In the case in point, you did approve, i.e. enter, all the relation on your graph so I’m not sure how your question is related. To your question: GDPR allows you to access any information associated to identifiable information, there are explicitly no limits on whether you entered it, it was scraped, logged or if it was inferred.
>> main use-case that was discussed
I have the notes from my PhD, yeah. Statistics on blogs posts mainly. They are on another computer, but if you really think this is important. The main use case was obviously to have your friends as a feature in social games, music sharing but that was not really discussed — unless, like for Apple Music, the intention appeared to be to build a competing graph.
I probably should have phrased it better, “the most discussed case”.
> The vast majority of people whose data was stolen did not grant ANY access.
Every one of them granted access to their likes and social graph to their friends. Their friends then overlooked how the platform granted them the ability to share that further. That’s the thing about a social graph that hardly anyone seems to notice now: it’s shared personal data. That’s why calling it “ownership” makes it confusing: information isn’t an excludable good.
> So how can I monitor and delete the shadow profile they have build for me?
I don’t think you have a shadow profile. Your friends shared information about you with Facebook, namely that they know socially the person controlling your email address. What you are asking is for you to be able to tell Facebook that the company should not accept, or store, the information that your friends want to connect with whomever ends up connecting using a certain address. But, if you change your mind, Facebook needs to be able to change that too. Storing your intention, or controlling the ability for you to change it, that would be a profile, missing most feature — a ghost or shadow profile, if you wish.
If you want to prevent your friends from sharing your personal information with programatic agents, I’d love to get your take on how to do that. I use Facebook for most of my social life because I know that, because as a central control the tool, they enable me to prevent my friends from abusing my trust (like email would) and they monitor other programatic agents.
> Nobody has said their sold the data.
This is alas a commonly repeated story (like the shadow profile). If you go through the paragraph, it should be fairly clear that I was actually trying less trying to debunk that and more trying to contrast Facebook and data brokers.
> something Facebook did got me sick
If you don’t have a Facebook account, I’m not sure how Facebook or Cambridge Analytica would have been able to hurt you personally.
I did not enter my friend's birthday, or other "extended profile properties". In what world does GDPR legally require facebook to allow me to export my friend's birthdays and their extended profile information?
> I probably should have phrased it better, “the most discussed case”.
Yeah, I'd totally buy that they tried to sell the feature externally as supporting social competitors. That is very distinct from what you claimed.
> Every one of them granted access to their likes and social graph to their friends.
You were distinctly talking about the permissions people were granting facebook applications and blaming the problem on people not reading those permissions carefully. Now you seem to be blaming people for using Facebook at all?
> What you are asking is for you to be able to tell Facebook that the company should not accept, or store, the information that your friends want
I'm not asking for it, (though GDPR will provide that), but you were claiming it existed.
It doesn’t and that’s not what the API allows today. At the time this was a feature, there were arguments that allowing that would help new competing services to emerge, but they never became law.
Because they did not, competing services now rely on a handful of people claiming they switched, rather than have more effective (or invasive) ways to remind people to switch. That means that it’s extremely unlikely that any project competing with Facebook, many of which have recently felt a gust of interest will actually take off meaningfully. So the reaction you are asking now from Facebook, thinking you are being critical and provocative, happened six years ago and locked them as a monopoly. I guess that’s hindsight.
> That is very distinct from what you claimed.
Yes, because what I claimed is that external activists, developers who set up OpenSocial (OAuth and OAuth 2.0, Activity Streams, and Portable Contacts) were the ones asking for it.
> Now you seem to be blaming people for using Facebook at all?
I’m not blaming anyone (except you): I’m just stating that having a social service means sharing access to personal information. Once information is shared, you have to trust people who are not the person who the information is about, but their friends, with said information. Facebook empowers that trust: you can learn about how long lost friends are doing, which is a great way to leverage that trust; or you can sell their details for a dollar, which is less great.
>"not allowing that export at all would probably be met with legally-binding criticism"
What legally binding criticism were you talking about? Why did you bring up the GDPR to defend this statement?
> Because they did not, competing services now rely on a handful of people claiming they switched, rather than have more effective (or invasive) ways to remind people to switch. That means that it’s extremely unlikely that any project competing with Facebook, many of which have recently felt a gust of interest will actually take off meaningfully. So the reaction you are asking now from Facebook, thinking you are being critical and provocative, happened six years ago and locked them as a monopoly. I guess that’s hindsight.
Oh please tell me, what reaction am I asking for? Are you saying we should have legally force Facebook to continue letting CA strip mine users data? WFT are you talking about?
> The main use-case that was discussed then was to empower services like Riot, to encourage competition — something that, surprisingly, Facebook was very supportive of at the time.
> Yes, because what I claimed is that external activists, developers who set up OpenSocial (OAuth and OAuth 2.0, Activity Streams, and Portable Contacts) were the ones asking for it.
No, you never claimed that at all. You claimed that facebook was discussing this API mainly as a means of fostering competition.
> Once information is shared, you have to trust people who are not the person who the information is about.
And you have to trust the platform to respect your privacy and not give any random quiz app full access. Obviously Facebook is not trust worthy and should not be given this information.
> Facebook empowers that trust: you can learn about how long lost friends are doing
Facebook doesn't empower trust at all: it abuses it to make money off of our information.
Yeah? Can you point me towards any law that says I have the right to export data I did not enter?
> The main use-case that was discussed then was to empower services like Riot, to encourage competition — something that, surprisingly, Facebook was very supportive of at the time.
You have any evidence for that encouraging competing social networds was the "main use-case" for this feature? This is a pretty strong claim to make with no support.
> It has since became clear that people were not reading the permissions that they were granting and more applications were abusing them than trying to build an alternative to Facebook
The vast majority of people whose data was stolen did not grant ANY access. You appear to be deliberately mis-representing events.
> Some services who needed the social graph for legitimate reasons well understood by the users (e.g. Tinder) have kept their now-not-publicly available access.
Access to the social graph, and full access to the activity of all your friends are not the same thing. Again you seem to be deliberately misleading people.
> Facebook not only has been very effective at showing me and letting me edit
So how can I monitor and delete the shadow profile they have build for me?
> Don’t be misinformed and attack Facebook for selling your data — they did not.
Nobody has said their sold the data. They gave it away for free
> The amount of blaming the nurse for your fever on those issues is getting really concerning.
I didn't have a fever before I reached Facebook, something Facebook did got me sick, so why shouldn't I blame them for the fever?