Slashdot Mirror


Facebook Tweaks Privacy Tools To Ease Discontent Over Data Leak (reuters.com)

Facebook has adjusted privacy settings to give users more control over their information in a few taps, it said on Wednesday, after an outcry over a whistleblower's allegations that members' data was used to sway the 2016 U.S. election. From a report: It put all the settings on one page and made it easier to change and more straightforward to stop apps using data. Until now changing settings had been complex, spread over at least 20 screens, which had frustrated users. The world's largest social network said in a blog post it had been working on the updates for some time but sped things up to appease users' anger over how the company uses their data and as lawmakers around the globe called for strong regulation. "Last week showed how much more work we need to do to enforce our policies and help people understand how Facebook works and the choices they have over their data," Facebook wrote in the blog post on Wednesday.

57 comments

  1. Too little by nucleartool · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It seems like this new feature was waiting to be launched much like those news articles ready for when people of fame/stature die. I wouldn't trust them. This tool is a reaction to the news and stock value, not because they want to empower users.

    1. Re:Too little by jellomizer · · Score: 2

      Agreed. It seems like an I'm sorry we got caught, vs. an I'm sorry for what I did.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    2. Re:Too little by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      It seems like this new feature was waiting to be launched much like those news articles ready for when people of fame/stature die.

      Facebook needs more than a "new feature" or a "tweak".

      This reminds me of the diesel scandal, with automakers saying that they could fix everything with a simple "tweak" . . .

      Facebook needs a complete overhaul, top to bottom, left to right, up and down, and many other innumerable directions.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    3. Re:Too little by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry we got caught, vs. an I'm sorry for what I did

      I'm sorry we got caught, vs Well, we did ask you about this, and this, and this one, plus this one, too, etc.

      Pairing FB messenger with Android's permission set is not the bad part.
       
      Venkman: I'm a little fuzzy on the good part-bad part thing.
      Egon:Try to imagine all life as you know it stopping instantaneously and every molecule in your body exploding at the speed of light.
       
      The bad part is someone you know has that set-up, and tried to reach you (you were on his contact list). Your info from his contact list, plus other data e.g. text messages, attempts to contact you, whereabouts, etc. has suddenly become part of their data trough
       
      Venkman: Right. That's bad. Okay. All right. Important safety tip. Thanks, Egon.

    4. Re:Too little by nucleartool · · Score: 1

      Given that their entire market value is based on all that data I doubt it will happen. They can never apologise for this, they have to say that users willingly gave over this information for sale/mining. And perhaps we did, but they have to spin the 'problem' as a user permission/education issue vs corporate profiteering on said data. So here comes the tools to put the control back in users hands just when they need it.

    5. Re:Too little by datavirtue · · Score: 2

      It also demonstrates that they were purposefully acting shady to begin with.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    6. Re:Too little by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People are calling this a leak or a breach. Those idiots don't get it - It's SUPPOSED to work like this.

    7. Re:Too little by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, and addition to that, you have to be truly naive to believe any real change was made. The internal memo to the employees says, "All you dumbasses better learn how to cover your tracks! Get caught and we blame/sue you!"

    8. Re:Too little by unixisc · · Score: 1

      I want to disable FaceBook's ability to suggest new 'friends' to me. Is that now there in their new settings?

  2. Too little. Too late. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I didn't choose to #DeleteFacebook because of CA, but because Facebook wasn't paying me to provide them with intellectual and emotional labor. These changes don't fix the fundamental problem with Facebook, which is that the company derives far more value from users' activities than the users themselves do.

    1. Re:Too little. Too late. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not sure how you're ever going to get laid now, but whatever, it's your life #FUCKTARD.

    2. Re:Too little. Too late. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I didn't choose to #DeleteFacebook because of CA, but because Facebook wasn't paying me to provide them with intellectual and emotional labor.

      Is twitter paying you for your inane use of hashtags outside of it's platform?

    3. Re:Too little. Too late. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have Tindr and Grindr for that. That's how I met your mother and father, respectively.

    4. Re: Too little. Too late. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't delete a facebook account.
      You can block access, if FaceBook approves.

    5. Re:Too little. Too late. by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      "the fundamental problem with Facebook, which is that the company derives far more value from users' activities than the users themselves do."
      I think you hit the nail on the head of this debate. You cannot operate like that without the government protecting you.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
  3. You know what, Zuck? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As a non-Facebook user I find it disgusting that I've to put up with your ads all over the place just because you've got the money to buy them.

    Stop intruding into my life. I haven't called you.

  4. Translation by jenningsthecat · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Last week showed how much more work we need to do to enforce our policies and help people understand how Facebook works and the choices they have over their data

    Last week showed that the jig's up, and that at least for a little while we have to pretend that we give a shit about the concerns of Facebook users by making a show of giving them the illusion of control over their data. Dumb fucks.

    --
    'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
    1. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yup, unless they add a setting which basically says hide everything from everyone except my friends, then it's totally bullshit.

    2. Re:Translation by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Will hide data collection and sale of data much better next time.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    3. Re:Translation by hjf · · Score: 1

      We develop an app to respond to facebook comments and messages. Facebook won't give us the same user ID for "messenger" and for "page comments". They claim this is for protecting user privacy (dude their name and profile pic are there!)

      The truth is: they give you app-scoped IDs so YOU can't mine data on their users.

      But doing so, with our app we can't determine if you wrote to us in public before. So we have two open tickets from you: one for your public comment, one for private.... it's stupid.

      And people are offended about facebook? I guess no one has ever read Twitter API. It's a joy for datamining. They even give you tweets in real time by location! give them latitude and longitude, and twitter just starts streaming tweets at you from that location!

  5. In other words... by Virtucon · · Score: 2

    Facebook gets caught hawking your data and has to scramble to release that project that Jerry was working on down the hall in a hurry.

    --
    Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
    1. Re:In other words... by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      LMAO!!! That's aweseom.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
  6. Facebook Tweaks Privacy Tools for not to get ... by Qbertino · · Score: 1

    ... sued for a bazillion dollars once the EU GDPR goes live on May 25th 2018.

    FTFY.

    Facebook could probably just wait for the Cambridge Analytics thing to blow over - which it probably will. The CA thing and FBs encroachment on privacy arent't exactly news even though most of the world seems to think so today. Most will probably have forgotten again in 2 weeks time. FB however can not afford to get pissy with the EU GDPR, as it's clearly designed to bar off some of the worst privacy issues with FB, Google and the likes. Including fines that *really* hurt - unlike the laughable stuff courts have fined to date.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
  7. Blurred focus becomes crystal clear immediately. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Blurred focus becomes crystal clear immediately.

    CAPTCHA: attempts

  8. No change. by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you think Facebook tweaking the setting page is going to change how they have been doing things for the last 14 years then you are as dumb as they think you are.

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    1. Re:No change. by supremebob · · Score: 1

      Yeah, unless they add "Delete Android call log history" button to their privacy controls interface, I'm not interested in their changes. Their app isn't going back onto my phone until they show me exactly what data they are collecting now, and what data they collected in the past.

    2. Re:No change. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, I believe that they would add that button. I bet that if you pushed it and confirmed the warning it would even stop displaying that call log history to you. I don't believe for an instant that it would actually delete it though. I believe it would populate a field in a database labeled "display_to_user" to false, and nothing more.

    3. Re:No change. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I keep thinking this. I could code a page with switches for privacy on it in about half a day that would make the general plebes all warm and fuzzy inside but if those settings essentially turn off a public display of data I'm ganking instead of actually turning off ganking that data and storing it somewhere hidden, what fucking good has it actually done? Marketing BS, but Facebook isn't going to stop storing your every digital move forever and ever and ever amen because that's the entire mode of operation.

  9. They can't think we are this stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    None of that addresses Facebook themselves. What a load of crap. Until these companies are forbidden to collect data themselves, all of these 'solutions' are the emptiest of gestures.

  10. Default to NO sharing by GrBear · · Score: 1

    Wake me up when they switch all data sharing features to OFF and force users to specifically opt in.

    1. Re: Default to NO sharing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe if they switch profit models and start charging $9.99 a month (or a percentage of income since they know your demographic) to access their network, they might stop harvesting.

  11. they always knew by Jodka · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I suspect that Facebook has always know that their privacy settings controls were confusing and difficult to use, in fact made them that way on purpose, the more so to profit by selling customer information. They have resorted only now to fixing that preemptively under looming threats of fines and litigation.

    Zuckerberg is the Bill Gates of his era. There have always been two Silicon Valley archetypes. Steve Jobs and Elon Musk embody one, those with a powerful ambition to realize something great by means of business. Musk wants futuristic transportation for mankind. Jobs wanted awesome product design for the masses. Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg, on the other hand, represent pure profiteering. Microsoft products are an abomination which achieved market dominance only because of strategic marketing and Facebook is gross and addictive. The choice between "We can make this better for our customers" or "we can make another dollar" defines who is which.

    You can kind of tell who is which type according to who is admired. You see a lot of intense hero worship with Jobs and Musk. Little to none with Gates and Zuckerberg.

    --
    Ceci n'est pas une signature.
    1. Re:they always knew by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      You see a lot of intense hero worship with Jobs and Musk. Little to none with Gates and Zuckerberg.

      . . . and, yet, Zuckerberg was (still is?) eyeing the Democratic Nomination to go up against Trump. So maybe Zuckerberg just mistakenly believes that people worship him like a hero. And just maybe he has surrounded himself with Group Think "yes"-folks to support that illusion.

      . . . or . . . fresh off the wacky conspiracy presses . . . the whole Facebook downfall was orchestrated by Oprah! She needed to take Zuckerberg off the field, to leave, um, "room" for herself.

      . . . and then . . . the wackiest conspiracy postulates that Zuckerberg wanted Trump to win. He was hoping that some bad Trump years would guarantee a Democratic victory in the next presidential election, no matter who the Democrats field as a candidate . . .

      . . . including Mr. Zuckerberg, natch.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    2. Re: they always knew by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The theory I read was that Zuck has ties to a Gazprom oligarch who is invested in FB. Money and power corrupts so well I am not sure anyone with either should be given trust freely.

    3. Re:they always knew by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If Zuck would win the Democratic nomination after what we've seen with Trump, that would say a lot more about Democrats than it would about the Zuck.

    4. Re:they always knew by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... only because of strategic marketing ...

      ... and licensing terms.

      Although a UI experience that is still better than all those freeware suites, means MS office sold itself. It's why it is free of the abusive habits plaguing nearly every other MS product.

      ... choices they have over their data.

      Why don't I believe Zuckerberg? He wants the users to forget the available choices so he can hide all options that reduce his profit.

    5. Re:they always knew by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They fix them often so they can screw up the defaults and evade the critics.

  12. Technical term by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The automakers really could fix it with a simple "tweak" because that's how they got in trouble in the first place. Or at least, they could get back on the emission targets at the expense of performance, but that's a fairly understandable trade-off they lied about for marketeering reasons.

    Not so much facebook. The technical term for what they're doing is "turd polishing".

  13. Protip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Protip from a tech person: You'll never be able to confirm anything was ever deleted from their databases.

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

      Protip: professionals never say "protip".

    2. Re:Protip by sexconker · · Score: 1

      Jeditip: Only a Sith deals in absolutes.

  14. TL;DR by design by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

    Until now changing settings had been complex, spread over at least 20 screens, which had frustrated users.

    Which was actually the objective - make it too long / complicated so people don't read / change things.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  15. O yeah, this is it by Notabadguy · · Score: 1

    Updated privacy policy that no one reads.

    THAT'LL FIX IT.

  16. Too. Late. by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    You built this city on selling our lives as products.

    You reap the whirlwind.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  17. Re:Facebook Tweaks Privacy Tools for not to get .. by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    Same with Canada. Privacy rights are in the Constitution.

    Sucks to be FB.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  18. Privacy tool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I tweaked my privacy tool years ago to blackhole the following domains.

    facebook.com
    facebook.net
    fb.com
    fbcdn.com
    fbcdn.net
    fbsbx.com
    tfbnw.net

  19. Are you fucking kidding me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > it had been working on the updates for some time but sped things up to appease users' anger over how the company uses their data

    They STILL aren't taking responsibility for this, even worse actually are trying to spin it with some BS UI changes that won't affect the fact that your data IS ALREADY OUT THERE.

    Fuck this company. Hope their stock price tanks.

  20. See ya by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Too bad I already left /s

  21. Only a fool would trust these bastards now. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unfortunately, there ARE a lot of fools out there.

    The question you have to ask yourself is, are you one of them ?

  22. Fool me once by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fool me once, shame on you.
    Fool me twice, shame on me.
    Fool me over and over, and damn, that must be some good sh*t

  23. Weasly headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What a weasly headline so of course it's from 'msmash': Slashdot's resident spokeswhore.

  24. FB privacy settings are marketing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I always thought FB privacy settings were are marketing tool. You get people to post more personal info by the illusion of privacy. The goal is to always get more data for each user. Actual privacy is not part of the FB ecosystem and it counter to the reason it exists.

  25. Beside the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The national interest is not served unless everyone's privacy is protected not just the ones who realize that it is important.

    You can fool all of the people some of the time and Facebook gets the data to know how and when.

    When they use it to manipulate elections in favor of ass hats, I don't give a shit about MY privacy settings. Your privacy settings need to be fixed as well.

  26. Zuckered - "We will never sell your data" video by kaptink · · Score: 1

    If you haven't seen this, watch it. Then decide if you trust Mark

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    --
    Those who can, do. Those who cannot, sue.
    1. Re:Zuckered - "We will never sell your data" video by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow!!!
      That little Zucker somehow managed to make a video in the past SATIRISING THE FUTURE FACEBOOK!!
      That's very clever; where is he hiding his DeLorean?
      Genius I tell you, just genius.

  27. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  28. I swear, I'm going to open a book... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...on how FB will react to their next gross embarrassment.
    FB are more transparent than glass; mind you don't cut your fingers.