That page notes that you need a recent enough build of DD-WRT. My router is running v24-preSP2 (build 13064) which is the newest on the dd-wrt.com frontpage. Where do I get a newer build?
Netflix HD is 720p or 1080p VC-1, running at a maximum bitrate of 6Mbps.
Citation? Not that I don't believe you, but everywhere I've looked for details on Netflix streaming has been "we don't really quite know what codec/bitrate they're using".
The rendering issues on OS X were known bugs and were in the release notes for 4.0b9. You are using beta software and there are bound to be bugs. It is fixed in their repo, and you can run Minefield (nightly builds) if you want to get the fix.
There are absolutely no users who think that getting rid of the status bar is a good idea. Absolutely none. Had you guys even bothered to consult with any actual users before making this change, you'd immediately have known that it was a stupid change to make.
I think that getting rid of the status bar is a good idea. Your statement is wrong. Absolutely wrong. Had you even bothered to consult with more "actual users" than yourself, you'd immediately have known that saying that everyone wants the status bar was a stupid statement to make.
Likewise if someone else has 3 friends, who are all just their immediate family and has locked every privacy setting as far down as possible to limit anyone else seeing anything and they are happy with that than more power to them.
I'm not sure if that was just hypothetical, but I do actually know people who do that. Indeed, more power to them.
Ah, taken by itself, I suppose so. (I should also probably have thought of it being a joke before anything else.) On the other hand, given the previous attitudes towards Facebook here...
A lot of the performance stuff is "how can we do X without fetching too many cache keys?" and "how many cache keys is too much given we already have X Y and Z? Which one can we optimize?" The infrastructure for caching does exist, but the infrastructure for efficiently fetching and caching your brand-new feature does not. When you're writing a whole new profile page, you have the dual problems of "I have a whole lot of new features I have to build" and "we really really have to make sure this page is fast".
If I view my profile without being signed in, I don't see the birthday; but, it also doesn't really look like the new profile, so either it hasn't been updated yet or something else...
If you go to edit your privacy settings and click "customize settings", there is a preview profile feature you might find useful.
The changes unsurprisingly are being met with mixed opinions ranging from rage to anger.
WTF? Can the editors please stop bashing Facebook every single time they do anything? For once, everyone I've talked to has been decently happy with this change.
Building a Facebook profile page isn't hard. Building a Facebook profile page that has exactly the new features you want, designed in a reasonable way, and that doesn't cause the site to fall over when your 500 million monthly active users begin using it is rather more difficult.
It wasn't guaranteed, it was an interview offer (sorry that wasn't clear). We all do have work experience as interns at other companies, and most of us already have offers from places like Google, Facebook, Microsoft, and Dropbox.
I think/hope that they are going to absolutely shoot themselves in the foot with this. Much of their top talent has left in droves since the Sun acquisition. They sent a recruiting email to myself and some of my friends -- some of the top students at the top CS school in the country -- asking if we were interested in coming to work on the Solaris kernel full-time; they were pretty much collectively told, "After what you did to Sun? No way." If their talented engineers are by-and-large leaving and they are by-and-large unable to hire more, they will quickly become a dying shell of a mediocre company.
From my interpretation of TFA, it just looks like some apps were accidentally passing a referrer containing the user's Facebook ID.
"Recently, it has come to our attention that several applications built on Facebook Platform were passing the User ID (UID), an identifier that we use within our APIs, in a manner that violated this policy," Vernal wrote. "In most cases, developers did not intend to pass the information, but did so because of the technical details of how the browsers work."
"Press reports have exaggerated the implication of sharing at UID [user ID]. Knowledge of a UID does not enable anyone to access private user information without explicit user consent. Nevertheless, we are committed to ensuring that even the inadvertent passing of UIDs is prevented and all applications are in compliance with our policy."
Re:I only hear good things
on
Why Microsoft?
·
· Score: 1
Good employer, yes, but there are far better. Google, Facebook, and Mozilla come to mind.
We never share your personal information with advertisers. We never sell your personal information to anyone. These protections are yours no matter what privacy settings you use; they apply equally to people who share openly with everyone and to people who share with only select friends.
Which isn't a problem until said stranger is in the position of offering or not offering you a job.
We all do dumb shit, including that recruiter. It's only a matter of time before the rest of the world catches up to realizing that just because you post status updates about being drunk from time to time does not mean that everyone else don't get drunk (and make some bad decisions while drunk) occasionally too.
The link you have provided is to a fan page for Obama, not a personal profile. Fan pages cannot be members of groups, and fan pages are the way people "hawk their latest book, CD, movie" etc -- not with personal profiles. (If you use your personal profile for this, you are doing it wrong.)
I'll give them a break when they stop reseting options with new privacy policies or ToS that lowers the ability for users to lock down their accounts and defaults all options to the most open setting.
Over the summer, they added a "master control" which you can set to "friends only" (or several other settings). This will make all of your current settings "friends only" and will also make any future setting default to "friends only".
I'll give them a break when their account deletion process no longer requires users themselves to manually go through and delete everything they put on the website.
I love how people used to bitch that you couldn't get your data off of Facebook (which wasn't even completely true, given Platform and Connect), but now that they added that exact feature, people are bitching that it will allow spammers to get information or that it trains users in some bad way. Can you give them a fucking break? They are honestly trying to add a feature exactly for the demographic here (most users probably don't care about this level of data portability one bit) and all most people can do is still complain.
At best it's a usability issue, where Facebook isn't making it clear to users what is private and what is public.
Have you gone through the new user flow recently? The amount of messaging saying "YOUR STATUS UPDATE IS GOING TO BE COMPLETELY PUBLIC, HERE IS HOW YOU CHANGE IT!!" is insane in my opinion. If someone writes a public update after that accidentally, they have bigger problems...
At worse (and more likely) it's intentional obfuscation on Facebooks part to try to make money.
How does that help Facebook make more money? Ads are targeted based upon demographics and interests without sharing information to advertisers (explanation of how it works) -- how does someone sharing publicly vs. privately help this?
Fan pages were always public IIRC. There was a transition to force listed activities and interests to be fan pages, but that required clicking through a transition tool that very, very clearly stated they would become public.
I honestly don't see the big deal with friend lists, but that one was quickly fixed. As of a couple of months ago, fan pages don't have to be public anymore either.
The people buying your information from Facebook are the customer.
What do you mean, exactly? Facebook does not sell any user information:
We have designed Facebook to provide relevant and interesting advertising content to you in a way that protects your privacy completely. We never share your personal information with advertisers. We never sell your personal information to anyone. These protections are yours no matter what privacy settings you use; they apply equally to people who share openly with everyone and to people who share with only select friends.
The hoohah over the panic button they're now putting in to 'protect the children' is proof that Zuckerberg's cavalier attitude towards privacy will stand, and that we can expect more of the same from Facebook in coming years.
Slashdot Mirror
That page notes that you need a recent enough build of DD-WRT. My router is running v24-preSP2 (build 13064) which is the newest on the dd-wrt.com frontpage. Where do I get a newer build?
Netflix HD is 720p or 1080p VC-1, running at a maximum bitrate of 6Mbps.
Citation? Not that I don't believe you, but everywhere I've looked for details on Netflix streaming has been "we don't really quite know what codec/bitrate they're using".
The rendering issues on OS X were known bugs and were in the release notes for 4.0b9. You are using beta software and there are bound to be bugs. It is fixed in their repo, and you can run Minefield (nightly builds) if you want to get the fix.
There are absolutely no users who think that getting rid of the status bar is a good idea. Absolutely none. Had you guys even bothered to consult with any actual users before making this change, you'd immediately have known that it was a stupid change to make.
I think that getting rid of the status bar is a good idea. Your statement is wrong. Absolutely wrong. Had you even bothered to consult with more "actual users" than yourself, you'd immediately have known that saying that everyone wants the status bar was a stupid statement to make.
Likewise if someone else has 3 friends, who are all just their immediate family and has locked every privacy setting as far down as possible to limit anyone else seeing anything and they are happy with that than more power to them.
I'm not sure if that was just hypothetical, but I do actually know people who do that. Indeed, more power to them.
Ah, taken by itself, I suppose so. (I should also probably have thought of it being a joke before anything else.) On the other hand, given the previous attitudes towards Facebook here...
A lot of the performance stuff is "how can we do X without fetching too many cache keys?" and "how many cache keys is too much given we already have X Y and Z? Which one can we optimize?" The infrastructure for caching does exist, but the infrastructure for efficiently fetching and caching your brand-new feature does not. When you're writing a whole new profile page, you have the dual problems of "I have a whole lot of new features I have to build" and "we really really have to make sure this page is fast".
If I view my profile without being signed in, I don't see the birthday; but, it also doesn't really look like the new profile, so either it hasn't been updated yet or something else...
If you go to edit your privacy settings and click "customize settings", there is a preview profile feature you might find useful.
WTF? Can the editors please stop bashing Facebook every single time they do anything? For once, everyone I've talked to has been decently happy with this change.
Building a Facebook profile page isn't hard. Building a Facebook profile page that has exactly the new features you want, designed in a reasonable way, and that doesn't cause the site to fall over when your 500 million monthly active users begin using it is rather more difficult.
It wasn't guaranteed, it was an interview offer (sorry that wasn't clear). We all do have work experience as interns at other companies, and most of us already have offers from places like Google, Facebook, Microsoft, and Dropbox.
I think/hope that they are going to absolutely shoot themselves in the foot with this. Much of their top talent has left in droves since the Sun acquisition. They sent a recruiting email to myself and some of my friends -- some of the top students at the top CS school in the country -- asking if we were interested in coming to work on the Solaris kernel full-time; they were pretty much collectively told, "After what you did to Sun? No way." If their talented engineers are by-and-large leaving and they are by-and-large unable to hire more, they will quickly become a dying shell of a mediocre company.
From my interpretation of TFA, it just looks like some apps were accidentally passing a referrer containing the user's Facebook ID.
"Recently, it has come to our attention that several applications built on Facebook Platform were passing the User ID (UID), an identifier that we use within our APIs, in a manner that violated this policy," Vernal wrote. "In most cases, developers did not intend to pass the information, but did so because of the technical details of how the browsers work."
"Press reports have exaggerated the implication of sharing at UID [user ID]. Knowledge of a UID does not enable anyone to access private user information without explicit user consent. Nevertheless, we are committed to ensuring that even the inadvertent passing of UIDs is prevented and all applications are in compliance with our policy."
Good employer, yes, but there are far better. Google, Facebook, and Mozilla come to mind.
We never share your personal information with advertisers. We never sell your personal information to anyone. These protections are yours no matter what privacy settings you use; they apply equally to people who share openly with everyone and to people who share with only select friends.
How exactly are phone numbers useful to them?
Which isn't a problem until said stranger is in the position of offering or not offering you a job.
We all do dumb shit, including that recruiter. It's only a matter of time before the rest of the world catches up to realizing that just because you post status updates about being drunk from time to time does not mean that everyone else don't get drunk (and make some bad decisions while drunk) occasionally too.
The link you have provided is to a fan page for Obama, not a personal profile. Fan pages cannot be members of groups, and fan pages are the way people "hawk their latest book, CD, movie" etc -- not with personal profiles. (If you use your personal profile for this, you are doing it wrong.)
I'll give them a break when they stop reseting options with new privacy policies or ToS that lowers the ability for users to lock down their accounts and defaults all options to the most open setting.
Over the summer, they added a "master control" which you can set to "friends only" (or several other settings). This will make all of your current settings "friends only" and will also make any future setting default to "friends only".
I'll give them a break when their account deletion process no longer requires users themselves to manually go through and delete everything they put on the website.
I don't believe this has been true for a while: https://ssl.facebook.com/help/contact.php?show_form=delete_account
I love how people used to bitch that you couldn't get your data off of Facebook (which wasn't even completely true, given Platform and Connect), but now that they added that exact feature, people are bitching that it will allow spammers to get information or that it trains users in some bad way. Can you give them a fucking break? They are honestly trying to add a feature exactly for the demographic here (most users probably don't care about this level of data portability one bit) and all most people can do is still complain.
At best it's a usability issue, where Facebook isn't making it clear to users what is private and what is public.
Have you gone through the new user flow recently? The amount of messaging saying "YOUR STATUS UPDATE IS GOING TO BE COMPLETELY PUBLIC, HERE IS HOW YOU CHANGE IT!!" is insane in my opinion. If someone writes a public update after that accidentally, they have bigger problems...
At worse (and more likely) it's intentional obfuscation on Facebooks part to try to make money.
How does that help Facebook make more money? Ads are targeted based upon demographics and interests without sharing information to advertisers (explanation of how it works) -- how does someone sharing publicly vs. privately help this?
Fan pages were always public IIRC. There was a transition to force listed activities and interests to be fan pages, but that required clicking through a transition tool that very, very clearly stated they would become public. I honestly don't see the big deal with friend lists, but that one was quickly fixed. As of a couple of months ago, fan pages don't have to be public anymore either.
I don't recall any instances of anything private retroactively becoming public -- when did this happen?
The people buying your information from Facebook are the customer.
What do you mean, exactly? Facebook does not sell any user information:
We have designed Facebook to provide relevant and interesting advertising content to you in a way that protects your privacy completely. We never share your personal information with advertisers. We never sell your personal information to anyone. These protections are yours no matter what privacy settings you use; they apply equally to people who share openly with everyone and to people who share with only select friends.
Source: http://blog.facebook.com/blog.php?post=403570307130
The hoohah over the panic button they're now putting in to 'protect the children' is proof that Zuckerberg's cavalier attitude towards privacy will stand, and that we can expect more of the same from Facebook in coming years.
It's not really a panic button: http://eu.techcrunch.com/2010/07/12/facebook-has-not-launched-a-panic-button-its-smarter-than-that/