Slashdot Mirror
Why Facebook Won't Stop Invading Your Privacy
GMGruman writes "Every few weeks, it seems, Facebook is caught again violating users' privacy. A code error there, rogue business partners there. The truth, as InfoWorld's Bill Snyder explains, is that Facebook will keep on violating your privacy, no matter what its policies say, what promises it makes, or how shocked it claims to be at the latest incident. The reason is simple: Selling personal information on its users is how it makes money, and Facebook is above all a business."
Selling personal information on its users is how it makes money, and Facebook is above all a business.
Why is this news? Nothing to see here, move on please...
No really. Don't let the deadpan delivery fool you into thinking I am not shocked. I am. Really.
"I'm just here to regulate funkiness."
It is really quite easy. Many of us get along quite nicely not using Facebook.
Because it's a perv?
When Facebook announces new privacy-preserving settings for its users, what they mean is "we have implemented a new zero-day exploit that will allow hackers to steal all your info with a simple script and sell it all off on the internet with very little effort."
If you're not paying for the service, you are the product, not the customer.
Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
...water is wet, the sky is blue, and Elvis is still dead.
Check out my world simulator thingy.
Advertising needs to be HEAVILY regulated. Regulate it like nuclear waste. Advertising also needs severe first amendment restrictions.
I'm sure this will be an unpopular post, but Facebook is NOT violating privacy.
Really, if you post something on the internet and expect it to be private, you are an idiot. You can't reasonably expect privacy on someone else's servers. Once you release information in the wild, you have no control over what happens to it. None. Those privacy settings mean jack shit. They are only veils. In fact, those privacy settings aren't even guaranteed.
If you don't want people to know something about you, don't post it on the internet. It really is THAT simple. If you don't want the evidence to make it to your wife, your boss, or whatever, don't put that evidence in an archivable medium AT ALL. And lastly, if you don't like the way Facebook uses your information, DON'T USE THE GOD DAMN SITE. If you aren't using it, they can't "violate" your "privacy."
Which is the very reason why I deleted my Facebook account.
And that's what's so sad about this. When friends encouraged me to get on Facebook I told them about the profit model and why they shouldn't contribute to it, but they all had the same response, "who cares?" It was hard enough for them to understand why their personal information would even be profitable in the first place, but for them to actually care was impossible. Lets face it, Facebook users have the same view of privacy Zuckerberg has: they don't value it and they don't understand why anyone would (unless, of course, they had something to hide).
I value my privacy and I find Facebook to be the finest example of everything that is wrong with capitalism. But that's why I'm here on Slashdot and not there.
"From the depths of my skeptical and rationalist soul, I ask the Lord to protect me from California touchie-feeliedom."
If you actually use your real name and personal information on any social networking site, then you are an idiot, plain and simple. You may not even be able to exercise damage control at this point by erasing everything and deleting accounts; it's all still out there somewhere and someone has it -- and in many cases, it's people you never even met in person who you allowed on your friends list in the neverending quest to have more "friends" than your buddies do.
I already know I'm going to get modded down to -1, Troll or -1, Flamebait for posting this, but you can't escape the cold hard truth that so many of you have not been wise, and now you're paying the price.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
"No privacy" is (almost literally) coded into Facebook's DNA. The very premise of the site is that privacy is a thing of the past. The fact that this dovetails nicely with its business model of selling access to information is simply the reason it's financially successful.
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
I thought the whole point of facebook was that you could put all your information online. You can't have your cake and eat it too, right?
Maybe we should stop using facebook? do we really need a computer for social relations?
Unfortunately (for Facebook), there are some strong laws on privacy in many countries, including all of the EU.
Fines imposed might be outrageously high, and actually, if they were caught selling personal data, they would get in real trouble.
Facebook might be big and powerful. States are even bigger and more powerful. Ask Microsoft and how their disregard for lawmakers actually got them hit quite hard at the end.
Paying what price? huh? people keep saying shit like that, and yet no one can point to where facebook actually makes money from selling any private information.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
If you don't like Fecebook invading your privacy, don't join...seems rather harsh but that is the only rationalization I can see Mark Zuckerberg coming up with at this point.
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
again and again; it's old news by now. But there are a whole lot of people who just don't seem to either get it or care. Facebook is really good at exploiting that ancient "be part of the pack or else you'll die" thing that got us through the Pleistocene era.
You will obey me while I lead you
And eat the garbage that I feed you
Until the day that we don't need you
Don't got for help...no one will heed you
Your mind is totally controlled
It has been stuffed into my mold
And you will do as you are told
Until the rights to you are sold
These lyrics are about television, but if FZ were alive today he'd be saying the same about social media.
It has value for yourself, if you decide / manage to keep it (or at least some). It also has value to data mining companies / advertising firms / governments etc, should you decide (or be 'forced') to give it away. And it has negative value (aka damage) in case you lose it unintentionally.
Which brings me to a logical conclusion: when not forced, it's stupid to give away your privacy for free. If some company wants private information from you, you should always make sure to get something in return: either money, extra convenience in using their product, some 'privileges' that others don't have etc, whatever you think is worth giving up the private info you're turning over. And similarly: if some party violates your privacy (eg. data breach), they should pay, period. Either through monetary compensation or otherwise. Because they made you lose something valuable. Same way someone that makes a dent in your car should have to pay because it takes money to repair or makes your car worth less.
Listen! And understand! Zuckerborg is out there. He can't be bargained with! He can't be reasoned with! He doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And he absolutely will not stop, ever, until your privacy has been violated!
If you actually use your real name and personal information on any social networking site, then you are an idiot,
I use my real name and personal info on Facebook. I honestly don't care what they do with it. Most people don't care, the information they put on Facebook isn't really that much of a secret anyways.
See, here's the trick: If you use a social networking site, don't post sensitive information. AHA! The penny's dropped! The most sensitive information anyone could get from my facebook site is the town I live in and relatives' names. No phone number, no address, no credit card numbers, nothing. So the bottom line is that any information facebook could sell about me is totally meaningless and most likely available all over the net anyway.
Facebook will have to man up and offer an ad-free / privacy-guaranteed subscriber model for $x dollars a month/year, before someone else does. Call it "Cadillac level service." I'd want this option before I'd ever consider getting an account, and I'd be more likely to "friend" someone if I knew they were paying extra for privacy.
.
Prisencolinensinainciusol. Ol Rait!
The same thing will happen to the Facebook social networking service as happened to the Compuserve electronic mail service. New, open protocols and standards will negate the network effects it currently enjoys, and it will become one of many inter-operative social networking platforms.
Why? Your name is generally a matter of public record. It's not private. Pretty much the opposite, in fact.
If you post any actual private information on a social networking site then you're taking a risk. You might be an idiot, or you might have weighted the costs and benefits and made an informed decision.
Facebook provides a service. The price of that service is information about users' online behavior and social networks. Paying that price is painless, and most people would contend that it's not even a payment. Loss of privacy? Nonsense. Privacy is what people expect in the bathroom, when they're changing their clothes, when they're on the phone. Facebook is effectively free for them - they are not giving up anything of value to use the service.
In other words, most people don't care if their public activities are recorded (as evidenced by the hunderds of millions of Facebook users). Credit card numbers, social security numbers, weight...that's what people want kept private.
Fine them for more than they gain with their practices, end of story.
If you actually use your real name and personal information on any social networking site, then you are an idiot, plain and simple.
Well, except maybe linkedin.
Am I part of the core demographic for Swedish Fish?
Let's see how you feel about that when you become a victim of indentity theft, or when the number of telemarketing calls you receive every month goes up by an order of magnitude. Let's see how comfortable you are with your private and personal information being used by marketers or scammers (not that much difference these days) to specifically target you. Let's see how you feel when your employer demands access to all your social networking pages and/or your job is put in jeopardy because there's something they don't like on them. Let's see how you feel when your entire life is put under the microscope by people you don't even know!
Oh and by the way: if you REALLY feel that way about it, then why not put up live internet cameras in your bedroom so we can watch you have sex with your wife? After all, you have nothing to hide and you honestly don't care with what anyone does with your personal information, right?
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
...when there's a print option available!
As a bonus by selecting the print link you avoid much of the other crap and have a full screen paragraph width instead of the tiny one you get on the now linked page... Thinking is allowed, even encouraged.
..informed decision
Don't you see, that's my point: most people haven't made an "informed decision", they didn't even think about it! All my friends are doing it, I should do it too!
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
I know because of network effect all you people don't care about Google's Orkut. But here in Brazil Orkut is quite popular, and evil or not evil aside, Google is well above average in trustworthiness. Sure the final solution must be some standard open social network.
A year ago, we launched a privacy site with the goal of providing a safe, secure, simple means to share information using end-to-end encryption. Without going into detail and without mentioning the name of the site, I can tell you that we succeeded and we have a small group of regular users. We don't have an advertising budget, so most users find us through google ("private secure encrypted"). Even those with no knowledge or understanding of how encryption works can figure out how to use this site. Since we collect no personal data, we have nothing to sell to advertisers. Eventually, there will be a nominal fee to use the highest privacy level ("secret"), but anyone creating an account this year will get to use the site free for life (or until the site is sold or terminated).
So? Why do you feel the need to protect everyone?
And really, what are they losing? Probably the same stuff we've all already given to Google.
You did realize that Google collects information on you, right? And (assuming you use any Google services) you made an informed decision to use it, right?
If you actually use your real name and personal information on any social networking site, then you are an idiot, plain and simple.
Because...?
Come on, the least you could do is, like, actually present an argument.
I already know I'm going to get modded down to -1, Troll or -1, Flamebait for posting this
Ahh, classic. The ol' "I know I'm going to get modded down for thus, but..." insurance game... it's amazing the idiot moderators actually fall for it. *sigh*
Facebook and other such sites on;y exist to collect and sell personal data! Any service they provide to users is secondary to that. They will never stop selling out their users no matter what thehy say!!!!!!!!
If a single company can be found that does not sell on private information, then selling private information cannot legitimately be said to be "in the nature of companies". If it is still said it should be nuanced to say "some do while others don't".
We can do this for groups of people, why throw that principle away for companies?
-1 Troll, because Slashdot is about as coloured as a bucket of red paint.
First, the parent poster to your comment didn't say that Facebook specifically makes money from selling private information. I heard it explained very well on NPR a day or so ago. I think this is more analogy than technical, but here goes:
1. Advertisers have been collecting information on your browsing habits for some time. Data has been stored without a distinct identifier. Picture a huge file with tons of very revealing data about you, with no actual name attached.
2. You provide your real name on Farcebook, click on a few things.
3. The identifying data in the URL of your referring location broadcasts your real name to advertisers.
4. Advertisers suddenly can put a distinct name the massive folder of online browsing habits they have been amassing.
5. Advertisers profit. They keep paying Farcebook to keep turning a blind eye. Farcebook profits. Everyone is happy, including the user who meant to do this when they signed up for the great new service that skewers your information at no cost to the user. ~ For me, the rub is that the service, from their perspective, *exists* solely to do the above. And yet they basically lie very openly to their users in stating that they are "shocked" that this kind of thing is going on. I think TFA addresses this frustration.
Since people keep using it, they're sending the message that they don't care about invasions of privacy. It's not too hard to figure out how to avoid this invasion: don't use the site.
One key part about it is that Facebook, and particularly Zuckerberg, is convinced that privacy is an illusory notion at best in today's world. Privacy was all some strange social construct that is now, or soon will be, thoroughly antiquated. It's an impediment to the future; a mental hangup. It's right up there with believing the Earth is flat and the sun revolves around us. The sooner we all realize this the better off we'll be.
Within this philosophy each move that Facebook makes isn't some sort of violation or theft. You can't steal what someone doesn't have. Instead, it is an object lesson to the unenlightened. I, for one, believe this is total bullshit. Then again, I'm also not on Facebook. The movers and shakers in technology have been all about this for a long time: dragging the masses kicking and screaming to that future only he has the genius to see. Usually, they have limited it to technical or economic matters, a'la Bill Gates. Or, like Steve Jobs, they have an overt social vision behind their technological heavy-handedness, but folks generally haven't been too offended by it. Zuckerberg is upping the ante in a dramatic way.
I've had a Facebook for 5 years, and a Myspace before that. I've never had any telemarketing calls, nor any signs of my identity being stolen. I don't mind if marketers are using my information to advertise me, at least they're adversing something I might be intrested in besides Penis Enlargment pills. There is nothing on my Facebook(or anywhere on the net that I posted) would ever put my job in jeopardy.
Oh and by the way: if you REALLY feel that way about it, then why not put up live internet cameras in your bedroom so we can watch you have sex with your wife?
just go to http://www.zombiegetsfreakywithchicka.net/
After all, you have nothing to hide and you honestly don't care with what anyone does with your personal information, right?
Right
Many of us get along quite nicely not using Facebook.
If only my friends (and parents) would tolerate and respect that. It's hard when everyone you know uses Facebook and shuns you for not being their "Facebook friend" because you're the one weirdo who refuses to create a Facebook account, never mind privacy concerns. No, I still haven't created a Facebook profile (and won't), but I also still take a lot of flak for it the few circumstances my friends are willing to talk to me. It's like you're free to not do business with a company, only as long as you're willing to give up aspects of your life (like friendship) you used to get for free.
I am shocked at this situation!
The media sensationalising very little, again!
It's as if people take the bait time and time again, yet they avoid educating them just so they'll keep coming back..
*ahem*
http://developers.facebook.com/blog/post/418
http://developers.facebook.com/blog/post/419
Kay: A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it.
Good day.
And that is why I myself will not ever have a Facebook account. I'm not one to publicize my life in the first place, and the privacy issues with Facebook gives me plenty of incentive to refuse when someone prompts me.
THE SOFTWARE, IT NO WORKY!!!
Ever wonder why debatable operations in the Middle East, airport "security" scanners, wiretapping without warrants, push to privatize social goods [think: utilities and pensions and that universal health care that never happened] all started under Republicans' watch?
To make money.
FB cares about privacy in the same way that McDonald's cares about nutrition.
Reply to That ||
Funny thing is, GP didn't say he "had nothing to hide" - he said that the stuff he posts on facebook isn't that private anyway, and he doesn't care that it's up there, or that Facebook knows it. He didn't say "I post every detail of my life there," he said "I don't care if people know the details I do post up there."
There's worlds of difference between "I don't care that Facebook knows I like golf (but suck at it), have half a dozen friends who live in New York City, and like rock and alt-country music, and uses that knowledge to display advertisements I might be interested in seeing based on those interests." and "I don't care if Facebook films me having sex with my wife and posts that up on facebook.com/bobsmith_porking_lisajones/livestream, and uses it to sell male enhancement products and plastic surgery."
Reasonable people are able to draw the distinction between these two scenarios. You seem to have missed the distinction. Conclusions that may be drawn from these facts are left as an exercise to the reader. The rule to keep in mind on Facebook is: don't post it if you consider it private information.
I already know I'm going to get modded down to -1, Troll or -1, Flamebait for posting this, but you can't escape the cold hard truth that so many of you have not been wise, and now you're paying the price.
Nah, all the smug folks facebook. It's the current fad. People in 1880 hated the phonebook, too.
"My name and phone number are in a public directory!? *gasp!* Surely you wouldn't put your real phone number in such a book, someone might call you!"
"It has your address, also."
"AHHHH!!!! SHARPEN THE PITCHFORKS!"
I remember reading a comic... xkcd or abstruse goose. The strip showed a computer tech telling his friends that they shouldn't use facebook. The next frame showed the friends doing it anyway while the guy was ignored. The final frame showed the friends suddenly hating facebook and the tech was giving them an "I told you so". The punchline though is that the last frame only happened in the tech's mind because he was too stubborn to change his initial opinion of it.
So? Why do you feel the need to protect everyone?
How is that any of your business? If you don't like what I have to say then you can ignore it, and if you don't agree with it then you can give your whole life away to the fucking internet for all I care.
And really, what are they losing? Probably the same stuff we've all already given to Google.
Really? I do regular Google searches for my legal name and nothing comes up, because I was never so stupid as "give up" anything to them in the first place. Problem?
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
Everyone has their birthday there.
Identity theft. That will be the price. Don't think they are selling your information to just advertisers. You name, phone, email, preferences, friends, friend's email, etc are all in a database not authorized by you.
The annoying:
1. Spam emails that are either terribly translated or written by a child.
2. Actual spam snail mail. Annoying flyers from advertisers, etc.
The bad (if you execute):
1. Phishing emails sent from your friends.
2. Phishing emails sent from an organization you belong to or a game you play.
3. Telemarketing calls to cell phones or as text messages.
The Ugly:
1. Total identity theft or account access because enough personal information is available to answer security questions like your mother's maiden name or favorite thing.
2. Accounts opened in your name without you ever even knowing (Cell phone accounts, credit cards, I have even heard of mortgages).
Oh and your IP Address is a pretty nice bit of information that will link the facebook you to other you's in these database to get an even bigger idea of who you are. Organized crime is alive and thriving on the internet. It is BIG business and you are the merchandise. Does it happen to everyone? Nope. But I believe the numbers are increasing. Here is one report: http://www.spendonlife.com/blog/2010-identity-theft-statistics. Oh and last I checked a valid credit card number was only worth about $2. Probably less by now since the increase in availability (stock) has increased as well.
So you don't have to worry unless it happens to you. But you can make the chances of it happening to you less likely if you want.
"The reason is simple: Starting flamewars and attracting eyeballs is how it makes money, and Slashdot is above all owned by a business."
No. That's not correct. Facebook is an unethical business. It lies. It deceives its users. Deceit is not required to be in business. There are ethical and unethical businesses and which type of business they are depends on the morals of the people who run them. Dishonest people run unethical businesses. Honest people run ethical businesses. Do not lump the honest people in with the dishonest ones. They are nowhere near being alike. They are at opposite ends of the spectrum.
"while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude." de Tocqueville
Well, you are here posting comments on a site that features a nice threading model so that other people can easily reply. Maybe if you don't like that, you need to ignore it.
You think what appears in a Google search is all the information they have about you? And you're calling all social networking users idiots? Seriously?
You put your data on its server for the purpose of sharing it with others. Any expectation of "privacy" on a system designed to share information seems misinformed, especially when all that information is further shared with third parties (apps) over whom Facebook has no control. You might reasonably expect your FB inbox to be private but that's about the only type of information on the entire site that isn't "shareable."
Plus, if you're not accessing a service exclusively over SSL, do you really care how private the data is that you're transmitting?
rooooar
I came here to say that people are almost certainly over-analyzing the issue. Really, it's simple: Selling personal information on its users is how it makes money.
Except in this case, they didn't over analyze it at all! :-)
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
Thing is most people's informed decisions fail to take into account the trustworthiness (or lack thereof) of a business that has a vested interest in breaking any sort of privacy promise they make to you.
It's in facebook's best interest to lure you in with promises of shelter from the public, and then whip out their TOS to throw you under the bus by reselling your soul to the advertisers.
Infoworld - from which TFA comes - has facebook.com in my noscript list of sites seeking further permission. WTF? His article should maybe disclose this as I understand he can't necessarily change it nor should he draw a line in the sand over that. The number of sites listed in noscript has become a barometer of just how fucktarded a site, or its audience, is. This is by no means a perfect measure.
and in many cases, it's people you never even met in person who you allowed on your friends list in the neverending quest to have more "friends" than your buddies do.
I think this is the big mistake people make, coupled with Facebook's "friend of a friend" permission that allows people you really don't know (aka strangers) to troll your profile, friends list and photos.
Outside of people I knew in high school or college, I make a point to turn down friend requests from business/work acquaintances and people I don't know personally.
If you keep your profile relatively clean (ie, no pictures of you freebasing heroin) and limit your friend exposure, it's actually a reasonable way to keep up with people you like but can't stay in contact with in more traditional ways due to geography, family, etc.
I just ran through my profile and there's little of use to anyone, friend or foe. I don't even put my own picture up there.
that won't stop them
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - Evelyn Beatrice Hall, re Voltaire
you're an idiot.
Pay what price? They'll deliver more ads to me? Oh gee, no please, oh wait... I block them anyway. Maybe someone will find out my name? Oh god whatever will I do?
Do I post my entire personal history on there? No.
Do I like reconnecting with friends I had 10 years ago? Yes, so the extremely minor amount of information that is gleaned from my profile is worth it to me. That doesn't make me an idiot and you should probably watch out when you generalize like that.
Socialism 101: the employees own their place of employment. It could be directly, such as a partnership, or via proxy (ie. shares of stock). Period.
Some people prefer a more indirect proxy (ie. a Socialist government). Obviously, *that* model has had problems.
Social Democratic parties prefer the employee-ownership part. But, rather than require it and overturn the whole apple cart, accept that yer gonna have owners exploiting employees, and use social welfare programs to ameliorate the "getting screwed" parts of capitalism.
To manage a social welfare system requires records of the beneficiaries. On the other hand, large firms selling products purporting to ameliorate the "getting screwed" parts of life require records of the beneficiaries, and may sell those records to other firms.
Potaytoes, potahtoes.
Luke, help me take this mask off
I'm late to the party, but would the following work? A new apps API which publishes session-based hashes for user IDs and query results. The app-processed results are then passed back through Facebook API to be published. It won't answer all concerns, but it would allow a class of 'non-identifying' apps to thrive. Slashdotters might find a clever way of finding repeating patterns to identify users and linking through to known clusters, but it should be better than the 'open access' that apps currently enjoy just to function.
"No privacy" coded into Facebook's DNA... so true. Reading Zuck's interview in the Sept 20th New Yorker allows one to better understand this explicit point, beyond the coarse Harvard email zingers. As the writer points out, Mr. Zuckerberg can afford to take the "open book" approach to life, since he's been on the favored side of the US economy - with the means to protect his livelihood - literally since childhood.
Luke, help me take this mask off
ouch...I'm hurt...
tell your mom to remember her fucking diaphragm next time
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - Evelyn Beatrice Hall, re Voltaire
why do you cower? what are you afraid of?
I use my real name on facebook. That makes me an idiot? Thanks for the classification.
I tend to believe I'm more informed than the average person. Maybe I'm mistaken. If you believe that social networking sites sharing this type of information is the greatest privacy issue at the moment then you are mistaken.
To provide an example, I recently remortgaged my house. I received no less than 2 dozen mail offers to my home address (the address remortgaged). Most of them were to either offer insurance protection in case I was disabled and couldn't pay my mortgage or to allow me, for a fee, to pay my mortgage more often thus saving money in interest. A service my bank offers for free.
These companies put information on the mailings that could only be found in the mortgage documents, including the principal amount. How did they get this information? All of it is readily available public information available on the internet. Any piece of property in the state I live in has this information available online. This includes deed information such as amount paid and any liens including mortgages and tax liens. These are full images of the documents, including the signature. For many cities and towns tax assessment information is also available: property value, floor plans, property acreage and address.
There are many other examples of information online that compromise privacy. To worry about people putting information they themselves decide to put out there is the least of our worries.
Are you one of those "if they have nothing to hide, what are they afraid of?" anti-privacy douchebags? It's not fear that makes me not want any jerkoff with a keyboard to be able to find out anything about me. It's the simple fact that some things are nobody else's fucking business. If you want to live in a glass box, that's your business, more power to you.
How's your wife, Rachel?
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - Evelyn Beatrice Hall, re Voltaire
Well for the advertising piece I guess I'm not sure why everyone automatically makes the assumption that Facebook is giving any specific personally identifiable information about you to advertisers? I know they've had a couple of widely reported problems here and there, but I guess I assumed that FaceBook was operating in a similar manner to Google, in that advertising aggregation is done in house?
Personally I guess I assumed that that the reason that companies hire outside advertising firms is to promote their products is that it saves them from having to invest to develop a strategy in an arena that they don't have any prior experience in and probably would not get enough money out of compared to development costs?
Therefore as a result, the reason that companies that provide free online services (Facebook, Yelp, Google, Slashdot, etc.) retain such a massive sales force is in order to promote themselves to businesses by saying we have x amount of people interested in y field (that you are in) pay us z amount of money and we will push your product/service to them in the form of online advertising.
But I guess it seems to me that giving specific information on people seems like an unnecessary risk.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not naive enough to think that Zuckerberg and others of his ilk care about us consumers any further the they can exploit us for the purposes of making money, but with a few key exceptions, I'm afraid that's really the state of business as a whole nowadays.
Remember though, if you start giving out customer specific information, doesn't that mak it much harder to exaggerate/manipulate the numbers you provide to companies to get them to pay you for pushing their products/services through your online service?
Incidentally, I feel I should also mention I know one of the big reasons a lot of people always get hysterical about applications/services potentially retaining/sharing medical information for fear of problems with insurance. However, I hate to burst the bubble of everyone who has already commented about this here, but that's actually a very big misconception.
The sad truth is that insurance companies can already do that as they automatically gain access to all your medical records when you apply for a policy and they already have a lot of industry funded companies that aggregate and share that information across the industry to prevent people with serious health problems from getting insurance.
As a result, they don't need to pay another outside company to aggregate data in that way when for the most part they can already access the information they need to turn you down for free!
By the way, does anyone else find it really ironic that although most people here keep raving about privacy online, that Geeknet Inc., does aggregated advertising on all the sites they own? Which, by the way, includes Slashdot? Yet somehow we don't still don't see the majority of people posting as anonymous cowards though. I guess us Facebook users aren't alone in either failing to realize/rationalizing off privacy concerns for online services we want to use?
Then again, I suppose the preference for most Slashdot users (myself included) is to criticize Facebook for privacy concerns online rather then giving in and submitting our personal information for the purposes of (god forbid) meeting/connecting with people in real life. ;)
I'm honest enough to admit I lie to myself.
If you actually use your real name and personal information on any social networking site, then you are an idiot, plain and simple.
Exactly!
That's why I always walk around outside wearing a Guy Fawkes mask, a biohazard suit and use a different alias at every shop. Can't let just anyone know my real face or true name - and who knows what dark magics they might weave with a lock of my hair?
Plus it makes everyone who comes to the help desk at work really quiet.
You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
Have you ever posted anything that wasn't a troll?
You seem to be suffering from some sort of delusional psychosis. Further conversation can serve no purpose. Enjoy your "power."
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - Evelyn Beatrice Hall, re Voltaire
Scream your surrender again. You will obey. You could easily defy me but you never will. You always do as you're told.
Really? Do you work for Google and have access to their (according to you) secret database of people's personal information? Can you prove that? Even if you can what has this to do with voluntarily listing your personal information on social networking sites not being a smart move in the first place?
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
Not to mention the fact that I think Facebook's terms and conditions pretty much require you to use your real name. And even if it didn't, I would not go as far as to use a fake name.
ur fugly mum
id post her fugly face again but im afraid to even make sure i still have it
honestly id prefer to forget it existed
well, you obviously want it, so here.
ur mums fugly face
present yourself to me; admit what you've done, then i will kill you.
I love how you are cognizant of this, yet you post "your mum" and "I will kill you" repeatedly. You do realize that this and your "cache of assorted guns" is the third result in a google search for your name? What picture does that paint for people who don't know you?
For me, and I say this as someone who doesn't know you, your behavior here makes you seem like a violent, petty individual prone to petulant outbursts.
If you're not actually Michael Kristopeit, this is a pretty good way to ruin his image.
ur mum's face seem like a violent, petty individual prone to petulant outbursts.
why do you cower? what are you afraid of?
you are NOTHING.
you are NOTHING.
What about me? Am I nothing?
to the individual responsible: present yourself to me, and i will bring unto you the ultimate penalty for your discretions.