They also published an internal ethics review where they absolved themselves of any wrongdoing and made weak excuses for not having an IRB.https://twitter.com/RVAwonk/status/843136047496282114 …
-
-
The whole point of an IRB is that internal controls are natural conflicts of interest and are insufficient protections.
-
Welcome to your light Saturday afternoon of research ethics.
-
"Consent the participants" is Step 0 for any research protocol, except apparently at Facebook. These rules were made because of Nazis.
-
Actual Nazis, I mean. Karl Brandt. The Nuremburg Code. Facebook's failure to consent is actually Nazi shit.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
But IRBs cover "research" e.g. pursuit of basic knowledge, and biomedical testing. That was never FB's purpose /2
-
ehhhhhh, they published their findings in a psychology journal. I argue it is.
-
A search only found Michal Kosinski's PhD papers using opt-in data. Are there others? Please point me there. TIA.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Cute li'l arguments on beneficence (under self-interested conditions), nothing on justice or informed consent. /1
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Bottom line, the US needs EU-style laws to limit commercial/political/3rd-party use of proprietary data. /last
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
FB's info collection looks like research to researchers, but to a lawyer? "Program improvement" doesn't need IRB /3
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.