Lighthearted Facebook Friends Could Make You Join NAMBLA Group

yet another reason by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-08 02:18 · Score: 2, Insightful

not to use facebook. This can have some SERIOUS consequences for people working in the defence industry where security is well known to have a humor level of 0.

Re:yet another reason by countertrolling · 2010-10-08 02:55 · Score: 3, Informative

Won't help. A perfect stranger could put up info, pictures, etc that could be just as damaging, even if you have nothing to do with them or facebook.

--
For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
Re:yet another reason by JWSmythe · 2010-10-08 03:06 · Score: 3, Interesting

You know, you're totally correct there.
In one of my group of friends (real world, not just online), all but one had a Facebook account. They told him, "You'd better set one up." There was a legitimate reason for it, he just never got around to it. Since he didn't, they did. It had his name, picture, and they were posting comments for him. It was kind of humorous. And no, they didn't sign him up for anything illicit. :) It was enough encouragement for him to finally set up his own account, so they took the bogus one down.
Now, what's the difference between friends doing it for a friend, and someone doing it for their own nefarious purposes? Well, just about nothing, except the nefarious purposes would likely get that person in trouble.
We've all seen stories where someone got in legal trouble for pictures they posted. Like, a school teacher drinking beer, or a suspect in a case bragging about what they did. I found a profile not long ago of a rather attractive woman local to me. She was (or still is) a teacher at a local high school. By the posted comments, it was pretty apparent that it wasn't really the teacher. But if they were written a little better, some of the comments would have been damning. There were things about her liking sex with young boys, and frequent drug and alcohol abuse.
I'm sure this kind of thing happens all the time. So how do you tell? Well, you don't. If I wanted to put up a profile of a popular figure, and I filled it with things that were really happening to them, and photos gleaned from tabloid news sites and regular media, it would look perfectly legitimate.
Hmmm.
[JWSmythe goes off looking for photos of Bill Gates and the link to the NAMBLA group]

--
Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
Re:yet another reason by Austerity+Empowers · 2010-10-08 03:43 · Score: 4, Interesting

Happens a lot, not always with evil intent but ends up that way. Two of my coworkers have set up a sock puppet facebook account for a third coworker who is a relative technophobe but had recently acquired an iPhone. They found immense humor in his having the iPhone and felt that "facebook was the next logical step". They invited a lot of his friends, and made routine posts about his life that were factual although somewhat snarky. Anyone who knows the guy personally knew instantly that he wasn't operating the account. It was all in good fun, until someone posted something that was considered company confidential (by a petty piece of shit manager whose IQ may or may not exceed that of a 2x4). That got reported to the boss of the victimized coworker, said coworker of course has no idea what's going on, it stopped being funny at that point. The perpetrators did come forth and submit to their flogging, fortunately, but I can easily see facebook being damaging even if you avoid it.
Re:yet another reason by John+Hasler · 2010-10-08 04:21 · Score: 1

So create an account, lock it down tight, and never use it.

--
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
Re:yet another reason by vlueboy · 2010-10-08 04:41 · Score: 1

Good point.
Specially an evil ex-girlfriend w/ FB access is out to get me, who lack it. They'd have pictures to post igniting the false belief that I'm the one posting, in a mirror image of chan board trolls posting pretending to be naked chick depicted there.
Just hoping obscurity will keep others from using the corporate joke on me. Access to my office email can be compromised to create an FB account for it, so any evil boss w/ access might want to sink you in front of upper management by leaking something in your name --though FB will never authenticate based on your biometrics or government ID (playing police state retroactively on 500 million old users would be its downfall.)
I can bet most perpetrators would NEVER come forward after impersonation-posting --what the heck could I do to prove it then, if it might just look like feigned ignorance and FB is never gonna bother to provide IP logs in my defense for free? I want to see Zuckerberg defend against legal cases for this. This must already have ruined someone's day and gives me fear for remaining outside FB.
Re:yet another reason by erroneus · 2010-10-08 04:58 · Score: 2

Precisely. Just about everyone in my family does facebook. And they all try to get me to do it too. I just see too many problems with it. Among them are some pretty obvious ones such as external entities attempting to [mis]use information acquired there, but it's also something of a chore. I already frequent a good number of sites. Adding more would be more of a hassle. And really -- there is no deep meaning there -- it's almost as if such sites encourage shallow, thoughtless personalities. I have various definitions for the word "friend" and the context carried through facebook doesn't even approach mine.
Works for some people, but I need more quality than the format offers.
Re:yet another reason by Surt · 2010-10-08 05:00 · Score: 1

In what way does that help? It's not like there can be only one John Hasler account on facebook.
In fact, right now there are 40.
http://www.facebook.com/people/John-Hasler/746875314#!/srch.php?nm=john%20hasler
So what are you going to do, deny that this other John Hasler who posts that he likes young girls is you?

--
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
Re:yet another reason by Jeremiah+Cornelius · 2010-10-08 05:22 · Score: 1

They joined Zuckerberg to NAMBLA?
Gosh, next they'll put his profile in a group for Catholic priests. Or make a defamatory movie based on taking Facebook from a university side project to a public corporation.

--
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Re:yet another reason by vux984 · 2010-10-08 06:08 · Score: 1

All you've demonstrated is that it doesn't matter if you create an account or not. Even if I had a facebook account, you could still create one on my behalf, stick my picture on it, friend people, post comments. The fact I'd have a 'real' account that I don't use much doesn't prevent you from doing any of this...
Re:yet another reason by clone53421 · 2010-10-08 07:10 · Score: 1

So what are you going to do, deny that this other John Hasler who posts that he likes young girls is you?
Yes... and if there’s two John Hasler accounts it’s a lot more believable. Because everyone knows everybody has a facebook, and if there’s only one, it must be you.

--
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
Re:yet another reason by JWSmythe · 2010-10-08 07:11 · Score: 1

Yup, that's exactly what was demonstrated. Your online identity doesn't prove anything at all.
As a matter of fact, if 10,000 other people decided to become Mr. JW Smythe sometime today, I would not be one of hundreds, I'd be one of thousands. :)
I like my anonymity, and I like that I am identified as a lot of different people. Trying to figure out which is the real me, from the rest of the me's is a challenge.
What's funnier is, my real name has thousands of users (people using the name as their own). They were probably issued at birth, not as an attempt of identity theft. I'm very proud of my name, we are a diverse and well respected crowd.

--
Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
Re:yet another reason by Surt · 2010-10-08 07:23 · Score: 1

With 500 million facebook accounts and counting, I doubt there is more than 1 in 1000 people with no doppelganger. So I guess this is something pretty much no one needs to worry about then.

--
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
Re:yet another reason by clone53421 · 2010-10-08 07:24 · Score: 1

If only one of the profiles has your photo, it narrows it down significantly.

--
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
Re:yet another reason by vux984 · 2010-10-08 08:30 · Score: 1

What's funnier is, my real name has thousands of users (people using the name as their own). They were probably issued at birth, not as an attempt of identity theft. I'm very proud of my name, we are a diverse and well respected crowd.
Lol, of course. But your missing my point I think. Its not so much that there are other people on fb that have your name, its that someone could impersonate you on fb whether you had an account or not. It would not be particularly difficult for someone that knew you to create a profile, use your real address and so forth, upload your real picture, join some groups, friend some people, post real stuff about your life (previous / current job, hobbies, etc, and then post a ton of juvenile asinine crap, and result in you not getting a job because someone who looked you up found this alternative "you". And they'd know it was you because the picture matched the guy they interviewed, and they noticed amongst the ranting and ravings that they mentioned working at the place mentioned in your resume, and so on.
If you aren't on facebook, you have no defense against this.
But joining facebook doesn't actually help you all that much either, especially if you aren't all that active. That was my point. You seemed to suggest that by joining fb you'd at least control "your own identity", but even that isn't necessarily true.
Re:yet another reason by Thinboy00 · 2010-10-08 13:41 · Score: 1

FB is never gonna bother to provide IP logs in my defense for free? I want to see Zuckerberg defend against legal cases for this. This must already have ruined someone's day and gives me fear for remaining outside FB.
Sue the bastards and then subpoena the logs.

--
$ make available
Re:yet another reason by bandmassa · 2010-10-10 06:55 · Score: 1

You create a Facebook account, add no data about yourself, turn off all notifications, then suspend it. Your name/email combo can't be used again by anybody but you. Use Facebook to not use Facebook.

--
"I hope you like Guinness, Sir. I find it a refreshing substitute for, er... food." Col. Jack O'Neil, SG-1
Re:yet another reason by RockDoctor · 2010-10-11 05:36 · Score: 1

We've all seen stories where someone got in legal trouble for pictures they posted. Like, a school teacher drinking beer,or a suspect in a case
Wow, what sort of horrible country do you live in? Saudi Arabia? Or Kuwait? Most countries I know, thankfully, don't consider it illegal for a schoolteacher - or anyone else - to drink beer. Please, let us know where you are, so that we can avoid the place.

--
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
Re:yet another reason by JWSmythe · 2010-10-11 06:31 · Score: 1

I'm sad to say, the land of the free, the United States of America. Not sad because I'm an American. I'm sad because this isn't the land of the free any more.
Oh, and here's about 15 million references to check through. There are probably a few duplicates in there. Enjoy.

--
Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
Re:yet another reason by RockDoctor · 2010-10-11 11:33 · Score: 1

here's about 15 million references to check through. There are probably a few duplicates in there. Enjoy.
I googled for "teacher arrested beer facebook photograph" and gave up after a couple of pages of teachers being arrested for possession of kiddy porn, of people being arrested for providing beer to minors after Facebook photographs and that sort of thing. But a teacher being arrested for having a beer themselves ... not found, so I'll assume until proven otherwise that it's another of those unfounded internet memes. Not implausible, but unproven. (I don't get paid enough to be serious here either, but I'd need to be paid much more to be frivolous.)
Of course, I suppose that it is possible that in some states (... provinces, countries, or regions) it is possible to be a qualified teacher (PGCE or equivalent) and still be under age to drink. But not anywhere I've worked, outside the Gulf States.

--
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"

Yes, learn to grow up folks by Etcetera · 2010-10-08 02:18 · Score: 4, Insightful

If your "friends" refuse to respect your request, then they're not really your friends. If they're not really a friend, why are they a "friend"?

Facebook to users: We give you tools with which to communicate with people you trust. If you don't trust them, don't allow them to use those tools with you.

--
Hire a Linux system administrator, systems engineer,

Re:Yes, learn to grow up folks by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-08 02:25 · Score: 5, Funny

Sometimes the only way to get ahead with your farm is to say that you are a 13 year old boy who likes older men.
Re:Yes, learn to grow up folks by PatHMV · 2010-10-08 02:30 · Score: 5, Insightful

Well, no. I'm FB friends with my younger brothers. The youngest is in high school, and has the sense of humor one expects to find in bright, 16 year old boys... rather juvenile. I'm not going to de-friend my brother. I work at helping to teach him what's appropriate and what's inappropriate, but of course that's not always successful. If he were to add me to some group because of some childish whim of his, that doesn't mean he's not my friend... just that he's exercised some bad judgment.
Do you immediately ditch all your friends the instant they do something against your wishes? If so, I doubt you have many left. Most of us have at least a few friends who on occasion act a bit like an asshole, but are our friends nevertheless.
The REAL problem here is Facebook failing to let its users have control over what other users do to an aspect of our account. I can un-tag myself from pictures. I can turn off the ability of others to tag me in photos. Why can't I turn off the ability of other users to tag me in (i.e., make me a "member" of) groups? I should have complete control over all aspects of where my FB identity is linked in FB.
Re:Yes, learn to grow up folks by morgan_greywolf · 2010-10-08 02:31 · Score: 4, Insightful

Right. But lots of famous people will allow almost anyone to be their 'friend' so that they can hawk their latest book, CD, movie, coffee cup or whatever.
So, for example, you could friend, say Barack Obama, and then start a group called, say 'Friends of Osama Bin Laden' or 'the Al Qaeda United Terror Front' or whatever and hilarity then ensures.
Not that I'm suggesting anyone should do that.

--
My blog
Re:Yes, learn to grow up folks by maxwell+demon · 2010-10-08 02:32 · Score: 3, Informative

Of course, relationships change. You can have a friend, and then he learns something about you which makes him hate you (doesn't matter if it's true or not, as long as he believes it's true). You cannot know this before he makes it known to you. And if he decides to make it known to you by doing revenge, you cannot prevent it, because you cannot expect it.
Moreover, someone who was never really a friend can play a friend exactly to get your trust, and thus to enable him to do more serious damage to you.

--
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
Re:Yes, learn to grow up folks by Angst+Badger · 2010-10-08 02:39 · Score: 2, Interesting

A Facebook spokeswoman said, 'If you have a friend that is adding you to Groups you do not want to belong to, or they are behaving in a way that bothers you, you can tell them to stop doing it, block them or remove them as a friend -- and they will no longer EVER have the ability to add you to any Group.' In somewhat related news, guillotines ensure you won't have dandruff on your shoulders anymore.
Yeah, I'm a bit puzzled by the submitter's reaction, too. It may be the norm among high school jocks, college frat boys, and, after graduation, stalkers, to use abusive behavior as a form of affection, but mature, self-respecting people don't put up with it. Blocking someone on Facebook is what, two or three clicks? Anyone who thinks that's like the guillotine really needs to develop some perspective.

--
Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
Re:Yes, learn to grow up folks by bytestorm · 2010-10-08 02:54 · Score: 3, Insightful

The tool should allow me to disable tagging of me by others in groups, pictures, notes, thus becoming more versatile, allowing me to also communicate with acquaintances and the general public with tiered levels of access.
Re:Yes, learn to grow up folks by qoncept · 2010-10-08 02:56 · Score: 2, Insightful

Amazing, isn't it? Your friends and family can affect your real life! And the only choice you have is to either deal with it or cut off all ties to them. Ever seen Black Sheep?

The summary sure is rich. Removing someone from your Facebook friends is akin to cutting off your head. Brilliant.

--
Whale
Re:Yes, learn to grow up folks by twidarkling · 2010-10-08 02:59 · Score: 5, Insightful

spoken like someone who's never had to explain to someone why someone was removed from a friends list. People get pretty damned pissy at things like that, especially family, or if they think they were just kidding around, and you're taking it too seriously. So yes, removing a friend from a social network can have a detrimental effect on having them as friends in real life.

--
Canada: The US's more awesome sibling.
Re:Yes, learn to grow up folks by GrumblyStuff · 2010-10-08 03:19 · Score: 1

And the chicks keep winning that game. :(
Re:Yes, learn to grow up folks by Mitchell314 · 2010-10-08 03:25 · Score: 1

I think the summary was more like making the analogy that it's extreme to defriend somebody over a grouping issue as it's extreme to dehead somebody over a bad case of dandruff. Both are 100% effective, yes, but not necessarily the best route. There's, y'know, catching your hair on fire and keeping the rest of your head on your shoulders. There's, y'know, catching your friend on fire but not getting rid of 'em on facebook. There are other better solutions is what I'm saying.

--
I read TFA and all I got was this lousy cookie
Re:Yes, learn to grow up folks by operagost · 2010-10-08 03:40 · Score: 1

He probably isn't, but said friends and family might be.

--

Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
Re:Yes, learn to grow up folks by StikyPad · 2010-10-08 03:45 · Score: 2, Insightful

Removing someone from your Facebook friends is akin to cutting off your head. Brilliant.
Uh, no.. remember those "A is to B" as "X is to Y" questions? Comparing A to X is irrelevant without factoring in B and Y. "2 is to 3" as "100 is to 150". Nobody's saying 2 is like 100.
That said, I agree that removing someone from FB friends is not quite as disproportionate a response as the author seems to believe.

--
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
Re:Yes, learn to grow up folks by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-08 04:02 · Score: 4, Insightful

The REAL problem here is Facebook failing to let its users have control over what other users do to an aspect of our account.
Funny, and my thought was that the problem is that you can be arrested or detained based on information gathered from a social network.
Re:Yes, learn to grow up folks by peragrin · 2010-10-08 04:14 · Score: 1

Of course if you don't realize you joined a terrorist group on face book because your friends signed you up for it, and then have trouble getting on a plane. Sorting out who, what, where, and when your friends helped you out can be difficult.
you don't know when to unfriend some one until it is almost to late.

--
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
Re:Yes, learn to grow up folks by sinclair44 · 2010-10-08 04:15 · Score: 1

The link you have provided is to a fan page for Obama, not a personal profile. Fan pages cannot be members of groups, and fan pages are the way people "hawk their latest book, CD, movie" etc -- not with personal profiles. (If you use your personal profile for this, you are doing it wrong.)

--
Omnes stulti sunt.
Re:Yes, learn to grow up folks by Surt · 2010-10-08 05:11 · Score: 2, Interesting

Who did that happen to?

--
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
Re:Yes, learn to grow up folks by TheCarp · 2010-10-08 05:12 · Score: 2, Informative

Of course... are we not laying the blame in the wrong place?
Why are you being denied access to the plane? Why again? Is it because someone posted something on facebook? No... its because there are morons out there who think that they are somehow making the world safer by pulling names out of their ass and adding them to lists.
Its the very fact that a "no fly list" even exists that is the REAL problem here. Ditto on employers trolling facebook for dirt. Its stupid.
-Steve

--
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
Re:Yes, learn to grow up folks by severoon · 2010-10-08 05:57 · Score: 2, Informative

Yea, to 1st post, why should anyone be able to control the groups they're associated with? You're right, it should work just like real life where your most casual friends sign you up for all sorts of things that you have no control over, and you're just an idiot unless you simply accept your fate and go along with it, or terminate all your friendships just in case.
It's obvious to me there's no other solutions, you just have to pick one of those two extreme, unpalatable options. THERE IS NO OTHER POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVE.

--
but have you considered the following argument: shut up.
Re:Yes, learn to grow up folks by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-08 06:18 · Score: 2, Insightful

If your "friends" refuse to respect your request, then they're not really your friends. If they're not really a friend, why are they a "friend"?
Facebook to users: We give you tools with which to communicate with people you trust. If you don't trust them, don't allow them to use those tools with you.
Do you trust your friends to:
1) always be sober?
2) share your sense of humour?
3) use a secure unique password for their facebook account?
4) be immune to phishing attempts?
5) only have friends in their friends list that meet requirements 1-4?
If all 5 points aren't met, the person should not be in your facebook friends list.
Hmm... suddenly, nobody has any friends.
Honestly, opt-out implicit trust of *accounts* is a BAD idea. Your friend and your friend's account are not one and the same.
The concept would work great if there was a 1:1 mapping between person and account metadata. Unfortunately, this is not the case.
Re:Yes, learn to grow up folks by khallow · 2010-10-08 07:03 · Score: 1

Sounds like you need to find friends that are less shallow.
So the solution isn't to make a minor fix in Facebook, it's to prune your group of friends.
Re:Yes, learn to grow up folks by ukemike · 2010-10-08 09:05 · Score: 1

Do you immediately ditch all your friends the instant they do something against your wishes?

No one would sign up a real friend as a member of an organization of pedophiles. That's way beyond "against you wishes" it's a malicious attack plain and simple. If I found out someone did that to me, I would be shocked. After getting out of the group, I would denounce them harshly on their wall and on mine, to warn others and to protect myself. Then I absolutely would "defriend" them. I'd also consider a defamation of character suit. There is only one label in our society that is more damaging and more sticky than "pedophile" and that is "terrorist." A person like Mark Zuckerberg who is famous and has ample access to the press can laugh it off. But very few people have that sort of power.

Remember that fellow a few years back who had possession company laptop that was all infected and also had kiddie porn hidden on the hard drive? He was fired and persecuted for a few years before finally being exonerated. I expect the case would have turned out very differently had it been discovered that he was a member of the NAMBLA Facebook group. Each and every one of you reading this is just a few jpgs, and some unlucky turn of events from being a registered sex offender for the rest of your life.

On the other hand if FB is prompted to disable this "feature" after this incident I have to thank the person who did it to Mr. Zuckerberg.

--
-- QED
Re:Yes, learn to grow up folks by Lost+Race · 2010-10-08 13:55 · Score: 1

The REAL problem here is Facebook failing to let its users have control over what other users do to an aspect of our account.
The REAL problem is that anybody anywhere ever takes anything about Facebook seriously.
Re:Yes, learn to grow up folks by jlehtira · 2010-10-12 19:49 · Score: 1

Funny, and my thought was that the problem is that you can be arrested or detained based on information gathered from a social network.
That has also happened in non-digital social networks, no?
There's nothing wrong in that people can be arrested or detained based on information received from other people. Internet is not some detached thing we shouldn't take seriously - it's a part of Real Life(tm) and must be dealt with an approppriate level of seriousness.

Wait.. WHAT? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-08 02:19 · Score: 5, Insightful

If you have a friend that is adding you to Groups you do not want to belong to

That's how it works?
So, instead of inviting someone to join the group, you can just add them?

Dumb fucks.

Re:Wait.. WHAT? by oldspewey · 2010-10-08 02:30 · Score: 5, Interesting

It's almost as if Facebook is a gigantic sociological test lab. The idea is to make the whole thing incrementally more ridiculous and obnoxious, and then measure how far you can push people before they quit.

--
If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
Re:Wait.. WHAT? by PatHMV · 2010-10-08 02:34 · Score: 4, Informative

I know it's /., but please at least RTFS (read the f'ing SUMMARY), which explains that this is a NEW Facebook feature, which works DIFFERENTLY from the OLD Facebook feature. You've just described the OLD Facebook group feature. This one works differently.
Re:Wait.. WHAT? by koreaman · 2010-10-08 02:44 · Score: 4, Funny

Looks like you're right -- I apologize for my ignorance.

--
Le français vous intéresse?
Re:Wait.. WHAT? by Seriousity · 2010-10-08 03:14 · Score: 4, Insightful

.... Dude, he made a simple mistake, just a normal human misunderstanding. and he admitted fault - this is commendable. Even if his original post was slightly inflammatory, it hardly warrants such a malicious outburst. You're either trolling or incredibly stressed/angry about something else, and venting on this poor guy - not cool.

I think you should go outside, sit in the sun and try to find something to smile about - those facial muscles probably need a workout!

--
This post was made in complete sincere seriousity; as such any attempts to derive humour are doomed to instant failure.
Re:Wait.. WHAT? by StikyPad · 2010-10-08 03:55 · Score: 1

I would quit...
but then I'd have to start buying birthday cards again. It's finally socially acceptable for me to put in the actual amount of effort I feel is appropriate to celebrate the day someone came out of someone else, and I'm not throwing that away without a damn good reason.

--
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
Re:Wait.. WHAT? by ObsessiveMathsFreak · 2010-10-08 04:19 · Score: 2, Insightful

And the only way to win is not to play. And as someone who has never had any social networking accounts of any kind, I'm feeling schadenfreude-nly victorious right about now. Also, a bit lonesome--but the alternative seems to be getting worse every day.

--
May the Maths Be with you!
Re:Wait.. WHAT? by precariousgray · 2010-10-08 05:54 · Score: 1

But what if he hates the sun, you insensitive clod!

--
not much, just being forced to manually insert line breaks into my comment
Re:Wait.. WHAT? by thegarbz · 2010-10-08 10:31 · Score: 1

I think we should join him to the NAMBLA group.
Re:Wait.. WHAT? by blackest_k · 2010-10-09 01:15 · Score: 1

An account on slashdot is like a dynamic bookmark allowing you to keep track of subjects that interest you.
For people that read your posts regularly they give a sense of quality and background to the poster for example Newyork country lawyer usually posts interesting and informative comments which qualify his posts with real court room experience rather than the armchair lawyering which most of us indulge in from time to time.
AC's comments can range the whole spectrum from troll to accurate and insightful, you can't really engage with an ac their comments are one shots which even they are unlikely to revisit. Even graffiti has the possibility of a more meaningful dialog than that.
Facebook is something different, it allows a continuity with the people from your past life that required an effort to achieve before facebook. Without Facebook your life is mainly based around your immediate social group the people that you see day to day. Unfortunately there are many drawbacks with facebook making part of your life an imperfect and often too public record which can come back to haunt you. Is it likely that your grand children will look back up on your facebook account and see posts from your teenage years? Will your friends draw from your posts when they write your obituary?
Facebook is a long way from perfect and its necessary to think how you want to use it, or if you want to use it all. Facebook I keep away from my immediate life the people who I see day to day, others may use it to organise nights out and their social calendar. while others refuse to use it all. The third group may be making the best choice for themselves.
Groups may be badly implemented right now certainly flawed but then facebook is flawed and unstable which is why not joining may be the wisest choice.
final thought would slashdot be better if you could mark a post without replying to it?

--
Blarney Quality Restaurant, Plants
Re:Wait.. WHAT? by vlueboy · 2010-10-09 18:13 · Score: 1

An account on slashdot is like a dynamic bookmark allowing you to keep track of subjects that interest you.
[...]
would slashdot be better if you could mark a post without replying to it?
That's insightful, especially the bit about grandchildren reading it as your memoirs, and obituaries including content from your posts. Frightening, too. Our social lives used to be so much more intractable 15 years ago. Now, to just keep bookmarks for ourselves, we are keeping them for anyone at all who wants to look, even when we... go away from this world. It's like freezing our brain's goals in some piece of silicon for others to ponder after you're dead.
Anyway, I thought about the "bookmark" feature functionality... for a while I was posting AC because I didn't want my old comments (1999 /. account) to dissolve due to /.'s once-enforced 24-comment horizon. When posting AC, I would bookmark the comment if I thought it brilliant, especially when it got high scores. Keeping track of it across multiple browsers, OS-loginprofiles-partitions and even machines became hellish, so I started using the FF extension "Read it Later" to easily go back to old comments... I tagged other users' comments ocassionally, and my list grew too unwieldy once a dozen or so comments with diverse and obscure-seeming titles were showing up where I had little recollection of what thoughts caused me to bookmark the posts.
The moral of the story is, that I wouldn't enjoy just bookmarking stories, and seeing my own comments reacting to the stories and /. posts is the best way to use /.
Everything else would sort-of be like having a heavily AI-based RSS feed of all slashdot posts catered to my interests --without having posts of my own to digest.
Re:Wait.. WHAT? by Eivind · 2010-10-10 04:51 · Score: 1

Very much true.
I quit long ago, initially thinking I'd miss some aspects of it. But I haven't.

But it's so brilliant! by Draconi · 2010-10-08 02:20 · Score: 5, Insightful

I swear this is the standard response of any designer confronted, suddenly, with gaps in their thinking. "It can't be a serious problem, there is a workaround!"

Re:But it's so brilliant! by Asic+Eng · 2010-10-08 02:32 · Score: 1, Funny

Well it definitely isn't their problem. If the TSA would actually be retarded enough to detain a person merely because they have been added to a facebook group (and I'm not saying that's unlikely) - well that would be the TSAs fault. It would also be the fault of the politicians which allow to operate the TSA as it does. And of course that means it would b the fault of the citizens of the US who are willing to put up with that shit.
Re:But it's so brilliant! by EasyTarget · 2010-10-08 02:43 · Score: 1

None of which helps when you are sitting locked in a little room and a big aggressive bloke has just laid a pair of rubber gloves on the table.

--
"Oops, I always forget the purpose of competition is to divide people into winners and losers." - Hobbes
Re:But it's so brilliant! by residieu · 2010-10-08 02:54 · Score: 1

The TSA would probably detain you if a "Terrorist" facebook group had a member with the same name as you.
Re:But it's so brilliant! by Surt · 2010-10-08 05:15 · Score: 1

The good news is, the courts are very generous to people who suffer such abuses, so you're going to get a couple million for your unwarranted rectal probe.

--
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
Re:But it's so brilliant! by Surt · 2010-10-08 08:09 · Score: 1

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1355/is_24_104/ai_111616826/
The govt settled in this case, presumably believing they'd lose more if the jury decided.
http://www.efoxlaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1518294.html
Settled for 2 million. Again, presumably they thought the jury would be worse.

--
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking

NAMBLA by niteice · 2010-10-08 02:21 · Score: 5, Funny

What's wrong with the National Association of Marlon Brando Look-Alikes?

--
ROMANES EUNT DOMUS

Re:NAMBLA by maxwell+demon · 2010-10-08 02:40 · Score: 1

They all will face lawsuits for violating Marlon Brando's copyright on his look.

--
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
Re:NAMBLA by daremonai · 2010-10-08 02:54 · Score: 1

Didn't you ever see Brando in his later years? He made the fat Elvis look like the skinny Elvis.
Re:NAMBLA by dpilot · 2010-10-08 03:24 · Score: 3, Funny

I was all ready to make some post about NAMBLA being a right-wing boogieman. But first I decided to check Snopes and Wikipedia. Sometimes I guess truth really is stranger than fiction - including conspiracy theories.

--
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.

Non-issue by schmidt349 · 2010-10-08 02:21 · Score: 1

Why is this an issue? Non-friends can't add you to groups at all, you can withdraw from any group ad libitum, and you can block obnoxious misbehaving friends who don't stop doing dumb shit to you.

Re:Non-issue by hedwards · 2010-10-08 02:33 · Score: 5, Insightful

Because in the meantime if you haven't mastered Facebook's privacy settings a stranger might think you actually belong to those groups. Which isn't a problem until said stranger is in the position of offering or not offering you a job. Or deciding whether to do a more thorough investigation prior to a lawsuit or charges being filed.
Re:Non-issue by Pinky's+Brain · 2010-10-08 02:33 · Score: 2, Insightful

Why worry about why? When you say it's a non issue, you're factually entirely wrong. It's an issue to them and their request is a relatively simple one ... allow a preference to disallow friends to make you join groups.
Re:Non-issue by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-08 02:40 · Score: 2, Insightful

Yeah, no need to fix the lock; you can totally call the cops on any burglar who gets into your home. Every time.
Re:Non-issue by Wooky_linuxer · 2010-10-08 02:43 · Score: 2, Insightful

I do have an account af Facebook but I really don't use it much. But if is is like anything round here, there may be lots of people who have lots of friends that they don't really know - I for sure know I have an awful lot of friends requests from people I've never seen. It is quite hard if you have a thousand of friends to track them all. So you go to sleep one night and the next morning you wake up to find out you've been added to a hate-speech, or a pro-taleban group, a neo-nazi group (which is actually a criminal offense in some countries) or something like that. It is an inherently flawed concept. Of course you may always argue you never actually joined that group, but we live in a world where appearances count more than evidence.

--
Where is that guy who'd die defending what I had to say when I need him?
Re:Non-issue by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-08 02:48 · Score: 2, Insightful

I'd have a different request. Remove the "feature" that lets friends automatically put you in groups and replace it with the standard invite scheme. If they really want they can add a preference (defaulting to off) to automatically accept these invites.
Re:Non-issue by falsified · 2010-10-08 03:44 · Score: 1

It's an issue because most people don't watch their Facebook accounts like a hawk. I don't have any idea what this new feature even is beyond this summary, nor how to find it. Someone could do this to me and I wouldn't know for a week or more. More plainly, this feature sounds absolutely useless and I can't understand why they would change it from the previous Facebook Groups system. Why would having OTHER PEOPLE tell the world what affiliations I have be useful? You may as well make my Facebook info page be editable.

--
HI, MY NAME IS ISAAC.
Re:Non-issue by Nyder · 2010-10-08 04:00 · Score: 1, Insightful

Because in the meantime if you haven't mastered Facebook's privacy settings a stranger might think you actually belong to those groups. Which isn't a problem until said stranger is in the position of offering or not offering you a job. Or deciding whether to do a more thorough investigation prior to a lawsuit or charges being filed.
Guess next time you shouldn't sign up on facebook.

--
Be seeing you...
Re:Non-issue by sinclair44 · 2010-10-08 04:18 · Score: 2, Insightful

Which isn't a problem until said stranger is in the position of offering or not offering you a job.
We all do dumb shit, including that recruiter. It's only a matter of time before the rest of the world catches up to realizing that just because you post status updates about being drunk from time to time does not mean that everyone else don't get drunk (and make some bad decisions while drunk) occasionally too.

--
Omnes stulti sunt.
Re:Non-issue by silverglade00 · 2010-10-08 04:19 · Score: 1

It's an issue because I don't have time to log in all day, every day just to make sure that nobody has added me to some dumb group. Let it send me a request and I will log in and deal with it when I feel like it.
Re:Non-issue by silverglade00 · 2010-10-08 04:21 · Score: 1

You may as well make my Facebook info page be editable.
WikiFace... interesting idea.
Re:Non-issue by smooth+wombat · 2010-10-08 04:36 · Score: 1

does not mean that everyone else don't get drunk (and make some bad decisions while drunk) occasionally too.

When you say bad decisions, you mean like Karen F. Owens and her PowerPoint presentation?

If I were in charge of making hiring decisions, she would get the circular file. Not because she slept with a bunch of guys, not because she wrote about it, but because she was stupid and lacked common sense in thinking that said list wouldn't be all over the Net shortly after giving the list to some friends.

If that is the kind of judgment that person makes, I wouldn't want them in my company.

--
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Re:Non-issue by clone53421 · 2010-10-08 04:43 · Score: 2, Insightful

Great idea, until someone else registers a profile using your name and an old photo of you.

--
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
Re:Non-issue by Kjella · 2010-10-08 09:52 · Score: 1

Well it does show you have a low threshold for what you're sharing. You might have had a shitty day at work, but companies prefer that you don't broadcast it on facebook. Particularly if it's not just whining but actual flaws in products or services or insults or well... there's not really many ways to win. I don't know how your office is, but mine is not past saying "Man, I got so wasted on saturday this hangover is killing me" when we meet Monday morning but only talking, it's not recorded anywhere for posterity. Anything written is just filtered to "Not feeling very good today :/" or something. Personally at least I feel that is natural, but I've noticed many people have no filter about what they post up for their 200 facebook friends to see. I wouldn't exactly call it a positive qualification at least...

--
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings

Great... by __aaqvdr516 · 2010-10-08 02:22 · Score: 3, Funny

I used to only have one friend, my mother. To prevent being added to a bad group I had to unfriend her. Now she's yelling at me to come up out of the basement and explain myself...

Re:Great... by S.O.B. · 2010-10-08 06:46 · Score: 1

Norman...it that you?

--
Some of what I say is fact, some is conjecture, the rest I'm just blowing out my ass...you guess.

In Soviet Russia... by Jon+Abbott · 2010-10-08 02:23 · Score: 2, Funny

Facebook Groups subscribe you!

--
Slashdot's first reaction to VMware

Re:In Soviet Russia... by Surt · 2010-10-08 05:24 · Score: 1

In Capitalist America too, as it turns out. For once, there is no reflection!

--
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking

but by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-08 02:23 · Score: 1, Funny

but what if you were already in NAMBLA? you would be immune to this attack.

Re:but by Sechr+Nibw · 2010-10-08 03:21 · Score: 1

How many problems does a 12 year old boy truly have?

What? by moeluv · 2010-10-08 02:24 · Score: 5, Insightful

Why the hell would an option to do something like this even be added. I can see an invite system offering the ability to accept or deny an invite but being able to add someone automatically? Damn it was bad enough when my friends and I used to have junk mail wars and see who could get who on the worst mailing lists. This only ended when someone sent baby product catalogs to the wife of friend who was having trouble getting pregnant. I'm kind of surprised that guy survived. Perfect example of why this is a bad idea....someone always goes too far. Let's face it NAMBLA is pretty damn offensive.

Re:What? by moeluv · 2010-10-08 05:05 · Score: 1

No one forgot facebook's purpose, even for facebook structuring the service this way creates far more noise than signal. Think before you speak please.

What kind of security is that? by jbarr · 2010-10-08 02:26 · Score: 2, Insightful

So "friends" can automatically add you to a group? That sounds like a HUGE security and privacy hole. I could certainly see friends "suggesting" groups to you to join, but to give them default ability to add you to a group is just WAY beyond belief.

--
My mom always said, "Jim, you're 1 in a million." Given the current population, there are 7000 of me. God help us all!

Re:What kind of security is that? by John+Hasler · 2010-10-08 02:36 · Score: 1

I can see how it would be irritating, but how is it a privacy or security problem? Doesn't it just mean that your account gets sent a lot of crap you don't care about?

--
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
Re:What kind of security is that? by RobDude · 2010-10-08 04:13 · Score: 1

Very few people can claim they've never been inflicted with any type of virus or malware.
Virtually nobody can claim that everyone they correspond with online is a professional IT Guru and has never fallen victim to a virus or malware.
Even in a perfect world where you trust every Facebook friend with your life; computers are horribly insecure. Now anyone who can compromise one friend of yours can control aspects of your Facebook, which reflects heavily on your image. I've done job interviews where I'd pull up their Facebook (if they had one) before I spoke with them.

It's all fun and games... by Itesh · 2010-10-08 02:27 · Score: 1

until a 6'7" 300 pound man named Tiny is searching every crevice on your body looking for dope..

Re:It's all fun and games... by Archangel+Michael · 2010-10-08 03:06 · Score: 1

unless you're in to that kind of thing ... just sayin

--
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.

"...remove them as a friend..." by John+Hasler · 2010-10-08 02:30 · Score: 1

Or remove yourself from Facebook. That'll work too, and relieve you of many other irritations.

In somewhat related news, guillotines ensure you won't have dandruff on your shoulders anymore.

I think a better analogy is snipping an unsightly hair out of your nose.

--
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.

Re:"...remove them as a friend..." by aardwolf64 · 2010-10-08 02:49 · Score: 1

Remember kids, you can pick your friends, and you can pick your nose, but you can't pick your friend's nose.
Unless they have a Facebook account, that is...
Re:"...remove them as a friend..." by Drakkenmensch · 2010-10-08 03:58 · Score: 1

I think a better analogy is snipping an unsightly hair out of your nose.
With a lawn mower?

Joining and then leaving a group makes you immune? by Zed+Pobre · 2010-10-08 02:34 · Score: 3, Informative

The oddity to this is that they already have an approval mechanism -- it's evident when they say that if you leave a group that someone has added you to, you cannot be re-added without authorization. That makes it pretty clear to me that it would be trivial to make that setting a default, but they don't want to.

Anyone care to start making a bot that automatically joins and then leaves groups as they are detected?

Uh oh, not everyone can be your friend by jeffmeden · 2010-10-08 02:36 · Score: 2, Interesting

While I think facebook has a callous disregard for privacy in general, their suggestion that you simply un-friend someone who plops you into a group is spot-on.

Membership in a group really just means that your name will appear in their roster. No one will have additional access to your personal information. If you find it annoying that you have to remove yourself from a group you don't want to be in, just remove the friend who put you there along with it.

Facebook has long needed better "friend" vs. "acquaintance" handling; i.e. you can share more with your inner circle than with the person you met once and say Hi to about every 6 months. Maybe this ruffle will be the push they need to get cracking on that feature.

Re:Uh oh, not everyone can be your friend by TexVex · 2010-10-08 02:59 · Score: 1

While I think facebook has a callous disregard for privacy in general

Facebook advocating privacy would be like the Pork Council advocating vegetarianism.

--
Fun with Anagarams! LADS HOST, SHALT DOS. HAS DOLTS. AD SLOTHS, HATS SOLD. ASS HO, LTD.

The group could be a sting by AHuxley · 2010-10-08 02:38 · Score: 1

with ip tracking or have a new admin with ip log powers ie the feds.
If noted, you could face phone taps, sneak and peek searches, strange double bookings of a very on time tradesperson ect.
"Random" laptop cloning, extra searches and job applications just not getting to any of the stages they used to.

--
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"

even close friends i don't trust with everything by circletimessquare · 2010-10-08 02:42 · Score: 5, Insightful

you are offering the absurd choice: trust your friends with everything or have no friends

no, i want friends, and i want to decide how much i trust each one. am i asking too much?

your understanding of what friendship means is crude and useless

--
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it

CIA is smart enough? by Deflatamouse · 2010-10-08 02:42 · Score: 1

Hopefully CIA is intelligent enough to know the difference. Intelligence is their middle name right?

Re:CIA is smart enough? by MozeeToby · 2010-10-08 03:17 · Score: 1

If the CIA is using this kind of 'evidence' against someone, you can damn well bet that they know exactly how ridiculous it is, they just don't care. Believe it or not, government agencies are made up of people that aren't completely retarded, they just don't have the same value system that you do. For them 'immoral but works' is a much preferable alternative to 'honest but fails', it's just part of the mindset required to work there effectively.

Thanks, another reason not to sign up by GodfatherofSoul · 2010-10-08 02:47 · Score: 1

I decided to be uncool and stay out of Facebook. I feel better and better about that decision every week from the articles I see. Now, why on earth would Facebook allow other people to subscribe YOU to a group?

--
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!

Re:Thanks, another reason not to sign up by AJWM · 2010-10-08 05:40 · Score: 2, Insightful

I decided to be uncool and stay out of Facebook.
That's okay, your friends* created an account for you.
* If you don't have any friends, read "enemies".

--
-- Alastair
Re:Thanks, another reason not to sign up by bigato · 2010-10-09 00:16 · Score: 1

They already allow other people to set up fake profiles of someone, so I don't think this new feature is THAT bad. The worst privacy problem of social networks is that they let other people see WHO is your friend. I and my wife had a real problem with this. She had a ex-boyfriend who is obsessive and keeps trying to find her, even after we moved to another city. She needed to delete her profile to try to hide. Then she set up another account without pictures and with only her first name. But because she added most of the same friends she had before, he found her again. He remembered the name of some of her friends and kept trying to find her. He tried to talk to some close friends to get some information. Someday, one of her friends almost told him the new place we are living in. In fact, she did not told only because she didn't know exactly where we are! Now you may tell my wife should not be friend of this big mouth girl. But this is real life, we don't always know what's gonna happen. So the bigger problem with social network is the information disclosure. The time when I begin to worry about the obsessive guy, I decided that I had enough trying to be deffensive and began to access his emails and social network to find out more about him. They say the best deffense is the attack, isn't it? For now I think we are quite safe, but if I have to worry about this, is only because of internet social networks. I tried to convince my girl to unsubscribe the social network, but that was much harder. Even I am not convinced that it would be the right thing to do. Because it's a useful tool to keep some contact with people and share pictures about your daily life. Anyway, the real social network exists already and is vulnerable to this kind of exploitation. But the internet just makes it so much easier. It's the old good social engineering thing. I have a purple belt in brazilian jiu jitsu that could work well as a workaround... Should I also get a gun? That's how serious it gets.

Woohoo! by JSBiff · 2010-10-08 02:49 · Score: 3, Funny

. . . I knew not having any friends would pay off in the long run! Suckers!

Re:Woohoo! by Gohtar · 2010-10-08 03:10 · Score: 1

YEAH!!! High Five! Lets be friends!
Re:Woohoo! by John+Hasler · 2010-10-08 03:42 · Score: 1

Facebook has nothing to do with having real friends.

--
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
Re:Woohoo! by JSBiff · 2010-10-08 04:44 · Score: 1

Oh, I totally agree. I was just making a point through a joke - I do actually have some friends, believe it or not.

Re:The idea behind the policy by maxwell+demon · 2010-10-08 02:50 · Score: 1

Ah, now I start to get the picture. There's a big behind-the-scenes competition going on between Larry Page and Mark Zuckerberg, about who can collect more data about the people.

--
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.

This has to change by Maxo-Texas · 2010-10-08 02:50 · Score: 4, Insightful

Facebook can't be this stupid.

A friend should be able to SUGGEST that you join a group-- TO YOU so you make the decision.

I wasn't aware this was even a feature of facebook. So there is no way to disable this short of unfriending the person? (and then it's still on my record as being part of that group anyway!)

--
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.

Re:This has to change by swordgeek · 2010-10-08 03:14 · Score: 1

"Facebook can't be this stupid."
Yes they can. And they are - dumb like a fox.
This is another subtle erosion of privacy and control of your own information. They'll possibly scale it back, but then down the road, re-implement it.
All in the name of making a buck.

--

"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
Re:This has to change by vlueboy · 2010-10-09 18:34 · Score: 1

Facebook tagging is similar in annoyance. You can either prevent tagging completely, or let everyone tag pictures of their dog in your name, and block each tag *individually*.
Nobody can just suggest a tag for you to approve, and I suspect groupds will not be modified. The implementation of FB groupds copies the much-maligned Google Buzz default to "share and friend everyone I know automatically" to balloon user bases as quickly as possible. Whatever datamining is going on at FB, they want to profit from their 500 million userbase by avoiding the failure-prone "default-deny-all" and "default-ask-all-users" GUIs. Because a good firewall blocks every port by default and won't ask at all, but nobody buys it except for the truly dedicated customizers. For everyone else, there's the known-process-whitelist model, the guess-process-behavior model, and facebook's successful, but insecure allow-all-transmissions-until-user-complains model.

I'm sure I am not the only one by assertation · 2010-10-08 02:52 · Score: 1

who enjoyed reading that Mark Zuckerberg got caught up in one of his own snares.

He and his people just don't want to accept the need to inform people before making decisions with their information.

Google Groups has same flaw by peter303 · 2010-10-08 03:09 · Score: 1

The nearly obsolete google usenet reader has the same flaw: any group can sign you up for it. Spammers and religious fanatics are abusing this feature.

Re:Google Groups has same flaw by John+Hasler · 2010-10-08 04:17 · Score: 1

If you read Usenet using Google Groups you deserve anything you get.

--
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.

Re:Non-issue? - bull by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-08 03:28 · Score: 1, Informative

In what insane world is it acceptable design to let _someone else_ add you to groups without your consent?

me too! by Thud457 · 2010-10-08 03:39 · Score: 3, Funny

hey, we should, like, totally form a social group for people who aren't on facebook. Here, I'll pencil you in...

--

the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

Re:JEWS CONTROL THE MEDIA & PALESTINE by Lion+XL · 2010-10-08 03:48 · Score: 1

Your an asshole, the Koran says no such thing. If you are going asinine statements at least base it on current propaganda and foolishness. Lets not lose sight of the fact that religious zealots exist in ALL religions. Did you forget the crusades? Sounds like that was a form of JIHAD, if you ask me. Nazi's used religion and beliefs to go to war against Hebrews. Shit the Hebrews used religion to go to war against themselves (yes, Jesus was a born Jewish, so yes they had a problem with themselves!).

I don't know if you ever met true fundamentalist Muslims, they are nothing like what is portrayed in the media. If most people that claim to be Muslims, or even claim to be of other religions followed the true path, this world would be a much better place. Too bad most religious zealots usually find one aspect of the "Bible/Koran/Torah/etc" , twist it out of context and off they go.....

Basing your opinions on propaganda or public furor is just plain stupid. If your not going to read the Koran, at least read up on the Koran or anything for that manner before talking out your ass.

Re:Palestine is where Jews commit Genocide by Lion+XL · 2010-10-08 03:55 · Score: 1

OK your an asshole too, see comment below.....

Re:JEWS CONTROL THE MEDIA & PALESTINE by Lion+XL · 2010-10-08 03:56 · Score: 1

Yet another asshole....see comments below...

Very bad idea by CmdrPorno · 2010-10-08 04:22 · Score: 1

"The people you add to the Group are automatically members--they don't have to accept."

Given some of the bad apps that are on Facebook, this capability is rife for abuse. A shady application could presumably add all of your friends to some scammy group--and then all of your friends would have to remove themselves. What was so wrong with the old system where the invitee had to approve group invites?

--
Sent from my iPhone

Terrorist Group? by thenonoman · 2010-10-08 04:32 · Score: 1

I admit that wanting to molest pre-pubescent boys is reprehensible, but how is it terrorism? The summary is misleading. That being said, even if they fix this problem, another will come up. Every time you think you have idiot-proofed a system, someone builds a better idiot.

Re:Terrorist Group? by canajin56 · 2010-10-08 05:13 · Score: 1

You need to work on your abstract reasoning: Just because the example of shenanigans happing IRL is of NAMBLA, doesn't mean that the NAMBLA group is the only one in all of facebook that allows your friends forcing you into groups. In fact, they all do. Including all of the fake terrorist groups people make as a "joke".

--
ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
Re:Terrorist Group? by thenonoman · 2010-10-08 06:50 · Score: 1

You need to work on your abstract reasoning: Just because the example of shenanigans happing IRL is of NAMBLA, doesn't mean that the NAMBLA group is the only one in all of facebook that allows your friends forcing you into groups. In fact, they all do. Including all of the fake terrorist groups people make as a "joke".
I was not confused, I said the summary could be misleading/confusing. Since you seemed to miss it, here goes - #sarcasm. +1 for pendants. I was in the 97th percentile on the verbal section of the GRE. Was that clear enough of a statement for you?

Re:even close friends i don't trust with everythin by hairyfeet · 2010-10-08 04:40 · Score: 2, Insightful

Bingo! Give that man a ceegar! Only YOU should have the power to join a group PERIOD. This sounds like the guys at FB simply refusing to admit a feature is a "Bad Idea" and ignoring their users. I personally hope with all the asshattery FB has been pulling they will go the way of MySpace and another will come along that actually listens to their users. Sadly there are simply too many out there that use FB as an accurate source of info, even though it makes wikipedia look like encyclopedia britannica.

--
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.

Re:JEWS CONTROL THE MEDIA & PALESTINE by Omestes · 2010-10-08 04:41 · Score: 1

Obvious troll.

But...

Then, what if the Americans forced the creation of Israel and gave back a small piece of Judea to the rightful caretakers, the Jews?

Your wrong. It was the British, mostly. And a lot of Americans were against going to war with Germany because they viewed the Jews in pretty much the same way as the Germans. Before Pearl Harbor, invading Europe to put down Germany was a very unpopular idea. Please don't pain America better than it was. Revisionism is bad.

I had a teacher in high school who basically told us that WWII was fought over Jews, and the Civil War was fought over freeing Blacks. Both of these are complete falsehoods. America also had an active eugenics campaign, and Hitler actually wrote one of our presidents (I think Wilson) a letter commending our "great" ideas.

Also, my family moved from Ireland and Germany to be here. Do I have the right to go back to these countries and claim some of my forefather's land? Am I the "rightful caretaker" of this land? It has only been around 70-100 years that they moved, not the thousand that the Jews have been vacant from Israel. Do the native Americans have the right to reclaim most of North America? Does Mexico have the right to reclaim much of the Southwestern US?

Pretty much every group has taken something from another group sometime in their history. It happens. Pining over somewhere that you didn't hold since BABYLON (note: that was a very, VERY, long time ago) always struck me as a bit inane.

I refuse to argue the general point of your post though, since you are obviously a troll, or one of those "bring on the apocalypse" fundamentalist Christians.

But then again I don't understand how Khomeini can be called a "satanist", last I checked he didn't worship the Christian guy named "Satan", he worshiped Muhammad and Allah (who also happens to be the Christian and Jewish god) and power. Mostly the latter.

Oh and btw hiring terrorist thugs is not a government

Terrorism is often in the eye of the beholder. Much of the world would think the CIA is a bunch of "terrorist thugs" since they had many of the same tactics, and some of the same ideology. Does this mean the US government is no longer a government?

--
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey

Re:even close friends i don't trust with everythin by sabt-pestnu · 2010-10-08 05:07 · Score: 1

Strangely enough, whether someone is my friend or not does not hinge on the status of a web site.

Re:JEWS CONTROL THE MEDIA & PALESTINE by kenrblan · 2010-10-08 06:44 · Score: 1

Hey Rick Sanchez! Welcome to Slashdot.

--
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler. - Albert Einstein

Re:even close friends i don't trust with everythin by samkass · 2010-10-08 07:13 · Score: 1

Good for you. Next time you're denied a job because they looked you up and found some questionable group affiliations... well, you're not even going to know about it because they won't tell you why.

--
E pluribus unum

Joe Lipari comes to mind by stickrnan · 2010-10-08 08:00 · Score: 2, Interesting

http://www.techdirt.com/blog.php?tag=joe+lipari&edition=techdirt

Re:Joe Lipari comes to mind by Surt · 2010-10-08 08:14 · Score: 1

Well that seems like a bit of a stretch. Admittedly, the person I replied to didn't specify that it should be information posted by someone else, though that is pretty central to the whole discussion. In the Joe Lipari case, he actually did post the information himself.

--
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking

Workaround Solution by BJ_Covert_Action · 2010-10-08 08:50 · Score: 2, Funny

Hopefully Facebook will fix this. In the meantime, or if they don't, I suggest someone start a group for, "Obnoxious Friends that Add Their Friends to Controversial Groups," group. Then, every time someone adds you to a stupid group, you add them to that group. Recursion and drama ensues. Nobody can take Facebook groups seriously ever again...Of course, the fact that they did in the first place is just too bad.

--
Motorcycles, Robots, Space Gossip and More!

Slashdot Mirror

Lighthearted Facebook Friends Could Make You Join NAMBLA Group

134 of 178 comments (clear)