Facebook closes down 470 inauthentic 'Russian' accounts

[HEXUS]

The users spent $100k on FB ads to agitate on immigration, gun rights, LGBTQ and race topics.

Read more.

[philehidiot]

Is this genuinely Russian influence or are they, like a lot of media companies, just using the Russians as an excuse to attack Trump and people with the wrong opinions? Twitter have been at this a lot as have Youtube. Wouldn't surprise me if Facebook did the same but used "Russia" as an excuse. Also, if it were the Russian state then they'd be using VPNs and so on to spoof their location and I doubt you'd be able to get around that with any degree of confidence.

[rabidmunkee]

I suspect that they would have tracked the money back rather than the access logs?

[Corky34]

Is this genuinely Russian influence or are they, like a lot of media companies, just using the Russians as an excuse to attack Trump and people with the wrong opinions? Twitter have been at this a lot as have Youtube. Wouldn't surprise me if Facebook did the same but used "Russia" as an excuse.

Maybe if you read the whitepaper Facebook published back in April that's linked to in the operational update mentioned in the article you could make up you're own mind if you think they're just using Russia as an "excuse" for what you consider to be "wrong opinions".

[globalwarning]

I hope that they publish(ed?) the full data set - without that this just leads to a lot of conspiracy theorists just whining about FB blocking their first amendment rights and hiding the truth.

[Kamikaze-X]

Is this genuinely Russian influence or are they, like a lot of media companies, just using the Russians as an excuse to attack Trump and people with the wrong opinions? Twitter have been at this a lot as have Youtube. Wouldn't surprise me if Facebook did the same but used "Russia" as an excuse.

Maybe if you read the whitepaper Facebook published back in April that's linked to in the operational update mentioned in the article you could make up you're own mind if you think they're just using Russia as an "excuse" for what you consider to be "wrong opinions".

'published by Facebook' ¬_¬

[philehidiot]

Maybe if you read the whitepaper Facebook published back in April that's linked to in the operational update mentioned in the article you could make up you're own mind if you think they're just using Russia as an "excuse" for what you consider to be "wrong opinions".

Just to be clear, I'm not actually saying they are. I'm asking the question given what we have seen as these big companies clamping down on people who have a certain viewpoint. Whilst I don't share the perspective of most of the people who have been banned from these platforms, I do see the pattern and find it concerning hence feeling the need to ask. This is possibly why Facebook feels the need to publish their evidence so as to demonstrate they're not partaking in the same "ban hammer" approach with no reason given. Even when you get kicked off a CS server you usually get a reason.

And I suppose you're probably right, Rabidmunkee in that they probably followed the money rather than IPs. Either way this clearing out of accounts isn't going to do anything as they'll just be recreated with all of a few hours work. Plus they've served their purpose if indeed it was to influience the election... They won't need them again for another few years.

Edit: And it's not my view that these are the "wrong opinions" - I think everyone is entitled to their opinion. My use there was to imply that the people running these companies DO feel that you can have the wrong opinions and stop you using their platform for expressing them.

[philehidiot]

I hope that they publish(ed?) the full data set - without that this just leads to a lot of conspiracy theorists just whining about FB blocking their first amendment rights and hiding the truth.

Damn straight. I don't see any reason why they can't publish the full dataset given they are a public company, not the NSA and should have done everything legally therefore having nothing to hide. I don't have the ability to validate what they say but there will be people out there who can and hopefully stop any whining. There are a lot of people from the right getting banned from social media, often without any reason given and often when they've actually said or done nothing wrong. This is why the conspiracy theories are abound and I do think there are genuine concerns about free speech on these platforms. Hopefully Facebook can prove it isn't doing this and is going legitimately after a state actor seeking to interfere in a democratic process...

...although we should also point out that America does this kind of thing routinely as well and are in no way the victim here...

[Corky34]

Just to be clear, I'm not actually saying they are. I'm asking the question given what we have seen as these big companies clamping down on people who have a certain viewpoint. Whilst I don't share the perspective of most of the people who have been banned from these platforms, I do see the pattern and find it concerning hence feeling the need to ask. This is possibly why Facebook feels the need to publish their evidence so as to demonstrate they're not partaking in the same "ban hammer" approach with no reason given. Even when you get kicked off a CS server you usually get a reason.

To be fair they've not published all the evidence publicly, they've handed it over to Mueller's investigation, although if they say there are links to Russia (not necessarily the government) then i would assume the evidence they've handed over support their claim.

While i agree with you on disagreeing with banning people that have different opinions, or what maybe deemed "wrong" opinions, at the end of the day i would imagine Facebook have a policy regarding acceptable behavior much in the same way as real life society does and if you break those rules then expect to pay the consequences.

Edit: And it's not my view that these are the "wrong opinions" - I think everyone is entitled to their opinion. My use there was to imply that the people running these companies DO feel that you can have the wrong opinions and stop you using their platform for expressing them.

And that's their decision to make, just like in real life governments do the same, and to be fair i personally believe someone can have a wrong opinion, I'd consider the opinion that violent action is acceptable to be wrong, I'd also consider opinions intended to divide society to be wrong, although that ones a bit a grey area.

[globalwarning]

I think people are forgetting that FB is NOT a public forum. They make it somewhat public, but no one has a "right"to be on FB or any other social media. And while I'm all for freedom of speech, this isn't even remotely covered by the 1st amendment. Additionally, we are talking about them banning non-human accounts - they are, at best, businesses from a not-exactly-friendly nation pushing destructive narratives into our world, or in some cases, actual, self-proclaimed Nazis for example, pushing not just "hate"speech (ie, hateful opinions) but groups actually threatening others, which I think is a violation of the terms of service. (Interestingly, while threats against an individual have been considered an ok restriction on the 1st amendment, threats against a group are fine... "herd immunity" for crimes?).

[globalwarning]

I hope that they publish(ed?) the full data set - without that this just leads to a lot of conspiracy theorists just whining about FB blocking their first amendment rights and hiding the truth.

...although we should also point out that America does this kind of thing routinely as well and are in no way the victim here...

I'm curious how much this actually does go both ways. Unfortunately, on the economic side, the US is putting money into actual product development, while other countries seem to just be stealing our products. I'm sure there's plenty of political digital espoinage, but I'm not convinced that the other kinds of hacking are even remotely on the same scale.

[philehidiot]

I hope that they publish(ed?) the full data set - without that this just leads to a lot of conspiracy theorists just whining about FB blocking their first amendment rights and hiding the truth.

...although we should also point out that America does this kind of thing routinely as well and are in no way the victim here...

I'm curious how much this actually does go both ways. Unfortunately, on the economic side, the US is putting money into actual product development, while other countries seem to just be stealing our products. I'm sure there's plenty of political digital espoinage, but I'm not convinced that the other kinds of hacking are even remotely on the same scale.

<Please forgive any typos, I'm moderately drunk and Firefox appears to think spell checkers are for tbe sober>

America's miltary is WAY behind in assymetric wareface whereas Russia has showed it's capbility quite readily, especially recently in Ukraine. The CIA has been practicing this in many ways for decades, even against its own citizens. Interestingly it started this program of influencing the media (according to documents released by Snowden) in the same year "1984" was published. The CIA send political agitators to influence local politics in the favour of the CIA (not the US, at the moment the CIA is arming one side of a conflict and the NSA is arming the other so god only knows what's in the best interests of the citizens of the US, I suspect staying out of it....) as a matter of routine.

As for product development, it will always be the richest nation which is at the tip of the spear developing whereas others then copy. See the Dreadnaught class battleship pioneered by the British Royal Navy at great cost with huge problems and then this design and concept copied once those teething issues had been ironed out. Same with railways and so on. It has always been the way and will continue.

I'm currently watching a youtube video on this Russia / Facebook issue by an independent (and not crazy) journalist. I'm not sure how interesting it'll be but this guy usually has an informed, neutral perspective. Link here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6bpHTJiKEI

EDIT: Please let it be known that these are my views based on my limited information and I don't proclaim to know everything about everything so if people can point out that I'm wrong or have another view I'm more than interested to hear it and to change my mind if someone can convince me.