Slashdot Mirror


Ask Slashdot: Facebook, Twitter For Business, Is It Worth the Privacy Trade-Off?

cayenne8 writes "I've been a staunch advocate of NOT joining Facebook or Twitter or the other social networks to protect my privacy and to not voluntarily give all my personal information away to corporate America, or even the Government. However, I'm beginning to look into making money through various means on the side, one of them being photography/videography. With these mediums, being seen is critically important. Having a business facing site on Facebook/Google+ and even using Twitter can be great for self promotion, and can open up your business to a huge audience. If you were to open your FB and other social network accounts with business ONLY information, and keep your personal information (name, image, etc) off the Facebook account...will this keep your personal privacy still from them, or are their algorithms good enough to piece together who you are from the business only sites? Is the payoff worth the potential trade-off for generating potential customers for your business and guiding them to your primary website?"

158 comments

  1. Cookies and referers by Albanach · · Score: 4, Interesting

    See all those sites you visit with a facebook like button. Those images are usually served from facebook, not the site you're visiting.

    So, unless you're careful with your privacy settings, you are likely reporting a huge amount of your browsing to facebook.

    At the very least, I'd recommend logging out of facebook when you're done and trying to browse with 3rd party cookies disabled.

    1. Re:Cookies and referers by Mitreya · · Score: 1

      See all those sites you visit with a facebook like button. Those images are usually served from facebook, not the site you're visiting.

      If facebook ever goes down for an extended period of time, it would probably halt half the internet (which may be a good thing).

      I remember it used to be the case that you had to want 10-20 seconds for adserve....facebook.com to timeout before blockbuster.com would respond at all.

    2. Re:Cookies and referers by Cryacin · · Score: 1

      Use a business machine and only log in there. It's all about managing your public image after that. Only posting photographs that you wish to leverage to promote yourself as opposed to having one promoted with your underwear on your head is the general idea.

      --
      Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
    3. Re:Cookies and referers by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      Are you basically saying IF I did set up the business account, to make sure I was not logged into that business FB account when browsing around from one of my computers?

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    4. Re:Cookies and referers by Albanach · · Score: 3, Informative

      Are you basically saying IF I did set up the business account, to make sure I was not logged into that business FB account when browsing around from one of my computers?

      I was replying on the presumption that you have no way to avoid a FB account in the line of work you want to pursue and that you'd like to protect your privacy as much as possible.

      Assuming that's the case, I'd make sure I was logged out of the account. Others have suggested there might be plugins that can help by blocking these links from third party websites, and I think that too would be worth your exploring.

      Social networks can only build a picture of you based upon what you give them. The trouble is that it's very very easy to not even realize you're giving them vast quantities of personal information as you browse third party websites.

    5. Re: Cookies and referers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Use a separate browser for FB, et al, and don't do any other web surfing in that browser.

    6. Re:Cookies and referers by edibobb · · Score: 4, Funny

      Aw, man... I've been doing it backwards!

    7. Re:Cookies and referers by AK+Marc · · Score: 2, Informative

      Facebook doesn't sell user info.

      I thought they did, but only indirectly.

      You can't buy the names and addresses of people from them, but you can request an ad be shown to gay males between 20 and 25 living in the Houston area, then it's up to you to track the IP addresses from your Facebook campaign, and gather the IPs from those people. You can now track them all you like by IP, place cookies (even malicious ones, if you don't mind getting banned from advertising again).

    8. Re:Cookies and referers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Facebook doesn't sell user info.

      You really sure? I know Google and Yahoo do: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/11/18/microsoft_does_not_charge_for_government_surveillance/

    9. Re:Cookies and referers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No not seen those yet.

    10. Re:Cookies and referers by Gr8Apes · · Score: 2

      Hopefully the posting, not the underwear.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    11. Re:Cookies and referers by mlts · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My mind gets blown by sites that demand you authenticate from FB in order to use functions like posting, seeing pictures, and other stuff.

      Call me crazy, but basic security 101 just says that you don't trust another site with the keys to your kingdom... especially with zero assurance that it might even work.

    12. Re:Cookies and referers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      One Word:

      requestpolicyrequestpolicy

    13. Re:Cookies and referers by foniksonik · · Score: 1

      Ah but you potentially gain 600 million auto logged in users, no barrier, one click access.

      Decisions decisions.

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
    14. Re:Cookies and referers by aztracker1 · · Score: 1

      Honestly.. I really don't care that much.. which is funny... but the convenience of not having to remember passwords to every site I see an article I want to comment on is a plus. I know there's aggregation of data, the fact is a lot of it is already there anyhow. If you really are concerned about it, as suggested, use a dedicated machine with it's own public IP for any social stuff, and don't do it on your regular machine. I'm more concerned about all the unencrypted email traffic the US government is logging than I am about facebook knowing that I visited any given site.

      --
      Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
    15. Re:Cookies and referers by Roderic9 · · Score: 2, Informative

      My own experiments show that the facebook cookie is transferred by the site to Facebook even if you have logged out. The only way to ensure that facebook doesn't follow you around is to delete its cookies before going anywhere else.

    16. Re:Cookies and referers by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      Exactly. I have to admit I haven't looked into it, but I'm really worried about the security implications. Many sites offer logging in by Open Id, Yahoo, Facebook, Google, and some more. On top of their own account. I'll always register a new account (usually easy enough) if I really want - too worried about such sites snooping my passwords. Plus of course the fact that Facebook has more than enough info about me already, no need to provide them even more.

      Now I wouldn't call my Facebook account my kingdom - it's just one of the many web site accounts that I have in that respect, and I'm not about to use the login credentials of one site to login to another site.

    17. Re:Cookies and referers by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      The web site owner's pov is not always the same as the web site user's pov. So not too hard a decision for a webmaster to use Facebook or Google for login, especially if those sites make it easy to use.

    18. Re:Cookies and referers by BlackPignouf · · Score: 1

      Adblock + EasyPrivacy

    19. Re:Cookies and referers by hawkinspeter · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hosts file? Where can I find an expert to outline the benefits of that method?

      --
      You're a temporary arrangement of matter sliding towards oblivion in a cold, uncaring universe
    20. Re:Cookies and referers by Sardaukar86 · · Score: 1

      Hosts file? Where can I find an expert to outline the benefits of that method?

      Noooooooooooooooooooooooo....ooooo...!! Oh, the humanity!

      --
      ..Mullah or Pope, Preacher or Poet, who was it wrote: "Give any one species too much rope and they'll fuck it up"?
    21. Re:Cookies and referers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd recommend using an anonymous proxy service to connect to FaceBook and/or Twitter if you are really concerned about privacy. And use a business email account instead of your personal email address to further remove yourself from the tracking data. There is a course offered on Coursera that covers mapping social network data if you are curious about the extent to which your Internet presence is tracked.

    22. Re:Cookies and referers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Could one simply use one browser for Facebook-only (e.g. Safari) and a different browser for everything else? Would that prevent Facebook tracking?

    23. Re:Cookies and referers by CaptainJeff · · Score: 1

      basic security 101 just says that you don't trust another site with the keys to your kingdom... especially with zero assurance that it might even work.

      If the other site can handle proper authentication of the user, secure storage of credentials using a suitable hash algorithm and a good amount of salt, and generally follows all of the best practices associated with these functions, and can provided federated single-sign-on using a mature, tested, and generally accepted protocol like OpenID or OAuth, then you absolutely says that you can trust another site to provide your authentication function for you. Well, maybe you can, depending on your business model and risk tolerance. Whatever you decided, I *highly* doubt that you can securely and safely store your users' credential information in a more secure manner than Facebook can.

    24. Re:Cookies and referers by CaptainJeff · · Score: 2

      I'll always register a new account (usually easy enough) if I really want - too worried about such sites snooping my passwords.

      When you use a federated single-sign-on capability like this, your password is NEVER sent to the service provider (the one you're logging in to using you Yahoo/Facebook/Google/etc account). It is only sent to the authenticating service (the identity provider), who already has it, and then that provider generates a signed message in a specific format (OpenID, SAML, etc) that vouches for your identity to the other site. In this model, your password is actually exposed LESS than if you create an account at the site in question.

    25. Re:Cookies and referers by History's+Coming+To · · Score: 1

      You don't give them the keys to your kingdom. You register an app on fb which gives you a private key. Your site sends a request to fb which includes the key, the user logs in through fb's system and this then returns a json string to your site to be used as you see fit. At no time does fb have any access to your site above and beyond what is publically available anyway. It does log a significant amount of info against the user's account and their use of your site, but you don't need to hand over any sensitive information other than your app key (which, if you're doing it properly, isn't stored anywhere that is publically visible).

      Twitter's API works in much the same way.

      --
      Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
    26. Re:Cookies and referers by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      My passwords are randomly generated and stored in LastPass - which appears to be rather trustworthy in that.

      For the "login with Facebook": how to tell that really validates towards Facebook, and is not yet another fishing operation?

    27. Re:Cookies and referers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When you use a federated single-sign-on capability like this, your password is NEVER sent to the service provider (the one you're logging in to using you Yahoo/Facebook/Google/etc account). It is only sent to the authenticating service (the identity provider), who already has it, and then that provider generates a signed message in a specific format (OpenID, SAML, etc) that vouches for your identity to the other site. In this model, your password is actually exposed LESS than if you create an account at the site in question.

      How can you know that at any random 3rd party website? Sure that is ideally how it works, but theres nothing to stop someone to add a 'log in with facebook button' and capture your entries. Do we want to teach random users to simply trust anything with a facebook logo on it and forget about the age old advice of having separate passwords for everywhere you go?

    28. Re:Cookies and referers by tgd · · Score: 1

      When you use a federated single-sign-on capability like this, your password is NEVER sent to the service provider (the one you're logging in to using you Yahoo/Facebook/Google/etc account). It is only sent to the authenticating service (the identity provider), who already has it, and then that provider generates a signed message in a specific format (OpenID, SAML, etc) that vouches for your identity to the other site. In this model, your password is actually exposed LESS than if you create an account at the site in question.

      How can you know that at any random 3rd party website? Sure that is ideally how it works, but theres nothing to stop someone to add a 'log in with facebook button' and capture your entries. Do we want to teach random users to simply trust anything with a facebook logo on it and forget about the age old advice of having separate passwords for everywhere you go?

      They link you over to the destination identity provider. The safest way is to login directly to Facebook and then login with your FB credentials to the other site -- you're already logged in and Facebook will just ask you for permission to pass the authentication along. Same thing happens with Microsoft accounts and Google accounts (the other two big ones).

    29. Re:Cookies and referers by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      See all those sites you visit with a facebook like button. Those images are usually served from facebook, not the site you're visiting.

      So, unless you're careful with your privacy settings, you are likely reporting a huge amount of your browsing to facebook.

      At the very least, I'd recommend logging out of facebook when you're done and trying to browse with 3rd party cookies disabled.

      Don't forget Google as well - besides all the AdSense and DoubleClick and other ad companies Google owns, don't forget all those +1 buttons Google has.

      Probably a bit more insidious than Facebook since it's probably impossible to avoid hitting a website that doesn't have a Google-owned something or other on it

    30. Re:Cookies and referers by Roderic9 · · Score: 1

      Could one simply use one browser for Facebook-only (e.g. Safari) and a different browser for everything else? Would that prevent Facebook tracking?

      Yes - that's what I do. Mind you, I wouldn't put it past the bastards to find a way around that one day. Eternal vigilance is needed, if you're really paranoid about it.

    31. Re:Cookies and referers by FauxReal · · Score: 1

      The Priv3 and Ghostery browser plugins can block those Facebook and Google+ like buttons for you.

    32. Re:Cookies and referers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's why the hole in the back is so damned inefficient! I wondered where their heads were, with that feature!
      If a tag goes in the back, how are you supposed to read it? Makes no sense...

  2. Yes, and use a one-time-only address by jfruh · · Score: 5, Informative

    Having a social media presence is pretty crucial to doing the sort of freelance work you're describing, since so much of how you get business happens via word of mouth (and so much of "word of mouth" happens on social media).

    One of the simplest things you can do to protect your privacy is to create an email addres that you *only* use for social media accounts (like, a special gmail address that just forwards mail to your regular adress, or maybe facebook@yourdomain.com if you own your own domain). This rather horrifying article from the WSJ about the way that social media tracking work makes clear that your email address is a big part of how your identity is tracked online. If they can't match the email address you use for your Facebook login with any other aspects of your online identity, you have some protections.

    If you're using them strictly as a business tool, I wouldn't worry too much about photos -- I do think it's helpful to have a photo of yourself, especially in a one-to-one business like freelance photography. You can set your Facebook account so other people can't tag you in their photos.

    1. Re:Yes, and use a one-time-only address by illumnatLA · · Score: 1

      If you're using them strictly as a business tool, I wouldn't worry too much about photos -- I do think it's helpful to have a photo of yourself, especially in a one-to-one business like freelance photography. You can set your Facebook account so other people can't tag you in their photos.

      Agreed... people are more likely to choose your business when they can connect the business with a face.

      --
      Web hosting that doesn't suck!Dreamhost
    2. Re:Yes, and use a one-time-only address by Bradmont · · Score: 1

      I take it a step further -- I have a unique (virtual) email address for every site I sign up for, using postfix's recipient delimiter (like gmail's name+keyword@gmail.com). So, for example, s+slashdot@mydomain.com. If ever one gets corrupted (or leaked to a spammer) I can just start rejecting mail to it.

    3. Re:Yes, and use a one-time-only address by cayenne8 · · Score: 2

      Agreed... people are more likely to choose your business when they can connect the business with a face.

      Well, actually, a lot of the photographers that are donig well, on some webinars on CreativeLive...have been saying they found that posting TOO many pics on the FB account was detrimental.

      They mentioned to have your branding/logo stuff there, and a few of the high quality images, some of clients you've shot, but that the main thing you wanted to do with it, was to use the FB account to drive traffic to your main website.

      As for the email address. Can you register FB with one email (say, made up only for that logong), but in your FB text about yourself, have your company email address there? Would that cause any 'confusion' with FB, or d they suck up and use ANY information in your descriptions and your registration info?

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    4. Re:Yes, and use a one-time-only address by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Two problems with that:
      1) Most places won't accept email addresses with plus signs in them. I've tried :(
      2) It's trivial to cut off the extra keyword and track you by the main address on their backends. Any tracking company worth trying to avoid will be able to defeat such measures in most instances.

    5. Re:Yes, and use a one-time-only address by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just don't put much of your professional work on FB. I believe that FB claims copyright ownership to all text and imagery posted. Just provide a link to a page that you own.

    6. Re:Yes, and use a one-time-only address by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      For freelance yes social media is or can be a huge part of your networking, but for more established companies, this can often be just a big waste of energy and capital and time. There are lots of studies and anecdotes all over the place signing praise and scorn about social media for business, but if you look for numbers, the real hard numbers behind conversions and ROI for social media campaigns, they're either hard to find or embarrassingly bad.

      For example there was a widely publicized "case study" that the bloggers went nuts over a few years ago, one I like to keep around and show my bosses, etc. They compared walmart and target social media campaigns, call walmart dumb and said their campaign failed, called target smart and successful. But, both spent close to a million dollars on this crap and if you look at the actual numbers their cost per conversion was absurdly high and it would be quite a feat to say they achieved an ROI on those campaigns. Target, the "successful" one, spent $500,000 on their campaign and netted a glorious 7,100 members. Even a modest website can generate that kind of traffic in a month with minimal effort.

      Marketers love to go on about social media because of how successful it can be, and how low cost, but they always gloss over the time element. You have to be active and on it all the time to get anything out of it, what does that cost? It's time expensive, and that always goes directly back to money expensive, by labor or by your own opportunity cost, so it's just... well it's just expensive. It's like saying "hey do you want free energy, have some people turn the crank of this generator all day ... see free energy!" The only people who really get anything from it is the guy who sells the generator, or facebook.

      Basically it's good for people who have more time than money, and need customers, after that, it's really awful and burdensome and will usually cost you in the long run if you want to maintain it. Run a business not a social club. Get customers, not friends.

    7. Re:Yes, and use a one-time-only address by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 1

      Does postfix allow you to use something other than a +? Like an underscore or the letter z for instance?

    8. Re:Yes, and use a one-time-only address by SgtChaireBourne · · Score: 1

      The plus (+) is part of the mail standard, so all compliant mail transfer agents should support it. That should include postfix. Other characters are not supported because they are not part of the standard.

      --
      Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
    9. Re:Yes, and use a one-time-only address by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 1

      I am aware of the standard. The standard says all mail to something+else@example.com must go to something@example.com, but there's nothing saying something_else@example.com can't go to something@example.com. I just thought that if they had to implement the filter anyways, they may have added the option to "customize" it a bit.

    10. Re:Yes, and use a one-time-only address by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, it can. Just change recipient_delimiter in the configuration. I also have address rewriting set up so I can also use a . But that's a little hackier.

    11. Re:Yes, and use a one-time-only address by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 1

      Cool, I will definitely look into that when I get the rest of my mail server set up (currently only works as a mirror).

    12. Re:Yes, and use a one-time-only address by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong. Facebook claims the right to use any content you post. So they can, y'know, let other people see it. Never does it claim "LOLOLOL THIS R MINE NOW", dumbass.

  3. They are that good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Their little data bots are good enough that they already have information on you whether you have an account or not. You and your browser are traceable if you visit any websites with their widgets, whether you are signed in or not. Just bite the bullet and set up a business account already and stop worrying. You aren't that special.

    Having a Facebook has certainly helped my business' promotion, it gets a lot more eyes visit our websites.

    1. Re:They are that good by cayenne8 · · Score: 2

      Their little data bots are good enough that they already have information on you whether you have an account or not. You and your browser are traceable if you visit any websites with their widgets, whether you are signed in or not. Just bite the bullet and set up a business account already and stop worrying.

      Well, my browsers have Ghostery, no script and adblock on them, I honestly don't usually notice seeing any FB links or 'likes' on most websites I visit...

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  4. Sign up as your dog by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nuff said.

  5. No by gweihir · · Score: 1

    And what kind of unprofessional questions is that anyways?

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    1. Re:No by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      As unprofessional as your answer. You obviously don't run your own business.

      Part of running your business is getting your name out - and depending on your business that includes plastering it all over the Internet, listing yourself on as many trade related sites as possible, providing a forum for potential customers to contact you, etc. The more you become known, the better it is.

  6. What are the other options? by illumnatLA · · Score: 2

    What are your other options for self promotion? Ad in the newspaper? How many people will see it let alone act on it these days? Ad on TV? Is the Return of Investment worth it for what you're trying to do?

    Really, for better or worse "social" media is the best way to reach a target audience.

    --
    Web hosting that doesn't suck!Dreamhost
    1. Re:What are the other options? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      There are TONS of other ways to promote yourself and find business (after you've setup a website showing samples of your work):

      - Respond to ads on free sites like craigslist*
      - Network, network, network online or IRL: participate in specialized forums, volunteer for community events, tell friends who tell their friends, etc.
      - Donate your services to "silent auctions" in your community.

      I got my freelance work started solely from the above, never posted an ad anywhere. It only takes one or two initial clients who are happy with your work and word of mouth snowballs from there. This works especially well for photographers since most of their business will be local anyways.

      * I realize in some areas craigslist is overrun by scammers and spammers, well poor you, works great in my area.

    2. Re:What are the other options? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm starting up a company as well. I've been successful using meetup.com to promote (face-to-face) my visual effects company. I'm in Silicon Valley. Hope this helps.

    3. Re:What are the other options? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not the AC above (just don't have an account here) but I agree, there are TONS of options, and it sometimes depends on industry. Make your own website for a start, build yourself out on your own property not on facebook/twitter/google+, those can supplement, but not replace. You don't want to be chasing around fads like a teenage girl. Your website should be center hub with the social media presence and other parts being spokes. This does not stop at the web, it goes for your offline presence as well. Everything from local ads to business cards.

      One thing I think really helps if you start thinking in terms of passive. You want to perform actions that give you passive results, so that you can perfom once, and could potentially benefit for months or even years to come.

      It's a little sad people asking "if not facebook then what else???" but on the other hand business is competitive so I'm glad some people do think that like makes it easier for me continue to be really lazy :P

    4. Re:What are the other options? by scsirob · · Score: 2

      Just make an entry on your website named "Why am I not on Facebook". Explain why you do not join the rage and that you value privacy. Don't make it a rant, just state that you see no value in opening up your life there.You'll attract people who appreciate your value on privacy. They will know that *their* privacy is safe in your hands.

      --
      To Terminate, or not to Terminate, that's the question - SCSIROB
  7. online name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    chronoss chiron
    real name nothing like that
    email a strange gmail account
    and ive never ever used my real name anywhere in the entire history ive been on the net

    some arabs thought i was arab once and invited me to a site when i told em i was scottish well i got booted LOL
    the rub is people could do this type a thing for business too. Think how holly molly the stripper makes a buck....that ain't her real name but its prolly registered as a business name and thus IT can make money....want privacy as much as you can thats about all i can offer other then the above.

    fact is if they are tracking my email address then good for them track away if i stop using it and this name then what...
    oh and one year i tried to many name syndrome and had 96 email accounts..WHAT you say well 10 meg form geocities per each...ROFL

    1. Re:online name by AK+Marc · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I've used my real name thousands of times on the Internet. I got paid $1000 for reviewing a book once, based on a letter to the editor I wrote once, using my real name and email. I've had people track me down 10 years later to send an email to me, after having seen me post something (I'm not sure what), or get a hit on my name from something else. But no bad has ever happened to me, nor has anything ever happened that I would consider a "close call".

      I'm ok posting real info, and I don't get the paranoia. What could possibly go wrong?

    2. Re:online name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ever post something controversial on Usenet? Google Groups search will make sure that if you were flamed or ridiculed for it, that it is on the first page of search results.

    3. Re:online name by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I found my real name posted on usenet. Though my email addresses from then are no longer accessible, having started at college with an edu address, and a freemail service that's long dead now.

    4. Re:online name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've used my real name thousands of times on the Internet. I got paid $1000 for reviewing a book once, based on a letter to the editor I wrote once, using my real name and email. I've had people track me down 10 years later to send an email to me, after having seen me post something (I'm not sure what), or get a hit on my name from something else. But no bad has ever happened to me, nor has anything ever happened that I would consider a "close call". I'm ok posting real info, and I don't get the paranoia. What could possibly go wrong?

      The issue for me is that is you have controversial views, like being anti-capitalist or thinking 9/11 was an inside job, employers and others can form a negative impression of you without really knowing you. That can come back to bite you.

    5. Re:online name by elisabethrobson · · Score: 1

      Ha. you are clearly a white male.

    6. Re:online name by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I'd likely not survive a presidential candidate background check, but employers wouldn't be able to find any "good stuff" worthy of denying me employment unless they spent more money on the background check than I'd make in a year (I have no idea how many usenet posts I've made, but I'd guess well into the thousands, and multiple email addresses across multiple providers, most long dead).

    7. Re:online name by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I'm a white male because I'm not an idiot jackass online? Please explain the logic behind that. I'm curious as to whether white males should be offended, or everyone else.

    8. Re:online name by elisabethrobson · · Score: 1

      No one should be offended. I was just noting that many people, including many women like me, are very nervous about being so open on the internet because we've seen what can happen. Sorry if it came off too flip.

    9. Re:online name by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Women are more likely to get a stalker. But I've not seen anything to indicate that such Internet stalkers result in a reduced physical safety. Perhaps it's another case of incorrect risk assessment. Humans are bad at risk assessment.

  8. of course not by fish+waffle · · Score: 3, Funny

    anything connected somehow is trackable somehow and eventually will be.

    ...unless you're clever, like Ronald McDonald or Colonel Sanders, the real identities of which are still mysteries.

    1. Re:of course not by msauve · · Score: 3, Informative

      Colonel Harland David Sanders (September 9, 1890 â" December 16, 1980) was an American businessman and restaurateur who founded the Kentucky Fried Chicken (KFC) restaurant chain.

      Really.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    2. Re:of course not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

      So they would have you believe. Wake up, sheeple!

    3. Re:of course not by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Wake up, sheeple!

      For ten thousand years have we slumbered whilst you have grown weak and complacent. Now we have returned to lead your people to oblivion like lambs to the slaughter.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    4. Re:of course not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obligatory xkcd

    5. Re:of course not by JestersGrind · · Score: 1

      Wow!! Colonel Sanders lived to 90 eating that crappy chicken?!?

    6. Re:of course not by McGruber · · Score: 1

      Wow!! Colonel Sanders lived to 90 eating that crappy chicken?!?

      No; he lived to 90 by *selling* that crappy chicken to others to eat.

  9. Any studies that show by future+assassin · · Score: 3, Interesting

    >>>Having a business facing site on Facebook/Google+ and even using Twitter can be great for self promotion, and can open up your business to a huge audience

    actually increases sales?

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
    1. Re:Any studies that show by grcumb · · Score: 3, Interesting

      >>>Having a business facing site on Facebook/Google+ and even using Twitter can be great for self promotion, and can open up your business to a huge audience

      actually increases sales?

      That's a really good question.

      I've run a photography website for 9 years, promoting Vanuatu, a tiny but beautiful chain of islands in the South Pacific. Traffic has always been low but steady, and Google image search gives me a decent ranking for my decidedly niche category.

      In August, I got recruited to manage the Humans of Vanuatu Facebook page. The page is still tiny by global standards, but I get people visiting from around the world, a ton of positive feedback and a steadily increasing and solid fan base. I've been featured in an online culture magazine, and now have a regular series in a decent (4 color glossy) lifestyle magazine that focuses on the South Pacific. Three musicians have asked to use my work in their cover art, the local newspaper has offered me a regular feature and I've been solicited to shoot more weddings than I want to[*].

      In terms of actual revenue, the jury's still out. I have seen an uptick in website visits, but the vast majority of people prefer to wait for my daily posts. I haven't tried to leverage it much yet, but I've been asked to do an exhibition early next year, with the proceeds going to charity. If that goes well, then maybe I'll try selling prints or a book online.

      Best I can suggest at the moment is that a Facebook presence emphatically does increase your exposure, mostly because of what they call 'virality' - the fact that whenever someone Likes a photo of mine, all their friends see it too. This means that I get about ten times as many eyes as I have fans. Will this translate to money? Not sure yet. Why not Like my page and follow me to find out? 8^)

      --------
      [*] In fairness, I just loathe shooting weddings. So one would be too many.

      --
      Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
  10. Privacy is an illusion by devforhire · · Score: 2

    They already have or can gain easy access to all that information. The govt already has a ton of info on you, tax records, dmv, etc. Business do also (you prolly get junk mail every day addressed to you.) It's a fact of life, it sucks, but thinking you can erase or hide your digital or paper trail is foolish. If you want to protect privacy spend your time fighting to protect it, don't waste it trying to hide.

    1. Re:Privacy is an illusion by cayenne8 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      They already have or can gain easy access to all that information. The govt already has a ton of info on you, tax records, dmv, etc. Business do also (you prolly get junk mail every day addressed to you.) It's a fact of life, it sucks, but thinking you can erase or hide your digital or paper trail is foolish. If you want to protect privacy spend your time fighting to protect it, don't waste it trying to hide.

      Well, actually....after Katrina, I fell off a LOT of lists, and over the years, I've been pretty careful to not put my personal name out there again. I get very little junk snail mail. Over the past year, I've gotten a few. But moving around so much after the storm, addresses changed often, and I was lax in catching up most anything to those.

      Heck, even now, my car registration says out Parish, my drivers license say another one and another address, from the parish I currently live in right now.

      Registering for voting was a fun exercise, let me assure you that.

      :)

      No, I'm not invisible by any stretch of the imagination, but I also don't go out of my way to give information out to companies out there, I actually go out of my way to give disinfromaton whenever I can. Customer store cards, in some I'm a 98 yr old Hispanic lady name Sven, whose shopping habits HAVE to skew their system a bit, and most any time I fill out anything that isn't legal, I fudge the years and dates around, give out wrong or partially wrong names, etc. Anything that goes into a non-legal database usually has misguided information about me, but often to the correct address.

      It is funny to see some junk mail that arrives here that comes from the fscked up data I give them.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    2. Re:Privacy is an illusion by devforhire · · Score: 2

      I salute you, noise is most likely the best way to protect yourself. I do the same from time to time also. My main point is the effective use of time, if you can easily be invisible by all means be invisible and I sincerely hope you can stay that way. But once the helicopter spot light is on you, it might not be worth the effort to get back into the shadows. But that is for each of us to decided.

    3. Re:Privacy is an illusion by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I went out of my way to give my info to companies when I moved, and most didn't follow me. The only thing I get is my insurance bill. My banks have my address but won't use it. The trick is, move out of North America. Most don't have the ability to put in the correct address. My "state" is an 8-character string, and most US systems check for a 2-character string only, often only one of 50-60 choices (allowing 3-chars, only if those 3 are APO or FPO). My bank will officially not do business with me as a "foriegn national" (who is a US citizen) because of that HSBC stuff. It's hard to touch my US money because the only reason someone would move USD out of the USA is to buy drugs.

    4. Re:Privacy is an illusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      100% false. The government might, but I certainly don't want to make the situation worse by handing over all of my information to private companies, too!

      "The situation is already bad, so make it worse!"

  11. So let me get this straight by enjar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You want to start working freelance and you don't want to publicize how people can reach you? I'd expect a decent head shot, a phone number, a short bio and an email address. Also representative galleries of past work, as well.

    You don't have to put your life story out there, but it's really not uncommon in business to have some small amount of "About Me" information posted with experience, education, sometimes martial status/number of children (especially if you are looking to photograph families/children).

    If you are going to set up a social media presence, you can't just set up a page and have it sit there. It does require tending and maintenance or it looks abandoned. If you do photography, post examples of good work at a steady pace, even if it's not paying gigs. Hopefully people forward it around and you get some notice.

    It sounds like you need to loosen up, or find another way of making money on the side that doesn't require social media. You can be a successful freelander without it, but you will still need to get your name out there somehow (personal networking, business networking groups, etc)

    1. Re:So let me get this straight by Beetle+B. · · Score: 1

      You want to start working freelance and you don't want to publicize how people can reach you? I'd expect a decent head shot, a phone number, a short bio and an email address.

      Pretty much this.

      If you were to open your FB and other social network accounts with business ONLY information, and keep your personal information (name, image, etc) off the Facebook account...will this keep your personal privacy still from them

      This is silly, and I don't mean in the Internet era, but in any era. Go back to ye old pre-Internet days. Would you expect to be able to place an ad in a newspaper but refuse to give them your name, phone number, address and credit card information?

      --
      Beetle B.
    2. Re:So let me get this straight by TeknoHog · · Score: 2

      martial status

      I'm a corporal and I know ninjutsu.

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
    3. Re:So let me get this straight by SirGarlon · · Score: 1

      If you do photography, post examples of good work at a steady pace,

      I Am Not A Lawyer (and if I were I would not tell you this for free). I none the less strongly recommend AGAINST posting samples of your work to Facebook. Unless you actually understand that you are granting them a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook and understand what that implies for your business and your clients.

      --
      [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
    4. Re:So let me get this straight by enjar · · Score: 1

      Many photographer friends I have watermark the photos they post to their Facebook accounts with their contact information. So if Facebook did indeed re-use their posted, watermarked photo, it becomes free advertising for them.

      I'd file this under "the cost of doing business". Especially if you are a photographer. No one cares (and wants to pay you) until they see your work.

    5. Re:So let me get this straight by SirGarlon · · Score: 1

      Especially if you are a photographer. No one cares (and wants to pay you) until they see your work.

      Amen to that! I'm just questioning whether Facebook is a smart way to get your work seen. Setting up your own domain is approximately as easy as falling off a log (but it does have a nominal cost). Setting up your own online gallery is not hard either.

      --
      [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
    6. Re:So let me get this straight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Our wedding photographer also put watermarks on the copies of our pictures she posted to FB.

  12. Ghostery by Frankie70 · · Score: 4, Informative

    See all those sites you visit with a facebook like button. Those images are usually served from facebook, not the site you're visiting.

    Ghostery blocks them

    1. Re:Ghostery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cool, I did not know about this. I was blocking these, I think it works..

      .*facebook.com/plugins.*
      .*facebook.com/widgets.*
      .*facebook.com/extern.*

    2. Re:Ghostery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is so much I miss due to Ghostery, AdblockPlus, and NoScript. I forget about that until someone reminds me why I don't see that stuff. Thanks for the reminder.

    3. Re:Ghostery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      isn't Ghostery proprietary? If so, I wouldn't be caught dead using it. Better to use Tor.

    4. Re:Ghostery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tor can hide who you are, but not what you're doing. Ghostery makes it so that Facebook et al don't even know someone accessed a website with a like button in the first place. It really disgusts me that people willingly hand over their visitors' data to Facebook, even more so when Facebook isn't even paying them like the advertisers.
      Ghostery is proprietary, and, unfortunely, I don't know of any free alternatives. One possible work-around is to directly block the offending domains in your hosts file or with a proxy with filtering capabilities. For the latter you can use squid + adzapper (it can do more than blocking ads).

    5. Re:Ghostery by stooo · · Score: 1

      just block that single one, it will work :

      *facebook.com*

      --
      aaaaaaa
  13. You are in control by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Always remember that you are in control over how much information you make available to others. If you don't want the world to know your SO pads her bra, then DON'T post that information. If you don't want the government to know you are cheating on your taxes DON'T post that. If you don't want your home burglarized by criminals, DON'T post your home address and then say your going on a six month tour of Europe. Figure that whatever you do post will be harvested for profit by unscrupulous people no matter what the currently published "privacy" policy is and what settings you are using.

  14. Honestly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I use Facebook sometimes, as well as Mixi, and G+. I am not a heavy user of any of them, but they are ok. As far as privacy, just don't put in Facebook anything secret. That's easy.

    What I don't get is the business thing. For example, let's say I love Sony. That's great, but it doesn't mean I want to be "facebook buddies" with them. I'm sorry, but that's not what Facebook is useful for. I also don't need tweets (or a blog) from the ramen place down the street that I eat at. There are various reasons I don't have any interest in "friending" companies in general:
    1. They get information on me I might not want them to have.
    2. I don't get anything much useful from it
    3. There is linked-in for that kind of stuff.

    If you want to promote yourself, you can certainly use the tools you want, but at the end of the day, Facebook is basically a system for connecting for forgotten high-school buddies, not a professional promotion tool. Your best way to self-promote is:
    1. Do something really useful and do a good job at it - let word of mouth work
    2. Get permission to share work you did for clients as samples (a portfolio of photos, programs, etc.). Put some portion of this online on your own web site.
    3. *Maybe* make a blog or something if it suits your work.

  15. Twitter: yes. Facebook: No. by Zadaz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think Twitter is worth it because there are very few privacy concerns. Twitter is 98% public, and everyone who participates knows it. (I hope.)

    Facebook is a privacy nightmare, and is crap for driving business to your web site. It does everything it can to keep all information on Facebook, including jerking everyone around. And that will only increase.

    Once you post something on either service it's out of y our control. With Twitter it's pretty minor, 140 characters, and it will be gone eventually. (I believe they only archive the last 2000 Tweets or so.) Facebook is trying to make a timeline of people's entire lives and won't stop trying to make money off your content until well after you're dead.

    1. Re:Twitter: yes. Facebook: No. by epSos-de · · Score: 1

      Yes, privacy and secrets are allays a concern, but I believe that employees must have access to their social networks during breaks, becasue it makes them happy. Otherwise the management is loosing out to get employee motivation for free.

  16. Try these by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

    linkedin

    elance

  17. media business and facebook account by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    are a great cover, go for it

  18. Ignored by no-body · · Score: 1

    dutifully - any FB business showing - Walmart is there!

  19. Better use For Your Time? by rueger · · Score: 1

    Our business has Twitter, and Facebook, and I'm on LinkedIn, and Quora, and Slashdot, and... damn I probably even have a MySpace account hanging around somewhere. The problem with anything online is that you can never, ever stop updating, fixing it, redesigning it, monitoring it....

    Beyond that, all that you can do with Facebook is try to get people to "like" you (aka subscribe). E-mail does that better - Constant Contact seems good. All that you're really doing is building a list of people who already know you and probably buy your product. A public list. Is that really of much value?

    At the end of the day, I seriously doubt how much any of those drive business for the small operator. Facebook in particular will bury your content in a barrage of cat pictures and weird and sometimes offensive ads - who in hell programs their ad servers? Algorithms by chimps?.

    I'm thinking that if time and resources are limited you would do better with a really tight and well designed website, and some money spent on Google Adsense placements. Unlike Facebook, Google seems to be able to hit me with ads that actually might interest me.

    -

  20. Opposites by TheNinjaroach · · Score: 1

    You want to increase your exposure, you just don't want to increase your exposure. Hmm. If you want to leverage the benefits of social networking, you may need to make a bit of a trade off here.

    FWIW, the "Facebook for Business Pages" stuff is kind of gimped - you can't "Like" other pages and you are limited in other ways. I ended up making up an EMail address and a fake name in order to "Like" other pages (for the free music giveaways), but now Facebook seems to recognize that account on every page I visit.

    I've done the Twitter thing for a couple months now, and if they are following me around the web I haven't seemed to notice.

    --
    I went to eat some animal crackers and the box said, "Do not eat if seal is broken." I opened the box and sure enough..
  21. AU CONTRAIRE !! THOSE MAKE YOU OUT AS A DWEEB !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dweebs are uncool !! Self-promting dweebs are scum !! Dweebs are poor old sorry sods !! Look it up !! Aqualung !!

  22. Welcome to iinterwebs loser! by musixman · · Score: 1

    You might have pre-conceived notions of why FB / XYZ / ZZY is bad for you or your company. But the reality of the situation is that if you do "good" then you will be rewarded in the social world. However, if you are a shady MF as a company expect to be called out!

    1. Re:Welcome to iinterwebs loser! by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      Well, it is mostly that I want the Business to be known.....but my personal info, I'd prefer to keep in the shadows. Not for any evil reasons, just that I value my privacy as much as I can still have it these days...

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  23. Ok, for starters: by Ralph+Spoilsport · · Score: 1
    1. Big business already knows EVERYTHING about you. Every credit card purchase and WHAT you purchased, where and when is recorded and stuffed in a database, usually some place like Axiom or some other data warehouse.
    2. The gubmint has access to the same databases.
    3. Deep privacy is no longer possible if you have ever gone into debt, rented an apartment, or done any number of things that involve Large Systems.
    4. Shallow privacy can be kept by avoiding Social Networks. But it is fungible and variable.
    5. Photography and Videography as a profession are pretty well toast. When a fucking phone takes better video than a $100,000 camera did 30 years ago, the Gig Is Up. Content creation is trivial and a short ride to the poor house, unless you move to LA and suck enough dick to get into the film industry.
    6. If you will notice most of the most famous and popular photographs of the past year were taken by amateurs on crap gear.

    In short: Only get into a creative profession if it is something you absolutely MUST do, as in, inner necessity I will go insane if I can't do this MUST do. Otherwise, just shoot videos of kittens, post it on youtube and collect the rent.

    --
    Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
    1. Re:Ok, for starters: by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      5. Photography and Videography as a profession are pretty well toast. When a fucking phone takes better video than a $100,000 camera did 30 years ago, the Gig Is Up. Content creation is trivial and a short ride to the poor house, unless you move to LA and suck enough dick to get into the film industry.

      Content creation is trivial; good content creation just as hard as it was 50 years ago.

      6. If you will notice most of the most famous and popular photographs of the past year were taken by amateurs on crap gear.

      Many of which are lucky shots. And with a million amateur shots to every professional shot, the amateurs do have an advantage to get lucky and catch that unique moment just because they happen to be there.

    2. Re:Ok, for starters: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Content creation is trivial; good content creation just as hard as it was 50 years ago.

      No creating good content became a lot easier. The required investment in equipment is largely gone, the required technical knowhow has been greatly reduced as well. That doesn't mean it doesn't take any skill to create good content. But it did become easier and, perhaps more importantly, became accessible to a lot more people. This does shift the whole supply-demand equation and does impact the industry. There are plenty 'amateurs' shooting weddings as a weekend job, that simply didn't happen 30 years ago.

    3. Re:Ok, for starters: by alphatel · · Score: 1

      5. Photography and Videography as a profession are pretty well toast. When a fucking phone takes better video than a $100,000 camera did 30 years ago, the Gig Is Up. Content creation is trivial and a short ride to the poor house, unless you move to LA and suck enough dick to get into the film industry.

      Content creation is trivial; good content creation just as hard as it was 50 years ago.

      6. If you will notice most of the most famous and popular photographs of the past year were taken by amateurs on crap gear.

      Many of which are lucky shots. And with a million amateur shots to every professional shot, the amateurs do have an advantage to get lucky and catch that unique moment just because they happen to be there.

      Further, an actual professional photographer is worth every penny. The horrors and nightmares some people have gone through as a result of hiring their friend or relative to "photograph" their big event which was as good as not hiring anyone at all (Oh Jenny is soooo good with a camera, and you don't have to spend $3,000!). Only stupid people think that photography is something that anyone with a megapixel can do.

      --
      When the foot seeks the place of the head, the line is crossed. Know your place. Keep your place. Be a shoe.
    4. Re:Ok, for starters: by painandgreed · · Score: 1

      5. Photography and Videography as a profession are pretty well toast. When a fucking phone takes better video than a $100,000 camera did 30 years ago, the Gig Is Up. Content creation is trivial and a short ride to the poor house, unless you move to LA and suck enough dick to get into the film industry.

      As a photographer with lots of photographer and videographer friends, I'd have to say, "hardly". A phone might take video as good as a $100k camera from 30 years ago, but nobody wants 30 year old quality in the same market these days. Everybody might have a camera, even a DSRL camera similar to what pros have, but content creation still goes to the talented. There is still a market to get good photos and good video done in a professional manner as there always has been. Even more because there is more need for content since everybody is online. What we are seeing is the market being flush with lots of people with good equipment and people who were used to being able to set up a business because they were part of the few that could afford expensive equipment, finding out that they can't compete with other people with talent or talentless people with the same equipment. The bar has been lowered for entry, but if anything the market has increased.

      It is very similar to the situation in hairdressers. Anybody can buy scissors and clipper or hair dye. There are $10 haircut places all over, but there is still a very large market for expensive salons which hire the highly trained people with talent.

  24. CIA Head: We Will Spy On Americans Through Electri by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    CIA Head: We Will Spy On Americans Through Electrical Appliances

    Global information surveillance grid being constructed; willing Americans embrace gadgets used to spy on them

    Steve Watson | Prisonplanet.com | March 16, 2012

    http://www.prisonplanet.com/cia-head-we-will-spy-on-americans-through-electrical-appliances.html

    "CIA director David Petraeus has said that the rise of new "smart" gadgets means that Americans are effectively bugging their own homes, saving US spy agencies a job when it identifies any "persons of interest".

    Speaking at a summit for In-Q-Tel, the CIA's technology investment operation, Petraeus made the comments when discussing new technologies which aim to add processors and web connections to previously 'dumb' home appliances such as fridges, ovens and lighting systems.

    Wired reports the details via its Danger Room Blog[1]:

    "'Transformational' is an overused word, but I do believe it properly applies to these technologies," Petraeus enthused, "particularly to their effect on clandestine tradecraft."

    "Items of interest will be located, identified, monitored, and remotely controlled through technologies such as radio-frequency identification, sensor networks, tiny embedded servers, and energy harvesters - all connected to the next-generation internet using abundant, low-cost, and high-power computing," Petraeus said.

    "the latter now going to cloud computing, in many areas greater and greater supercomputing, and, ultimately, heading to quantum computing." the CIA head added.

    Petraeus also stated that such devices within the home "change our notions of secrecy".

    Petraeus' comments come in the same week that one of the biggest microchip companies in the world, ARM, unveiled new processors that are designed to give practically every household appliance an internet connection[2], in order that they can be remote controlled and operate in tandem with applications.

    ARM describes the concept as an "internet of things".

    Where will all the information from such devices be sent and analyzed? It can be no coincidence that the NSA is currently building a monolithic heavily fortified $2 billion facility[3] deep in the Utah desert and surrounded by mountains. The facility is set to go fully live in September 2013.

    "The Utah data center is the centerpiece of the Global Information Grid, a military project that will handle yottabytes of data, an amount so huge that there is no other data unit after it." reports Gizmodo.

    "This center-with every listening post, spy satellite and NSA datacenter connected to it, will make the NSA the most powerful spy agency in the world."

    Wired reports[4] that the incoming data is being mined by plugging into telecommunications companies' switches, essentially the same method the NSA infamously uses for warrantless wiretapping of domestic communications[5], as exposed six years ago.

    Former intelligence analyst turned best selling author James Bamford, has penned a lengthy piece[6] on the NSA facility and warns "It is, in some measure, the realization of the 'total information awareness' program created during the first term of the Bush administration-an effort that was killed by Congress in 2003 after it caused an outcry over its potential for invading Americans' privacy."

    ----------------------

    Steve Watson is the London based writer and editor for Alex Jones' Infowars.net[7], and Prisonplanet.com[8]. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham in England.

    (C) 2012 PrisonPlanet.com is a Free Speech Systems, LLC company. All rights reserved.

    [1] http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/03/petraeus-tv-remote/
    [2] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17345934

  25. My advice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Grow up.

  26. Segregated logins by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 2

    Personally I had (past tense) a fb account but I haven't used it for many years.

    But my business does have a fb presence - it has its own fb account and in the office a cpu is dedicated for that fb account.

    Nothing important is on that dedicated cpu - so all the info fb can obtain from that dedicated machine is the ip (static) and the hw/sw info.

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    1. Re:Segregated logins by cayenne8 · · Score: 3, Funny
      Thank you!!

      That dedicated PC idea is fantastic!! I'll definitely use that one!

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  27. You are under an illusion by Technomancer · · Score: 1

    that you actually have any privacy without joining Facebook or Twitter.

    You see all these Facebook buttons everywhere? They are already tracking you without you needing to log in into Facebook or even having an account there.
    Same thing for all the ad networks. Single pixel bugs and ads are used to track you. And from scraps of the info you left on some sites, and the emails and addresses you provided to shopping sites they know who you are, where you live, what is your phone number and what size of shoes you wear.
    It works so well that for instance after visiting some furniture store site just to browse it, a little while later I got their nice printed catalog in snail-mail.
    Oh yeah, and I am browsing with Adblock and Ghostery.
    So unless you nuke your cookies and Flash cookies and change IP address every day as well you probably have zero privacy.
    Welcome to 21st century.

  28. Privacy? Hahahahaha!!! by um...+Lucas · · Score: 1

    A) Facebook and gogke already know all about you, unless you're meticulous with your cookies and only browse through Tor.

    B) you're only a subpoena away from the government getting anytime they want about you, at best.

    C) privacy is toast, in other words.

    D) does a tine even us google+? Moreso, do any real companies have a presence there?

    E) I'd be interested in a truelly neutral study about the effectiveness of advertising on Facebook. I know they're raking in the dollars, but that doesn't mean it's money well spent for companies. I know for myself, I use it, and I have yet to visit any business page intentionally. The ones I have seen, I've backed away from immediately. Unless you're running daily specials, there's just no purpose to building a Facebook presence I don't think. Would you pay any amount of money to garner "likes", for instance?

    F)I'd suggest go the "ld fashioned route" of a good web presence, some SEO, and some decent spending on AdWords if you're serious about it. Once you have a couple customers, maybe you think aboutvfacebook or twitterif you think they'll provide you any linkage, recommendations or traffic. But no point in investing any time or energy until you've got the basics covered.

    G) don't waste any time worrying about privacy. Again, unless you've been nutty with your countermeasures, your privacy Is already long gone. And if you do manage to set up a business presence and keep it totally detached from your online persona,which lol be hard since you'll use the same browser at worst, or just be using the same ip addresss, personal and business at best, corporate info is only a few clicks away on most states' websites.

    But go ahead do your business, it can't hurt!

    1. Re:Privacy? Hahahahaha!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      C) privacy is toast, in other words.

      So give up and make the situation worse! Privacy is far from dead. Your next door neighbor probably doesn't have cameras installed in your bathroom, for instance.

      Also, if you're not an idiot, random companies will not have information about you. So no, privacy is not "toast," and even if it was, the solution wouldn't be to give up and accept that.

      Again, unless you've been nutty with your countermeasures, your privacy Is already long gone

      The fact that you think this shows how ignorant you are. You don't have to be "nutty" to come up with countermeasures; it is all easy. Sure, you won't ever have perfect privacy, but you can certainly prevent random companies from having a bunch of your information.

    2. Re:Privacy? Hahahahaha!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A) Facebook and gogke already know all about you, unless you're meticulous with your cookies and only browse through Tor.

      Chances are, somebody that knows you already has uploaded all the relevant data to their servers and much more, so even that is in vain unless you're isolated from all of mankind.

  29. Re:why come no facebook? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  30. Depends by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Depends.

    No, not the diaper. God i'm lame.

  31. Different browsers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One browser for business - a different one for personal stuff.

    Better yet install virtualbox or something and conduct all your business/facebook browsing from it, reverting to snapshot after each visit.

  32. Paranoia from ignorance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I make my living extracting content from Facebook's API. If they are recording what sites you visit, it's not exposed anywhere in their API. I can say anything you've directly acted upon with your Facebook account, but looking at something is not a direct action. Further, a sample account was posted to Slashdot at one point, courtesy of the court system and none of that information was in there.

    What you actually care about is protecting your information from people like me. To do that is simple. Click the arrow next to Home while logged into your freshly minted account. Then click Privacy Settings.

    Now edit Ads, Apps and Websites. Then click "Turn off your ability to use apps, plugins, and websites on and off Facebook. After you turn this off, we will not store information about you when you use apps or websites off Facebook." Set "Old versions of Facebook for mobile" to Only Me. Click Edit Settings next to "How people bring your info to apps they use" and uncheck everything. Disable Instant Personalization. With all of this in place, you become nearly invisible to my code. The most I can ever see is your name and Facebook ID and you may occasionally show up as a friend of someone who uses my Facebook app.

    Since you're presumably still paranoid, let's also prevent people from directly interacting with your timeline. Back in Privacy, click Timeline and Tagging. Remember that "Only Me" is under Custom, so lock that bad boy down.

    Presto, you're about as private as they come. And if you follow Slashdot, you'll quickly know when it's time to revisit these settings because Facebook has made further changes.

    1. Re:Paranoia from ignorance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, thanks very much for this. I'm in a similar position to that of the original poster: I have a FB account for my business, mainly so as to avoid confusion by keeping anyone else from grabbing the same name. (It's not like I'd ever want to post to the damn thing.)

      I do have to wonder about something, though. You say you make your living extracting information from FB. I realize you have to eat and all that, but... why do you do what you do? You're clearly intelligent and articulate, you can no doubt argue the anti-FB side of the privacy debate as well as I can, and you shouldn't have any trouble finding a better job. Why continue to (help FB to) make the world a worse place?

  33. Step 1. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Add Missy MWAC as a friend.

    No, seriously, you should add her as a friend if you are doing any freelance photography. So many people come into the freelance photography business every day that it is almost ridiculous. This is because there is an industry of "Rockstar Photographers" that do nothing but sell stuff to the new photographers. Then, the new photographers get into the workshops, actions and gear and eventually get out of it a few months later. Some last a whole year, but there is a high attrition rate. Just as fast as they appear.

    You don't know what you don't know, and it is easy to wash out. However, Missy MWAC sarcastically pokes fun of the newbie mistakes, and will keep you from making the mistakes.

    Step 2. Make an account on a non-facebook social media. Facebook likes don't translate into clients, and most of the pages with thousands of like are only liked by other photographers, and not people interested in photography services. If someone is going to refer your photography services via facebook, they can share your web page or other social media page.

    Just remember, Facebook is for you to network with other photographers, Pinterest is for you to network with potential wedding or maternity clients, 500px is for you to network with commercial clients, and tumblr is for you to network with editorial and fashion clients. Just remember, if other photographers are commenting, sharing or liking your work, then you are doing it wrong. You need to get in front of possible clients.

  34. correction by stooo · · Score: 1

    "However, I'm beginning to look into making money through various means on the side, one of them being pornography/videography. With these mediums, being seen is critically important"

    Corrected the sentence for you :)

    --
    aaaaaaa
    1. Re:correction by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      "However, I'm beginning to look into making money through various means on the side, one of them being pornography/videography. With these mediums, being seen is critically important"

      Funny you should mention this....I have a friend that used to be a bouncer for many of the strip clubs in the Quarter...and he's lining me up a bunch of strippers that need publicity shots, that should make for some interesting shoots!!

      :)

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  35. Business vs Private by tigersha · · Score: 1

    The privacy needs of a business and the privacy needs of a private individual are polar opposites.

    Individuals usually want to remain hidden to the general public but not to their circle of friends.
    A business usually wants maximum exposure to attract customers. That is the whole idea of advertising.

    --
    The dangers of excessive individualism are nothing compared to the oppressiveness of excessive collectivism
    1. Re:Business vs Private by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Businesses only want to hide stuff from tax administrations.

  36. Yes it is worth it by thewolfkin · · Score: 1

    basically yes. If you segregate everything business related. Run management thru a separate browser. Maybe make Opera your business browser if you're not already using it. Set to wipe on shut down or whatever. Then any privacy concerns should be minimized. Building a respectable small business used to be so much harder and nowadays the only reason it's still a viable option for so many people IS because of social networking. You're going to have to use it even if only minimally as a point of contact. people will want to facebook you rather than email you. it's weird like that.

    --
    Just another second banana
  37. How much does it *really* help? by bradley13 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I see lots of businesses investing in Facebook and Twitter. This is driven by the marketing departments, and especially the younger staff that wants to prove something. Maybe I'm an old geezer, but I am not convinced - in the businesses I am familiar with, I haven't seen any sort of believable results, and the marketing departments can't produce any numbers, only "trust us, we know what we're doing".

    Has anyone seen actual, solid numbers from any business that prove that these marketing channels were worth the investment? If so, for what type of business?

    --
    Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
    1. Re:How much does it *really* help? by mitchy · · Score: 1

      I remember reading that advertisers and brands were getting a paltry 5% return on Facebook campaigns. I cannot take that any further without more data, but it would appear to me that "facebook for business" is no better than groupon (and should be avoided unless you like getting bulldozed by a short-lived stampede of cheapskates).

      That said, YMMV obviously based on your revenue model, which is what should be driving your decision making process when it comes to business development.

      --
      "The mind is a terrible thing to, um, uh, oh bollocks." -- Me
    2. Re:How much does it *really* help? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In online advertising terms a 5% return is quite good, normally they target for 1-2% in regular banner advertising. Snailmail flyers are not much different.
      Though sometimes the return on advertising in not measurable, for example when the target is for brand recognition, and the idea is that you are just wanting views and not conversions per se. It is also difficult to measure the value of these views.

      *Disclaimer: I have been contracted by mainstream advertisers so I have a bit of insight into the business but I do not condone their practices, they should all curl up and die IMHO. Evil fuckers.

    3. Re:How much does it *really* help? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A 5% return rate for advertising in general across all media types is considered fairly decent though not as spectacular as a 10% return rate.

    4. Re:How much does it *really* help? by asylumx · · Score: 1

      Has anyone seen actual, solid numbers from any business that prove that these marketing channels were worth the investment? If so, for what type of business?

      http://www.zynga.com/

    5. Re:How much does it *really* help? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A 5% return rate for advertising in general across all media types is considered fairly decent though not as spectacular as a 10% return rate.

      I've heard that a 15% return rate is even better than a 10% return rate, but I can't remember where I heard this, so YMMV.

    6. Re:How much does it *really* help? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the marketing departments can't produce any numbers, only "trust us, we know what we're doing".

      Marketing, in general, is a horrid cesspool of pseudo-science. It's that way everywhere.

  38. Vanilla by stenvar · · Score: 1

    You still "get reported", in the form of your IP address and browser identity, even if you're logged out.

  39. It's worse than you think by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am forced to maintain the facebook page (included in my job responsibilities) for work but do not have a personal account. I'm still at risk and sometimes I work from home.

    Here are addons for Firefox that I would recommend:

    RequestPolicy (HIGHLY recommended!)
    Increases your browsing privacy, security, and speed by giving you control over cross-site requests
    https://addons.mozilla.org/en-Us/firefox/addon/requestpolicy/

    Facebook, Google, or Twitter Disconnect
    Don’t let Facebook, Google, or Twitter follow you around the web
    (Be aware thant the Google Disconnect addon will prevent embedded youtube videos from showing up)
    https://disconnect.me/tools

    Ghostery
    Protect your privacy. See who's tracking your web browsing and block them
    https://addons.mozilla.org/en-Us/firefox/addon/ghostery/?src=search

    Use a HOSTS file to block ads, banners, 3rd party Cookies, 3rd party page counters, web bugs, and hijackers
    http://winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.htm

    The sad truth is that you are tracked every time a youtube video is in a page or a graphic image is displayed from other sites. You don't even realize how much you are being tracked until you understand how many cross-site requests there are that do NOT use java script (that means that NoScript won't help you there).

    And really, nothing is going to help you with your ISP tracking every URL you go to in any browser - unless you use Tor. And don't think for a moment that companies like Time Warner Cable or Verizon are on your side.

    But that doesn't mean you shouldn't fight for privacy. It's just a shame that so many mindless idiots really don't care.

  40. I was a stauch advocate.. by msobkow · · Score: 2

    The article reads as "I was a staunch advocate for privacy until I realized I could make money by selling my soul."

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    1. Re:I was a stauch advocate.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can you further elucidate how you came up with that interpretation for those of us who have trouble interpreting hyperbole, sarcasm, unstated implications?

  41. Business Stand Point by lipanitech · · Score: 1

    If you want keep yourself hidden from the world on social media it's not going to work out. I own a computer business and online store I have enjoyed a great deal of success but I am the public face of the company. Just the way being a business owner is people people want to see the boss whether it's in face or on internet. I am not saying share your life but you are your brand when it comes to business.

  42. You can get a Facebook Business ID by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And use it. All updates will show up with that ID, and, you can choose what types of personal information you wish to give out. You do not have to associate your real Facebook account with your business account. (Facebook likely will combine such data on their servers anyways, but, it won't show publicly for your business ID).

    I work for a mega-corp and this has worked out nicely. You probably see mega-corp brand daily anyways, but this gives one more medium for communication. Individual functions/departments can have their own Facebook IDs and post updates. No longer restricted to marketing drones, a lot of technical folks can coordinate through the Facebook ID owner for their business function and post updates that otherwise wouldn't reach as large of an audience.

    On a side note, if you work for mega-corp and you are looking for an internal solution for social media, do NOT use Facebook or Twitter. There are plenty of solutions for social media where data remains private, under your control, and employees still get the same look/feel as Facebook/Twtitter. Here's a Wikipedia link to get started: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_social_software

  43. Giving away ALL your personal information? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why would you post ALL your personal information to a social site? You only 'give away' as much as you post. If you have such little self control then perhaps it's best that you're not on those sites.

  44. If... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the OP doesn't think the government doesn't know a lot about their personal lives already...well, there's nothing we can do to keep them from that delusion.

  45. Doesn't FB claim owership of what you post? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So if that's the case, and you're a photographer who's livelihood is making money from taking photos. If you post examples on FB to help self promote, you must be willing to allow someone else to own your work that you post on their site.

    If you do create an account of this type, only put some photo stuff that you're willing to give away for free.

  46. FBI, here I am! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I really like this guy's idea: link

  47. Look up "Wiggy107" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Look up "Wiggy107" to see what could happen.
    Bad things CAN happen.
    Bad things are unlikely to happen to everyone.

    There is no way to predict if something bad will happen to you, specifically, based on online posts.

    I'm a reformed poster. I used to post all my detailed travels daily while I was out of town, including photos. I was stupid. I picked up a stalker from this. She ended up being fired from her job over her lack of self control. I hated going to work for about 6 months while I was being sexually harrassed and followed. I should point out that I am not particularly attractive. At the time, I was 40+ lbs overweight - obese.

    I am paranoid now. I'd rather not cause so much harm to another person and their family.

    1. Re:Look up "Wiggy107" by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      There is no way to predict if something bad will happen to you, specifically, based on online posts.

      Sure there is. If you are stupid, then bad things are more likely to happen. This guy advertised he was a rich gringo headed to a specific place. People looking for that profile took advantage of it. He also advertised that he doesn't lock his front door. Nobody took advantage of that. When you are stupid enough long enough, someone will take advantage of it. Use the tiniest amount of sense when posting and there shouldn't be a problem.

      I'm a reformed poster. I used to post all my detailed travels daily while I was out of town, including photos. I was stupid. I picked up a stalker from this. She ended up being fired from her job over her lack of self control. I hated going to work for about 6 months while I was being sexually harrassed and followed.

      You can't protect yourself from other's mental illnesses. Sure, advertising yourself online will increase the chances of an encounter, but is irrelevant to the illness of another.

  48. So let me get this straight.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're worried about privacy on SOCIAL networks? Really?

  49. Get a real site! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If your serious with business then you will need a REAL web presence, not a facebook account which is not taken seriously in many business circles, or customers.
    You can link through a social network but simply point to a real website. That way it not only allows you to customise exactly what you want to promote without restrictions, but also gives a professional appearance, and gives the impression your not just another "fly by nighter" or scam site. I personally won't deal with any major concern without either a bricks and mortar store, or a proper website. Cost for online presence these days is negligible for any business.
    Facebook, twitter Google plus, should be treated as additional tools NOT the primary focus.

  50. You may already be a winner! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    May as well jump in:
    "voluntarily give all my personal information away to corporate America"?
    You may have noticed:
    You are on a public network.
    Accessing a public site.
    Using a public I.P.
    Talking in a public forum.
    And your chip ID's make proxies and blockers irrelevant.

    You have already giving them what they want.
    May as well jump in with both feet :-)

  51. Sardaukar86 should be expert by now on 'em by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Considering how many times he has had his ass handed to him regarding hosts files. Ready everyone, because this IS hilarious:

    http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2579684&cid=38415816

    http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2356916&cid=36938204

    http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2579684&cid=38415774

    Sardaukar's profanity laden reaction at the end of that one tells the tale, lol, on his getting his behind beaten, here http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2579684&cid=38414888

    Nothing new that though. He's flipped out before too on that same note http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2579684&cid=38414922

    It is very amusing watching you constantly FAIL on hosts files Sardaukar86 and having your tantrums. Maintain your dignity boy, instead of having 'foaming @ the mouth' rages due to your screwing up.