Slashdot Mirror
Facebook Competitor Orkut Relaunches as 'Hello' (bloombergquint.com)
An anonymous reader quotes Bloomberg:
In 2004, one of the world's most popular social networks, Orkut, was founded by a former Google employee named Orkut Buyukkokten... Orkut was shut down by Google in 2014, but in its heyday, the network had hit 300 million users around the world... "Hello.com is a spiritual successor of Orkut.com," Buyukkokten told BloombergQuint...
"People have lost trust in social networks and the main reason is social media services today don't put the users first. They put advertisers, brands, third parties, shareholders before the users," Buyukkokten said. "They are also not transparent about practices. The privacy policy and terms of services are more like black boxes. How many users actually read them?"
Buyukkokten said users need to be educated about these things and user consent is imperative in such situations when data is shared by such platforms. "On Hello, we do not share data with third parties. We have our own registration and login and so the data doesn't follow you anywhere," he said. "You don't need to sell user data in order to be profitable or make money."
Buyukkokten said users need to be educated about these things and user consent is imperative in such situations when data is shared by such platforms. "On Hello, we do not share data with third parties. We have our own registration and login and so the data doesn't follow you anywhere," he said. "You don't need to sell user data in order to be profitable or make money."
Posting my status updates and photos into yet another company's database doesn't appeal in the slightest. Put aside for the moment that they could be bought up and have their privacy policy changed. The inevitable data breach will expose my data in the end. There's a lot of talk about how Facebook sells our data to third parties. But how about why they are keeping it for so long in the first place?
Their pledge is "user first", but the relevant method to forecast privacy behavior beyond words is economy: who pays?
It's not even a site... hello.com only talks about downloading some fucking "app". I have no phone. This is bullshit. And not a word about it in the summary... Retarded news.
If only you knew how close you were.
Why the fuck would anyone be trying to sign up to yet another social media platform.
Don't worry. You probably can't.
'United States of America' is greyed out in their dropdown list. Additionally the App Store tells me their app is 'incompatible with all your devices'. I have a Google Pixel. Sounds like bad programming or deliberately blocking US users because of some stupid arbitrary thing like sign-up limits. Meh. Fuck 'em.
Unfortunate deployment method. It refuses to be available unless I install it on a smartphone, but I must get a download link by sending an SMS text. If I go to an app store for software that's been vetted as safe to install, I counted eight diferent apps named "Hello" before I gave up trying to find a safe version of their software.
Yet.
Eventually they all sell your data. There's just too much money at stake.
That it eventually got shut down, and nobody cared.
#DeleteChrome
There are several competitors that are fighting to be the new facebook. I looked at several of them and they are already getting traction. I like the look of MeWe best so far but I'm keeping my eye on a few of the others.
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
yes
"As your attorney, I advise you to take a hit out of the little brown bottle in my shaving kit. You won't need much, just a tiny taste." -- Dr. Gonzo
Debate is a form of harassment. Do not question my truth.
Really?
Again?
I thought we were Pastis.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
On the app store, are you looking at the India-only version?
Relevant link: https://m.hello.com/en/downloa...
Google Wave failed. Apache Wave is also dead as of Jan. 2018.
The idea of a centralized service for building social networks is intrinsically defective. Social networks should be distributed, with no single point of failure or control, no single point to monetize users, and no single point to compromise privacy. What we need if we really care about privacy and individual control is some combination of web-of-trust, digital signatures, blockchain, and peer to peer networking.
Apart from being a bloody mess and having a horrible UI, in what way was Google/Apache Wave even "distributed"? At least in its Google incarnation, it seemed to require centralized servers and maintenance.
Even in its Google incarnation, it could federate with any server that implemented the protocol (much like email) - you didn't even need to touch Google's servers. The UI was only one implementation. Of course, UI was the hardest part of designing something like that and probably failing that is what killed it.
There is no web version of it to use on a computer.
If I'm sitting in front of my computer already, I don't want to have to use my phone just to access a site.
It's blocked by Facebook.
Uninstall that and try again.
If that doesn't fix it, suspect that I'm full of shit.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Available only as a smartphone app.
There's likely a reason for that; to get permissions it would not get on a PC. No thanks.
That just means that multiple service providers could offer the service; it doesn't make it a distributed service.
Please conduct the test as you propose and then report back to us the results.
Thanks.
We had coffee and crème brulée last night at Pastis. Nice place.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
If you're looking for a new social network that really does respect your privacy, try http://www.foxsake.com/ .
IRC has that, it’s called hyperlinks to whatever you want( its up to the client to implement tho) , I will admit that IRC lacks ( at last most networks) a server side chat history but thst is a limitation that will dissapeer if enugh users wantit I think. Bonus irc client are svalable on all platform, there are even quite capable web front ends. But why did i post this on slashdot? Most of the users here allready know about IRC.
To use an identifier that I own and can port to another provider without their cooperation. For example, something based on a domain name that I own, as with email. A large number of email providers, for example, allow me to point my DNS records at their server and use them to handle my mail. This dramatically reduces lock-in, because if I don't like them I can just point the DNS records elsewhere.
To be able to extract all of my data in a standard format. Again, with email I can move between providers by just pointing an IMAP client (including a command-line tool like imapsync) at both and telling it to move my data.
To use a federated open protocol, so that I can communicate with users who do not use the same provider. Again, with email I can communicate with people who host their own service, people who use an employer-provided service, people who use a free service such as GMail or Hotmail, without any problems.
To be supported by multiple implementations. With a single implementation of a protocol, you have no guarantee that it's actually documented well enough for anyone else to use and you have no guarantee that it doesn't expose implementation details by accident. Equally importantly, if there's a single implementation then there's nothing stopping the developers from pushing the UI in a direction that I don't like, because there's nothing for me to switch to. Again, with email there are a load of different clients (native and web-based) that I can use, so if one annoys me then I can switch without losing any of my data.
Diaspora appears to be pretty close to this. The federation protocol is mostly sane and has a few implementations (though putting an extreme copyleft license on the reference implementation wasn't such a great idea), though the client-server part of the protocol doesn't seem to be very well documented or possible to support with different implementations. Ideally, I'd want to see a clean separation between client-server protocol and web UI, so the web interface is just that: an interface that talks to a back-end server as a separable component. Again, this improves competition because someone else can easily decide that they hate the UI, write a better one, and reuse all of the back-end code.
Oh, and in an ideal world it wouldn't involve PHP. Anywhere.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
I can't find it on hello.com, but Google can:
https://hello.com/policy/privacy/
(excerpt)
Information that We Share with Third Parties
We will not share any PII that we have collected from or regarding you except as described below:
Information Shared with Other Account Holders. As part of our Services, any Account holder may view your profile information, which includes your name, gender, location of interest and profile picture. You may also choose to share additional information, such as age or birthday. Your email address and phone number will never be shared with others as part of your profile information. Any Account holder may also view your public posts. As part of our Services, you can directly communicate with other Account holders, whether you are connected with them or not. The content of your communications will be visible and available to those Account holders with whom you communicate. For example, the phone number you provide to create your Account is not shared with other Account holders when you connect with them, unless you decide to share it by providing the number yourself in a communication with another user. We encourage you to use your good judgment for your communications and not post any private or sensitive information.
Information Shared with Our Services Providers. We may engage third-party services providers to work with us to administer and provide the Services or to respond to your questions and inquiries. These third-party services providers have access to your PII only for the purpose of performing services on our behalf.
Information Shared with Third Parties. We may share aggregated information and non-identifying information with third parties for industry research and analysis, demographic profiling and other similar purposes.
Information Disclosed in Connection with Business Transactions. Information that we collect from our users, including PII, is considered to be a business asset. Thus, if we are acquired by a third party as a result of a transaction such as a merger, acquisition or asset sale or if our assets are acquired by a third party in the event we go out of business or enter bankruptcy, some or all of our assets, including your PII, may be disclosed or transferred to a third party acquirer in connection with the transaction.
Information Disclosed for Our Protection and the Protection of Others. It is our policy to protect you from having your privacy violated through abuse of the legal system, whether by individuals, entities or government, and to contest claims that we believe to be invalid under applicable law. However, it is also our policy to cooperate with government and law enforcement officials and private parties to enforce and comply with the law. We may disclose any information about you to government or law enforcement officials or private parties as we, in our sole discretion, believe necessary or appropriate: (i) to respond to claims or the legal process (including subpoenas); (ii) to protect our property, rights and safety and the property, rights and safety of a third party or the public in general; and (iii) to stop any activity that we consider illegal, unethical or legally actionable activity.
Your Choices
We offer you choices regarding the collection, use and sharing of your PII and weÃââll respect the choices you make. Please note that if you decide not to provide us with the PII that we request, you may not be able to access all of the features of the Services.
Alerts and Notifications. As part of the Services we provide, you may (if enabled) receive push notifications, text messages, alerts, emails, or other types of messages directly sent to you outside or inside the App (ÃâÅ"Push MessagesÃâÂ). You have control over the Push Messages settings, and can opt in or out of these Push Messages through the Services (with the possible exception of infrequent, important service announcements and administrative messages). Please be aware that third party messagin
...and city channel moderator, I'll say this: it won't work. People left Orkut to get on Facebook for a reason. If you never used it, think about MySpace rebranding itself and trying to become relevant once again.
People have lost trust in social media, but we're not like the others! I call bullshit on this.
Getting really tired of what ought to be a standard web interface demanding instead that I must install their special "app". I *do* have a phone, but I still don't want yet another special "app" running in the background for just one more special website.
Hacker Public Radio is our Friend
While true that's an incredibly weak criticism of Hello (nee Orkut). In time that could change, and this critique would suggest that somehow makes Hello worth considering.
A more thoroughgoing critique is that Hello just another central-point-of-censorship/tracker regardless of what their current terms of service and/or developer promises say. Switching from Facebook to this or some workalike is switching masters or switching parties who spy on you, not getting away from being spied upon. Google's saying used to be "Don't be evil" but as far as we know Google always spied on their users, Google distributes proprietary malware, and Google pushes other central/single-point-of-censorship services that could be done in a privacy and freedom-respecting way (such as free software-based, decentralized, real-time chat). The fix for this is possible but not in line with any business built to be yet-another spying service. This a far better reason to reject Hello and to reject anything else with the same centralized architecture.
Digital Citizen
Bye
To use a federated open protocol, so that I can communicate with users who do not use the same provider. Again, with email I can communicate with people who host their own service, people who use an employer-provided service, people who use a free service such as GMail or Hotmail, without any problems.
In a federated protocol, other providers can refuse to communicate with a provider that they deem abusive. SMTP servers, for example, often use RBLs to refuse messages from dynamic IP addresses on grounds that the vast majority of home MTAs are spam zombies, not especially technical home users who host their own service on a home ISP. Instead, they accept messages only A. from data centers (on port 25) or B. from their own subscribers (on port 587 with authentication). So how does a provider convince other providers that the provider is not abusive?
Oh, and in an ideal world it wouldn't involve PHP. Anywhere.
I'm told PHP running on Zend Engine 3 is faster than the equivalent Python running on CPython 3. What makes PHP any worse than, say, ECMAScript? Many of Eevee's complaints against mirror Douglas Crockford's against JavaScript, as I've described elsewhere.
And if they value privacy why do they require an email or phone number to sign up?
Through what other means do you expect users to receive a synchronizer token to reset their authentication credentials?
IRC has that, it’s called hyperlinks to whatever you want( its up to the client to implement tho)
To what server would the client upload said media in order to produce a hyperlink? IRC server software distributions tend not to bundle a file drop for use by the server's members. This means each user has to lease web hosting for the file drop.
I will admit that IRC lacks ( at last most networks) a server side chat history but thst is a limitation that will dissapeer if enugh users wantit I think.
ZNC is one popular example of an IRC proxy program called a "bouncer" that remains connected to an IRC server and saves chat history on behalf of a user so that the user can view it once he reconnects to the bouncer. But IRC server software distributions tend not to bundle a bouncer for use by the server's members. This means each user has to lease a shell account for the bouncer.
I think you should turn the question around and ask were some groups of people have the traits you cite. According to Professor Gregory Clark, there was a persistent selection of some population subgroups over 20 generations up to about 1800. http://faculty.econ.ucdavis.ed...
That's the same number of generations and selection pressure that the Russians used to change the personality of wild foxes into tame ones.
Not that selection will matter very much in the not so distant future when we have complete control of our genes.
End MGM. Get prospective parents of boys to Google: Men do complain