competition to Facebook has been to quotes that the average American uses eight social apps. But that conveniently glosses over the fact that Facebook owns three of the top 10 U.S. iOS apps:# 4 Instagram,# 6 Messenger, and# 8 Facebook according to App Annie. The top 3 apps are games. Facebook is constructing its Watch video hub to challenge# 5 YouTube, and has relentlessly cloned Stories to beat# 7 Snapchat. And Facebook also owns #19 WhatsApp. Zoom in to merely” social networking apps”, and Facebook owns the entire top 3.

” The average American I guess utilizes eight different communication and social apps. So there’s a lot of various types of option and a lot of innovation and activity going on in this space” Zuckerberg said when asked about whether Facebook is a monopoly by Senator Graham during yesterday’s Senate hearing, and he’s trotted out that same talking point that was on his note sheet during today’s House witnes.

But Facebook has relentlessly sought to acquire or co-opt the features of its challengers. That’s why any valuable regulation will require congress to prioritize rivalry. That entails either broken off Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp; avoiding regulations that are easy for Facebook to comply with but prohibitively expensive for potential challengers to manage; or ensuring data portability that allows users to select where to take their contents and personal information.

Breaking up Facebook, or at the least preventing it from acquiring established social networks in the future, would be the most powerful way to promote competition in the space. Facebook’s multi-app structure creates economies of scale in data that allow it to share ad targeting and sales teams, backend engineering, and relevancy-sorting algorithm. That constructs it tough for smaller challengers without as much fund or data to provide the public with more choice.

Regulation done wrong could create a moat for Facebook, locking in its result. Complex transparency statutes might be merely a paperwork velocity bump for Facebook and its army of lawyers, but could be too onerous for upstart companies to follow. Meanwhile, data collected regulation could avoid challengers from ever building as big of a data war chest as Facebook has already generated.

Data portability dedicates users the option to choose the best social network for them, rather than being stuck where they already are. Facebook provides a Download Your Information tool for exporting your content. But photos come back compressed, and you don’t get the contact info of friends unless they opt in. The listing of friends’ names you receive doesn’t allow you to find them on other apps the style contact info would. Facebook should at least offer a technique for your exporting hashed version of that contact info that other apps could use to help you find your friends there without violating the privacy rights of those friends. Meanwhile, Instagram altogether absence a Download Your Information tool.

Congress should push Zuckerberg to explain what apps compete with Facebook as a core identity provider, an omni-purpose social graph, or cross-platform messaging app. Without choice, users are at the compassion of Facebook’s policy and product examples. All of the congressional questions about data privacy and security don’t mean much to the public if they have no viable alternative to Facebook. The fact that Facebook owns or clones the majority of the 8 social apps used by the average American is nothing for Zuckerberg to boast about.

Make sure to visit: CapGeneration.com

Zuckerberg doesnt want to talk about changing the business model

Facebook is testifying is again before congress about the Cambridge Analytica debacle and Facebook’s privacy policy in general. One representative including with regard to nailed down Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s position on many subjects.

The U.S. Representative for California’s 18 th congressional district Anna Eshoo started by setting the tone. “First, I believe that our democratic institutions are undergoing a stress exam in our country, ” she said. “Putting our private information on offer without concern for possible misuses is simply irresponsible, ” she added.

Eshoo asked her constituents to submit questions that they want to ask Zuckerberg. The result is an intense four-minute yes-or-no round of questions.

While Zuckerberg was pretty good at answering yes or no to Eshoo’s topics, it wasn’t so simple with the business model topic. “Are you willing to change your business model in the interest of protecting individual privacy? ” she asked.

“Congresswoman, we have made and are continuing to make changes to reduce the amount of data…” Zuckerberg told. Eshoo stopped him and recurred her question word for word.

“Congresswoman, I’m not sure what that means, ” Zuckerberg said.

Earlier questions were also quite telling. “Do you think you have a moral responsibility to run a platform that protects our republic? Yes or no? ” she asked. After a short reluctance, Zuckerberg answered yes.

Later in the conversation, Eshoo asked if Facebook would offer a blanket opt-in option to share their personal data with third-party companies.

“Congresswoman, yes, that’s how our platform works. You have to opt in to sign in to any app before you use it, ” Zuckerberg said.

“Let me merely add that it is a minefield in order to do that and you have to make it transparent, clear, in pedestrian language:’ this is what we will do with your data, do you want this to happen or not? ’ So I think this is being blurred, I think you know what I entail, ” Eshoo said.

Even more interesting, when Zuckerberg used to say Facebook was analyse third-party developers who “had access to large amounts of data, ” Eshoo couldn’t take it.

“What does that mean? ” she said. Zuckerberg recurred his answer about the internal investigation, without clarifying what Zuckerberg means by large amounts of data and who qualifies for that.

No other representative thought about asking a basic question about Cambridge Analytica’s data. Eshoo asked if Zuckerberg’s data was included in the data sold to the malicious third party. Zuckerberg simply answered “yes.”

Make sure to visit: CapGeneration.com

Mark Zuckerberg: We do not sell data to advertisers

While many of us in the tech world are familiar with Facebook’s business model, there is a common delusion among people that Facebook collects information about you and then sells that information to advertisers.

Zuckerberg wants everyone( especially the U.S. Senate) to know that’s not the case, and has laid forth the most simple instance to explain it.

During his testimony, the Facebook CEO clarified to Senator John Cornyn that Facebook does not sell data.

There is a very common misconception that we sell data to advertisers, and we do not sell data to advertisers. What we let is for advertisers to tell us who they want to reach and then we do the placement. So, if an advertiser comes to us and tells,’ Alright, I’m a ski store and I want to sell skis to women ,’ then we might have some sense because people shared skiing related content or said they were interested in that. They shared whether they’re a woman. And then we can show the ads to the right people without that data ever changing hands and going to the advertiser. That’s a very fundamental part of how our model works and something that is often misunderstood.

While, again, this may seem straightforward to many of us, Zuckerberg detected himself having to explain more than once that Facebook does not sell data during the course of its Senate testimony.

Make sure to visit: CapGeneration.com

Highlights and audio from Zuckerbergs emotional Q&A on scandals

” This is going to be a never-ending battle ,” told Mark Zuckerberg. He only gave the most candid appear yet into his thoughts about Cambridge Analytica, data privacy and Facebook’s sweeping developer platform changes during a conference call with reporters today. Voicing alternately vulnerable about his past negligence and confident about Facebook’s strategy going forward, Zuckerberg took nearly an hour of tough questions.

You can read a transcript here and listen to a recording of the bellow below 😛 TAGEND

The CEO started the call by giving his condolences to those affected by the shooting at YouTube yesterday. He then delivered this mea culpa on privacy 😛 TAGEND

We’re an idealistic and optimistic company … but it’s clear now that we didn’t do enough. We didn’t focus enough on preventing abuse and thinking through how people could use these tools to do damage as well … We didn’t take a broad enough opinion of what our responsibility is and that was a huge mistake. That was my mistake.

It’s not enough to simply connect people. We have to make sure those connects are positive and that they’re bringing people together. It’s not enough just to give people a voice, we have to make sure that people are not utilizing that voice to hurt people or spread misinformation. And it’s not enough to give people tools to sign into apps, we have to make sure that all those developers protect people’s information too.

It’s not enough to have regulations requiring that they protect the information. It’s not enough to believe them when they’re telling us they’re protecting information. We actually have to ensure that everyone in our ecosystem protects people’s information.

This is Zuckerberg’s strongest statement yet about his and Facebook’s failure to anticipate worst-case scenarios , which has led to a string of scandals that are now decimating the company’s morale. Spelling out how policy means nothing without enforcement, and pairing that with a massive reduction in how much data app developers can request from users builds it seem like Facebook is ready to turn over a new leaf.

Here are the highlights from the rest of the call 😛 TAGEND

On Zuckerberg calling fake news’ influence “crazy”: ” I clearly made a mistake by just rejecting fake news as crazy — as has implications … it was too flippant. I never should have referred to it as crazy.

Facebook and the endless string of worst-case scenarios


On deleting Russian trolls : Not only did Facebook delete 135 Facebook and Instagram accounts belonging to Russian government-connected election interference troll farm the Internet Research Agency, as Facebook announced yesterday, Zuckerberg told Facebook removed” a Russian news organization that we decided was controlled and operated by the IRA .”

On the 87 million number : Regarding today’s disclosure that up to 87 million people had their data improperly accessed by Cambridge Analytica,” it very well could be less but we wanted to put out the maximum that we felt it could be as soon as we had that analysis .” Zuckerberg also referred to The New York Times’ report , noting that ” We never put out the 50 million number, that was other parties .”

Facebook acknowledges Cambridge Analytica hijacked data on up to 87 M users


On users having their public info scraped : Facebook announced this morning that” we believe most people on Facebook could have had their public profile rubbed” via its search by phone number or email address feature and account recovery system. Scammers abused these to punch in one piece of info and then pair it to someone’s name and photo. Zuckerberg told search features are useful in languages where it’s hard to type or a lot of people have the same names. But” the methods of react limiting this weren’t able to prevent malicious performers who cycled through hundreds of thousands of IP address and did a relatively small number of queries for each one, so given that and what we know to day it merely stimulates sense to shut that down .”

On when Facebook learned about the scraping and why it didn’t inform the public sooner :” We looked into this and is understandable more over the last few days as part of the audit of our overall system ,” Zuckerberg told, declining to specify when Facebook first identified the questions.[ Update: Facebook subsequently specified that the sophisticated scraping had been picked up in the past few weeks during the audit, recently corroborated, and that the company disclosed the situation as soon as it had details ready .]

On enforcing GDPR worldwide : Zuckerberg refuted a Reuters story from yesterday saying that Facebook wouldn’t bring GDPR privacy protections to the U.S. and elsewhere. Instead he tells,” we’re going to make all the same controls and situates available everywhere , not just in Europe.”

Zuckerberg says Facebook will offer GDPR privacy controls everywhere


On if board has discussed him stepping down as chairman :” Not that I’m aware of ,” Zuckerberg said happily.

On if he still thinks he’s the best person to run Facebook :” Yes. Life is about draw lessons from the mistakes and figuring out what you need to do to move forward … I think what people should evaluate us on is learning from our mistakes … and if we’re building things people like and that make their lives better … there are billions of people who love the products we’re building .”

On the Boz memo and prioritizing business over security :” The things that induces our product challenging to manage and operate are not the trade-offs between people and the business. I actually guess those are quite easy because over the long-term, the business will be better if you serve people. I think it would be near-sighted to focus on short-term revenue over people, and I don’t think we’re that short-sighted. All the hard decisions we have to make are trade-offs between people. Different people who use Facebook have different wants. Some people want to share political speech that they think is valid, and other people feel like it’s hate speech … we don’t always get them right .”

The real threat to Facebook is the Kool-Aid turning sour


On whether Facebook can audit all app developers :” We’re not going to be able to go out and necessarily find every bad use of data ,” Zuckerberg said, but confidently said,” Iactually do think we’re going to be able to cover a large amount of that activity .”

On whether Facebook will sue Cambridge Analytica :” We have stood down temporarily to let the[ U.K. government] do their investigation and their audit. Once that’s done we’ll resume ours … and ultimately to make sure none of the data persists or is being used improperly. And at that point if it constructs sense we will take legal action if we need to do that to get people’s datum .”

Cambridge Analytica denies accessing data on 87 M Facebook users…claims 30 M


On how Facebook will measure its impact on fixing privacy : Zuckerberg wants to be able to measure” the prevalence of different categories of bad content like fake news, dislike speech, bully, terrorism … That’s going to end up being the style we should be held accountable and measured by the public … My hope is that over day the playbook and scorecard we put out will also be followed by other internet platforms so that style there can be a standard measure across the industry .”

On whether Facebook should try to earn less fund by utilizing less data for targeting :” People tell us if they’re going to see ads they want the ads to be good … that the ads are actually relevant to what they care about … On the one hand people want relevant experiences, and on the other hand I do think there’s some inconvenience with how data applies in systems like ads. But I think the feedback is overwhelmingly on the side of wanting a better experience. Perhaps it’s 95 -5 .”

Facebook rewrites Terms of Service, clarifying device data collected


On whether #DeleteFacebook has had an impact on utilization or ad revenue :” I don’t think there’s been any meaningful impact that we’ve find … but it’s not good .”

On the timeline for fixing data privacy :” This is going to be a never-ending combat. You never fully solve security. It’s an limbs race ,” Zuckerberg said early in the bellow. Then to shut Q& A, he said,” I think this is a multi-year endeavor. My hope is that by the end of this year we’ll have turned the corner on a lot of these issues and that people will see that things are getting a lot better .”

Overall, this was the moment of humility, candor and contrition Facebook desperately needed. Users, developers, regulators and the company’s own employees have felt in the dark this last month, but Zuckerberg did his best to lay out a clear route forward for Facebook. His willingness to endure these questions was admirable, even if he deserved the grilling.

The company’s problems won’t vanish, and its past sins can’t be apologized away. But Facebook and its leader have finally ripened past the incredulous dismissals and paralysis that characterized its response to past scandals. It’s ready to get to work.

Make sure to visit: CapGeneration.com