[jimmygrapes]

So... you tried to interfere in an election? I don't get that last part or why that's relevant: maybe you could have said "analyzed potential voter patterns" or some other weasel words. Either way I wish I'd read that before wasting my time trying this (see my other post). Thankfully I can now add you and your "team" to my growing list of activist brogrammers without actual ethics.

[dfrankow]

Wow, that's pretty harsh.

I don't accept the characterization as a "brogrammer without ethics."

I don't think anything I say would change your opinions, but I'm willing to answer questions if you have any you want answered.

[demselben]

I agree with your assessment that name calling is both presumptuous and unproductive. However, I also think you (perhaps inadvertently at an attempt at comedy) set that tone by assuming that everyone who disagrees with your setup is cranky. There are certainly conversations on here which GPT-3 could predict with striking accuracy, but there are usually good counterpoints interspersed throughout.

In any event, I’m loathe to go down the “election ethics” rabbit hole but I would like to a) reformulate the critique into questions as you’ve asked and b) relate it to your current project.

I find it difficult to believe that you think it’s okay to knowingly sway an election through an apparatus like Facebook. Additionally, Facebook’s ability to do so has already been established by prior research published in Nature:

https://www.nature.com/articles/nature11421

Since the experiment was simply to increase voting, it was arguably neutral. However, the implication is certainly that an election can be swayed. All you’d have to do is remind one candidate’s base to vote and not the other.

It could be “ethical” to explore nefarious uses of Facebook in order to develop mitigations much in the same way people have talked about gain of function viral research. But, I think what makes your endeavor particularly dubious is the focus on beating Trump.

1) Given FB’s own prior research, what made the answer to your research so valuable that it required pushing generally agreed upon ethnical norms?

2) Given that FB (to my knowledge) does not have an IRB, can you describe what processes you used to make sure you stayed within an ethical framework and to that end, what the framework was?

This is related to your current endeavor because you are asking us to sign in with an organization who also has a, shall we say, “fluid” definition of what “evil” means in their guiding ethical framework which is to “not be”. Ethics aside, it is an organization that already has the ability to triangulate an enormous data from a number sources into an immense amount of power.

So, between your election work and Google’s record, if people are “cranky” it’s probably due to the fact that, as someone astutely pointed out to me once, past behavior is a good predictor of future behavior.

3) So then, how do you plan to establish trust in order for people to use our product?