Slashdot Mirror


Facebook Threatens To Delete Users' Photos If They Don't Install Moments app (betanews.com)

Mark Wilson, reporting for BetaNews: Not content with forcing people into using its Messenger app, Facebook is continuing its aggressive tactics and driving users to install its photo-sharing app, Moments. The social network has warned users that their photos face deletion if they fail to use the Moments app. Unsurprisingly, this has led to a huge surge in interest in the app, pushing it to the top of the download charts. Facebook says it is going to delete Synced Albums and Synced Photos if Moments is not installed by July 7, sending warning emails to a number of users. This has understandably led to panic installations of Moments as people sought to protect the photos that have been automatically synchronized from their phone. It's important to note that it is only these synced photos that are at risk, but it's clear that there is an element of confusion about what Facebook is planning to delete.

189 comments

  1. Facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ribbed for her pleasure.

  2. Why does this cause surprise or panic? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "only these synced photos that are at risk, but it's clear that there is an element of confusion about what Facebook is planning to delete."

    No, it's clear that you should not use Facebook for informaiton you care about, or at all if you care about your privacy.

    1. Re:Why does this cause surprise or panic? by reboot246 · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's clear that you should not use Facebook for anything. Ever.

      I can't really feel sorry for the ones who do lose their photos. They take photos with a crappy cell phone camera and then Facebook compresses the hell out of them. What? You didn't save them somewhere else? Tough. Even if you save them from Facebook, all you have is tiny little files that are masquerading as photos.

      My bother's two daughters, both college educated, are like that. They never back up the photos from their phones. They just depend on Facebook. The photos look okay on a phone, not so much on a 24" monitor. And forget about printing them.

    2. Re:Why does this cause surprise or panic? by TigerPlish · · Score: 1

      My bother's two daughters, both college educated, are like that. They never back up the photos from their phones. They just depend on Facebook. The photos look okay on a phone, not so much on a 24" monitor. And forget about printing them.

      I don't know what they're using, but when my iToys back up to iTunes (which everyone seems to hate but works OK for me) the pics are backed up as well, in full rez). This is default behavior. And this is backup to local disc, not iCloud (or any other cloud)

      Are they not backing up their phones at all? If so... then this may be a learning experience.

      --
      The "Civilized World" jumped the shark ca. 1973.
    3. Re:Why does this cause surprise or panic? by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 0

      And forget about printing them.

      How quaint! So 20th Century. Imagine, they used to always do photos on paper, or all things....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    4. Re:Why does this cause surprise or panic? by TigerPlish · · Score: 2

      How quaint! So 20th Century. Imagine, they used to always do photos on paper, or all things....

      They'll never see an image slowly appear before your eyes submerged in a tray of developer in a room lit only by an orange lamp..

      I miss it, and I don't miss it. My romantic side, the side that likes Rachmaninoff and Beethoven misses it.

      My nose doesn't miss it.

      --
      The "Civilized World" jumped the shark ca. 1973.
    5. Re:Why does this cause surprise or panic? by mlts · · Score: 1

      This. Use FB for photos to be published, not for anything else. For everything else, there are many other ways to do it. I personally just use an app that dumps all the photos of my device to a NAS when I'm within Wi-Fi range (the NAS is firewalled away from the world), then the NAS does an encrypted backup offsite.

      The last place I'd ever want to use for a photo storage place is FB, even if it is "free".

    6. Re:Why does this cause surprise or panic? by hazem · · Score: 1

      I personally just use an app that dumps all the photos of my device to a NAS when I'm within Wi-Fi range

      Which app do you use for this?

    7. Re:Why does this cause surprise or panic? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      I don't know what they're using, but when my iToys back up to iTunes (which everyone seems to hate but works OK for me) the pics are backed up as well, in full rez). This is default behavior. And this is backup to local disc, not iCloud (or any other cloud)

      Are they not backing up their phones at all? If so... then this may be a learning experience.

      I plug me iphone income Mac, and yup- it gets loaded tight on onto the mac. Then I have two backups from there. I also just plug in the SD card from my Nikon, and it gets backed up automatically. FUll rez, and easily retrievable. I can't for the life of me understand how anything could be easier.

      Now I want to be kind, but the tools that use Facebook are teh same sort of tools that used to use America On Line. Backups? That's sumpin you do in a car.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    8. Re:Why does this cause surprise or panic? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      And forget about printing them.

      How quaint! So 20th Century. Imagine, they used to always do photos on paper, or all things....

      And those photos might be around long after the cloud backup - if any - goes belly up.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    9. Re:Why does this cause surprise or panic? by mrzaph0d · · Score: 2

      Sweet Home is what I use. Works great, backs up from my kids, the wife, and mine.

      --
      this is just a placeholder till i send back my real sig from the future.
    10. Re:Why does this cause surprise or panic? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You... plug shit in still?

      Such legacy thinking. I can't remember the last time I had to plug my phone in. Google syncs my photos full rez for free when it's charging and on wifi. If I don't like Google, there's plenty apps I could download. Actually remembering to plug things into the computer (like on vacation)? Why?

      My camera has wifi sync (just have to touch the two NFC tags and bam, shit's transferred). Get back to the hotel, bam, they're saved -- don't have to bring my expensive laptops and don't even have to think.

    11. Re:Why does this cause surprise or panic? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      .. and don't even have to think.

      Yeap, we figured that already.

    12. Re:Why does this cause surprise or panic? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My bother's two daughters, both college educated, are like that. They never back up the photos from their phones. They just depend on Facebook. The photos look okay on a phone, not so much on a 24" monitor. And forget about printing them.

      I don't know what they're using, but when my iToys back up to iTunes (which everyone seems to hate but works OK for me) the pics are backed up as well, in full rez). This is default behavior. And this is backup to local disc, not iCloud (or any other cloud)

      Are they not backing up their phones at all? If so... then this may be a learning experience.

      Speaking of learning experience, perhaps you will learn to read the fucking post you're replying to before asking such silly questions.

    13. Re:Why does this cause surprise or panic? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      You... plug shit in still?

      Such legacy thinking.

      I can do it wirelessly - I choose to do it the better way.

      and don't even have to think.

      I believe that.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    14. Re:Why does this cause surprise or panic? by mlts · · Score: 1

      Synology has an app that I use. It can go over the Internet, but I use it to directly connect via IP and dump the files when on the home Wi-Fi segment. The NAS isn't perfect (SynoLocker comes to mind as what can go wrong), but I'd rather store my data under my physical control, and if I do store anything offsite, it gets stashed encrypted, preferably with a keyfile, so an attacker has to brute force the entire keyspace.

    15. Re:Why does this cause surprise or panic? by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      Dead on. Facebook is like AOL in the modern age. The lamest of the lame.

    16. Re:Why does this cause surprise or panic? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fakebook users may loose access to those photos...but if you really believe that fakebook would delete the photos, you are really stupid. Fakebook is in the business of selling its users information...they will never delete any of it! BTW, fakebook users are not people to me, they are just sheeple!

      Real people are too smart to use fakebook, twitter, etc... and don't back anything up to the ":cloud" or any web site. Real people back up to flash drive or hard drives and keep total control of them!

  3. keep what's yours by Lead+Butthead · · Score: 5, Insightful

    the reason why you should never trust data you want to keep with a third party.

    --
    ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
    1. Re:keep what's yours by dgatwood · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This. If it isn't under your direct control, it isn't really yours.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    2. Re:keep what's yours by Threni · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, when you're using a free service, anyway.

      If I was in a restaurant, or getting someone to fix my car or paint my house and i wasn't giving them any money I'd set my expectations accordingly.

      If you want to keep your pictures safe, just don't upload them to facebook and hope they'll keep them safe foryou forever; spend a few pennies on a usb key and keep them safe yourself forever, and/or store them on google photos.

      This really isn't something which should a surprise a developmentally normal adult.

    3. Re:keep what's yours by war4peace · · Score: 0

      Only the service isn't free. It costs no money, but costs privacy and personal data, which you might attribute a value of zero, but others don't.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    4. Re:keep what's yours by Threni · · Score: 0

      They're wrong. It's a free service because it costs no money. It's a simple as that. Even things which cost you money can result in you losing privacy; nearly always you'll lose more, in fact, because you end up paying via methods which reveal information about you, so that cost - if you want to look at it as a cost - is decreased too when it's free.

      People can say stuff's not free because, for example, Facebook have your photos, or they can sell or use your browsing habits (in a very limited sense), it doesn't impinge on your freedom in any observable way. I mean, people are free to claim that wifi gives you cancer or whatever but they're just that; baseless, stupid claims. And other people repeat it just because they don't like facebook because they don't have friends or because it's not cool or whatever. Good for them, I saw. Go grow a stupid hipster beard or something.

    5. Re:keep what's yours by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      I can't worry about that silly shit. Facebook is the best free advertising platform anybody could ask for. Take advantage of it and make a buck or two.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    6. Re:keep what's yours by TigerPlish · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Entire generations are forgetting that. It's not just the Millenials -- I'm an "X" and I find most of my friends have shunned physical media wholeheartedly. I look at them like they're crazy.

      Streaming and cloud offer no permanence unless one can store local copies of equal quality.

      I was shocked about 3 years ago when I wanted to add four more "Benno" DVD shelf towers from Ikea to my existing 10. Benno is the foundation of my home cinema storage. I couldn't find them in the store, it said "order only." So I ordered, and paid a fortune in freight because there's no store pickup for special orders.

      SO I got them, put them up, and now, should I want more, i'm screwed unless I buy used. But fortunately, i follow my own storage advice -- whatever you think is adequate, double it.

      The point of the anecdote? Physical is dead, no matter how much we try to cling to it. And entire generations are being suckered into believing this and trusting it! Ugh!

      But of course, this is what the industry wants! Want that movie? Pay for it for every view! Want that song / record? Pay for it for every listen! Or at least a subscription!

      I'm starting to feel physical media was our way of holding "their" content ransom.

      --
      The "Civilized World" jumped the shark ca. 1973.
    7. Re: keep what's yours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't think they're forgetting - they've never really known any different. Most kids these days never experienced the joy of spending a day reloading data from a pile of floppy diskettes.

    8. Re:keep what's yours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your sentiment is perhaps intentionally or not misleading. I think you could better phrase your point as "this is why keeping at least 1 copy, let alone multiple offsite backups, is always the best idea"

    9. Re:keep what's yours by RogueWarrior65 · · Score: 1

      Sadly, with the every expanding rental economy, there will come a day when your data is held hostage by the software and cloud companies. Never mind ransomware from some former Soviet bloc country. This extortion will be entirely legal.

    10. Re:keep what's yours by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 3, Interesting

      They're wrong. It's a free service because it costs no money. It's a simple as that. Even things which cost you money can result in you losing privacy; nearly always you'll lose more, in fact, because you end up paying via methods which reveal information about you, so that cost - if you want to look at it as a cost - is decreased too when it's free.

      So, those hard drives I bought, are telling the world more about me than if I posted every pic on Facebook? Explain, because I gave them my credit card and get email from the place I bought them from. If I was stupid enough to use FB I'm giving out less info?

      People can say stuff's not free because, for example, Facebook have your photos, or they can sell or use your browsing habits (in a very limited sense), it doesn't impinge on your freedom in any observable way.

      These idiots seem to have a little less freedom after sharing on Facebook: http://mashable.com/2012/12/12...

      I mean, people are free to claim that wifi gives you cancer or whatever but they're just that; baseless, stupid claims.

      Go get a script blocker. Enable it 100 percent. Now start enabling scripts. A whole lot of them are facebook and they are tracking you even if you don't "belong". You'll have to look them up, because unlike Google, Facebook obfuscates where they are sending your info.

      Despite your lofty claims of superiority, you kind sir, are doing a fine imitation of baseless stupidity. Or does Facebook have paid shills here now, because you ar either purposely dissembling, challenged, or paid to distribute the inaccurate info.

      And other people repeat it just because they don't like facebook because they don't have friends or because it's not cool or whatever. Good for them, I saw. Go grow a stupid hipster beard or something.

      You mad bro? Hey, some of us spout it becuse we did the research. And have determined that people like you are spreading BS. I've got friends outside of FB. I see them in person every day. As for "cool", The FaceBook crowd would be on AOL in another era. But they are tracking the bejabbers out of most of us. And in Corporate America, nothing is done without pecuniary purpose.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    11. Re:keep what's yours by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Sorry, can't do. I shave with a straight razor and I know what I'd do if I had a sharp knife at the throat of someone like that.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    12. Re: keep what's yours by Hylandr · · Score: 1

      I also remember losing all my data to floppy disks and/or Virii that infected them.

      We keep multiple copies of our photo album on personal devices. Nothing is in the cloud unless I control the hardware.

      --
      ~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
    13. Re:keep what's yours by Tyr07 · · Score: 1

      Legally.

    14. Re:keep what's yours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      . .but . .but . . .the Cloud !!!!

    15. Re:keep what's yours by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      Free? I call TANSTAAFL on that.

      You are the product at Facebook, nothing else. The ability to share your info there is just a lure.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    16. Re:keep what's yours by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      How they think of me, whether it's a product or cattle feed or whatever, means nothing. I haven't handed them a penny, and I have a free place to post my shit. I really don't understand people are upset about.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    17. Re:keep what's yours by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      The point of the anecdote? Physical is dead, no matter how much we try to cling to it. And entire generations are being suckered into believing this and trusting it! Ugh!

      They're suckered into it by the whole "convenience" aspect. Physical means having to find it, then stick it in the slot. "Digital" means just picking it off a list and watching it instantly.

      Applies to anything - books, music, movies, etc. The physical version is always less convenient, requiring searching and finding and physical manipulation to use. There's also the whole DRM thing - piles of people refuse to buy movies on physical media because of the DRM put on Blu-Rays and such.

      Of course, the other thing is, they're all hoping the backup of last resort will be around (torrents/piracy)...

    18. Re:keep what's yours by ultranova · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Streaming and cloud offer no permanence unless one can store local copies of equal quality.

      But content isn't scarce anymore, so what's the point of permanence?

      Want that movie? Pay for it for every view! Want that song / record? Pay for it for every listen!

      How many movies are worth watching more than - or even - once? Go to a theater if you want to see big-budget special effects. For everything else, there's Youtube and endless amounts of user-generated content. And the same goes for music.

      Not worrying about permanence or control is perfectly rational when the Internet makes content like the air we breath: always there, just inhale when you need it and don't worry about it otherwise. Yes, some gulps of air smell sweeter than others, but there will be others just as sweet, so why try to cling to them? It's us old farts who carefully store pressurized containers because we're haunted by our memories of pre-photosynthesis days who are the irrational ones :).

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    19. Re:keep what's yours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Entire generations are forgetting that. It's not just the Millenials -- I'm an "X" and I find most of my friends have shunned physical media wholeheartedly.

      It's called "living in the moment".....which is another way of saying they will remember history any which way they want rather than how it really happened.

    20. Re:keep what's yours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The point of the anecdote? Physical is dead, no matter how much we try to cling to it. And entire generations are being suckered into believing this and trusting it! Ugh!

      They're suckered into it by the whole "convenience" aspect. Physical means having to find it, then stick it in the slot. "Digital" means just picking it off a list and watching it instantly.

      Applies to anything - books, music, movies, etc.

      And then they whine incessantly online about Netflix or Kindle or whatever dropping that content at some point....

    21. Re:keep what's yours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Ikea replaced the BENNO with the GNEDBY DVD shelf tower. It looks almost the same, and side-by-side you can't see a difference. (The only difference I could tell between them is the small shelves themselves; the Benno ones had two indentations in the back to fit over the shelf support nubs, while the Gnedby has four, so front and back fit over the nubs.)

    22. Re:keep what's yours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Physical is dead, no matter how much we try to cling to it.

      I strongly disagree. I think that we'll always have physical devices like HDDs and SSDs for local storage.

      I have stopped using DVDs, and I started using portable USB HDDs for backup purposes.

      The advantages are overwhelming -- using a HDD is considerably cheaper than a DVD (per GB), and the HDD capacity is far larger and therefore much more convenient than a DVD.

    23. Re:keep what's yours by Threni · · Score: 1

      > So, those hard drives I bought, are telling the world more about me than if I posted every pic on Facebook?
      > Explain, because I gave them my credit card and get email from the place I bought them from. If I was stupid
      > enough to use FB I'm giving out less info?

      You're conflating the difference between storing images on a high drive vs posting them on facebook with my comparison between using a free service to share images vs using a paid service. Keep up!

      > These idiots seem to have a little less freedom after sharing on Facebook: http://mashable.com/2012/12/12...

      Now you're implying that I didn't previously realize that if you post something on the internet somebody else could read it; perhaps (wrongly) assuming this makes some sort of case for law abiding people avoiding sharing photos on facebook.

      > Go get a script blocker. Enable it 100 percent. Now start enabling scripts. A whole lot of them are facebook and
      > they are tracking you even if you don't "belong". You'll have to look them up, because unlike Google, Facebook
      > obfuscates where they are sending your info.

      I block javascript and trackers, and destroy cookies via plugins on all browsers i use. I also post photos to facebook. I'm failing to see any contradiction.

      > Despite your lofty claims of superiority, you kind sir, are doing a fine imitation of baseless stupidity.

      That's a two way street.

      > Or does
      > Facebook have paid shills here now, because you ar either purposely dissembling, challenged, or paid to
      > distribute the inaccurate info.

      You're just struggling to understand what I posted and are rambling meaninglessly about...well, fuck knows. Just anti-facebook bollocks as far as I can tell.

      > You mad bro? Hey, some of us spout it becuse we did the research. And have determined that people like
      > you are spreading BS. I've got friends outside of FB. I see them in person every day. As for "cool", The
      > FaceBook crowd would be on AOL in another era. But they are tracking the bejabbers out of most of us. And
      > in Corporate America, nothing is done without pecuniary purpose.

      More random typing. Facebook is a business which exists to make money; primarily through ads based on users' interests, just like several other successful companies. I have no problem with any of them, trackers or no trackers. It's how they turn a profit (and keep all the servers running). "Doo...facebook users are so stupid, like AOL users were...gu-hoo gu-hoo gu-hoo! Wake up, sheeple!". You're quite the rebel prophet, aren't you?

    24. Re:keep what's yours by TigerPlish · · Score: 1

      Ikea replaced the BENNO with the GNEDBY DVD shelf tower.

      Sweet! This must've happened recently. I'm thinking eventually, within a year or two, I'll need 4 more.

      Thx for the info!

      --
      The "Civilized World" jumped the shark ca. 1973.
    25. Re:keep what's yours by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2

      "Doo...facebook users are so stupid, like AOL users were...gu-hoo gu-hoo gu-hoo! Wake up, sheeple!". You're quite the rebel prophet, aren't you?

      That's an amazing quote you made up for me. I now understand why you don't understand when people make direct replies to your fallacious statements - you are one of those people who have imaginary arguments with people in your head. And when you can make up shit for them to say, you can win them all.

      And to eliminate all the other stuff you've posted, and to your earlier comments, There is no such thing as a free lunch. Never has been, never will be. If a person wants to store their images on Facebook, they do pay for it in one way or another. You say otherwise.

      I say I do my backups on machines that I control, and like it that way. And there are some very good reasons for that. Not free, but worth the price.

      You can have the last post, dear chachalaca, and declare yourself the winner. You can even make up some new quotes - or as some of us say - lies - for me to say. Declare yourself the winner, and collect one internet. I don't have discussions with people who make up things I was supposed to say, then draw a conclusion about me from what they made up.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    26. Re:keep what's yours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The FaceBook crowd would be on AOL in another era.

      Facebook IS the AOL of this era.

      There fixed that for ya! :)

    27. Re:keep what's yours by Toshito · · Score: 1

      But content isn't scarce anymore, so what's the point of permanence?

      The point of permanence and ownership is that my kids and grandkids will be able to read any books I bought or listen to my vinyl and cd records collection for the next 50 years.

      Even if some government decides that it's now banned, or it gets edited to remove non-PC parts, or ads and product placement get inserted into the streaming version, or the author decides that he doesn't want to distribute his work anymore, my version will always be the one I bought.

      And the other point is that I can also re-sell what I bought.

      Just the other day me and my girlfriend we went to a lot of garage sales, and one guy was selling books for 1$. Any book, very old, recent, paperback, big coffee table books, any one was 1$. We bought 21 of them. After reading them all, I'll give em away to family and friends, and keep some.

      Can't do that with "licensed", "rented", "streaming", "online" stuff.

      --
      Try it! Library of Babel
    28. Re:keep what's yours by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Facebook IS the AOL of this era.

      Not really. Back when electronic communication mostly meant email, in what people think of as the AOL era, I could send and receive email with people with @aol.com addresses. With Facebook, I have friends who don't use email, so I need to use Facebook Messenger to send them messages. (In many cases, phone calls are uncertain, and I'm not going to send snail mail messages without a compelling reason.)

      Facebook has succeeded where AOL failed, and I don't mean that in an approving way.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    29. Re:keep what's yours by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      I'm a product they want to keep happy, for continuing use as a product. I just post to Facebook with the assumption that the entire world has access to what I put there, because that seems to be a reasonably safe assumption. There are things you will not learn about me from Facebook (or anywhere on the Internet, for that matter).

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  4. That's like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "If he won't come to school we won't let him!!"

    Zuckerberg is free to kiss my ass any time now.

    1. Re:That's like by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Yuck! Have a little standard there!

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  5. Promise or threat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Is that a promise? Hope so.

  6. facebook apocalypse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    they are desperate because the WHOLE world is waking up about the information apocalypse , people are abandoning facebook

    I give FB another 3 years at best

    1. Re: facebook apocalypse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like a perfect target for anonymous to do some good. Are you guys listening? Come on! Drop Facebook and make them pay.

    2. Re: facebook apocalypse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anonymous doesn't exist. It was always a sting operation.

    3. Re: facebook apocalypse by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      ...said the AC.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  7. Strange game. by TigerPlish · · Score: 4, Funny

    The only winning move is not to play.

    --
    The "Civilized World" jumped the shark ca. 1973.
    1. Re:Strange game. by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure why you were modded funny. This is actually very insightful - as well as a perfectly apropos use of this line from the movie.

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    2. Re:Strange game. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A better pwning move is to upload tons of GARBAGE. Let them data mine and sell that.

      Time is money, waste both their time AND money.

  8. That's OK by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Delete them. I won't upload photos to Facebook anymore. End of issue.

    --
    -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
    1. Re:That's OK by war4peace · · Score: 1

      That's what one (at the time) well known image storing website did. Imageshack it was.
      First they said "no more uploading anonymously" so I created an account.
      Then they said "no more uploading your images for free, you need to buy one subscription model" so I stopped uploading images there.
      Finally they said "if you don't pay, we'll delete your photos" so I made a ticket saying "fuck you, delete my account" which they did.

      Go ello (https://ello.co/) and never look back, fuck Facebook.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    2. Re:That's OK by Pharmboy · · Score: 1

      I agree. I've already decided to not install the messenger app no matter what, told people I chat with. What sucks is when you try to use regular chat NOW, it will bump you to down toad the app a couple of times, won't let you into the regular chat until you do a couple of gyrations No thanks, just like I said no thanks to Windows 10.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    3. Re:That's OK by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 1

      To tell the truth I don't upload photos there much anymore anyway. If it doesn't have some stupid meme written on it people on Facebook don't look at them much anyway. It's turned in to a rant machine from an empathy box. Can I get an amen and share to that?

      --
      -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
    4. Re: That's OK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Got a very specific '722' photos will be deleted. Odd because i have Never used sync.
      My rich relations have expensive cameras. They share pics on low res FB. In my youth we had "slide shows" when family and visitors were corraled into a darkened room. Its rare, but occasionally people show their pics on their TV.

            bitd i paid $ for flickr. Fun for a while. i used uri of pics to post on blog. Now photo storage Cos hate that... they dont get a mention.
      Back to rss feeds in some kind of reader.
      I miss the old web.
      My old blog is fairly wrecked now, it had lots of links to things, pics, that dont exist now.

    5. Re: That's OK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I miss the old web.

      Me too. With HTML5 and CSS3 around now, there's so much cool stuff the old web could do with their outrageous designs. I miss the time when the Web was about communicating ideas, sharing art or stories, and exploring.

      With the advent of search engines, social networks, and pervasive ad networks, it's little more than a capitalist dream.

      There's Gopher, which is oddly enough still alive. It's a protocol that doesn't really allow for much in the way of security *or* tracking, it's text-only, and is gaining a little traction among those of us who are tired of the modern Web.

    6. Re:That's OK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck Imageshack for this.
      I never even got any e-mails or anything over this deletion stuff.
      I only found out by sheer luck that I decided to check my old imageshack accounts.
      I was already too late. All my shitty pictures I made for Myspace and PS3Forums, gone. RIP.
      I did pretty much the same as you did.

      Same with Minus, in another way. Their servers seem to be completely non-functional.
      I've lost access to a load of crappy pictures I've made and uploaded there through the past couple years.
      Site works, image server just doesn't. Tried it at different times, friends houses, nothing.
      A site that started out as a generic file host, which turned to only images, then became some shitty chat app with images, now it appears to be dead.
      Good fucking riddance.

      My friend made his own file server, which is in the ShareX upload list now.
      Never trusting stupid websites again.

  9. Users Threaten to Delete Facebook ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... if they don't stop being a horde of insufferable pricks.

  10. those who dont use these sites by nimbius · · Score: 4, Insightful

    are left to wonder, is this cycle of trust, greed, and betrayal an inextricable part of the experience? Is the lennart pottering libertarian stance of "well no ones making you use it" simply how we're to approach these cabals of internet service? They do no wrong, offer a service, and we're to accept the illusion of choice?

    shouldnt we, the product of sites like facebook, have more say in how the site is managed or what happens to our data? or are these sites just doomed to decline, obsolescence, and venture capital buyout without any accountability for the years of activity they had on the web vis-a-vis AOL?

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re: those who dont use these sites by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AOL.

    2. Re:those who dont use these sites by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People don't want to have a say. People like being in a leash. That's why Facebook is a success and diaspora isn't.

    3. Re:those who dont use these sites by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As long as nobody is being forced to use such products and services there should be no issue here. I won't use facebook for instance. The problem is only when companies end up monopolies and third parties such as schools, government, employers force you to adopt said proprietary tools, technologies, and services. Provided that is not the case it is ones own fault for choosing to use such products and services. Now if you didn't choose to use it and it's being forced on you that I'd have an objection to. If a company utilizes tactics pushing proprietary protocols into its products to monopolize a market. That's objectionable. Facebook could become an issue. I haven't seen that yet though. I don't use facebook and know a lot of people who don't. However if it becomes standard to utilize facbook in some way and not having or using facebook is an issue then yes- it's a problem.

      * Note: I do see sites integrating facebook and those who don't use facebook that are logged out do create a problem.

    4. Re:those who dont use these sites by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, I'm wondering if you can coherently form sentences and have a basic mastery of English. Based on your post, I think not.

    5. Re:those who dont use these sites by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      shouldnt we, the product of sites like facebook, have more say in how the site is managed or what happens to our data?

      1. On the subject of how Facebook is Managed:

      No, I don't expect to have any say in how Facebook is managed because I'm not an owner of Facebook. I have no shares in FB stock. However, from what I understand it wouldn't even matter if I did since Zuckerberg has superior shares that reserve complete control to him and him alone. It's his way or the highway so in exchange for a 0% share of the profits and no voting power, I say "no thanks" and keep my money. I don't own Facebook and I'm not involved with Facebook, as either a user or shareholder, and I like it that way which brings me to the next point:

      2. On the subject of what happens to our data:

      Because I'm not involved with Facebook in any way, I expect them to respect my privacy. It's too bad that the libel laws here in the United States aren't as strong as they are in the UK. If they were, it would be much easier to sue Facebook successfully for damages to reputation, especially if I'm not a user of Facebook and want nothing whatsoever to do with them. The answer to data privacy, in my opinion, is tougher libel laws. If companies had to think twice about storing data on people they don't do business with because they could be sued, you would see how well privacy would be respected. The British have a thing or two to teach us Americans in that regard.

    6. Re:those who dont use these sites by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Facebook is a billboard, and it's free to all. Can you think of a better setup? Only put up the data you want to share, pictures of products, prices, location, contact info, etc. Why does everybody make a big stink about nothing? This is what the *Market Will Bear*. It is what most people accept.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    7. Re:those who dont use these sites by BigU+03C0mpin · · Score: 1

      You have it wrong.

      It obviously costs money to store all those photos since they do require, you know, physical memory space and such.

      This is a natural move, install something that lets us market to you and gather more data on you or stop using our free service.

      I'll delete my account if they delete my photo's. Stop trying to squeeze a dime out of me, I have no real need for your service.

    8. Re:those who dont use these sites by ohnocitizen · · Score: 1

      It's not so cut and dry. When friends and family use the site to organize events, and post photos of you, saying "I just won't use it" isn't practical. If "no one makes you use it" was a sufficient argument or approach to corporate misbehavior we would live in a much nicer world. The reality is when corporations abuse their power - we move to regulate them or as we are able boycott them. (And if a boycott is not realistic, then at the moment turning to public outrage or legal recourse through the courts or the legislature is our best option).

    9. Re:those who dont use these sites by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      are left to wonder, is this cycle of trust, greed, and betrayal an inextricable part of the experience?

      Those of us who do use it can't figure out what the fuss is all about.

      shouldnt we, the product of sites like facebook, have more say in how the site is managed or what happens to our data?

      Why? Facebook is nothing more than a publication service. It displays content I put on there. I really couldn't care less if they change their requirements. It's not like I use it as my only copy of critical data, and those people who do get zero sympathy from me.

      Note the story here is that this only affects synced photos. Facebook releases a separate app for it, so it makes sense to only support the separate app going forward. Kind of like Messenger, a dedicated app that is much better than the shitfest of trying to have a text conversation through Facebook's own app.

    10. Re:those who dont use these sites by swb · · Score: 1

      Something seems to have gone off the rails.

      Innovation in terms of intrinsic product improvement or creation seems to be be supplanted by innovation as business engineering. This type of innovation produces product changes which increase lock-in, adds tracking, coerces users into other platforms, furthers planed obsolescence, basically anything that changes the products to improve profit margins first, with improvements to users a distant second if at all.

      I suspect that big companies like Facebook or Apple or the like will eventually cross some line, either individually or collectively and we will end up with some kind of regulations that slow this process or reverse it somewhat. There will be an argument that regulations will kill innovation, but we're already to the point where a lot of the so-called "innovation" isn't making things better, but is really just ways too wring more profit out of customers.

      Ultimately I think so many of these companies just end up being so profitable and control so much of the market, they are a prisoner of their own success and risk aversion and rather than produce real innovation, they are forced by Wall Street thinking into ways to push the margin up ever further.

  11. Problem Solved by Stomper_Stoddard · · Score: 1

    I deleted all my photos and replaced my profile picture with a picture of me flipping the bird. Now they don't have anything to hold over my head. Your move FaceBook.

  12. Finally a way to delete your account? by mattwarden · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Perhaps with enough threats like this my "deactivated" account will one day actually be deleted like I would prefer

    1. Re:Finally a way to delete your account? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look, I hate facebook more than anyone, and I haven't used the service in like 5-6 years. However, they do now technically differentiate between deactivated and deletion. They steer you hard towards deactivation, but you can override that and get the account deleted. Does the data get deleted? It's 2016, and corporations and the government have all the power. So, probably not. That's a different issue however. You can still delete your account. If you really have an old "deactivated" account, you should see if you can get back in and actually delete it. At least, if the legislature ever decides it's on our side again, you'll be on record as having formally went through the deletion process.

    2. Re:Finally a way to delete your account? by mattwarden · · Score: 1

      Thanks. I guess I didn't look around long enough, as I didn't see the delete option. I guess I need to reactivate my account to see if I can delete it

  13. Moments app? by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

    Is that a smartphone-only thing? Will computer users have their photos deleted?

    Can anyone think of a synonym for "network" that begins with the letter "S"?

    Anti-Social S????? (ASS.com)

    1. Re:Moments app? by taustin · · Score: 2

      Since it apparently only affects synced photos, yeah, apparently, it is a smartphone only thing. That much is in the summary.

    2. Re:Moments app? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      do the summaries get edited post-post these days? It's quite plausible that my eyes grazed over it, but I don't recall seeing the specific July 7th date, or the italicized 'synced' verbiage when I read/skimmed the summary the first time. I suppose the like minded confusion I see in the comments could be explained by that, or people that react to the unclarified first sentences of the summary and headline.

  14. It's their right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Facebook can dictate whatever they want to you, you have zero rights except to leave Facebook and even after that they keep the rights on your images and postings. Read their EULA and stop whining. It's your decision where you upload your photos to.

  15. Makes you wonder what spyware FB has in "Moments" by shubus · · Score: 1

    You can bet that if FB is forcing this issue then they have some kind of spyware in it. Facial recognition, anyone? Glad I'm not on FB. I encourage all my friends to vacate NSA's premise, err...I mean FB.

  16. must be learning a thing or two from.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    microsoft's recent antics forcing windows 10 on everybody. i suppose it is microsoft's turn to say upgrade 'or else', now.

  17. By Delete them by bobstreo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    they mean, remove them from your ability to access them.

      I'm guessing they're probably planning on holding onto them, and using them for pattern training, facial recognition and future blackmail..

    1. Re:By Delete them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you forgot highly targeted psychological persuasion campaigns to convince you to spend money you otherwise wouldn't have spent.

  18. You are the product, not the customer by NotInHere · · Score: 4, Informative

    For facebook, you are the product, not the customer. I don't get it why people think otherwise and then first use it and after that get upset if they get treated like a product.

    Don't make a facebook account, that's it.

    1. Re:You are the product, not the customer by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      > I don't get it why people think otherwise and then first use it and after that get upset if they get treated like a product.

      Because, sadly, you can't stop idiots from using fazebook. They don't understand that someone else is profiting off the data they voluntarily gave.

    2. Re:You are the product, not the customer by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      With Facebook, Yoooo toooo can make millions selling distressed properties! Sign up now!

      People shouldn't take this internet stuff personally. Just treat it like a business. And do like the rich and famous, use a personal server for email and other *cough* personal information that might be used against you.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    3. Re:You are the product, not the customer by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Ironically enough the people most upset about this are the people who don't use Facebook.

      As for your product not consumer meme, please go and take a course in basic business if you believe you're only one or the other.

  19. FB was always anti-social by rsborg · · Score: 0

    This is only the beginning...of the anti-social network

    You think this is the beginning of the antisocial network? Zuckerberg, the highly socially skilled coder, thinks you're a dumbfuck: http://www.businessinsider.com...

    --
    Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
    1. Re:FB was always anti-social by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is only the beginning...of the anti-social network

      You think this is the beginning of the antisocial network? Zuckerberg, the highly socially skilled coder, thinks you're a dumbfuck: http://www.businessinsider.com...

      With story after story about the above, and Facebook's treatment of its users, all the privacy problems, etc ... anyone who continues to use it falls under at least one of two categories: they enjoy the abuse, or they're morons.

      You would have to be pretty stupid to be on the world's most massive and well-connected global communications network, and still think you need a particular web site to communicate.

    2. Re:FB was always anti-social by Man+On+Pink+Corner · · Score: 1

      The definition of irony: people arguing with each other on Facebook -- a platform whose founder considers them all 'dumbfucks' and has said as much -- about whether or not Trump has "finally gone too far this time."

    3. Re: FB was always anti-social by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look, I understand you. I completely understand you but... Face it, we're in the minority and losing ground every single day. I've kept away from social networks and there has been a time when I actually felt a smug sense of superiority over the "sheeple" who were giving up information about them to the Zucks of this world. No more. The Zucks have won. The internet has been reshaped in their image. Staying out is becoming increasingly pricey in terms of social interaction and career opportunities. You're not on Facebook? You do not tweet? Weirdo, antisocial, not a team player, do not bother hiring, do not bother contracting. That's the sad reality and we don't have the critical mass to do anything about it. Sooner or later I'll have to open an account, so I'll have at least a small measure of control over the information they already have thanks to people who have looked me up and who tagged my face. And to think I live in Europe where this invasion of privacy is actually illegal... But the Zucks are mightier than the law. :(

  20. No More Facebook News Unless Declaring Bankruptsy by zenlessyank · · Score: 1

    Thank you.

  21. The pattern is clear by zuki · · Score: 2

    This is only the beginning of the systematic rape of users and their data. Once tech companies have passed certain milestones in terms of size and user base, this power they hold over the plumbing infallibly goes to their collective heads.

    Just as Microsoft with the Windows 10 upgrades. It's merely a confirmation that we must find ways around entrusting our digital assets to such 'for-profit' outfits. They're obviously banking their entire business model on the fact that they will be able to monetize the user data for far more than what it's costing them, offering "free" as a way to entice them in.

    While it's not sexy, there needs to be the open-source equivalent, sort of what Android is to Windows but for social networks. Something that is community-supported, and allows people more freedom, even if the price is less curation and more chaos. Sort of like... The Internet?

    1. Re:The pattern is clear by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      usenet used to be free and not owned by any one corp. most was not censor-able and no one could 'take their ball and go home' like they can with websites.

      you could fetch news and there was no COOKIE to let on that you were fetching news. think about that for a minute. seriously, think about what we lost when we added our own trackability to things.

      usenet was wonderful, for the most part. there was spam and commercial activity but a lot of it was self policed and done well enough so that we could use the medium and get real stuff done (and have fun, too).

      the web sucks. its broken by design, at this point. the transport protocols are not secure and we really could use an internet 2.1 (there was a 2.0 but I never got access to it. maybe 2.1 ?)

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    2. Re: The pattern is clear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can delete cookies, or have browser addons regulate external access to your cookies.

  22. This is perfect. by rsborg · · Score: 1

    I actually am glad - my wife posted family photos a while back (years ago, we don't make that mistake anymore), and maybe now that FB is threatening this, we'll get those old ones removed (at least from public access), too.

    Mark, keep this up! I simply can't wait until FB starts deleting other sections of your account for not installing other apps. First FB Messenger, now FB Moments, what's next? FB Graph?

    --
    Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
  23. Re:Panic in the (facebook) city by coastwalker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Facebook is fine so long as you do not use it for social networking. Great for cat pictures, great for liking random products. Just do not use it for anything personal.

    --
    Facts are history now plebs have politics for religion on social media.
  24. Property of Facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just sign on the dotted line in blood.

  25. Simple Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Replace all of your photos with goatse

  26. Facepalm by fred911 · · Score: 1

    Aside from the obvious "all your base are belong to us" great way to alienate users that don't use a mobile platform.

    Or those that don't trust os level permissions allowed on just about any of them.

    --
    09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
  27. Why do I care by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 1

    I don't have facebook. And this is why. I don't make broken shit, I don't buy broken shit. Professional ethics.

  28. What about non-mobile users? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just out of curiosity.... If I was a web Facebook user and I didn't have a mobile device to install the app on, would my pictures get deleted anyway?

  29. darwin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1+ billion fucktards can't be wrong. Keep using facebook. Keep proving Darwin was right.

  30. Proclaim our Greatness! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Zuckerberg is globalist trash!
    Free yourself of the parasitism social media!
    Hail the God Emperor!

  31. Entitled millenials explode in anger by gavron · · Score: 0

    "Not content with forcing people into using its Messenger app, Facebook is continuing its aggressive tactics and driving users to install its photo-sharing app, Moments"

    Not content? Aggressive tactics? Driving users? Perhaps it's time for an entitlement-check - when someone gives you free software and access to their social network perhaps a better attitude might be:

    Soon after giving people its second free app, the free online social network is now giving a second app and removing duplicate functionality.

    TFTFY.

    E

  32. Re:Panic in the (facebook) city by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Facebook is shit. Free yourself of the social parasite.

  33. This is stupid of them for the most part. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When something online is free, "you are the product"... with that being the case, Facebook looks pretty stupid deleting their own "inventory". However, I am sure they have already done the cost benefit analysis and determined it preferable to get users to install an app. Simply accessing facebook via a mobile browser does not give facebook the system level penetration they want on a user's phone/system.

  34. re: left to wonder by King_TJ · · Score: 1

    Well, first off? I don't think there's any point in trying to twist this into some sort of "anti libertarian" rant ... implying it's libertarian philosophies which cause sites like Facebook to act the way they do.

    IMO, this has nothing to do with politics, unless you're going to go so far as to say you feel social media, cloud drive storage, cloud backup and other such offerings should all be run only by the government or strictly regulated under government control. (I suppose that's ONE way to try to force these entities not to delete your data against your will or suddenly go out of business without adequate provisions for recovering your data first, or ??)

    But otherwise, no ... the truth is the same as ever. If someone offers you a service at no charge, you really have no say when it comes to not liking the way the service is performed, or any changes made to the rules of how the free service gets offered. Your options include discontinuing use of the service, complying with whatever rules and demands are placed upon it to continue using it, or spending money for alternatives (which could include building your own).

    That said? I see no harm in complaining when you're unhappy. If nothing else, Facebook management needs to hear the opinions of the user-base. If it's clear that a change is so strongly disliked, it causes a lot of people to stop using it -- at least they can't pretend not to understand why it happened. And maybe ... just maybe, it will cause them to rethink a bad idea once in a while and preserve the service as a little more friendly to use.

  35. If Zuckerberg demanded ius primae noctis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    people would still not leave Facebook, would they.

  36. What is Facebook? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought that died years ago. Who would use such kiddie trash? I guess that there are still a lot of insecure people who have to cry out to the world, "Look at me! Look at me!"

  37. Nobody cares. by Fragnet · · Score: 1

    Nobody cares what your cat looks like or what you ate for breakfast. Facebook is saving you the trouble of deleting them.

  38. Deleted? by Sperbels · · Score: 1

    Deleted? I have a hard time believing they delete any private information about users, including pictures. More like, they'll take your pictures offline so they still have your data, but you can't access it anymore.

  39. excellent idea by gomoku · · Score: 1

    Always wondered how I could make sure that my photos really did get removed after ditching the platform. Now they are doing it for me. :)

    --
    Track your fitness and strength gains with www.trackmytraining.net
  40. RIP PC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is that a smartphone-only thing? Will computer users have their photos deleted?

    Somehow I doubt it, because of how obviously stupid that sounds. But that certainly is what the /. clickbait headline and summary seem to suggest. Dollars to donuts we get another high value /. post within a week explaining how this /. summary was misrepresentative of what a real journalist would have said about the situation.

  41. Stop using Farcebook by Aethedor · · Score: 1

    Only ignorant people keep on using Facebook these days.

    --
    It doesn't have to be like this. All we need to do is make sure we keep talking.
    1. Re:Stop using Farcebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It must suck being a friendless loser like you.

    2. Re:Stop using Farcebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was wondering where the paid shills were...

  42. Re: left to wonder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    However, deleting files from your device if you don't comply with an order from them is both a violation of the CFAA and extortion.

  43. I'm so important by AndyKron · · Score: 1

    "This has understandably led to panic installations of Moments " Like their photos are worth twiddly shit.

  44. illegal tying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is textbook illegal tying. And don't tell my Facebook is free, it may not cost money but it is commerce (we both get something of value).

  45. Wake-up call by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This should be a wake-up call to folks who use freedom-restricting products/services like Facebook, iPhone, Kindle etc.: You, and your data, are at the mercy of these companies. "Install this app, or we will delete all your photos". "Upgrade to the newest version of iOS, or your iPhone stops working". etc, etc, etc.

    It is time to boycott all this nonsense, and go back to the good-old-fashioned method of keeping your photos, etc ON YOUR OWN HARD DISK, THAT YOU CAN PHYSICALLY HOLD IN YOUR HAND. And if you want to share a photo with friends/family, then e-mail it to them. It's not that hard.

    Facebook is a toxic cancer that needs to be eliminated from our society.

  46. Don't give Microsoft any ideas by ayesnymous · · Score: 1

    Otherwise they'll start deleting your C:\users\ directory if you don't upgrade to Windows 10.

  47. It can't be legal, at least not in EU by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    I know that americans firmly believe that it's the god-given right of companies to screw them any way they like, but it doesn't work that way in the rest of the world, particularly not in the EU.

    Here companies have a legal duty of care to the public which is codified in a large number of consumer and data protection laws, and those laws have teeth.

    A company has the right to implement anything they want on their own machinery, but that right doesn't extend to the machinery of others. They don't own their user's equipment and so they can't mandate that a user install anything on it. Even less can they threaten users with destruction of data or loss of access if they fail to comply with what appears to be an unlawful request.

    Facebook runs a web service, not an end-to-end delivery service running on set-top boxes or other equipment leased from Facebook over which they could have legal control. In trying to assert control over equipment which they do not own, they appear to have exceeded the boundaries of their legal rights. The threats just make it worse.

  48. The Cloud s a synonym for someone else's computer by mTor · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That's all it really is. You're basically entrusting your data with companies that have to somehow make money off you or off your data.

    So don't be surprised when they pull crap like this on you.

  49. What this actually means..? by bug_hunter · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So can someone explain if the following is true as it's my understanding:

    * Facebook can be configured to automatically sync photos from your mobile device.
    * That makes it super quick to share a photo. (and probably gives Facebook access to all your photos without user intervention)
    * Now Facebook will discard the server side copy of photos that you never shared or put into an album unless you install moments?

    Sorry if I've got my facts wrong, though it's so hard to work out the actual facts when 99% of discussion is Facebook bashing rather than fact discussing.
    (No fan of Facebook policies here myself, just annoyed at how hard it is to work out what's going on outside of "Facebook = evil")

    --
    It's turtles all the way down.
    1. Re:What this actually means..? by Christopher+Fritz · · Score: 4, Informative

      As I understand it, the Facebook app had a feature to synchronize photos you've taken to Facebook. This feature has been removed from the Facebook app, and put into a separate app (which probably has extra features related specifically to managing synced photos, I'm guessing). If you used the synchronization feature in the Facebook app, you need to install the Moments app to continue to use that feature. Anything synced from the Facebook app will be deleted, unless "transferred" to synchronizing from the Moments app. A feature from one app is being branched off to another app. If you want to use that feature, there's a more specific place for it now.

      I've never used any of these apps, so I don't know how accurate this is. It's just what I gather from reading some articles on this.

    2. Re:What this actually means..? by bug_hunter · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the info.
      I know Facebook isn't the most altruistic business by any stretch, but I never understood the massive hate for breaking messages out into a message app, and similarly for this.
      A separate app for messages makes a lot of sense, especially when it comes to notification settings, updates and local storage. All these apps are dollar amount free, and I feel their separation is for a cleaner technical experience rather than anything nefarious.
      I completely respect people who don't want to use Facebook for privacy or other reasons, but I don't feel this is a smoking gun of them hating their users or even mistreating them.

      --
      It's turtles all the way down.
    3. Re:What this actually means..? by iris-n · · Score: 1

      I'm one of the haters. I don't use Facebook's app because I don't want to give them total control of my phone, I just use the mobile version of the website. And now messages don't work anymore unless I install their crappy app! Well, I won't. I'll just use WhatsApp instead and be free of these assholes. Oh wait.

      --
      entropy happens
    4. Re:What this actually means..? by Raenex · · Score: 1

      I completely respect people who don't want to use Facebook for privacy or other reasons, but I don't feel this is a smoking gun of them hating their users or even mistreating them.

      It's one thing to separate out an app, it's another to bully users into downloading the app by telling them you're going to delete their photos if you don't move to it. Is this the kind of move you'd make if it was your decision?

    5. Re:What this actually means..? by Zeroko · · Score: 1

      Except that each separate app is bigger than the original app was when it did all the things (& I have yet to actually use any of the new features, as far as I can tell). It has gotten so big that my phone crashes (the OOM killer takes everything out, eventually including something-or-another important) if I attempt to install any recent version of the main Facebook app (whereas you would think separating the parts would have fixed that). I would say it must be because I have too little RAM, except that everything else seems to fit & work just fine.

    6. Re:What this actually means..? by bug_hunter · · Score: 1

      Yeah, to be fair to your point, I don't think Facebook is really hurting when it comes to disk space.
      The delete does sound more like a strong-arm tactic than a - we need to do this to keep things manageable - tactic.

      --
      It's turtles all the way down.
    7. Re:What this actually means..? by Raenex · · Score: 1

      I appreciate your acknowledgement. It's a rare occurrence.

  50. It never ceases to amaze me.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How is it that people are so willing to put up with shit like this?

  51. f&%k all the selfies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So all the selfie mirror pics with your tits out and that collection of dildo's in the background are at risk of getting deleted.

    1. Re:f&%k all the selfies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nooo! Plese Zuck, don't do this! Anything but the selfies of young, underaged females in bikini!

  52. That's a MASSIVE breach of copyright by Khyber · · Score: 2

    I've read and done term searching on FaceBook's ToS. Nothing in their ToS states that you have given them the right to DESTROY your copyrighted material.

    Sue their ass under the DMCA for violating and destroying your copyright. They voted for this law, time to put it to use against them.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    1. Re:That's a MASSIVE breach of copyright by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Uploading your stuff doesn't delete the copy on your device, they're just removing their copy, not the original. I'm sure they also say they're not liable for loss of data and that they can do what they want with your account including removing whatever content they want.

    2. Re:That's a MASSIVE breach of copyright by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uploading your stuff doesn't delete the copy on your device, they're just removing their copy, not the original. I'm sure they also say they're not liable for loss of data and that they can do what they want with your account including removing whatever content they want.

      That is not necessarily true. When it comes to syncing often times removing the remote copy will also delete the original on your device as well. Try it with dropbox sometime.

    3. Re:That's a MASSIVE breach of copyright by Khyber · · Score: 1

      Do you not understand that copyright is automatically granted to the creator of a work? Try again when you understand the Trademark, Patent, and Copyright section of law.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    4. Re:That's a MASSIVE breach of copyright by Khyber · · Score: 1

      "When it comes to syncing often times removing the remote copy will also delete the original on your device as well."

      DING DING DING we have a winner!

      I guess people don't understand that SYNC means "Make everything THE SAME across all instances" in computer terms.

      Which means if you wipe something on one device that action should carry over to every other device following the same sync protocol.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    5. Re:That's a MASSIVE breach of copyright by Shawndeisi · · Score: 1

      Are you implying that Facebook has a duty to publish your copyrighted material? They're not destroying copyrighted material when they stop hosting any more than people are stealing when they copy copyrighted information.

  53. Sherman act by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    when dadada deposites in a petri dish as an HBS sized sausage chopper bangs out another sausage bill-ong-air

  54. I don't use Facebook mobile by ubergeek65536 · · Score: 2

    I wouldn't care if Facebook deleted everything but how many people don't use Facebook via a phone? I refuse to use apps that have access to my contact lists, sms messages, and call history.

    1. Re:I don't use Facebook mobile by Alumoi · · Score: 1

      Really? And how do you dial? Whistle in the microphone? The phone dialer is an app, you know. And, lo and behold, it has access to your contacts, sms, call history.

    2. Re:I don't use Facebook mobile by ubergeek65536 · · Score: 1

      I should have been more specific. I don't install apps that require network access which have access to contacts and SMS unless I see the source.
      You can install your own trusted dialer app or better yet, build and install the OS. I have all network access firewalled by default just in case I miss something.

  55. who didn't know? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsoft forces spyware updates on all Windows versions except the ones they sneak. They lie about it. They obfuscate.

    Google won't stop tracking you. You can't hardly access a website without hitting a captcha. (means their servers see your browser ID and IP)

    Facebook has all your stuff you say and want more? Golly.

    Could it be oh I don't know..

    This:
    Eric Schmidt Gets A Job At The Pentagon - Slashdot
    https://news.slashdot.org/story/16/03/06/1834211/eric-schmidt-gets-a-job-at-the-pentagon

    They take your tax dollars. Bill Gates has almost 100 billion dollars. Do you know what Linux or FreeBSD could do with 100 billion dollars? That is just he and his wife's assets.

    The us gov was going to split Microsoft in two, which didn't happen. Are they any scholars around?

  56. Re:Panic in the (facebook) city by Opportunist · · Score: 0

    Oh c'mon, Facebook has existed for years, what do you call a beginning?

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  57. Is this only for mobile users? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What if'n you don't have a thingy what runs apps?

    1. Re:Is this only for mobile users? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      then you use luddite software and not apps?

  58. Re:Panic in the (facebook) city by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is why I don't store files on 3rd party servers. Because I run my own server, I can be sure that nothing like this will ever happen and that nobody has access to my stuff unless I want them to.

    I'm glad I have actual friends and so was never suckered into the whole "social" media thing.

  59. Re: Panic in the (facebook) city by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Facebook is great if you're a marketer. They are a data/ad company, not a social network.

  60. Re:Panic in the (facebook) city by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://imgur.com/r/cats

    Got your cat pics covered man.

  61. LOL, too funny by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 2

    Serves people right for using Facebook.

    Grovel, you worthless worms, and swear fealty to the Almighty Zuckerberg!

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    1. Re:LOL, too funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Zukerberg is just a front, the real power is the people standing behind him, he is just the puppet in the show.

  62. Walled garden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... forcing people into using its Messenger app ...

    The walled garden slowly appears.

    ... photos face deletion ...

    Two years ago, Facebook was the data aggregator that never deleted anything. I don't believe that has changed.

    ... people sought to protect the photos ...

    Tech-savy Facebook subscribers (possibly a contradiction in terms) should be teaching other subscribers how to back-up their Facebook cloud. Then Facebook won't be blackmailing them.

    ... element of confusion about what Facebook is planning ...

    Only when one has the stupidity to use Facebook for storing photos, emails, or other files.

  63. Re:Panic in the (facebook) city by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    +1 I mostly read Facebook for the spam nowadays

  64. Sheep by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The problem ain't facebook. I'm sorry to say the problem is consumer sheep. As long as we are as we are, anything could step into facebook's place were facebook (ah, dreams!) to disappear tomorrow.

    Just ditch facebook. Don't twitter. Don't google. Internet's big enough to give you fun without those. Still...

  65. Creepiness, creeping in... by Howitzer86 · · Score: 2

    Sometimes I avoid doing things without a clear logical reason... like photo synching with cloud stuff. Every cloud company is trying to get at my photos, but not everything is something I want on a server somewhere... so I never did it and found the push to do it by various apps to be annoying. I pay for Dropbox, so I'm not being a Luddite. I was just unwilling to upload my pictures automatically to everything everywhere.

    Good to see that my not-completely-rational avoidance of these things can have a rational basis. Between this and Apple's cloud music problem, I'm in no rush to give up control of my content to a third party.

    On that note, imagine for a moment if Facebook were to replace all of your photos with generic whitewashed sitcom versions of the same thing, starring actors with perfect teeth and hair. Wouldn't that be creepy? That's basically what Apple did to people's cloud synched music. Unique, hard to find versions of specific songs... potentially lost forever, replaced with whatever official version Apple has.

    Honestly the whole thing is creepy when you get down to it. Even Microsoft's effort to force installs of Windows 10. What's going on in Silicon Valley (or Redmond/or this generation of the tech sector in general)?!

  66. Re: Panic in the (facebook) city by vivian · · Score: 2

    Facebook is great if you're a marketer. They are a data/ad company, not a social network.

    No its not - I have a web based business that has thousands of likes for our products on the facebook page but even during the period when we were getting the most likes, they never translated into actual sales or noticeably extra visits to our website.

    In my case, I saw a very low conversion rate between between likes and resulting extra traffic - let alone actual sales.

  67. Re:Panic in the (facebook) city by Thanatiel · · Score: 1

    Who would be stupid enough to use FaceBook or any of its clones for personal stuff ? Why not post their pictures and their lives in the newspaper while they are at it ? (And they must not fail to advertise when they are abroad).
    This is to be used only for bland avatars, left rotting in the wind after a few days/weeks, with all advertising blocked.

    --
    Irrelevant news and morons using moderation to mod down what they disagree on. 2018 resolution: so long.
  68. Facebook is so fakebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I am always amazed at how companies get just so big, and then begin the slow downward spiral. Some may do it it much faster but eventually they commit a series of bad decisions that eventually causes it's demise. Maybe it's because many have stock holders to answer too, or it's the companies desperate need for more money. Facebook to me was never more than a brilliant way of data mining people's information and using the format to push ads and other targeted commerce towards the end users. Since Facebook depends not on the user for direct support, but only on their information.
    Of course Facebook will force whatever it needs too onto that user.

  69. Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A way to delete content from Facebook, just don't use the app if you want to start deleting your stuff from Facebook! Wooo!

  70. Facebook apps by Malc · · Score: 1

    How many Facebook apps do we need? Isn't one buggy, battery draining, privacy invading app enough? If I want Facebook I just use my phone's browser now. They've tried to make it harder for you if you want to use private browsing sessions, but then that justs add to my feeling of enough is enough!

  71. The walls around Facebook are growing higher... by QuietLagoon · · Score: 1

    Facebook looks as if it is rapidly becoming a walled community, a platform separate from the rest of the Internet.

  72. F*ckers(berg) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Go ahead! I delete them myself anyway after people have seen them because I don't want my personal property on your theiving, insecure servers! So pathetic. ;)

  73. You guys are in an abusive relationship by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's been time to get out for the better part of a decade now. You have no control over anything on that site, and if you honestly believe otherwise, you're just deluding yourself.

    Here's a handy guide showing the seven (!!!) step process that will actually delete (as opposed to deactivate) your FB account that google found for me. http://www.wikihow.com/Permanently-Delete-a-Facebook-Account

    Follow these steps and 90 short days later, you should actually be free of their bullshit.

    I did this many years ago, and it's one of the better decisions I ever made. Farmville, Mafia Wars, and an endless stream of pointless updates from vapid people of all ages, all being collected, sorted and data mined to be sold to anyone that wants my metadata? Good riddance.

    There are other ways to stay in touch with your friends.

  74. Just.Say.No! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    fb:Just.Say.No!

  75. And nothing of value was lost. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like Facebook is finally doing the world a good service. Kudos to the new NSA^W FB for that.

  76. Re: Panic in the (facebook) city by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The likes probably came from people who had already done business with you.

  77. If you're stupid enough to use facebook apps by ToddInSF · · Score: 1

    You pretty much deserve what happens to you.

  78. Re: Panic in the (facebook) city by doccus · · Score: 1

    Yeah.. I have trouble understanding why people buy, sell, trade "likes" y'know, from places that promise to get you tons of them etc. In the real world, instead of Zuckerworld, people buy and sell items of actual value. But what the hell value doe a "like" have? I heard recently about one of your American candidates buying tens of thousands (could have been hundreds of thousands, I don't recall) of "likes" and I say, whatever for?

  79. Re:Panic in the (facebook) city by doccus · · Score: 1

    This is why I don't store files on 3rd party servers. Because I run my own server, I can be sure that nothing like this will ever happen and that nobody has access to my stuff unless I want them to.

    I'm glad I have actual friends and so was never suckered into the whole "social" media thing.

    Touche!

  80. Yet another reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To tell Facebook to F! off! People should just start ABANDONING Facebook. The ONLY thing Facebook will understand is when people start deleting their accounts wholesale. But Generally people who use Facebook are mind numbed imbeciles anyway. So they will willingly accept more abuse by Faceboook.

  81. Re:Panic in the (facebook) city by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Liking products? Who the hell "likes" diapers and other crap pushed by marketing?
    Feedback and reviews belongs on e-commerce websights or youtube videos.

  82. News just in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Corporations now openly threatening and blackmailing users. Users continue to love the corporation.

    Film at 11

  83. But what is it? by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

    That still doesn't explain what is a synced photo and how it differs from an uploaded photo.

  84. BS.... by SuperDre · · Score: 1

    Oh, and who reported it? is there real evidence? Because if this is real, why didn't a lot of users get the same 'threath'..
    Reading the original article I don't even see a decent Source, I even see it has a badly written email which I think is even more a fishing mail than a real mail from facebook..
    To me, this just looks more like the original article write wanted some extra traffic to his site without really investigating the actual claim if it's true..

  85. And for users without the app? by allo · · Score: 1

    What about users, which only use the website?

  86. Since when by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since when does Facebook actually delete anything?