4 ms·

If you work for a big company then you may already be a member of a Facebook "network" of company employees based on email addresses. (I was joined to one.) See

by scholia 10y ago

If you work for a big company then you may already be a member of a Facebook "network" of company employees based on email addresses. (I was joined to one.) Seems to work in much the same way as college addresses. I've also seen company employees start their own closed, private Facebook groups for work purposes because the in-house services were terrible. (I was joined to one.) It's easier than getting a group of people to sign up for a separate third-party service. (Tried that. Didn't work.) I assume Facebook noticed this phenomenon and decided to improve on it, and exploit it. I don't expect most users see a problem because they already trust Facebook with their personal information. And I wouldn't be surprised if users trust it more than Google, which now stands for surveillance-based advertising.

tdkl 10y ago
> I've also seen company employees start their own closed, private Facebook groups for work purposes This would probably get them fired in certain companies with responsible information policies. > I don't expect most users see a problem because they already trust Facebook with their personal information. Which is wrong as naive in the first place. > And I wouldn't be surprised if users trust it more than Google, which now stands for surveillance-based advertising. Facebook stands for social manipulation advertising. Pick your poison.
- scholia 10y ago
  > This would probably get them fired in certain companies with responsible information policies. Sure, but if people followed the rules, almost no work would get done. (In the UK, "working to rule" is a form of industrial action that's only a little short of a strike.) > Which is wrong as naive in the first place. Yeah, more than 1.6 billion people are naive and wrong. > Facebook stands for social manipulation advertising. Pick your poison. How does that work, then? Otherwise, there's an ethical difference between sharing information voluntarily, for their own benefit -- which people do on Facebook -- and Google's clandestine tracking, which is for Google's benefit.

by scholia 10y ago

tdkl 10y ago

> I've also seen company employees start their own closed, private Facebook groups for work purposes This would probably get them fired in certain companies with responsible information policies. > I don't expect most users see a problem because they already trust Facebook with their personal information. Which is wrong as naive in the first place. > And I wouldn't be surprised if users trust it more than Google, which now stands for surveillance-based advertising. Facebook stands for social manipulation advertising. Pick your poison.

scholia 10y ago
> This would probably get them fired in certain companies with responsible information policies. Sure, but if people followed the rules, almost no work would get done. (In the UK, "working to rule" is a form of industrial action that's only a little short of a strike.) > Which is wrong as naive in the first place. Yeah, more than 1.6 billion people are naive and wrong. > Facebook stands for social manipulation advertising. Pick your poison. How does that work, then? Otherwise, there's an ethical difference between sharing information voluntarily, for their own benefit -- which people do on Facebook -- and Google's clandestine tracking, which is for Google's benefit.