We Built a Facebook Inspector
The sample selection / non-response bias highlighted in this write-up is a _Big Idea_ problem I've been thinking about recently:<p><pre><code>  Limitations...*Trust in surveys and political leanings:*
  About 95 percent of people contacted for the panel chose not to participate because of lack of trust in having a third-party application installed on their computer or other concerns for privacy.
</code></pre>
Think about that - a reputable, privacy-first organization asked people to opt-in to fully consented, voluntary, compensated research and <i>~95% declined</i>! I can't even imagine what hidden skews are present in the 5% that agreed. This issue is systemic in consumer research and impacts both public (e.g. election polling, U.S. census) and private (pharmaceutical trials, media/advertising research, voluntary AI/ML training daat) polling.<p>Governments and businesses make biased, potentially discriminatory decisions if a non-random segment of the population chooses to never be counted. The ad industry attempts to circumvent this through non-voluntary passive tracking, which trades off non-response bias with bulldozing user privacy. The headwinds are only growing too, as consumer awareness of privacy lapses and the politicization of polling continues to reduce who participates in opt-in research.<p>Finding a solution to this that doesn't resort to privacy-eroding tactics is a moonshot level problem in terms of the size-of-the-prize if solved.