The skills are still there. ‘Why Cambridge Analytica informant Christopher Wylie is still worried

The skills are still there. ‘Why Cambridge Analytica informant Christopher Wylie is still worried

In March 2018 Christopher Wylie denounced Cambridge Analytica, a political consulting firm that has worked for the campaign Trump. Facebook information revealed Cambridge Analytica, data Canadian scientists illegally received 87 million people and has used the psychological profiles of the voters to build. With cutting-edge research, Cambridge Analytica – spreading stories about social media the goal of a culture war to turn, suppressed black voter turnout and exacerbate racist ideas – by owner hedge fund billionaire Robert Mercer and effectively managed by Steve Bannon starting from 2014 it was further funded held by some white voters. (Campaign staff Trump have Cambridge Analytica refuse an important role in the campaign played.) Revelations Wylie a temporary collapse of Facebook market value and designer governments has caused around the world to crawl stricter social media for control, data acquisition and political campaigns . But, 18 months later, as another US presidential elections approaching, Wylie says not enough done to avoid similar problems. In his new book, Mindf * ck: Oxford Analytica and the plot to break America, October 8th, Wylie says the story came to realize his experience as the enormous amount of data about ourselves, now everyday able to share on social media be combined, synthesized and ultimately a weapon to shape our thoughts, feelings and even voting patterns – we do not realize it. Wylie said to time about the dangers of Facebook, his fears by 2020 and his best advice for aspiring informants. TIME: You left Cambridge Analytica 2014, well before the campaign is Trump systems design uses have been helped. But in the book, she describes working on things disturb, as ways to exacerbate racist ideas found within specific target groups. Why do you need to realize as long as what you did was immoral? At the beginning of the building are only the database. It feels very trivial. They ask people many questions that you play with the models, you will not feel like you hurt someone go. In a way, I walked away from the reality that these people are. But then when you start to see things like video recordings Cambridge Analytica has made some of the focus groups, it becomes paranoid ideation account does cause racializing people’s thinking. It really starts to hit home is that it has obtained a contribution to manipulate these people worldviews to a point where they believe things that are not true, and engage in harmful actions and harmful thoughts. They promote the thought racialized scale or provoke and promote a misogynistic views, and harm society in the end. That was really bothered me, and I just sort of sit and how, what the hell am I doing? Moreover, truly extraordinary meeting, we had all kinds with some obnoxious. It ‘s just built to a point where I was like, I can not. I do not want to do this. What do you hope to get from ck to write Mindf *? As a journalist, you know that you only have a certain amount of real estate that you can use, so everything is top-line. After I finished my tour I’m calling as a witness – is proof of governments around the world – I sat back and thought there are so many things to explain last longer. Therefore, a book is a nice size. There are pieces of novelty in it, but one of the things I wanted to do was Cambridge Analytica, what can go wrong as a case study of use. What can go wrong? E ‘is the profiling of individuals, but also her and tried to deliberately around to manage the environment information. Once you can cut off its relations with other sources of information, put them in an environment where you have much more control over what information they actually see. This is a very powerful thing, because I still feel that they are responsible because in their minds to make the decision about something that shares some or chatting with a random clicks account who do not know. You do not see the thought process and the strategy behind it. Although Cambridge Analytica has dissolved, the skills are still there, the platforms are still there, the people are still there. What happens if China will be the next Cambridge Analytica? Like everything, the second, third, fourth time you do something, you start to refine and perfect it. So my concern is that if you have an operation supported by the state, could quite rapidly the ability to reconstruct similar to Cambridge Analytica, if it can not be beat. You see the rise of misinformation as an inevitable by-product of our increased connectivity? Disinformation has always existed. It is not that all of a sudden we just discovered this new thing called propaganda. But to have the irony of this truly open platform that actually achieve very similar objectives, that the Soviet Union had dominated in terms of information to someone and crafts, heal and build their perceptions. You can only do that by dominating a platform like Facebook, or some people around them. So it’s not that propaganda or disinformation is new is new, but the barrier to entry is much lower. If the Internet has lowered the barrier to entry, like her, and if these tools are more available than just dark counseling as Cambridge Analytica in 2016 has been, there is no hope for democracy? For all the problems that we are experiencing, there are a lot of good things that are connected with strong people can come. The Internet is a brilliant thing. But when it comes to the Internet and platforms on the Internet, civil society and the state, on the whole, a mean, really do not right now because it’s all business. And why should those who we trust? If this is our democracy, if you are an American citizen, why are you still granted the point that the protection of a part should be so basic of civil discourse in office? Why they are justified, we have the power of a company? In addition to helping you achieve Trump in power and membership referendum vote United Kingdom and European Union Gibraltar occur, you will see a deeper shot was joined by Cambridge Analytica tactics? The three years are still deeply polarized for both countries? Yes, I do, and that’s what’s really unpleasant. This is for the heart is the idea of ‚Äč‚Äčteaching Breitbart, in fact, that the culture of politics is downstream. Change if you can, the way people see themselves, their identity and how they see the company policy and what happens will just flow. There are a lasting impact what happens. God, that’s the understatement of the year. Cambridge tactics Analytica have contributed to a world where people hate nature, and does not want to talk, do not want to hear, they do not want to talk. Do you agree that the cultural policy is the valley? I truly believe that. Because if you can change the cultural point of view of the people, politics will respond. It ‘much more difficult to be canceled to cancel the culture as a candidate. Do you think Facebook has learned enough before the 2020 elections? Do you think they have done enough to have to deal with similar disinformation campaigns? No, because at every opportunity, when you look at their behavior, they are not upfront with the problems. They have a long history of mask what is really happening within their business. But the gap can be used to Cambridge Analytica in Facebook’s systems, which allowed them to get intimate data of 87 million users, it is now closed. This means that the risk is not so great? No, and that’s when you have a browser extension to the architecture and application engineering is what the session cookie pulls, for example, you can just do the same thing that made Cambridge Analytica because then your account may access like you , and then my all data of your friends. And ‘the Facebook design. It does not matter if you put a new door on the data repository. As long as you can get to, everything is very open. So I have questions like: why is it that people like you see? Why is it that people can see who you follow? Why is it that people see that such things are said or comment about who is on it? This data is used to profile you. What they fear could happen to know what you do on psychological profiles and data possibilities in 2020? If you see 2016 as a case study, it was evident that Russia was in the block before, in relation to the realization that one of these platforms can manipulate the voters many. My concern is that it is not only Russia. It’s going to be a wider constellation of threats. Like China, North Korea, Iran, and, frankly, America’s allies, too. If you have a trade dispute, saying that Mexico, could not begin to stop. What would you give to someone to whistle in the face? Speak. For. A lawyer. So, of course, that advice is that is that the informants almost never do anything. We jump on stuff delivery reporters or go to the public and do not think things through. There will be a lot more effective whistleblower if they operate within a legal framework. In the book we talk about a deal you strike with an “exceptional individual wealth” that has agreed to pay the legal fees. It was the agreement testified to remain anonymous? Yes, because there are security issues involved. We have to figure out due diligence on our part where this comes from. The reason why the person did not want to go public, because if you go in the Trump salt rub Administration, the Russian government, a company like Cambridge Analytica, which attacks the use of hackers, there are security problems. But now we talk about our right to know publicly, which is in our political campaigns disturbing. You are not knowing the public interest that you funding? And ‘my legal defense. It has never been used for anything other than legal defense, and I have a right to a legal defense. Finally, it is memorable, the UK and the membership campaign referendum Gibraltar to the European Union in a bar fight over. You see a similar mechanic in the game in the United States? Yes, completely. I do not know how regularly you are involved in barroom brawls, and do not say I do not commit myself regularly in bar fights. But if you have someone, and I’m really angry, and are holding their empty beer bottle and scream when you begin to say, “you’re stupid” or “will be consequences”, you’re going to that person to get worse. If you look at Trump supporters in the old law in the United States, where it is said that the construction of the wall, cutting the trade, and you say, “Do not do it. And ‘for the economy to be bad. It will be bad for you,” it is not going to work because people are angry. This is the last thing they want to hear, because all is to feel bad, prove it. For this metaphor even further thought, the bar is Facebook. If you are a responsible bar, you will step in and try to calm the situation, right? But now Facebook is like a strange bartender, is a bit ‘masochistic and enjoys fighting the bar. Who says they have already bought their beers, so I’m not going to throw away. In fact, this bar fight in my bar attracts more people to come – and buy more beer. This interview was for length and clarity. By
Picture copyright by Dominic Lorrimer-Fairfax Media