The article says that each entry has an ID associated with a Facebook account. What leads you to think that there are entries in this dataset for non-users?
It's well known that Facebook collects information on non users as well, frequently called "shadow profiles.", Zuck admitted as much to Congress although he claimed not to know what shadow profile meant. [0]
Whether or not that information was part of this database isn't clear, but it also isn't something the parent comment claimed.
> You are likely in this database if even a single one of your contacts uploaded their contacts to Facebook.
Shadow profiles are old news. The suspect claim is that the parent comment is more informed on this database than the source that published it.
> Whether or not that information was part of this database isn't clear
Yes it is. According to the source this particular public data dump consists only of entries with IDs linked a Facebook account.
> Each record contained a user’s unique Facebook ID and the phone number listed on the account. A user’s Facebook ID is typically a long, unique and public number associated with their account
I don't see why shadow profiles couldn't use the same ID system. why not?
For the parent comment saying they were in the data set: My initial interpretation was they meant if one Facebook user had done so, and you were also a Facebook user, whether or not you had provided your #, it was now associate with you. Your interpretation might be correct though.
