Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Facebook's Newest Privacy Problem: 'Faceprint' Data (cnet.com)

Posted by msmash on from the privacy-woes dept.

Katie Collins, reporting for CNET: Facebook knows you so well these days that it can recognize you just by seeing your face. You may not have a problem with this, but that doesn't mean it's all good in the eyes of the law. The social network lost the first round of a lawsuit on Thursday in which it is accused of "unlawfully" storing biometric data mined from people's photographs. The company was seeking to have the suit dismissed, but a federal judge in California rejected the request. Facebook taps into its photo-tagging system to build up a geometric representation of people's faces to create something called a faceprint for each of its users. Faceprints are then used to suggest tags for people when new photos are uploaded to the network. One could argue that the clue is in the name, but many Facebook users probably don't know that they agree to having data about their face stored when they sign up.

81 comments

  1. One could argue that the clue is in the name... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm more concerned with them having *my* "faceprint". I never signed up for their shitty service, but I know my face has ended up on there a few times.

    1. Re:One could argue that the clue is in the name... by i.r.id10t · · Score: 5, Interesting

      IIRC when it recognizes a face (or a face like shape) it offers users to tag that person, and I think the tag has to be of an existing facebook user, possibly in your friends or friends-of-friends...

      But my immediate thought is "what would it take to poison the data". IE, if you can tag your friends, and you have a large enough group of 'em, could you repeatedly tag similar photos (of say, yourself) with different names enough to "muddy the print" ?

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    2. Re:One could argue that the clue is in the name... by ranton · · Score: 0, Troll

      I'm more concerned with them having *my* "faceprint". I never signed up for their shitty service, but I know my face has ended up on there a few times.

      As long as you never go into the public you will never have to worry that public information about you exists. Just as long as your parents didn't do something foolish like getting a birth certificate and social security card, another horrible invasion of privacy.

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    3. Re:One could argue that the clue is in the name... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's easily overcome with weighing tags by yourself lower than tags by others.

    4. Re:One could argue that the clue is in the name... by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 1

      Facebook - and Google, and Microsoft, and all the others - are the reason why I strictly refuse to be photographed by other people in social settings, and I actively avoid cameras when they insist on taking a group pictures.

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    5. Re:One could argue that the clue is in the name... by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      *sigh* I remember the days when everyone tried to get into the picture...

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    6. Re:One could argue that the clue is in the name... by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No you can tag a face with any "name" you want. I do it to all sorts of people in pictures just to confuse facebook. I also like it when facebook screws the pooch and finds a face when there isn't one. According to facebook my face looks like one of these as it was really good at finding faces in mariposa lilies. I even got my friends to do it once I discovered it. I also apparently look like George Washington on Mt. Rushmore.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    7. Re:One could argue that the clue is in the name... by EvilSS · · Score: 1

      Facebook - and Google, and Microsoft, and all the others - are the reason why I strictly refuse to be photographed by other people in social settings, and I actively avoid cameras when they insist on taking a group pictures.

      I am the same way. There are no pictures of me on the internet and I work hard to keep it that way.

      --
      I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
    8. Re:One could argue that the clue is in the name... by Wycliffe · · Score: 1

      But my immediate thought is "what would it take to poison the data". IE, if you can tag your friends, and you have a large enough group of 'em, could you repeatedly tag similar photos (of say, yourself) with different names enough to "muddy the print" ?

      Yes, it's already muddy. It suggests my friend's name when their kids appear in the picture as well as when their face appears in the picture so it obviously is able to associate multiple faces with a single person. I'm assuming it works similar to fingerprint scanners where multiple fingers are all recognized as a single person.

    9. Re:One could argue that the clue is in the name... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it only offers the name to you if that name is in your circle of friends. Or to put it the other way, you are only identified by name to people who aleady know you; but FB knows it's you even in photos circulating between people who are not your friends -- those people just don't see it.

    10. Re:One could argue that the clue is in the name... by Qazimov · · Score: 1

      I have never signed up for FB, but my friends have tagged me in photos with my real name enough that I get auto-tagged now. I seem to recall hearing about "ghost" accounts that FB maintains for people like me who they are aware of, but have not actually registered any accounts with them.

    11. Re:One could argue that the clue is in the name... by i.r.id10t · · Score: 1

      except almost everyone has multiple fingers.... "two faced lying bastard" is just a description, not a physical property

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    12. Re:One could argue that the clue is in the name... by Wycliffe · · Score: 1

      except almost everyone has multiple fingers.... "two faced lying bastard" is just a description, not a physical property

      Exactly, so it must not be merging all the faces into a single face profile because if it was then my brother's name would be just as likely to show up for my dad or my other brother as it would for his kids (50% dna regardless) but that is not what is happening. They know that my brother's kids are being tagged as him so his name shows up as a suggestion on pictures of his kids but not of pictures of his brothers or parents.

  2. Non-Users? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about people who do not have a Facebook account? Can they be "tagged" in photographs? What is done with information involving non-users? Just because some idiot knows me and I happen to be in the background in some picture they take doesn't mean I consent to have my biometric data stored by Facebook.

    1. Re:Non-Users? by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Facebook, NSA, K-Mart, street cam, somebody has all your shit. You don't have much choice.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    2. Re:Non-Users? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't consent to have your biometric data stored, but having your biometric data stored is different than someone else describing you. It's the same deal as they likely have your phone number if more than zero people have you both in their phone contact list and have a Facebook application installed on their phone, you didn't give them your number, but someone else gave them permission to read the names associated with phone numbers in their contact list.

  3. A whole new low by ranton · · Score: 1

    many Facebook users probably don't know that they agree to having data about their face stored when they sign up

    The thought that users would think Facebook could automatically identify their face without storing any information about their face is mind boggling.

    --
    -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    1. Re:A whole new low by tnk1 · · Score: 2

      I don't think most of them really think about it, to be honest. It just sort of works. If they did think about it, they might think it is some advanced metadata processing or Big Data thing that allows it, without actually storing facial recognition files.

      Faceprinting probably still sounds futuristic to most people, even though it's now relatively common, so it's probably still pretty far down on the list of things they would think of first.

    2. Re:A whole new low by Flavianoep · · Score: 1

      many Facebook users probably don't know that they agree to having data about their face stored when they sign up

      The thought that users would think Facebook could automatically identify their face without storing any information about their face is mind boggling.

      Is magic, I mean, technology.

      --
      Linux is for people who don't mind RTFM.
  4. Do you want to tag Jane Doe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wish Facebook would stop asking me if I want to tag my friends. Some of them are single and pretty, so I'm like, "sure Facebook, I want to, but it might ruin our friendship" Other times they're married, and I'm like "Facebook, why are you tempting me?" Then it asks me if I want to tag male friends, and I already told Facebook I'm interested in women. Then it's like "Do you want to tag ?" Ewwww! Facebook!!? WTF?

    1. Re:Do you want to tag Jane Doe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then it's like "Do you want to tag [your mom/sister/cousin/aunt] ?" Ewwww! Facebook!!? WTF?

      If you have a mom-sister-cousin-aunt, it sounds like that's a family tradition.

    2. Re:Do you want to tag Jane Doe? by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      No, he's just from Utah.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  5. Stop. Using. Facebook. by Aethedor · · Score: 2, Informative

    Seriously people. Stop. Using. Facebook. It is really that simple!

    --
    It doesn't have to be like this. All we need to do is make sure we keep talking.
    1. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 1

      I think people are mostly aware that FB is a dystopian nightmare coming true. But they keep using it because they're also quite aware that there is no trustworthy alternative.

      In other words, the majority of people know the dystopia is global, and they have to submit to it if they want to continue socializing online. So... since they can't avoid it, they may as well choose the fullest-featured dystopia of them all.

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    2. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Incorrect. It does not stop other people tagging you in photo's they upload.
      It is simple though. As everybody on Slashdot instinctively knows. Stay. In. Your. Basement.

    3. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      But... if I stopped using Facebook, I'd have to go back to stalking cute women by going to their house and hiding the the bushes! Man, was that ever a drag! My daughter already considers Facebook the new MySpace, and hasn't been on it in months.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    4. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by NotInHere · · Score: 1

      You can tag people on facebook who haven't registered on it?

    5. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by Flavianoep · · Score: 1

      The trustworthy alternative is to get away from the computer screen and meet you *actual* friends.

      --
      Linux is for people who don't mind RTFM.
    6. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by Sowelu · · Score: 1

      I wound up migrating from FB to Twitter, which has its own problems but not nearly as many. Meetup works for planning things without Facebook (and has a lot more features).

    7. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That's good advice, but doesn't solve the "problem." If Facebook can do it, anyone can do it.

      Your face sometimes goes into public where other people can see it. Sometimes people remember it. Sometimes they know your name. When all those things happen, then you have a public identity. That was true even ten thousand years ago.

      If this is a privacy violation (look, I might be an idiot, but I'm not a total idiot -- I get why this is troubling and sure don't like it happening to me, but I hesitate to call it a real violation) then we have a huge problem: it's just like other so-called privacy violations, in that most of the time when it happens, you'll never know that it happened.

      That means two things:

      1) Facebook isn't the problem. They are the tip of the iceberg. They are the one weird case where you see the consequences of them having this data (which anyone could have). Much like how stupid people feared "Glassholes" for their cameras (in spite of constantly being surrounded by many cameras) it's more about the reminder that you're being watched, than actually being watched. We seem to be mostly ok with a panopticon as long as we can't tell that we're in it, and I think that's a really stupid attitude and I can't respect people who hold it. There, I said it.

      2) You can't outlaw it. Sorry, Europe (and apparently California too, in this case). Ok, you can outlaw it, but you can't enforce the law, so it'll be selective enforcement. Once again, this is like the worthless pieces of shit who punch Glassholes, selectively enforcing their faux-privacy-values while usually ignoring those values. You'll stop Facebook from doing it where you can see it, but the other 99 parties are allowed to go on doing it, because they won't use the tech to serve you, so they won't be telling you when it's happening. That's perverse: your law addresses the least objectionable cases while leaving actual adversaries alone.

      There is theoretically a "solution" but it's impractical (in this case, though in many privacy situations, it's the best thing to do): deny the capability to others. Usually that just means "encrypt your fucking email, you idiot!" but this time it means "don't show your face in public" and that's not practical.

      This can't be won.

      So make peace with it.

    8. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What stops them from storing faceprint data of publicly available photos? This can be beyond the scope of Facebook's platform.

    9. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you understand critical mass?

      Everyone using facebook has nothing to do with it being trustworthy or feature-rich.

      Everyone uses facebook because everyone uses facebook.

      In other words, it's the fact that the majority of people are ALL ON THE SAME SITE that makes social networking useful and popular.

      Facebook was the first social network to reach critical mass. And now it has "king of the hill" advantage.

      There are plenty of trustworthy and feature-rich alternatives. As soon as all your friends are using one of those alternatives, you will leave facebook.

      IT HAPPENED TO MYSPACE.

    10. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Eh, it still makes a convenient storefront, all for free. Just keep the bank account separate from your personal one.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    11. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and they have to submit to it if they want to continue socializing online. So... since they can't avoid it, they may as well choose the fullest-featured dystopia of them all.

      Why must they "submit to it if they want to continue socializing online"? I socialize online all the time, with friends, family, work buddies, neighbors. I've been socializing on the net since before Facebook was a thing, since before the Web was a thing, and since slightly before Mark Zuckerberg himself was a gleam in his daddy's eye.

      Yet I've never signed up for nor used Facebook. Somehow, you claim this can't be done, yet I have been doing it all along.

      Believe it or not, there was an (arpa|inter)net long, long before Facebook. Even before there was a Zuckerberg. Socialing on the internet does not require use of Facebook. It never has.

    12. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by Solandri · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I don't use Facebook. That doesn't stop my friends from tagging my face when I'm in one of their photos which they post on Facebook.

      This whole face recognition thing started as a useful tool - software can automatically add keyword tags to photos. So if you want to show someone the funny picture you took of Joe at the Grand Canyon on your 25th birthday, you can search for "Joe" "Grand Canyon" and "2009" and it'll return a dozen pics for you sift through, instead of of the thousands of pics on your HDD.

      But when they started using it to figure out who knows whom based on how many photos they showed up in together, that's when it changed from useful tool to creepy stalker.

    13. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I can not afford to meet my friends in RL on an regular manner. Neither money wise nor time wise.
      I have only 250 FB friends, 95% of them I have met in RL before we became FB friends. They live all over the planet. The only continent where I have no friends is Antarctica.

      Get out of your cave ...

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    14. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by Flavianoep · · Score: 1

      They are not all of them your "actual" friends, no matter what Facebook tells you.

      --
      Linux is for people who don't mind RTFM.
    15. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Actually most of them are my actual friends, you idiot. Otherwise I had not 'befriended' them.

      I thought that was clear from my previous post.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    16. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by Aethedor · · Score: 1

      It does if they also stop using farcebook.

      --
      It doesn't have to be like this. All we need to do is make sure we keep talking.
    17. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by dublin · · Score: 1

      Legally, the fact that they apparently *are* automatically creating faceprints (even for people like me who don't have facebook accounts) seems to be the thing that could get them in trouble. There can be no consent from innocent bystanders who choose not to participate in Facebook's internet hegemony (often very deliberately, since not having a Facebook ID is a real PITA these days) ...

      There are reports of people signing up for Facebook, and then as soon as they have an "official" profile, that gets connected to warehouse of things they have been tagged to prior to their signup, whether they were tagged by other Facebook users or by the faceprinting engine...

      --
      "The future's good and the present is nothing to sneeze at." - Roblimo's last ./ post
    18. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How fucking rude are you? How dare you believe you can dictate his relationship with his friends? Who do you think you are?

    19. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Different people have different definitions of a friend, if they aren't someone you see in person and interact with in person on a regular/constant basis, as in people you do not see every few days, they are not your friend as far as I'm concerned.

    20. Re: Stop. Using. Facebook. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have managed to keep in touch with all my friends without ever using facebook. You're too lazy, stupid, retarded or brain-damaged to do the same. Skin yourself alive and then get crucified.

    21. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I can not afford to meet my friends in RL on an regular manner.

      Then guess what? You don't have friends. What you have are people you know online.

      Real friends actually do stuff together, not post updates about what they did while living completely separate lives.

      I know plenty of people online. We have discussions, share stuff, blah blah, blah. But they aren't "friends". They're just people who I know online.

      At the other end of the spectrum I have actual friends- we actually get together and do stuff. And when we do it we're not constantly fondling to our phones or checking Facebook and posting selfies every 5 seconds. Instead we're actually living in the moment enjoying whatever it is we're doing. In real life, at the same time in the same room or at the same beach or restaurant or whatever. Crazy concept, huh?

      If your definition of a "friend" is someone who you only know online, then I genuinely feel sorry for you. No sarcasm, I truly feel sorry for you.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    22. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 4, Informative

      I don't use Facebook. That doesn't stop my friends from tagging my face when I'm in one of their photos which they post on Facebook.

      I solved this problem by telling my friends that if they ever "tag" me in a photo on Facebook, I'd come over to their house and beat their brains out with a baseball bat.

      They didn't believe me at first, but after 2 or 3 funerals, word got around.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    23. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True, at the same time, the up-loader often owns the copyright, so maybe they should ask which type if at all CC use they want to grant Facebook and viewers applied to their photos like Flickr does.

    24. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So because something is difficult to enforce you give up? Enforcement will reduce the problem even if it wont eradicate it. Consider (for a car analogy) that most speeders aren't caught but if you go 100mph down high street or otherwise act badly enough you will greatly increase your chances of getting caught so that the worst violators are caught. This can have a deterrence effect as well as the direct reduction.

      Also not being able to stop the big brother watching going on is not the same as being OK with it. I have written to my MP and am unhappy about it so please don't include me in being ok with panopticon spying.

    25. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by antdude · · Score: 1

      Prove it. :P

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    26. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For me it's about a business using my photos for their business value. I also don't want them to give me something back for it. I simply don't want them to use my photo, or any other piece of information, without my consent. And with not, I do mean not. It's my life. Not Facebook's. So fuck off Facebook.

      And to be honest, I don't visit cities very often. Only occasionally to buy clothes or things like that. Usually I'm at work where I consent to be monitored mildly and under Western-European laws that restrict an employer to harass me, or I'm at home. Which is country side. I have sheep and horses as neighbors who can watch me while taking a shower. I also like to go to sauna. Completely naked. Surrounded by like minded people.

      But businesses filming me for the purpose of localization and identity identification? For the purpose of selling me shit? For profit? Please fuck off Facebook & co.

    27. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I once actually had to legally threaten somebody to get a picture removed from Facebook. This was a group photo where I had said clearly that if I'm on it: then not on Facebook. That they should take another one without me too, and put that one online. Luckily, that's the worst I ever had to do. We're of course no longer friends and this person now thinks I'm crazy and constantly tells other people in that group about this. That's what Facebook does to people who want privacy, like me.

    28. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Then guess what? You don't have friends. What you have are people you know online.

      I obviously was talking about my "facebook friends". But thanks for making a moron out of your self for the sake of arguing.

      Obviously most of my friends here around my place are not on facebook. Unlike you haters there are people who are on facebook for a reason ... and even if you don't believe it my "face book" friends are real friends. We meet often enough ... but on "events" ... I can not randomly message one and say "lets meet" because plenty of them live on the other side of the planet. E.g. my ex girl friend lives now in south of Gorgia ... and those who live in my country are nevertheless mostly a few hours drives away.

      I truly feel sorry for you.
      Thank you, not necessary. :D

      If your definition of a "friend" is someone who you only know online
      You are pretty retarded, aren't you? I no where implied that ... but go ahead with your prejudices ...

      You seem not to grasp that plenty of people use facebook exactly in the way how it was intended to be: keep in touch with family and friends in a "community" and not single phone calls and emails.

      Crazy concept, huh?
      Perhaps you should become a social worker or something :D But thanks for your advice, I must be doing something wrong in meeting my friends who live close by in my most favourite pub. Like to come over and teach us?
      https://www.facebook.com/pages... Oh shit, that is on facebook so you won't come ... your fault.

      What about this then: http://www.scruffys.de? No worries site is in english.

      Hint: learnt o read. And when you see a post that upsets you: read the damn parent.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    29. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      if you don't believe it my "face book" friends are real friends

      You're right, I don't believe it.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    30. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Well, then join facebook, befriend me for a day and check them :D

      No idea why you are such an idiot.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    31. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      Well, then join facebook, befriend me for a day and check them

      Ewwwww, sorry, those are two things I'd never do- join Facebook and "friend" you.
      And besides, it's easy to buy fake "friends" on Facebook, just like it's easy to buy fake "followers" on Twitter.

      -

      No idea why you are such an idiot.

      You're probably not smart enough to know why I'm an idiot because you didn't stay in school.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    32. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      So you are not on facebook, but know everything about my facebook friends.

      So, you are an idiot

      When I was in school there was not even an internet ... and yes I know the difference between WWW and internet.

      And besides, it's easy to buy fake "friends" on Facebook
      Sure and make them load up photos of me and tag them, rofl. How do they make such photos, including them and me?

      The only photo of me that I uploaded is my profile photo, all others are from my friends.

      I guess you are not on twitter either but know everything about twitter, too! :D

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    33. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      So you are not on facebook, but know everything about my facebook friends.

      What facebook "friends"?

      -

      When I was in school there was not even an internet

      Same here. So what? When I started school, Kevlar, acrylic paint, and soft contact lenses hadn't been invented yet. There were no TouchTone© phones. Man hadn't walked on the Moon. So fucking what?

      ... and yes I know the difference between WWW and internet.

      Sonny, when I started out on "the web", it was on ARPANET, after access to it was expanded in 1981. You were probably still being potty-trained at the time.

      Before that I had the pleasure of unboxing brand my own brand new Atari 400 in 1978, and later I owned TRS-80's and Apple ][ machines. I was using PUT and GET on a NeXT machine while you were in elementary school. So if you don't mind, please get the fuck off my lawn. :)

      -

      I guess you are not on twitter either but know everything about twitter, too! :D

      Nope, I'm not on twitter, because 1) people like you are on twitter, and 2) I have other stuff I'd rather be doing.

      If you want to use twitter (the equivalent of throwing confetti on the internet) be my guest.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    34. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      So you are five years older than me: and how can such a guy be so retarded?

      I still have my Apple ][ +

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    35. Re:Stop. Using. Facebook. by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      So you are five years older than me

      More than 5, I suspect.

      -

      I still have my Apple ][ +

      That's nice, dear.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
  6. not just users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    doesn't FB store faceprints of any tagged person be it a user or not? They at least used to store "profile information" of non-users. That data is easily available to them via address books. Matching them by phone number or email addresses is trivial.

    Sign up and you are immediately greeted with a list of people you know even if you haven't entered any information apart from your email address. And it will also suggest you profile images out of images that it already has access to. Scary.

  7. How is this a problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Facebook wants to do this "faceprinting," and the functionality is being used successfully as intended. This is a feature on a service that people who are not interested in privacy use voluntarily. It's not for the kind of people who get upset by being recognized, and never was.

    Oh no, this service that I'd have nothing to do with is exposing the info of people who volunteered to do so. The horror!

    1. Re:How is this a problem? by dltaylor · · Score: 1

      Because they also tag ind identify NON-USERS, like me.

      Nuke 'em from orbit, please.

  8. Well duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "but many Facebook users probably don't know that they agree to having data about their face stored when they sign up."

    That's probably because MILLIONS of people signed up for facebook long before facebook even conceived the idea of doing so.

    1. Re:Well duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      isn't there some clause buried deep in their ToS that says they assume the rights to any photos uploaded? Information derived from their own property is unlawful?

  9. And if they don't sign up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't upload pictures of me, don't tag me. I do not agree to any of it. I don't have a Facebook account.

  10. Facebook is addictive because... by elcor · · Score: 2

    It sucks everybody's light in and redistributes it around. So you get other people's light and feel like you are making a real connection.

  11. My sentiment exactly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I've decided to stay away from Facebook. I don't have an account and never plan on having one. They may, indeed, have a "shadow account" of me, but I can do nothing about this.

    I think my in-laws must think I'm a nutter for asking them to never place photos of my children on Facebook. They just don't understand. I think this wholesale giveaway of personal data for free services will one day come back to haunt so many people.

  12. Only it's users? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If its only its users, it's their problem (the user's). They've sold their souls, they are aware of it. Not my problem.
    But how does Facebook make sure they do not create data about non-users? Who have not agreed to any terms?

  13. I've been saying this for years... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You gotta encrypt you face before you post _anything_ to basefook.
    Does anyone really believe William Gates cares about your privacy?!

    Really, people get it together!

    CAP === 'sender'

  14. Minority Report by shuz · · Score: 1

    If facebook makes storing bio metric data and also sharing that data with its partners part of the terms of use then people would potentially be allowing the use of that bio metric data to be tracked and advertised to. Legally it is obvious that governments will want to have a legal handle on this sort of behavior before it is widely exploited. If this kind of marketing behavior is found to be legally acceptable then a whole new market would be opened. Who holds the patent rights to this business process I wonder?

    --
    There is or can be built a machine that can simulate any physical object. -Church-Turing principle
  15. Wow by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    I can totally imagine them selling this data to law enforcement, advertising companies etc.
    The personalised billboard thing is getting ever closer.

  16. Not that I necessarily condone this... by mark-t · · Score: 1

    ... buf if facebook has lawful possession of the raw data, what is the issue with them finding and retaining biometric information that they glean from it, exactly? The data is, I said, already lawfully in their possession.

    --
    File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
    1. Re:Not that I necessarily condone this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just because you haven't literally stolen the data doesn't mean you are free to process personal data in any way you like in the UK. For starters it has to match what you said you where collecting the data for.

    2. Re:Not that I necessarily condone this... by mark-t · · Score: 1

      I would imagine that would only be a problem is the data or the results of your processing were being distributed to anyone else. If they are not, what is the problem? How would anyone generally otherwise even know that this was being done? Not that I think that Facebook has done nothing wrong here... since it is apparent that they are not retaining it for themselves alone.

      --
      File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
  17. Re: One could argue that the clue is in the name.. by WarJolt · · Score: 2

    Don't worry. These millenials have no concept of privacy and will glady jump into your photo. It's hard to care about faceprints when most of them have a dick pic or a public intoxication photo floating around that will be haunting them forever. By the way they are already working on a dickprints. I think millenials are the Miley Cyrus generation. Eventually they'll jump into your photos clothed or not and we all just let it happen.

    Privacy is dead. I'm sure there are places you can keep your privacy, but no one knows how to find them anymore because it's not on Facebook.

  18. Facebook by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

    Facebook....it's like cancer, but with comments!

    If I had a nickel for every time I heard about a Facebook privacy issue, I could afford to buy me a tropical island where they'd never heard of Facebook.

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
  19. Re: One could argue that the clue is in the name.. by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

    Privacy is dead.

    I don't know if it's dead, but it sure as hell is on life-support.

    Classmates.com is constantly advertising to me to sign up and become "more connected". Like I'd want anything to do with those lamers I went to school with 40 fuckin' years ago.

    I mean, hello? I don't want to be more connected, I want to be less connected.

    Now if they had a service to make me less connected, I'd sign up for that shit in a heartbeat.

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
  20. "when you sign up" ?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    HUH? you don't need to signup for facebook, or even ever visit their domains to have your name, your face, your identity, hell, even your web browser histories, tracked by facebook

  21. Ballsy for the Government by davesays · · Score: 1

    For a federal judge to hit up Facebook after the "FBI Wants to Exempt Its Massive Biometric Database from Some Federal Privacy Rules" http://www.nextgov.com/emergin...

  22. this is why I'm constantly changing things.. by advocate_one · · Score: 1

    growing a beard, allowing my hair to get really shaggy, shaving it all off, changing my glasses, sometimes wearing contacts...

    --
    Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
    1. Re:this is why I'm constantly changing things.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      cheek implants?

  23. Experimental Advertising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Facebook is experimenting with generating adverts so they will contain faces and images you find pleasing. This means instead of a generic old lady appearing in an ad, you will begin to see ladies who look like your grandmother.