Facebook

[Mellers]

Interesting.

Mel

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology...cebook.privacy

[Reverend]

Jeeze, no news there. Some folks need beaten with a "clue by four" and even then it doesn't sink in that They Are Not Alone.

I can't say that I feel sorry when people get shafted by online fraud and id theft, because they leave themselves so open to it. Same passwords on bank accounts, online communities and the login at work.
Personal info, birthdays, friends, family... all online.

Fuggem, I say. If anything you say online is true, don't blame anyone else when it comes back to bite you in the ass. This is not new, anyone remember the hooplah about club-cards in the stores? Give people a presumed benefit and they are willing to sacrifice a lot of privacy.

[enstorstark]

This is not really about having a clue.

You use the, "Well, smart people who have evolved won't fall for it" argument a bit too often. Don't companies have some responsibility?

The article is about a company taking advantage of its users. You love blamin' the victim.

[Fjord]

Fok, people have an over-rated opinion about themselves and the world's apparent interest in their tideous activities.

Ingen vill veta var du köpt din jävla tröja, Mr Brown.

[Reverend]

Originally Posted by enstorstark

This is not really about having a clue.

You use the, "Well, smart people who have evolved won't fall for it" argument a bit too often. Don't companies have some responsibility?

The article is about a company taking advantage of its users. You love blamin' the victim.

That's exactly what it comes down to. If you don't want anyone to know every detail about you, then don't put your detail out on a public forum. It's that simple.
Targeted ads are big money, if you provide your personal info for free, then the ad revenue is coming in with minimal expense.

The company takes advantage, just like with clubcards, just like with credit cards, just like with any company who "needs" your personal information.

If you're promiscous with your info, don't expect to NOT be harassed. If the victim is a clueless asshat with no forethought, then I do blame them.

Situational awareness.

It's the same lack of thinking that would lead them to be lionfood in the caveman days - never considering consequences. With your thinking nobody would be responsible for what they do and we'll have a whole nation of pussified idiots who feels the need to sue others for their problems.

Oh wait.. we already do.

[enstorstark]

Many Facebook users have never heard about "forums" before. They received an email from a friend and became interested. If Facebook decides to add a feature that allows companies to make your shopping habits public on your profile, fine! Who cares. But make it an opt-in agreement, not a hidden opt-out deep inside privacy settings.

In the US (and to a lesser degree here in Sweden), if you're not on top of companies (that are supposed to follow rules and regulations) they steal from you. Banks charge fees they are not supposed to- only some customers notice, call and correct. Cable companies, telephone companies (the list goes on) do the same.

I'm fine with being a responsible consumer, not being naive, etc. I realize I must check to make sure I am being charged correctly and so forth. But I'm so sick of checking my bills and finding out that 33% of the time, I am being fucked. We need checks and balances.

This was also covered in the NY Times Magazine.

He who controls the “default option” — the way a program runs if you don’t modify it — writes the rules. Online, it can be tempting to dodge the need to get assent for things that used to require it. This temptation is particularly strong in matters of privacy. For instance, the “default option” of the pre-Internet age was that it was wrong to read others’ mail. But Google now skims the letters of its Gmail subscribers, in hopes of better targeting them with ads, and the N.S.A. looks for terrorists not only in the traditional manner — getting warrants for individual wiretaps — but also by mining large telecommunications databases.

I think the difference in Google and Facebook is that Google mechanically skims them and uses the info on your mail page only and possibly compiles the info anonymously.

Facebook, from the beginning, has "owned" anything you put up and reserved the right to be able to use it as they please.

I wouldn't touch that place with my worst enemies diseased dick!

[tristessa]

Originally Posted by Mouse

I think the difference in Google and Facebook is that Google mechanically skims them and uses the info on your mail page only and possibly compiles the info anonymously.

And Google is allowed to store all your emails indefinitely, do whatever they wish with them, and even retain the right to sell them in the future if they are bought by another company.

Not saying they do anything with the info NOW, but they retain the right to use/abuse it as they please.

I work in Internet marketing and we're not allowed to use our gmails for anything work related, ever.

I was under the impression it was done anonymously with no user info kept?

[tristessa]

Originally Posted by Mouse

I was under the impression it was done anonymously with no user info kept?

That's true for the advertising/Google AdSense part, and sharing information with advertisers, because they have to ensure a certain amount (at least within Europe) to satisfy the EU Data Protection Act . . but not internally at Google. In their privacy policy they retain the right to use the information as long as it is to provide a service or improve Google . . which means for pretty much anything.

They collect as much information as possible through their cookies as well, and even if a user keeps cookies turned off . . well I can speak from firsthand knowledge that there are ways to identify a user anyway. Google's privacy policy allows them to share any personal info throughout their different parts (like Orkut, their social site like Facebook) and also allows them to create user profiles. Whether or not they do it, who knows, but they can. Their policy is so vague that it allows for a lot of interpretation.

Internet marketers who deal in things like search engine results make it their job to outsmart Google, so to speak . . so they don't exactly want to make it easy for Google by giving them all their information in an easy-to-read, easy-to-identify format for browsing at their leisure. It's made me a bit wary as well, since their policy allows for them to change their usage in the future and apply it to your stored emails.

[rlevitte]

Originally Posted by Mouse

Facebook, from the beginning, has "owned" anything you put up and reserved the right to be able to use it as they please.

Stop spreading bullshit, please. They have to ask for a license of that sort, or they wouldn't even be allowed to create thumbnails for the photos people publish there, let alone display the photos. The kind of thing you write has been spread by users and reporters alike who don't know how to properly read a license or don't care to, and most obviously don't know much at all about copyright law and how to deal with it.

FB did add a note in their Terms concerning this:

User Content Posted on the Site

...

Facebook does not assert any ownership over your User Content; rather, as between us and you, subject to the rights granted to us in these Terms, you retain full ownership of all of your User Content and any intellectual property rights or other proprietary rights associated with your User Content.

/Richard

[Reverend]

Originally Posted by tristessa

That's true for the advertising/Google AdSense part, and sharing information with advertisers, because they have to ensure a certain amount (at least within Europe) to satisfy the EU Data Protection Act . . but not internally at Google. In their privacy policy they retain the right to use the information as long as it is to provide a service or improve Google . . which means for pretty much anything.

They collect as much information as possible through their cookies as well, and even if a user keeps cookies turned off . . well I can speak from firsthand knowledge that there are ways to identify a user anyway. Google's privacy policy allows them to share any personal info throughout their different parts (like Orkut, their social site like Facebook) and also allows them to create user profiles. Whether or not they do it, who knows, but they can. Their policy is so vague that it allows for a lot of interpretation.

Internet marketers who deal in things like search engine results make it their job to outsmart Google, so to speak . . so they don't exactly want to make it easy for Google by giving them all their information in an easy-to-read, easy-to-identify format for browsing at their leisure. It's made me a bit wary as well, since their policy allows for them to change their usage in the future and apply it to your stored emails.

...and people say anonymous proxies are bad??!

[Mediterranean]

You can't have much privacy any more. If you want to have privacy, stop using credit cards, internet, IP-phone and IP-TV. Stop using Cellphones and GPS. In one word, go back to dark ages.

In marketing terms, we have reached a period where we are using a method called one-to-many, meaning we target certain groups of people based on different parameters. In few years or a decade, we'll reach something called one-to-one, where stores, companies, banks and so on will have target only you with a maketing campaign designed just for you. Have you seen Minority repport? That's where we are heading.

[enstorstark]

Originally Posted by Mediterranean

You can't have much privacy any more. If you want to have privacy, stop using credit cards, internet, IP-phone and IP-TV. Stop using Cellphones and GPS. In one word, go back to dark ages.

In marketing terms, we have reached a period where we are using a method called one-to-many, meaning we target certain groups of people based on different parameters. In few years or a decade, we'll reach something called one-to-one, where stores, companies, banks and so on will have target only you with a maketing campaign designed just for you. Have you seen Minority repport? That's where we are heading.

Pre-crime?

[Mediterranean]

No I mean, where everybody will know where we are and what we need and what we are buying, doing, eating, going to toilette and so on...

Pre-crime... I don't think we will ever be able to perdict a crime and prevent it from happening...

[KLB]

Originally Posted by Mouse

I wouldn't touch that place with my worst enemies diseased dick!

Now that is an LIS classic line if I've ever heard one.

[littlemissbad]

Originally Posted by KLB

Now that is an LIS classic line if I've ever heard one.

You're absolutely right about that. I used that line in 6th grade.

[Calle]

Originally Posted by Mediterranean

Pre-crime... I don't think we will ever be able to perdict a crime and prevent it from happening...

Never seen Minority Report?

[infinity]

Originally Posted by Mouse

I wouldn't touch that place with my worst enemies diseased dick!

Well, I am already on facebook....

[Fjord]

Drama queens.

I could not give a toss if Google Mail keeps on record the knob shots that that bloke in Nova Scotia e-mailed me. And personalised marketing sounds divine - might the sodding cat shelter stop trying to get me to donate!



How folk can bitch about there being a sinister side to free services is beyond me. I've nohting to hide and no demands to make.

[enstorstark]

Originally Posted by Calle

Never seen Minority Report?

his post was about Minority Report... read the thread.

[enstorstark]

Originally Posted by Fjord

Drama queens.

I could not give a toss if Google Mail keeps on record the knob shots that that bloke in Nova Scotia e-mailed me. And personalised marketing sounds divine - might the sodding cat shelter stop trying to get me to donate!



How folk can bitch about there being a sinister side to free services is beyond me. I've nohting to hide and no demands to make.

Read some books.

[Fjord]

Originally Posted by enstorstark

Read some books.

What a novel idea.

[Zoot]

Originally Posted by Fjord

Drama queens.

I could not give a toss if Google Mail keeps on record the knob shots that that bloke in Nova Scotia e-mailed me. And personalised marketing sounds divine - might the sodding cat shelter stop trying to get me to donate!



How folk can bitch about there being a sinister side to free services is beyond me. I've nohting to hide and no demands to make.

That's my stance on it, too. I put myself out there into the great unknown wilderness of the internet realizing that, yes, people will be seeing my information. There are risks in every aspect of life. You can either live in paranoia or you can just... live!

Shit happens!

[enstorstark]

Smiley happy people having fun.

Virtual friends are better than having virtually no friends...

[rlevitte]

Plus virtual friends sometimes become real friends... or even sweeties...

/Richard

[Reverend]

Originally Posted by Zoot

You can either live in paranoia or you can just... live!

Shit happens!

You'll change your tune when Shit Happens. You lose your kid because your club card shows that you've been buying a lot of alcohol. Your internet ramblings shows that you're a manic-depressive with a streak of violence. When someone hacks your paypal account and maxes out your CC and then uses your social security number to register guns to commit a felony. When you can't get a job because of that felony.
You try to refi your house and realize that someone ran your credit 15 times and ruined your credit.

Caution pays off in the end.

Originally Posted by rlevitte

Plus virtual friends sometimes become real friends...

...or real assholes. It's better to have no friends than bad 'friends'.

[rlevitte]

Originally Posted by Reverend

Caution pays off in the end.

So does trust. It's up to each to decide what they subscribe to.
(I had a discussion about locking doors with a sweetie a couple of days ago, going along the same lines )

Originally Posted by Reverend

...or real assholes. It's better to have no friends than bad 'friends'.

That may be true as well. Question is, should you go out there and meet the world, potential real friends as much as potential assholes, or should you hide in a cave to stay away in fear of the potential assholes? Where is life?

/Richard ( I'm sure I'm taking this too seriously, but then, it is serious matter to me )