Slashdot Mirror


Former Diplomat Slams Facebook For Inaction On Fake Pages

An anonymous reader writes "Former diplomat to Belgium and the European Union Brendan Nelson describes his astonishment at his inability to get any response from Facebook when trying to get a diplomatically damaging fake page taken down. The social network ignored official protestations from the department of foreign affairs and security agencies."

164 comments

  1. Points at Facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    Hideki!

    1. Re:Points at Facebook by flimflammer · · Score: 2

      No, Chii. That's Facebook.

    2. Re:Points at Facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Chiiiiiiiii...

  2. No one cares that you can't spin your own... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Self entitled shitpickles think their byzantine piles of dirt can dictate how history records their failings.

    1. Re:No one cares that you can't spin your own... by BrokenHalo · · Score: 1

      ...can dictate how history records their failings

      If Facebook is our history, then we're even more fucked than I thought. I want no part of it. Although I have a number of friends and relations who occasionally badger me to get a facebook page, I am militantly resisting.

      And I got so fucking tired of just about every website being cluttered with those stupid facebook and twitter buttons, I've now added all social media to my Adblock filters. (Apparently there's an Antisocial plugin that does the same thing if you're a Firefox user.) It makes the world a much cleaner place.

  3. Lame summery by Peter+H.S. · · Score: 3, Informative

    The flame baiting, lame summery tries to make it looks like some evil diplomat tries to censor some facebook pages. But as the TFA says, this is about an imposter who has assumed a diplomats name on a fake facebook account and now post fake posts.

    1. Re:Lame summery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't get that impression from this summary.

    2. Re:Lame summery by ThePeices · · Score: 2

      Just like to confirm that I also do not get this impression from the summary.

      In fact, my impression was exactly as described in TFA.

    3. Re:Lame summery by mjwx · · Score: 1

      The flame baiting, lame summery tries to make it looks like some evil diplomat tries to censor some facebook pages. But as the TFA says, this is about an imposter who has assumed a diplomats name on a fake facebook account and now post fake posts.

      Brendan is a common Australian first name.
      Nelson is a common Australian last name.

      I'd be surprised if there weren't a few Brendan Nelson's in Australia. Now if you called yourself Minister Brendan Nelson or Ambassador Brendan Nelson then we have an issue.

      So it seems that the real Ambassador Nelson was trying to get an impostor Ambassador Nelson shut down.

      Fake Brendan Nelson is also not a problem. We had a Fake Stephen Conroy (Stephen Conroy is the current Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy (and the ministry of excessively, needlessly and obnoxiously long ministry names) who had no problems, even when it was revealed that the person behind Fake Stephen Conroy worked for our largest Telco.

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

      Nah. Got more of a, "See... Facebook is going to start a war because they love money so much and they're so evils."

      To which I say, "Piss off."

    5. Re:Lame summery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd call it springy, it's a little early to be summery.

    6. Re:Lame summery by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But as the TFA says, this is about an imposter who has assumed a diplomats name on a fake facebook account and now post fake posts.

      So? Facebook allows multiple accounts with the same name. There is no reason to close the imposter account (other than it being against Facebook's TOS, but that's not the diplomats issue). The diplomat has no basis or standing to make the request.

      In what world is a facebook page going to be "diplomatically damaging"? He should go pound some sand.

    7. Re:Lame summery by anubi · · Score: 1

      Sounds like the same conundrum Microsoft was in regarding Mike Rowe, except this time there is not only exact name spellings involved but also a bit of acrimony.

      --
      "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]

    8. Re:Lame summery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I checked earlier today. There were two public accounts with his name and photo in the profile. They had similar descriptions of him. They were not obvious fake accounts from looking at the profiles. I didn't look at the posts though.

    9. Re:Lame summery by Joce640k · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I demand special privileges, dammit! I'm a special human being.

      --
      No sig today...
    10. Re:Lame summery by StoneyMahoney · · Score: 2

      I think someone skimmed the summary and skipped over the word "fake".

    11. Re:Lame summery by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      yeah let's ban kim jong il blog.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    12. Re:Lame summery by gsslay · · Score: 1

      They were not obvious fake accounts

      Well that's kind of the point. If they were obvious fakes he maybe wouldn't be so concerned. If you want to pose as someone else in facebook and lace it with false statements, you don't go full out and put a stupid profile photo up and lead with the description "i am a moron".

    13. Re:Lame summery by flyneye · · Score: 1

      The inverse of the story is that Facebook has it's head up it's ass, as usual.
      This story is just a dressed up way of telling us what we already know.
      Nothing NEW to see here, move along...

      --
      *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
    14. Re:Lame summery by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 1

      That's not really fair. If someone impersonated YOU on Facebook, you would certainly want their account suspended. The only reason "special" comes into play is it makes it more likely someone will impersonate/parody you if you're "special".

    15. Re:Lame summery by glop · · Score: 2

      Errr, actually. Facebook says they want to enforce a real name policy.
      They don't want me to join as 'glop' (which by the way is not the English word but what a funny comic book character says to mean 'OK'. He says 'Pas glop' when it's no good).
      So if Facebook cares about real names, it's quite surprising that they would not react to a complaint that somebody is using somebody's name. That's definitely more detrimental to Facebook's professed goals than letting me join as 'glop'.

      So I really don't think the guy is expecting anything special. Just what Facebook said they were doing.

    16. Re:Lame summery by tqk · · Score: 1

      If someone impersonated YOU on Facebook, you would certainly want their account suspended.

      Yeah, about as much as I'd want the head of that guy who wrote something obnoxious about me with a magic marker on the walls of some public pay toilet. Meaning, not much. I can't wait for FB and Twitter to implode. They've both had far too long a run for what they're really worth.

      --
      "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
    17. Re:Lame summery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      Then you need to work on your reading comprehension. The summary makes a point of calling it a "diplomatically damaging" page, not just a fake page, and makes sure to mention the involvement of a couple government agencies to boot. The actual article isn't even focused on that story, it's just using it as a lead-in. The actual article is about this diplomat who is basically shunning social media and crying about the good old days of pen and paper. The newspaper which ran the story never even asked Facebook for an official comment.
      In short, the criticism is valid.

    18. Re:Lame summery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In what world is a facebook page going to be "diplomatically damaging"? He should go pound some sand.

      I work for IT in a large metropolitan church and usually 3 to 4 times per year we have to go to Facebook and rarely twitter, with our pastor's ID and birth certificate and jump through a thousand hoops to get fake pages in his name and the church's name taken down because they post inaccurate info about the church, libel, or defame the church in some way publicly. It is a hassle and it is definitely damaging. So when I see a story like this one, it makes perfect sense. Facebook definitely doesn't make it easy to ensure you are who you say you are and makes it even harder to prove someone pretending to be you is NOT you.

      Just my own 2 cents, I think facebook, twitter, myspace and whatever other social media has popped up in the last 5-10 years is the scourge of the earth. I hate it with a passion but understand it is the new normal. NOBODY's life is so important that the rest of the world needs to know about it every second of the day.

    19. Re:Lame summery by MysteriousPreacher · · Score: 1

      That was my first impression. It's mentioned that this concerns *fake* pages, yet it could be made way clearer by having a slightly more detailed summary.

      Summaries don't have to be written fit on a post-it note.

      --
      -- Using the preview button since 2005
    20. Re:Lame summery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go away Scientologist! Xenu reigns supreme!

    21. Re:Lame summery by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      The antidote to unpopular free speech is more free speech. He could simply publicize the fact that he has some online imposters. As long as people in general realize that imposters can and do exist, I don't see the harm.

    22. Re:Lame summery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What, you mean the same world that treats a Twitter post as real news which has an affect on the stock market? That world?

  4. I agree with the man by Camembert · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I read through the article. I must say that I sympathise with him - he sees technology as something that should support life, not something that is pervasive, like people non-stop updating FB or twitter accounts. I also think that there could be a better authentication system at FB.

    1. Re:I agree with the man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As a former diplomat he neither has power or influence and theres no profit in Facebook helping so like an ordinary person he is screwed.

    2. Re:I agree with the man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hopefully as a former diplomat he still have friends in high places. He tried the straightforward approach and it didn't work. Perhaps making a few calls, and having all of Facebook's employees in Belgium (assuming they have any) arrested, might get their attention.

      Is that abuse of power? Well, isn't what Facebook is doing (or not doing) also abuse of power?

    3. Re:I agree with the man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh for chrissake. The diplomatically damaging fake facebook profile??

      Pull the other one.

      Pick up a goddamn phone and call whoever you're worried about. Jesus, I should be an ambassador.

    4. Re:I agree with the man by girlintraining · · Score: 4, Informative

      I also think that there could be a better authentication system at FB.

      We'll think about this while taking our fourth shower of wealth in our gold-plated bathtub. In the meantime, did you know you can promote a customer service inquiry by paying only an additional $3.99?

      Seriously dude, you're the product, not the customer. Who cares what you think? You've already given us all your personal data, what does it matter?

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    5. Re:I agree with the man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The best authentication system for FB would be a power blackout on all their (invasive) servers. I'm an FB widower and I hate Zuck and his gang.

    6. Re:I agree with the man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Facebook doesn't have the staff to take complaints from a billion users. It has less than 5000 employees. So it would be abuse of lack of power? They make a few dollars per account per year. 1 15 min phone call wipes out any chance of making a profit from an account.

    7. Re:I agree with the man by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      Facebook is located in California and here in California impersonating somebody online without their permission is now a crime punishable by a $1000 fine or up to a year in jail. It also creates an opportunity, independent of any other civil remedies which may also be available, to sue for injunctive relief (removal of Facebook page) and compensatory damages. At the very least this law could probably be used to get Facebook to remove the page for the price of a California attorney writing them a letter requesting that they do so and citing the statute.

    8. Re:I agree with the man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More specifically, knowing it's false, is it libel to publish it in that part of Europe?

    9. Re:I agree with the man by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      This guy isn't just anybody, he's a former Belgian ambassador. Not sure if Belgium has a consolate in Los Angeles, but surely he can convince the Belgian embassy in Washington DC to make a few phone calls or perhaps send them a certified letter on official letterhead asking them to kindly remove the offending pages. Facebook would do well not to ignore consular requests when made concerning such matters.

    10. Re:I agree with the man by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 5, Funny

      This guy isn't just anybody, he's a former Belgian ambassador.

      Out of the way you peons, it the FORMER BELGIAN AMBASSADOR!

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    11. Re:I agree with the man by CodeBuster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Correction. He was appointed as ambassador to Belgium, Luxembourg, the European Union, and NATO by Austria and Austria does indeed have a consulate office in Los Angeles. From TFA he sounds like an intelligent and well educated man who's made a reasonable request. Saying things about someone online is one thing, but impersonating them is quite another. Perhaps after all of this Facebook can spare this gentlemen a few moments of their time. I especially liked his advice about dashing off messages while you're angry. I know that I've done it before, without much good coming of it, and so have many of us here on Slashdot. I suppose you learn a thing or two about polite conduct being a diplomat.

    12. Re:I agree with the man by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      Sigh, it's definitely time to throw in the towel when the words start blurring together on your screen. That would be Australia for the double bogey to finish twenty over par. Thank you.

    13. Re:I agree with the man by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1

      Facebook also probably has decent lawyers who can point out the reason for the law is to stop actual fraudulent impersonation, like trying to get money from people under false pretenses. Outside of that, the first amendment provides good protection, especially if the intent is to parody Nelson.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    14. Re:I agree with the man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My dick is less interesting than FB and I hate Zuck and his gang.

      TFTFY.

    15. Re:I agree with the man by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that made smile too. Well played sir, well played indeed.

    16. Re:I agree with the man by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      Except it isn't quite like a political cartoon or a caricature because on Facebook it may not be immediately obvious that this isn't really him. There isn't somebody jumping out from behind his picture and saying, "Live from New York it's Saturday Night!". I'll admit that I haven't taken the time to examine the page in question, but even if it is a parody is this really the sort of thing that Facebook wants on their site? They're in the business of delivering "real" people, not parodies of real people, to paying advertisers. The customers are the advertisers, not the users, and Facebook is first and foremost a business or at lease their shareholders hope that it is.

    17. Re:I agree with the man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Former Belgian Ambassador is his claim to fame? He was the Australian Minister of Defence for a while, not to mention Leader of the Opposition

    18. Re:I agree with the man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      While what you say is accurate it is also completely irrelevant. You don't accept such abusive behaviour from a company simply because the company adopted a model that is too cheap to provide adequate support to address the problem. As a person you have certain rights and a company saying it doesn't have the staff to stop its assets from abusing your rights is facebooks problem, not the persons. Facebook needs to face some strict government crackdowns or fines to get them to address this type of problem better, it is simply not acceptable.

    19. Re:I agree with the man by oldhack · · Score: 1

      Out of the way you peons, it the FORMER BELGIAN AMBASSADOR!

      What's with the profanity? This is a family website.

      --
      Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
    20. Re:I agree with the man by rmstar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Facebook doesn't have the staff to take complaints from a billion users. It has less than 5000 employees. So it would be abuse of lack of power? They make a few dollars per account per year. 1 15 min phone call wipes out any chance of making a profit from an account.

      So they get to make that profit but without any responsibility? That can't work.

      If they can't do it properly they should not be doing it at all.

    21. Re:I agree with the man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What? Kangaroos cannot wear lederhosen? Discrimination!!!

    22. Re:I agree with the man by tibit · · Score: 1

      Facebook does quite well doing just the opposite, thank you very much.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    23. Re:I agree with the man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol

    24. Re:I agree with the man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      actualy he's a former australian ambassador, that was posted in Belgium

    25. Re:I agree with the man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I nominate this post to be included in the Slashdot QOTD rotation.

    26. Re:I agree with the man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the meantime, did you know you can promote a customer service inquiry by paying only an additional $3.99?

      The sad part is that this would be the fastest selling, most profitable product Facebook could ever release.

    27. Re:I agree with the man by PhxBlue · · Score: 1

      So they get to make that profit but without any responsibility? That can't work.

      Welcome to the United States of Republica. You must be new here!

      --
      !#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
    28. Re:I agree with the man by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      People have the right to stop people from parodying them? Sure, I guess if you live in China or in the middle east. Facebook is offering a free service. If you don't like it then don't use it. The problem is not Facebook. The problem is the unwarranted sense of entitlement people have.

      Freedom of speech is more important than people's feelings.

    29. Re:I agree with the man by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      Facebook no doubt doesn't want parodies on their site. This doesn't mean that they would welcome legal requirements to eliminate all parodies and having their mistakes punished with fines.

    30. Re:I agree with the man by iamagloworm · · Score: 1

      he's a low-life politician, not a career diplomat. these posts get given away to former cabinet members to keep them from causing trouble. best to ignore him and whatever facebook pages contain his name.

    31. Re:I agree with the man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So they get to make that profit but without any responsibility? That can't work.

      Why? It's what we've had for decades, and America is founded on the principle that you should get profit without responsibility ... it's practically the Republican platform.

      If they can't do it properly they should not be doing it at all.

      Oh, they're doing it 'properly' all right. They make the money, and aren't accountable to anybody, and if they don't like a law they kick into the election campaigns to buy what they want.

      This is the fucking America Dream. Unbridled and unregulated Capitalism, and if you can't swim with the sharks, you get to be the chum.

    32. Re:I agree with the man by BrokenHalo · · Score: 1

      What? Kangaroos cannot wear lederhosen?

      They do in South Australia. ;-)

    33. Re:I agree with the man by BrokenHalo · · Score: 1

      Freedom of speech is more important than people's feelings.

      And given that Brendan Nelson is a politician who has been handed a cushy sinecure to keep him in caviar and champers for the rest of his life, he should be sufficiently thick-skinned to just suck it up. He gets no sympathy from me.

    34. Re:I agree with the man by JeremyWH · · Score: 1

      Imagine if you could see what the owner of the account looked like.. Gestya suggests you can. Then all you need to do is to see if they look like a robot or a real person!

    35. Re:I agree with the man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you read the article, the issue occurred while he was the ambassador. Go on, have a read and a rethink

    36. Re:I agree with the man by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

      If you read the article, the issue occurred while he was the ambassador. Go on, have a read and a rethink

      OK,,,

      Out of the way you peons, it's the BELGIAN AMBASSADOR!

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
  5. The net of lies by blarkon · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Vernor Vinge called it in his Hugo winning book "A Fire Upon The Deep" - where the galactic net was known as the "net of lies". It was probably in Facebook's interest to do something about an account that wasn't clearly a parody as having a robust way of dealing with fake accounts engenders trust that accounts that appear to be from important/influential people and organizations are actually real. The follow on from Facebook's inaction is that those people/organizations that are influential/important will be less likely to use Facebook to disperse their message/propaganda.

    1. Re:The net of lies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hexapodia as the key insight.

  6. Cybersquatting by DaveAtFraud · · Score: 2

    I wonder if the cybersquatting laws are written (or interpreted) so narrowly that he couldn't hit the imposter that way. It may not be a domain name; it's his name and identity.

    Cheers,
    Dave

    --
    They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.
    Ben
  7. I'm not sure what his complaint is by Adult+film+producer · · Score: 1, Troll

    I crafted a name for facebook that would pass it's name filters but would protect my anonymity and I'm not ashamed to say it. I could have picked something as simple as John Smith but either way my identity remains protected. I also have 5 other facebook accounts that I use with vpn proxies... none of them are "fake" .. they just use a different name but they all reflect my same opinion. If his feelings are hurt.. well, too bad. Suck it up. My feelings have been hurt many times.

    1. Re:I'm not sure what his complaint is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why?

      Really, I can get the point of having one fake account to keep in touch with friends, although facebook will likely figure out your real name and everything soon enough based on the friends.

      Having several fake accounts to express your opinion just seems to be trying to make your opinion seem important. To start, its against their terms of agreement, however shitty those are, but it also doesn't seem to serve any "good" purpose. I really can't think of a good reason to do this, and I mean good as in the ethical sense. It would probably be nice to try and spread false information or whatever, but it seems a shitty way to do good things.

    2. Re:I'm not sure what his complaint is by Adult+film+producer · · Score: 0

      and I should care about the T&A of facebook? Go ahead and be tracked by facefuck if you want to so willingly.

    3. Re:I'm not sure what his complaint is by ThePeices · · Score: 2

      So you had your feelings hurt once, therefore he should be OK with having his name hijacked and diplomatically damaging posts posted under his name.

      Thats some mighty impressive logic and deductive reasoning you have used there sir.

      Color me like, totally impressed dude.

    4. Re:I'm not sure what his complaint is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I am not saying you should, although when you are using their service, maybe you should. Its not as if you aren't tracked now, hell, you are tracked 5 times now. If you use them all separately, on separate locations and never make a mistake, I guess you could probably make facebook believe there are 5 different people there. However, likely, they will all be linked, things like forgetting to log out or having multiple friends in common between each account.

      If you really dislike their service this much, and you really don't want to be tracked, why use them? Sure, nearly everybody else does, but not everybody, its quite possible to live without facebook, those obscure friends from years ago you wouldn't even talk to again without facebook? Maybe you really don't want to talk with them all that much if you can't do it without facebook.
      You don't want to sell your soul to the devil but hey, if we split my soul in 5 and kinda fake as if its not really my soul, it isn't all that wrong. Sure he still gets the whole soul, but there is a chance he can't put them all together and link them to me. And yeah, I lost my soul to him, but there is a chance he doesn't know it, which doesn't really matter all that much on second thought.
      If your principle is that you really don't want facebook to track you, the right way would be to not use facebook and if all possible ,block it as much as you can. If you are still going to allow them some tracking with the hope they cant puzzle together that its you, your principle really isn't worth all that much.

    5. Re:I'm not sure what his complaint is by Adult+film+producer · · Score: 1

      Not once... like I said, many times.. and it doesn't bother me personally. I just prefer to react to those comments in a different way.

    6. Re:I'm not sure what his complaint is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why?

      The adult films he produces may well be illegal, or something else about his operation is. By running five Facebook accounts under false names via vpn proxies, he only loses touch with 20% of his customers if he has to cut one loose due to law enforcement activities. Works for drug dealers too.

    7. Re:I'm not sure what his complaint is by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      If your principle is that you really don't want facebook to track you, the right way would be to not use facebook and if all possible ,block it as much as you can. If you are still going to allow them some tracking with the hope they cant puzzle together that its you, your principle really isn't worth all that much.

      Also, you need to not have any friends who use facebook, or you'll get a "shadow account" created for you if you don't sign up....

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    8. Re:I'm not sure what his complaint is by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1

      Just because TFS says the posts were diplomatically damaging doesn't make it the truth. It's most likely satire/parody that got under his skin because it had too much truth to it.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    9. Re:I'm not sure what his complaint is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why?

      It was the only way he could get five FB friends.

    10. Re:I'm not sure what his complaint is by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      I hate facebook. I refused to get a facebook account until last year. A friend of mine finally convinced me to get one because he was tired of sending group messages and needing to email me separately. Fine, I can understand that. I really don't want a bunch of random people finding me and trying to be my friend, so I made a fake account. All my real friends and family that I want to talk to know it's me, and everyone else has no idea. It's the best of both worlds.

  8. Define "Fake Post" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Because if it's parody or satire I'm not on his side. If it is someone literally impersonating him that's a different story.

    1. Re:Define "Fake Post" by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Informative

      If it is someone literally impersonating him that's a different story.

      It is someone literally impersonating him.

    2. Re:Define "Fake Post" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      There are two public accounts under his name with his face in the profile. Looks like a ligit complaint. Not sure why he thinks being a diplomat would give him special sway with Facebook though. Facebook is a low margin business that survives by not having much staff. Complaining to Facebook is complaining to a software program.

    3. Re:Define "Fake Post" by hjf · · Score: 5, Informative

      No difference for them. Facebook doesn't care because all they care about is serving ads. More pages=more ads.

      I had a problem a couple months ago. I have a business and a business page on facebook with nearly 2500 fans. I worked years to get it to where it is now. One day, suddenly, a fake profile appears, using all of my images, texts, etc... all except the prices: he claimed everything was half of what i posted on my true page. It took "orders" (send your money and i'll send your order).

      A couple of customers alerted me. So i asked all my facebook friends AND my customers to report the profile. It was still there for days, still active, friending more and more people. People even started coming into my shop asking and getting mad because "on facebook you told me half this price!" and i had to explain that it was a fake profile (mad people don't reason - they went away angry at ME!). Eventually I confronted the fake profile, told him everything i knew, and told him i had already contacted the police. Minutes later the profile was inactive.

      It wasn't facebook who deactivated it. I had to do it. Facebook NEVER gave a shit. I'm a facebook CUSTOMER (because I PAY THEM REAL LIFE MONEY FOR ADVERTISING). And I didn't get a phone number, mail address or anything. Just a useless contact form directed straight to /dev/null.

      Facebook has people checking "flagged" things - you will never see porn on fb because they kill that kind of content within minutes. But when it comes "edge cases" like mine, it's a big fuck from them.

      Do i still work with them? Yes. I have no other choice. I spent months developing a website. One that worked and that I kept updated. For 10 visits a week vs facebook page's ~500 visitors/mo. 5x that if i pay for ads. Right now, as of 2013, facebook has become "the internet". It has already killed Windows Live Messenger (THE IM system for spanish-speaking people).

      Facebook doesn't give a fuck about business pages either. They don't offer a "chat" option for pages (people actually want to chat. they don't want to "send a message", but the stupid antisocial asperger-syndrome driven facebook developer doesn't understand the power of "live chat with a real person"). They don't offer an option to "schedule" album posts. And to make things worse: they force you to pay now. Your reach will be minimal if people haven't added you to their "interest lists", and for 90% of your customers, your post won't appear unless you pay $5 to promote it for 3 days (which is an outrageous amount considering that, to keep your page "alive", you need to post at least once a day). I don't want to pay $150/mo to facebook - sorry.

    4. Re:Define "Fake Post" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL

    5. Re:Define "Fake Post" by EuclideanSilence · · Score: 1

      Sounds like an actual genuine legal problem if someone is misrepresenting your prices. Why didn't you ask a lawyer?

      Not to mention, when your argument to Facebook is "hey I'm real and he's fake", how are they to know you are telling the truth? What if the other page had made the claim first? They aren't going to hire a detective to investigate every claim just because you paid for some ads. God knows how many requests they get from angry teenagers, businesses with non-unique names, trolls behind proxies, etc.

      I suspect their policy is something along the lines of "respond to legal requests and to hell with everyone else" out of necessity. It's somewhat hard to imagine that for identity arguments that they could do anything else. I don't have any love for Facebook, but what exactly were you hoping for?

    6. Re:Define "Fake Post" by dingen · · Score: 1

      Facebook is a low margin business that survives by not having much staff. Complaining to Facebook is complaining to a software program.

      In 2012 Facebook had 4,619 employees. I'm sure they have more now. Surely one of those people could answer mister Nelson's e-mails?

      --
      Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
    7. Re:Define "Fake Post" by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1

      You sure about that? We don't have much evidence from this article alone of the kinds of posts made. However, judging from most fake accounts of public figures on facebook, its probably pretty clearly fake.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    8. Re:Define "Fake Post" by cristiroma · · Score: 1

      Umm, let me think ... opening a case, like on PayPal? Where the two can confront each other? Scanned IDs? Hand written papers like certificate of birth is hard to fake. It's not like everyone is a fucking Photoshop guru. And if you provide a scan with high dpi, it will be really hard to fake. Not fool proof, but discouraging. And if you can't solve that, warn that police might be notified and consequences could be nasty.
      Even if you can't handle that, at least pretend you're trying. But they can't do anything about it, because this kind of work is conducted probably by some african vilagers. And moving anything in that direction would cut a slice from Zuckerberg's pie. Who would like that?

    9. Re:Define "Fake Post" by flimflammer · · Score: 1

      Facebook already has systems for determining if someone is who they say they are, so hiring a detective isn't necessary for this sort of identification dispute. They also explicitly ask the public at large to report suspicious accounts exactly like those in grandparents post. All things considered, they should have looked into it, because they ask us to tell them when it happens.

    10. Re:Define "Fake Post" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd bet that most of those people are server or database admins, not customer service monkeys

    11. Re:Define "Fake Post" by dingen · · Score: 1

      And who's fault is that? Here's a hint: not mister Brendan Nelson's.

      And by the way, I don't think most of Facebook's employees are technical staff at all, they're probably mostly sales people. All over the world Facebook has opened offices to get local businesses to advertise on their website. I think most of Facebook's people work in one of those.

      --
      Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
    12. Re:Define "Fake Post" by xelah · · Score: 1

      Complaining to Facebook is complaining to a software program.

      Ah, so they outsource their call centre, too?

      I can't help thinking that if a company makes money out of publishing large amounts of known false information which is damaging to others, then 'oh, but that's not how our business works' is not a legitimate response to being challenged. If your business model doesn't work without doing this, then you should either fix it by finding an appropriate mechanism to deal with this, or shut yourself down (or you should get shut down by appropriate laws and the courts). Being a household name isn't an excuse for acting like a twat.

      Hmm, I wonder how they cope with the German laws on service providers providing their users with a way to communicate with them which were referenced on slashdot recently...(not that this necessarily would help him, as he's not one of their users).

    13. Re:Define "Fake Post" by ModernGeek · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The solution to this is that all the legitimate businesses need to erase their presence on Facebook, and leave only the scammers on the site. Facebook has the attitude that we need them more than they need us. Legitimate business needs to move back to the World Wide Web. The problem of social media should be solved through some sort of de-centralized protocol such as e-mail, and certificate authorities should solve the problem of identification.

      --
      Sig: I stole this sig.
    14. Re:Define "Fake Post" by gmack · · Score: 1

      Fat lot of good that reporting does. Last year someone cloned my aunt's account and sent everyone a message telling them to delete the real account from their friends list.

      Facebook eventually deleted the cloned account but absolutely refused to delete the account the scammer was using to reel people in. You would think that "AM ON FACEBOOK WORKING FOR THE GOVERNMENT" on his profile would have been a dead giveaway but Facebook couldn't be bothered..

    15. Re:Define "Fake Post" by hjf · · Score: 1

      Yes. A million points for you. But, not being a "fortune 500" company, I can't afford to do that.

    16. Re:Define "Fake Post" by hjf · · Score: 1

      Sounds like an actual genuine legal problem if someone is misrepresenting your prices. Why didn't you ask a lawyer?

      Because I'm in Argentina, and facebook is in the United States.
      Brands don't have "global" protection. If I register my trademark in Argentina, it's only valid in Argentina. (Wanna know a stupid thing about Argentina's trademark system? They require a legal address in Buenos Aires. I'm 1000km away from there, and I can't afford paying a lawyer to keep my trademark registered at his office). If my trademark was registered in the US, *maybe* I could have done something about it. Obviously this isn't the case.

      Not to mention, when your argument to Facebook is "hey I'm real and he's fake", how are they to know you are telling the truth?

      My facebook *PAGE* (page=business) has been online since 2009. This rogue facebook *PROFILE* (profile=person) was up for only a few days. This person used the photos on my page, and cropped the watermarks out of my images! The watermark was the url to my official page. It was very clear, to any non-retard, that this guy was a scam.

      I don't have any love for Facebook, but what exactly were you hoping for?

      An investigation, at least. Why do they put a "report" button, which tens of people clicked, reporting the profile as a fake, if they aren't going to do shit about it?
      Maybe I should have lied and report it as BIG BAD SINFUL PORN and that would have made it disappear in an instant. They claim they have people around the clock to wipe the dirty porn off their beautiful garden. How come they don't have something similar for this?

    17. Re:Define "Fake Post" by hjf · · Score: 1

      I tried to make my facebook page a facebook *place*. Seems the only way you can do this, is to use facebook places, check in to this place (to create it), then go to your page, find the place, claim ownership.
      After this, I got a facebook message asking me to scan the legal documents for my business and facebook profile, to show I really own this place.

      So yeah: anyone can create a business page, but it's a big issue to create a "facebook place" no one gives a fuck about.

    18. Re:Define "Fake Post" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I work for one of the top-grossing games on FB. We also have problems with fake official pages... And FB doesn't treat us any better.

    19. Re:Define "Fake Post" by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      The real problem seems to be that there is an unwarranted expectation by some that there are no fake facebook accounts and that anything said by someone with the same name on facebook is definitely what that person actually said.

      The solution to this problem is more fake facebook accounts so people realize that the internet is not to be trusted.

    20. Re:Define "Fake Post" by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      Exactly.

      If there is a bad movie in theaters, I have a right not to see that movie. I don't have a right to demand the movie be made better.

    21. Re:Define "Fake Post" by ModernGeek · · Score: 1

      A success of this would be to launch a campaign against Facebook. Every time we put a "Like us on Facebook" for sticker on a business, we are just making them stronger. The idea would be to lean more towards the "Find us on the web", and a smaller sticker detailing why.

      --
      Sig: I stole this sig.
    22. Re:Define "Fake Post" by hjf · · Score: 1

      For about 99.9% (with a 0.1% error margin) of the people, facebook *IS* the internet. Kids don't look at their email, don't have blogs, don't use IM anymore. They don't even pirate games (as they can play silly facebook games).
      Kids don't even google things anymore! How many "hey people do you know where i can find X / do you know how i can do Y" posts do you have in your feed? I have more than I'd like.
      Facebook doesn't even offer a decent search option. Facebook is the complete opposite of what the Internet was supposed to be. Yes, it's a communication medium but it's a closed one. And it's awfully scary how totalitarian it is. You can't customize ANYTHING on facebook. You are forced to use your real name. You are nagged to reveal data like what school you went to, or what city you were born in.
      But facebook is convenient. It's simple - the lowest common denominator. It doesn't require a powerful computer or a specific OS. You don't need to install anything to chat with your friends. It just works. And people are willing to give up everything for a little convenience.

      Hopefully, history will repeat itself. Facebook will be a fad. People will get bored with it. Just like my generation was addicted to MSN Messenger, this generation is addicted to FB. Something else will come sooner or later, and it will push FB into irrelevance, like FB has done with everything else. Like MSN pushed ICQ to irrelevance, and like ICQ did with IRC. (Change MSN/AIM/YIM/ICQ/QQ depending on where you lived), and like web forums killed usenet. FB is already riddled with spam. Ads are everywhere. Business tagging you in their ads (I know I do) is really annoying. (I don't even need to remind people if MySpace and other social networks that lived and failed)

      Facebook and to a worse extent, Google, don't understand one thing: People don't like being forced to buy shit. People don't like to be bombarded with ads. People are bored of searching for "something" and google turning the search into "Did you mean: where to buy something". I'm certain that spam will kill facebook. People will be bored of seeing nothing more than advertising in their newsfeed and they will move on to the next big thing.

      If we do some extrapolation, MSN messenger was born in 1999. No one knew about it until late 2001/early 2002. EVERYONE had at least 1 messenger account in 2004 (I remember working for an ISP. THE biggest problem was msn down. People didn't care about the web - they only wanted their chat). MSN was steadily popular until about 2008 when facebook chat started to gain traction. By 2009 kids were no longer using it. By 2010 you started to feel it empty. All along 2012, the only persons in my MSN list were my mom and dad. Until MS finally pulled the plug in 2013.

      I hope the same will happen to FB. No one had heard about it before 2006. People started using it in 2007. In 2008 everyone had an account and so far it's still in use. We'll have to deal with FB for a couple more years and then it will be a swift death. We can only hope...

  9. mod parent up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This (cybersquatting law application) is exactly right. Also, couldn't he call Mark Zuckerberg directly? He is a diplomat.

    1. Re:mod parent up by DaveAtFraud · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This (cybersquatting law application) is exactly right. Also, couldn't he call Mark Zuckerberg directly? He is a diplomat.

      He could try calling Zuckerburg directly but, as a guess, FB doesn't want to set a precedent for anyone of policing their content. OTOH, making Nelson get a court order means that FB doesn't have to judge (and be put in the position of having to judge) the veracity of anyone's page. It's a slippery slope and, if they're not careful, they could be held responsible for ensuring that no one is cyber-bullying, harassing someone, spreading hate or engaging in who knows what kind of politically incorrect behavior.

      Cheers,
      Dave

      --
      They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.
      Ben
    2. Re:mod parent up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I haven't written "Cheers, Dave" enough times in this thread, so allow me to repeat myself once again one more time some more. I'm just a douchebag that way.

      Cheers,
      Dave

  10. Former Politician by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Brendan Nelson is primarily a politician, not a diplomat. The highlights of his career include supporting the teaching of intelligent design as an alternative to evolution and gutting the academic independence of Australia's University/Science Research System.

    1. Re:Former Politician by Ignacio · · Score: 2

      Are you claiming that it's acceptable to impersonate a serial puppy murderer, but not someone that volunteers their time and money to save starving children in Elbonia?

    2. Re:Former Politician by Black+Parrot · · Score: 2

      Brendan Nelson is primarily a politician, not a diplomat. The highlights of his career include supporting the teaching of intelligent design as an alternative to evolution and gutting the academic independence of Australia's University/Science Research System.

      Fake scientist objects to fake diplomats?

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    3. Re:Former Politician by LukeWebber · · Score: 1

      Also, as head of the AMA, he opposed death with dignity laws. And as a doctor, he once denied his sick brother the same. The man's a dick.

    4. Re:Former Politician by stephanruby · · Score: 1

      Technically, diplomats _are_ politicians.

    5. Re:Former Politician by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      I don't care if people impersonate anybody on facebook. In fact I think lots of fake accounts serves a valuable purpose in society. It raises awareness that the internet can't be trusted. People need to be more skeptical.

  11. Cultural Differences by MarkvW · · Score: 3, Funny

    Free speech is just an absolute bitch, isn't it? We all approach it in different ways.

    1. Re:Cultural Differences by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, you think it entitles you to impersonate someone else, I think it entitles to speak in your own name to authority.

    2. Re:Cultural Differences by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      But wouldn't this be in the "fraud" territory and not "free speech"?

    3. Re:Cultural Differences by EuclideanSilence · · Score: 1

      What is your definition of freedom of speech? Mine is: no information may be made illegal to disseminate. By that definition, making identity theft illegal is not a violation of rights to freedom of speech. It's not the information that is illegal (who someone is) but rather the intent behind it (to steal or otherwise usurp someone's reputation).

      Some people confusion "X may not be made illegal" with "anything is legal as long as you are also doing X". Just because you are using speech does not mean that concurrent actions are or should be legal. A driver's license grants you legal right to drive on a road, but it doesn't mean you can drive over people. If you drive over someone you can't say "but I have a legal right to drive and my license proves that." You can drive all day long, but you are being arrested for hitting someone.

      You can talk about a person's identity all day long. But mens rea means that we just based on intent, not on superficial actions.

    4. Re:Cultural Differences by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      False attribution is not free speech. You can say what you wish, you can even say it anonymously, but you don't get to falsely claim I said something. That's not your right. There is no benefit to society to allow such behavior.

    5. Re:Cultural Differences by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What part of free speech protects identity theft, exactly?

    6. Re:Cultural Differences by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Defamation/fraud are not free speech.

    7. Re:Cultural Differences by iamagloworm · · Score: 1

      cultural difference of a dirt bag politician.

    8. Re:Cultural Differences by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      Rights are granted by governments. Different governments define different rights. The real question is not a right exists in some place and time, but whether it should exist. False attribution is probably not a good thing for society, but freedom of speech is. False attribution is certainly speech, and denial of this right is technically a limitation on free speech. We can either limit free speech, or simply encourage more speech to point out false attributions. I personally favor the latter approach. I think having a society where people are free to decide for themselves what is true (rather than a government), is much less susceptible to abuse.

  12. I doubt it's nefarious. by dead_user · · Score: 2

    They likely weren't even aware he tried to contact them until now. I doubt he ever actually spoke with anyone there. This smacks of melodrama.

    1. Re:I doubt it's nefarious. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      They likely weren't even aware he tried to contact them until now. I doubt he ever actually spoke with anyone there.

      Spoke with? Have you ever tried to get someone from Facebook on the phone? Good luck with that.

    2. Re:I doubt it's nefarious. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is your basis for assuming that, besides having a boner for Zuckerberg.

  13. $10,000 CHALLENGE? by tbird81 · · Score: 2

    Don't encourage him! We've already got APK/Jeremiah Cornelius complaining about impersonation every post.

    Next thing Brendan Nelson's going to be coming here, spamming "A corrupt facebook luser has infiltrated the liking system to downlike all my posts."

    1. Re:$10,000 CHALLENGE? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't encourage him! We've already got APK/Jeremiah Cornelius complaining about impersonation every post.

      Next thing Brendan Nelson's going to be coming here, spamming "A corrupt facebook luser has infiltrated the liking system to downlike all my posts."

      Wait, that's what we need. Somebody contact Michael Kristopiet. Let's see what happens when he and APK/Jeremiah Cornelius meet.

      Sorry, did I say "that's what we need"? I meant "that would be hilarious".

  14. Aww, too bad, go fuck yourself, 'kay? by pla · · Score: 0

    Anything "diplomatically damaging" can only mean "good for the rest of us mere humans".

    So...TFB! I don't use Facebook, but I'll support them on this issue until my blood runs down the street and into the gutter at the point of government bullets.

    1. Re:Aww, too bad, go fuck yourself, 'kay? by Aristos+Mazer · · Score: 1

      Did you read the article? It was someone impersonating a diplomat and encouraging problems between nations, which has this bad habit of leading to conflict of various kinds. That's what "diplomatically damaging" means. Free speech does not extend to impersonating someone and falsifying information.

    2. Re:Aww, too bad, go fuck yourself, 'kay? by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1

      Maybe I missed it, but all I saw were mentions of "pretty lame" comments about politicians within his own country. The posts were probably childish, asinine, and in no plausible way causing confusion for anyone remotely competent, and yet, I'd say there's a decent chance this account has been a better influence on Australian and international politics than the real McCoy.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    3. Re:Aww, too bad, go fuck yourself, 'kay? by flimflammer · · Score: 1

      Man, wouldn't it be great if only "remotely competent" people ever voted or anything like that!

    4. Re:Aww, too bad, go fuck yourself, 'kay? by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1

      It would be quite wonderful, as we'd have a much better signal to noise ratio in the political system. However, while I understand that some people are always going to be gullible, you have to draw the line somewhere. If you cater your standards to the lowest common denominator, all that will happen is that we'll engineer a better moron that requires even lower standards.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  15. The Social Network? by HeLLaCooL75 · · Score: 0

    Nelson: "...People you are speaking to need to know that they have your undivided attention..."
    Zuckerberg: ".. you have part of my attention..."

  16. No problem by Black+Parrot · · Score: 2

    Report it as a copyright violation and they'll take it right down.

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  17. Sorry, we're supposed to be mad? by nanotech · · Score: 2

    Mad because a government official cannot wield undue influence over the global, borderless Internet?

    Facebook treats all their users like shit, no reason this guy should be special. I agree it sucks for him, but it sucks just as much for the 13 year old whose classmates put up pages mocking him. I don't think you want it to be otherwise. Ideally they would always "do the right thing" but at least they are consistent in ignoring their users and don't play favourites.

    1. Re:Sorry, we're supposed to be mad? by flimflammer · · Score: 1

      We should be mad. Not because of who it is happening to this time but because it happens and they don't take as seriously as they should for anyone unless they're best pals with someone high up. This guy clearly wasn't high up enough to merit looking into. I deplore this sort of behavior. It reeks of the same crap you can find yourself in trouble with Google on YouTube. Whether or not your demerits or concerns are warranted or not, good luck ever getting the issue resolved with anyone at Google over it. Too much trust is placed in automated systems and it can really wreck someones livelihood should some kinks find their way to the surface.

    2. Re:Sorry, we're supposed to be mad? by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      I think facebook takes fake accounts far to seriously already. I think they should just allow anyone to make whatever accounts they want and post whatever they want.

  18. Former almost nobody - now is nobody by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Brendan Nelson is somewhat of a melodramatic idiot - known for such things as pretending to the press that he got into some life threatening situation when he was given a ride in a air force fighter jet - a pile of bullshit designed to inflate his ego at the expense of making the a pilot look incompetent.

    He made some very stupid choices as Australian defence minister against advice and they look very much like they were made to lick the boots of some corrupt people in the USA mixed up with defence contracts. The sea sprites were reconditioned Vietnam era helicopters (thus 40+ year old airframes), and none of them made it to sea after hundreds of millions were spent in the years before the project was scrapped. The torpedoes didn't fit our subs (thus an expensive modification was needed) and were no longer manufactured (with no plans to ever make another compatible with the launch equipment) - how stupid is it to sign up for that? The tanks were just about only for city driving as far as Australia goes, while they can go offroad they need to be followed by large fuel tankers. The JSF sillyness, he's not the only idiot that signed up there but it's also in the long list of ignoring advice and fucking up. In short, he was a guy way out of his depth that thought he had a thing to prove by acting as if he wasn't so he ignored advice and did a lot of stupid stuff. Not as bad as Rumsfeld's first effort in a similar role in the USA (destroyed what was left of military morale after Vietnam), but bad enough.

    To sum up, he was a party hack rewarded with a job he couldn't do but he did a bit of bootlicking and made a bit of noise. He would have done a lot more for his country by staying out of politics and continuing to work as a doctor instead of playing at other roles, then getting pensioned off into a petty sinecure as a diplomatic figurehead. He was no diplomat. He was a guy whose reward for making up the political numbers was an excuse to attend dinner parties in Europe while keeping somebody that could actually do it properly out of a job. There's no point trying to excuse it by saying that other parties or factions also give such rewards to useless pricks - I don't think useless cheerleaders should get such a reward either no matter what team they cheer for.

  19. Didn't China produce fake Facebook pages...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wasn't that a story awhile back / would seem to make this diplomat's concerns valid.

  20. FB is Evil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Come on. This is a company led by a highly manipulative narcissist and populated by same. In every aspect, from openess to transparency to honesty to *intent* this is a company that is the opposite of what the web is all about.

    People still signing up for FB over the age of 18 are going to see their quiet in-the-middle-of-the-night worst case scenarios of their HIGHLY personally identifiable information being sold off to would-be employers and other gatekeepers in society and yes, you WILL be compromised and never even know its happened by the near-future blackmarket for FB data.

    Legit advertising analytics on even the narrowest of demographics is going to be a commodity product ... once they know your SES status, proclivities and aspirations and how those things can be leveraged to put products you're likely to buy in front of you, there's nowhere profitable to go with all that information except personal profiles with the MOST sensitive data to the MOST motivated parties.

    As an informational profile to advertisers, your data is not only highly predictable after a while but that kind of data itself "wants to be free". Everyone who wants it will be able to acquire it easily at low cost from a wide variety of sources.

    But how drunk you were how often or how many BF you had or the information about you that gets tagged by all your *friends* with cams is something that FB will eventually try to monetize.

    Don't worry. They'll be an update on their privacy policy page just before that happens.
     

    1. Re:FB is Evil by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      So what you're saying is that eventually there'll be no more secrets anywhere.

      Except you're making this out to be a bad thing.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  21. Re:UFO's spotted at space station by deimtee · · Score: 3, Funny

    Wow. With grammar like that you should submit the story to slashdot.

    --
    I'm guessing that wasn't on their radar screen...
  22. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Informative

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  23. Former Ambassador To... by andersh · · Score: 1

    This guy isn't just anybody, he's a former Belgian ambassador.

    Brendan Nelson, Australian Ambassador to Belgium, Luxembourg, NATO and the EU.

  24. Prepositions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To Belgium. He's the former Australian ambassador to Belgium.

  25. Libel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Try the UK with their crazy laws. We're reasonable in Continental Europe.

  26. facebook is useless by zaax · · Score: 1

    I don't see what other people see in facebook. If it's supposed to be web 2.0 it useless. The the page for my club does not show the diary (whats on) that can find. The android facebook app does not work, everytime you search it clears the search box so you have to type it in again. The only thing I find as useful is the messegange service

  27. Re:UFO's spotted at space station by crutchy · · Score: 1

    they probably figured it was an abandoned piece of floating space junk

  28. This hurts Facebook more than anybody else. by ModernGeek · · Score: 1

    This is simply Facebook shooting themselves in the foot. Whenever somebody visits a Facebook page, they can normally be assured that the page in question is actually the company or person that it is claiming to be.

    I've noticed a barrage of fake Facebook pages for Apple and other companies that are touting fake giveaways and other scans. Facebook's walled garden is infected with impostors and they don't seem to be doing anything about it. Personally, I don't trust any site without an EV-SSL certificate. Though the method is criticized, and not perfect, I believe it is the best compromise we currently have on a de-centralizized authority to show that people on the web are who they claim to be.

    Facebook had a great opportunity to be a safe haven where you would know the the people around you are who they claim, but in the process of shoveling everyone in and keeping it Free, they've ended up with a real fundamental problem.

    --
    Sig: I stole this sig.
    1. Re:This hurts Facebook more than anybody else. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "normally be assured that the page in question is actually the company or person that it is claiming to be"
      Um, no they can't and why would they? Only an complete idiot would think that FB is there for their convenience, it is there to monetize you end of story. If it wasn't free then legions of retards wouldn't use it and tag themselves for tracking.

  29. Testing waters. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess someone should make a fake Al-Qaida group/page/whatever and see how it fares.

  30. What about the pressure for "real names"? by Bearhouse · · Score: 2

    Me no understand. These people, along with Google et al, are pressurisng users to use their REAL names:

    http://www.facebook.com/help/112146705538576/

    Facebook is a community where people use their real identities. We require everyone to provide their real names, so you always know who you're connecting with. This helps keep our community safe.

    So, when someone contacts them to complain that their real identiy has been hijacked, and also it could potentially have serious international diplomatic consequences, they do nothing?

    1. Re:What about the pressure for "real names"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Me no understand. These people, along with Google et al, are pressurisng users to use their REAL names:

      http://www.facebook.com/help/112146705538576/

      Facebook is a community where people use their real identities. We require everyone to provide their real names, so you always know who you're connecting with. This helps keep our community safe.

      So, when someone contacts them to complain that their real identiy has been hijacked, and also it could potentially have serious international diplomatic consequences, they do nothing?

      Of course. YOU taking the effort to provide YOUR real name to FB, it is free information for them to sell more advertisements to you. It takes no effort on the part of FB.

      You contacting FB to take effort to investigate a possibly fake account take effort on the part of FB, and brings zero revenue. Their advertisers couldn't care less about whether an account is fake or not (e.g. a bunch of followers for a fake page for X still means those guys are interested in X, it doesn't matter whether the page is official or not), thus there is zero profit for FB to expend such effort.

      Google and FB exists to make profit, and to make profit ONLY. Any additional effort to do anything is against their purpose, regardless of whatever lies they have told you. Follow the money and you will understand their logic.

  31. Little known fact by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    Zuckerberg hates waffles.

  32. Re:UFO's spotted at space station by tqk · · Score: 1

    Wow. With grammar like that you should submit the story to slashdot.

    I was just about to say, "Timothy?"

    --
    "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
  33. So? by akma · · Score: 1

    Facebook employee: A product is complaining again. It seems to think it is a customer....

    No response is exactly what you should expect when you are the product and not the customer.....

    --
    akma
  34. It's called proper diplomatic channels by Shag · · Score: 1

    The right way to go about this is:
    ex-Ambassador pings current Minister of Foreign Affairs OR current Ambassador to the US.
    They, in turn, ping John Kerry.
    He's a big enough fish that Zuckerberg will take the call.

    --
    Village idiot in some extremely smart villages.
  35. Hardly a former diplomat... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Brendan Nelson is the:
    - Former Leader of the Australian Liberal Party
    - Former Leader of the Opposition and , therefore the alternate government in Australia
    - Former Minister of Defense under John Howard's government, as well as preivous Minister for Science and Education

    oh... and apparently he got a nice retirement gig as the Australian Ambassador to Belgium and has occasionally been called a diplomat...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendan_Nelson

    1. Re:Hardly a former diplomat... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do we know that isn't a fake Brendan Nelson wiki page, hmmmmm?

  36. Re:UFO's spotted at space station by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow. With grammar like that you should submit the story to slashdot.

    I was just about to say, "Timothy?"

    Possibly, but the link was functional so, unlikely.