mfioretti: data mining*

Bookmarks on this page are managed by an admin user.

18 bookmark(s) - Sort by: Date ↓ / Title / Voting / - Bookmarks from other users for this tag

  1. One aspect of the novel technology it is talking about for the first time is image matching.

    If someone tries to upload a terrorist photo or video, the systems look to see if this matches previous known extremist content to stop it going up in the first place.

    A second area is experimenting with AI to understand text that might be advocating terrorism.

    This is analysing text previously removed for praising or supporting a group such as IS and trying to work out text-based signals that such content may be terrorist propaganda.

    That analysis goes into an algorithm learning how to detect similar posts.

    Machine learning should mean that this process will improve over time.

    The company says it is also using algorithms to detect "clusters" of accounts or images relating to support for terrorism.
    http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-40290258
    Voting 0
  2. earlier this month, The Australian uncovered something that felt like a breach in the social contract: a leaked confidential document prepared by Facebook that revealed the company had offered advertisers the opportunity to target 6.4 million younger users, some only 14 years old, during moments of psychological vulnerability, such as when they felt “worthless,” “insecure,” “stressed,” “defeated,” “anxious,” and like a “failure.”

    The 23-page document had been prepared for a potential advertiser and highlighted Facebook’s ability to micro-target ads down to “moments when young people need a confidence boost.” According to The Australian’s report, Facebook had been monitoring posts, photos, interactions, and internet activity in real time to track these emotional lows. (Facebook confirmed the existence of the report, but declined to respond to questions from WIRED about which types of posts were used to discern emotion.)

    The day the story broke, Facebook quickly issued a public statement arguing that the premise of the article was “misleading”
    https://www.wired.com/2017/05/welcome-next-phase-facebook-backlash
    Voting 0
  3. Quit fracking our lives to extract data that’s none of your business and that your machines misinterpret. — New Clues, #58

    That’s the blunt advice David Weinberger and I give to marketers who still make it hard to talk, sixteen years after many of them started failing to get what we meant by Markets are Conversations.

    In the world of 2001, people have become so machinelike that the most human character turns out to be a machine. That’s the essence of Kubrick’s dark prophecy: as we come to rely on computers to mediate our understanding of the world, it is our own intelligence that flattens into artificial intelligence.

    Even if our own intelligence is not yet artificialized, what’s feeding it surely is.

    In The Filter Bubble, after explaining Google’s and Facebook’s very different approaches to personalized “experience” filtration, and the assumptions behind both, Eli Pariser says both companies approximations are based on “a bad theory of you,” and come up with “pretty poor representations of who we are, in part because there is no one set of data that describes who we are.” He says the ideal of perfect personalization dumps us into what animators, puppetry and robotics engineers call the uncanny valley: a “place where something is lifelike but not convincingly alive, and it gives people the creeps.”

    Sanity requires that we line up many different personalities behind a single first person pronoun: I, me, mine. And also behind multiple identifiers. In my own case, I am Doc to most of those who know me, David to various government agencies (and most of the entities that bill me for stuff), Dave to many (but not all) family members, @dsearls to Twitter, and no name at all to the rest of the world, wherein I remain, like most of us, anonymous (literally, nameless), because that too is a civic grace. (And if you doubt that, ask any person who has lost their anonymity through the Faustian bargain called celebrity.)

    Third, advertising needs to return to what it does best: straightforward brand messaging that is targeted at populations, and doesn’t get personal. For help with that, start reading
    https://medium.com/@dsearls/on-market...bad-guesswork-88a84de937b0#.deu5ue16x
    Voting 0
  4. So, in essence, we have given the designers of time and thought saving applications a grave responsibility. We have implicitly allowed them to choose for us what presumably will be in our best interests. I, for one, find the natural progression of that prospect extremely scary and amazingly it is all self-imposed!

    Google, Amazon and Facebook do this all the time by mining our data, targeting us with custom advertising and even creating profiles that in practice could rival ones that our intelligence agencies keep on criminals and terrorists.

    And here is the thing: We all are complicit in allowing this to happen. So next time when you turn on your GPS or phone, which by the way pin-points to within twenty feet of where you are at any time of the day or night, remember the power you are ceding to that vast network in the sky. Do the powers that operate that network really have our best interests in mind or will they one day decide to direct us all to drive off the proverbial cliff? I, for one, will be dusting off my old Rand McNally road maps
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ralph-a...-crippling-effect-of-m_b_8285818.html
    Voting 0
  5. A May 2014 White House report on “big data” notes that the ability to determine the demographic traits of individuals through algorithms and aggregation of online data has a potential downside beyond just privacy concerns: Systematic discrimination.

    There is a long history of denying access to bank credit and other financial services based on the communities from which applicants come — a practice called “redlining.” Likewise, the report warns, “Just as neighborhoods can serve as a proxy for racial or ethnic identity, there are new worries that big data technologies could be used to ‘digitally redline’ unwanted groups, either as customers, employees, tenants or recipients of credit.” (See materials from the report’s related research conference for scholars’ views on this and other issues.)

    One vexing problem, according to the report, is that potential digital discrimination is even less likely to be pinpointed, and therefore remedied.

    Approached without care, data mining can reproduce existing patterns of discrimination, inherit the prejudice of prior decision-makers, or simply reflect the widespread biases that persist in society. It can even have the perverse result of exacerbating existing inequalities by suggesting that historically disadvantaged groups actually deserve less favorable treatment.” The paper’s authors argue that the most likely legal basis for anti-discrimination enforcement, Title VII, is not currently adequate to stop many forms of discriminatory data mining, and “society does not have a ready answer for what to do about it.”

    Their 2014 paper “Digital Discrimination: The Case of Airbnb.com” examined listings for thousands of New York City landlords in mid-2012. Airbnb builds up a reputation system by allowing ratings from guests and hosts.

    The study’s findings include:

    “The raw data show that non-black and black hosts receive strikingly different rents: roughly $144 versus $107 per night, on average.” However, the researchers had to control for a variety of factors that might skew an accurate comparison, such as differences in geographical location.
    “Controlling for all of these factors, non-black hosts earn roughly 12% more for a similar apartment with similar ratings and photos relative to black hosts.”
    “Despite the potential of the Internet to reduce discrimination, our results suggest that social platforms such as Airbnb may have the opposite effect. Full of salient pictures and social profiles, these platforms make it easy to discriminate — as evidenced by the significant penalty faced by a black host trying to conduct business on Airbnb.”

    “Given Airbnb’s careful consideration of what information is available to guests and hosts,” Edelman and Luca note. “Airbnb might consider eliminating or reducing the prominence of host photos: It is not immediately obvious what beneficial information these photos provide, while they risk facilitating discrimination by guests. Particularly when a guest will be renting an entire property, the guest’s interaction with the host will be quite limited, and we see no real need for Airbnb to highlight the host’s picture.” (For its part, Airbnb responded to the study by saying that it prohibits discrimination in its terms of service, and that the data analyzed were both older and limited geographically.)
    http://journalistsresource.org/studie...racial-discrimination-research-airbnb
    Voting 0
  6. Retargeting is another recent trend in ads. Rather than just targeting ads based on what you do on a service, sites can track the cookies left by other sites you’ve visited around the web. That means if you almost bought a flight to Hawaii on some travel site, Hawaiian Air might pay Google, Facebook, Twitter, or LinkedIn to show you an ad for a discount on that same flight in hopes that you’ll pull the trigger.

    But now, it’s not just your data being invisibly used to target ads. Your content and identity are being used as ads.

    Screenshot 2013-10-11 at 12.10.17 PMGoogle is doing it in the most respectful and responsible way. You can completely opt out of having your content used as ads. Facebook lets you opt out of being used in “social ads” that display your name next to ads, but you can’t opt out of Sponsored Stories that use your content as ads. Twitter doesn’t offer any way to opt out of your name being used in ads (though you can opt out of being shown personalized follow recommendations and retargeted ads).

    Companies have to choose between the health of their business and the freedom of their users. If they let people opt out easily, their ads will be less effective, and they’ll make less money to spend on building their products.

    So in some ways, by not opting out of being used as social ads, you’re being generous. You’re saving your friends from irrelevant ads for things they don’t care about.

    Maybe everyone should follow Google’s lead and give you the freedom to opt out of having your name, face, and activity turned into ads — even if it hurts the companies providing free services and your friends who use them. If you want to utilize the opt outs offered, go right ahead. Update: It’s your right to say you won’t have your identity leveraged and that these companies can find another way to make money. Maybe they should. »

    But before you opt out, remember, you can choose to make ads better for everyone else.
    http://techcrunch.com/2013/10/11/you-make-ads-better
    Voting 0
  7. With this latest privacy change on January 30th, I'm scared.

    Facebook has always been slightly worse than all the other tech companies with dodgy privacy records, but now, it's in it's own league. Getting off isn't just necessary to protect yourself, it's necessary to protect your friends and family too. This could be the point of no return -- but it's not too late to take back control.
    A short list of some Facebook practices

    It's not just what Facebook is saying it'll take from you and do with your information, it's all the things it's not saying, and doing anyway because of the loopholes they create for themselves in their Terms of Service and how simply they go back on their word. We don't even need to click "I agree" anymore. They just change the privacy policy and by staying on Facebook, you agree. Oopsy!

    Facebook doesn't keep any of your data safe or anonymous, no matter how much you lock down your privacy settings. Those are all a decoy. There are very serious privacy breaches, like selling your product endorsement to advertisers and politicians, tracking everything you read on the internet, or using data from your friends to learn private things about you - they have no off switch.

    Facebooks gives your data to "third-parties" through your use of apps, and then say that's you doing it, not them. Everytime you use an app, you're allowing Facebook to escape it's own privacy policy with you and with your friends. It's like when my brother used to make me punch myself and ask, "why are you punching yourself?" Then he'd tell my mum it wasn't his fault.

    "I have nothing to hide"

    A lot of people aren't worried about this, feeling they have nothing to hide. Why would they care about little old me? Why should I worry about this when I'm not doing anything wrong?

    One of the more obvious problems here is with insurance companies. The data they have on you is mined to predict your future. The now famous story of the pregnant teenager being outed by the store Target, after it mined her purchase data -- larger handbags, headache pills, tissues -- and sent her a "congratulations" message as marketing, which her unknowing father got instead. Oops!

    The same is done about you, and revealed to any company without your control.

    From the Terms Of Service (not the Privacy Policy -- see what they did there?):

    You give us permission to use your name, profile picture, content and information in connection with commercial, sponsored or related content (such as a brand you like), served or enhanced by us.

    And later:

    By "information" we mean facts and other information about you, including actions taken by users and non-users who interact with Facebook.

    So this includes everything they're collecting about you but not telling you. Everything you read online, everything someone ever posts about you, all your private financial transactions.

    Finally, I want to explain how this latest privacy change makes things way worse, and way more out of your control if you stay on Facebook.

    Facebook is demanding to track what you buy, and your financial information like bank account and credit card numbers. You've already agreed to it in the new Terms Of Service. It's already started sharing data with Mastercard. They'll use the fact that you stayed on Facebook as "permission" to make deals with all kinds of banks and financial institutions to get your data from them. They'll call it anonymous, but like they trick your friends to reveal your data to the third-parties with apps, they'll create loopholes here too.

    Facebook is also insisting to track your location via your phone's GPS, everywhere and all the time. It'll know extactly who you spend your time with. They'll know your habits, they'll know when you call in sick at work, but are really out bowling. "Sal likes 2pm Bowling at Secret Lanes." They'll know if you join an addict support group, or go to a psychiatrist, or a psychic, or a mistress. They'll know how many times you've been to the doctor or hospital, and be able to share that with prospective insurers or employers. They'll know when you're secretly job hunting, and will sell your endorsement for job sites to your friends and colleagues -- you'll be revealed.

    They'll know everything that can be revealed by your location, and they'll use it however they want to make a buck.

    And -- it'll all be done retrospectively. If you stay on Facebook past January 30th, there's nothing stopping all of your past location and financial data to get used. They'll get your past location data from when your friends checked-in with you, and the GPS data stored in photos of you. They'll pull your old financial records - that embarrasing medicine you bought with your credit card 5 years ago will be added to your profile to be used as Facebook chooses. It will be sold again and again, and likely used against you. It will be shared with governments and be freely available from loads of "third-party" companies who do nothing but sell personal data, and irreversibly eliminate your privacy.
    This is irreversible now.

    Location and financial data are not just really sensitive, they allow the "third-parties" de-anonymise information about you. This massively empowers these third-parties to collect all avaiable information about you, including calculated information that you never revealed. This is a situation where even Facebook itself will have trouble maintaining the privacy of its data -- not that they care.
    http://saintsal.com/facebook
    Voting 0
  8. Here's a look at what we know—and what we don't—about the consumer data industry.

    How much do these companies know about individual people?

    They start with the basics, like names, addresses and contact information, and add on demographics, like age, race, occupation and "education level," according to consumer data firm Acxiom's overview of its various categories.

    But that's just the beginning: The companies collect lists of people experiencing "life-event triggers" like getting married, buying a home, sending a kid to college—or even getting divorced.

    Credit reporting giant Experianhas a separate marketing services division, which sells lists of "names of expectant parents and families with newborns" that are "updated weekly."

    The companies also collect data about your hobbies and many of the purchases you make. Want to buy a list of people who read romance novels? Epsiloncan sell you that, as well as a list of people who donate to international aid charities.

    A subsidiary of credit reporting company Equifax even collects detailed salary and pay stub informationfor roughly 38 percentof employed Americans, as NBC news reported. As part of handling employee verification requests, the company gets the information directly from employers.

    Equifax said in a statement that the information is only sold to customers "who have been verified through a detailed credentialing process." It added that if a mortgage company or other lender wants to access information about your salary, they must obtain your permission to do so.
    http://www.propublica.org/article/eve...bout-what-data-brokers-know-about-you
    Voting 0
  9. If we give up all our privacy on-line for contextual ads, then how come so many of them are so far off the mark? Personal data harvesting for contextual ads and content should be a beautiful thing. They do it privately and securely, and it's all automated so that no human being actually learns anything about you. And then the online world becomes customized, just for you.

    The real problem with this scenario is that is we're paying for contextual ads and content with our personal data, but we're not getting what we pay for. Facebook advertising is off target and almost completely irrelevant. The question is: Why? Facebook has a database of our explicitly stated interests, which many users fill out voluntarily. Facebook sees what we post about. It knows who we interact with.

    It counts our likes, monitors our comments and even follows us around the Web. Yet, while the degree of personal data collection is extreme, the advertising seems totally random.

    Advertising on Google Search and in Google Ads on Amazon and other websites mostly seems to promote things that I've looked at or already purchased. For example, if I buy a wallet, I see hundreds of ads for wallets for months afterward -- the one thing I definitely don't need.

    The problem isn't that we're giving up all our personal data. The problem is that we're giving it up for nothing.
    http://www.computerworld.com/article/...rity0/why-do-contextual-ads-fail.html
    Voting 0
  10. In the last few decades, as we began to generate more data, our institutions became addicted. If you withheld the data and severed the feedback loops, it’s not clear whether they could continue at all. We, as citizens, are caught in an odd position: our reason for disclosing the data is not that we feel deep concern for the public good. No, we release data out of self-interest, on Google or via self-tracking apps. We are too cheap not to use free services subsidized by advertising. Or we want to track our fitness and diet, and then we sell the data.

    Simitis knew even in 1985 that this would inevitably lead to the “algorithmic regulation” taking shape today, as politics becomes “public administration” that runs on autopilot so that citizens can relax and enjoy themselves, only to be nudged, occasionally, whenever they are about to forget to buy broccoli.
    http://www.technologyreview.com/featu...story/520426/the-real-privacy-problem
    Voting 0

Top of the page

First / Previous / Next / Last / Page 1 of 2 Online Bookmarks of M. Fioretti: Tags: data mining

About - Propulsed by SemanticScuttle