Slashdot Mirror
Facebook Abstainers Could Be Labeled Suspicious
bs0d3 writes "According to this article printed in tagesspiegel.de, not having a Facebook account could be the first sign that you are a mass murderer.(German) As examples they use Norwegian shooter Anders Breivik, who used MySpace instead of Facebook and the newer Aurora shooter who used adultfriendfinder instead of Facebook. They already consider those with Facebook accounts, who lack friends to be suspicious, but now they are suggesting that anyone who abstains from Facebook altogether may be even more suspicious."
I submit: https://www.facebook.com/dexter
(OTOH, I unfriended the account because disappointingly it wasn't even a little bit in-character)
I'm starting a compay that knocks people to the ground and puts a boot on their neck. My business model is to sell ads on the soles of the boots. Ticker symbol FY is available. W00t! Get the VCs on the line.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
While there may be overlaps, my understanding is the primary objective of FaceBook and Adultfriendfinder are not precisely the same. For example, it seems that many more photos on facebook involves clothing, and I am sure many of the people on facebook do not intend to have sex with everyone who friends them.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
I submit that this sort of story is overblown.Yes, this is one out of hundreds of characteristics on a list. Just having one or even fifty from the list doesn't mean any individual has crossed the threshold of "suspicious". Everyone on /. should be familiar with this sort of thing from spam filters.
This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
That you are old.
They're a commercial enterprise making their money off profiting from the private data of others. I've had libertarians proclaim the company to be an example of the value of the free market, but I consider them an example of how a private company will manage to find something valuable about others and get money for it with a higher cost than you might realize.
Now maybe you consider the service Facebook provides worth it, but I consider the cost of being on Facebook not worth any service.
So...count me out of it. I could even be convinced to shut them down, though it would probably take some serious abuses before enough public support could trump the propaganda for it.
Breivik most certainly did have a Facebook account. He networked with anti-immigration and anti-Islam groups on Facebook. His address list for his manifesto was compiled from Facebook profiles that he had friended.
You know who else never used Facebook? Hitler!
This line of thinking could sure help Facebook's stock value.
Uhm ... no. The more that Facebook is seen as something that you need to do (institutionalization) instead of something you do because it is cool, the less cool it will be. In fact this line of thinking may even make it cool to 'rebel' against the establishment (Facebook). This is how these social networking sites die. The cool kids leave first, everyone else follows soon after.
Look where all this talking got us, baby.
Oh, and parent should not be modded down. "Fuck You" is pretty much the only valid response to that bullshit.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
This guy has been circulating around the internet as the profile of the next mass murderer on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?ld=2582718763
I've had a Facebook account for years. I've even made one for each of the little voices in my head, too :)
THE HONOUR OF THE KNIGHTS - CC Licensed Sci-Fi Novel
I'll admit the MySpace to Facebook comparison was closer. However ... comparing Facebook to AdultFriendFinder? Either I don't hang out in the "right" Facebook groups or this is total bull. They are not even close to interchangeable in purpose, audience nor function.
I suppose the reason I find the concept of this article sad is that we're moving to a place where instead of an expectation of privacy ... we now have an expectation of no privacy. I post photos, sure, and status updates and events. But I'm careful about the permissions on them and I don't post EVERYTHING nor will I. If that makes me suspect, well, I guess suspect me. But it -should- show I have a reasonable level of intelligence on what I keep private.
While I do use Facebook, I have a number of friends, neighbors and co-workers who do not. And I don't consider them suspect. Why would I? I don't go "oh, my neighbor is always frequenting that gaming site but refuses to use Facebook, he must have something to hide".
I also have a number of friends who either maintain multiple accounts (because they hate dealing with permissions) OR keep their account obscured so that you have to know that it is their account (different name, odd profile photo, different email account, etc). Purely because we ALL have people in our lives we don't want to know EVERYTHING. Is that the next step for being suspected?
Glass walls. You don't want them. At least not until everyone in power can give up their judgements about peoples' personal lives.
It is more productive to voice thoughtful opinions (reply) than to judge (moderate) others.
I thought most parents teach their kids "don't give your personal info to strangers".
Remember, Zuckerberg's a stranger to your kids no matter how many free things (services) he offers them, just as much as some guy offering free candy from an unmarked van.
Right on. This whole thing is very thoughtcrimey--I guess I should expect "lemme see your passport, SSN, and Facebook account while I wand and grope you" real soon.
You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
And I don't use FB, only LinkedIn - what does that make me? Potential murderer for hire?
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
Many of my real-life friends have no Facebook presence because they have cleared software jobs and have been instructed to not have social profiles or blogs in order to maintain their clearance.
Just another clue that Holmes was a CIA asset.
So using megadoses of peer-pressure to get everyone on Facebook isn't enough anymore... Now not being on Facebook is actually considered to be a serious clue that there is something seriously wrong with you? What a load of bullshit. What a load of bullshit. What a load of bullshit. ------ Many ordinary people who are smart about privacy do not put their lives on Facebook for a very good reason: Zuckerbook exists purely to make money, and cannot be TRUSTED with the details of your life, however mundane they may be. 3 cheers for everyone who abstains from Facebook for privacy reasons. Hip-Hip-Hooray. Hip-Hip-Hooray. Hip-Hip-Hooray. ------- End of message -----------
Why did the chicken cross the road? Because Elon Musk put an AI chip in its head.
I get funny looks all the time when I say I know all about FacePlace and consciously refuse to join.
My sister worked on me for months (we're both "old") to join before I finally got testy and told her under no circumstances would I join. I think she thought I just didn't understand it and just needed to be shown how wonderful it was. She was genuinely hurt by my reaction.
It's like belonging to a religion in many ways. True believers have trouble understanding how others don't share their beliefs; clearly they just need the right explanation to bring them around.
Today's Dilbert is right on topic: SHHHH! It hears you. .
I don't like being packaged and sold as a commodity.
Here's to losing my Karma Bonus again....
I know that the story CIA's 'Facebook' Program Dramatically Cut Agency's Costs was in the onion, but I would be surprised if the CIA did not tap into Facebook's data. Those of us who do not have a Facebook account must be a pain ... how to encourage us to tell the CIA^h^h^h Facebook all that they need to know .... how about make them feel worried that they might fall under increased suspicion ? Well: it will work with a few people, so a cheap and effective way of gathering information about more people.
I consider my self a pioneer in the use of computers but also modern. My experience covers the range from plug boards and punched cards to client-server networks and remote operation of PCs.
I do not participate in any social network. I have little interest in "friending" someone I never met face-to-face. I do not tweet. Now retired, I have no real use for LinkedIn. See my http://www.rossde.com/internet/surf.html#missing.
Profiling people based on their internet usage - for "national security" - is likely to become a reality in some countries before long.
I'm fairly sure the NSA has been doing this for years. And I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to find out they regard anti-social indicators with similar suspicion. It's not a very novel notion.
As a native German I just read the German article, and have to say it was a quite a good article. It just said not leaving any traces online(Facebook, MySpace etc.) makes you look suspicous in the eyes of HR departments, and you will probably not get the Job, because you might try to hide something. It also quted Dr. Christoph Möller that being addicted to Social Network can deepen Basic Mental Health Problems and also strengthen fear. Dr. Möller also said that he DOES NOT believe that absence from the Internet can lead to mass murders as committed by Anders Breivik and the Shooter from Aurora.
tl;dr Basically the activepolitic.com article got it backwards.
Breathing Human Beings Could Be Labeled as Suspicious
"According to this article printed in tagesspiegel.de, being a living mammal could be the first sign that you are a mass murderer.(German) As examples they use Norwegian shooter Anders Breivik, who is a homo sapien and the newer Aurora shooter who was also a person. They already consider those requiring life support as also suspicious, but now they are suggesting that anyone who is healthy altogether may be even more suspicious. While it is already established that places like hospitals and clinics are no good for zombies, the dead, and ghosts; the undead will have to take a back seat while more and more insane articles like this come out. This line of thinking could sure help morgue businesses."
I read TFA and all I got was this lousy cookie
A perfect example of why the Slashdot moderation system isn't broken.
Future articles on this subject will probably include:
"Not On Facebook? You're Harming The Economy"
"$Nation Requires Facebook Account Before Issuing Passport"
"Terrorist Suspects Had Fake Facebook Account"
"Terrorist Suspects Had No Facebook Account"
"Terrorist Suspects Had Facebook Account"
Anyone remember the 90s when the advice was not to put your personal information on the internet?
Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
A facebook account of an adult with only two friends; both children... best hope the government doesn't find out.
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
and if routine identity control on the street finds an abstainer then a deep cavity search should performed - who knows what such abstainer can hide there...
His/her privacy, for one (the horror!).
A Facebook abstainer could be a future mass murderer. And so could a Facebook participant.
A Facebook abstainer could be a saint and a scholar. And so could a Facebook participant (OK, that's a bit dodgy).
The whole thesis of judging people by whether they are on Facebook or not is ridiculous.
Out of 7 billion persons on this planet, let's say 4 billion are adults but not yet too decrepit to handle a PC or smartphone - i.e. of suitable age for Facebook. There are less than 1 billion Facebook participants (probably quite a bit less, due to fake accounts, etc.). So by a conservative estimate, 3 billion persons on the planet are Facebook abstainers, and therefore are potential mass murderers or something. Such an intellectually vacuous conclusion can only be reached by digesting utterly absurd bullshit.
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
They're probably using something like a Bayes classifier and not having an FB account is just one of many features.
I don't know how reassuring this is, given that I neither have a Facebook account nor a mobile phone, and don't twitter either...
"Money is a sign of poverty." - Iain Banks
Not too long ago my national government was looking for a way to make digital dealings with the government easier. As usual, a truckload of very, very expensive consultants were brought in (Cap Gemini) who then spent a lot of time, money and paper working on possible ways to accomplish this.
Their final verdict? Facebook integration. I kid you not. These guys actually thought using Facebook as the primary identifier to facilitate dealings with local and national government would be a good idea.
Fortunately it seems there must have been some civil servants with a bit of sense, because those documents were very quickly never heard from again.
People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
You can't change your race, but you can easily create a Facebook account that contains nothing useful or interesting, send friend requests to random people and accept any that come your way. If this becomes a real issue I'm sure we can automate the whole process so that you can have virtual Facebook presence without having to actually visit the damn thing yourself. As an added bonus having various Facebots interact with each other trying to pretend they are humans while other bots try to spot them should help advance AI quite a bit.
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
Adultfriendfinder instead of Facebook?! Are those really considered to fulfill equivalent niches?
That's like saying 'He uses K-Y Lubricant instead of WD-40'.
- For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat
Historically someone who behaves differently than everyone else could be labeled suspicious. It's how those in control suppressed rebelious thoughts. It's the same reason why the masses generally concider scientists to be suspicious.
My Facebook account is under a fake name, set to unsearchable and "private" every way FB will let me do it.
I don't tell anyone related to a job that I have a FB account.
If they ask, I tell them the half truth that I deleted my FB page a few years ago when they started exposing people's info without asking.
You could always do like I do, and make most of your Facebook information, disinformation. :) I change my employer and location to various government facilities. Sometimes people get confused at the more obscure ones. Sometimes, it's just an arbitrary city and bogus employer. Most of my posts are for my own entertainment.
I don't know what someone would be looking for there, but they're not going to find much factual stuff.
I'm not sure, that may qualify me more to be watched. Or I already am, and have been put on the list "harmless people with strange sense of humor"
Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.