5 ms·
"[..] if you didn’t want your pictures shared with the rest of the world, you shouldn’t upload them in the first place." Why can't we expect services like Face
by ElbertF 16y ago
"[..] if you didn’t want your pictures shared with the rest of the world, you shouldn’t upload them in the first place."
Why can't we expect services like Facebook to keep our private stuff private? Facebook was always about sharing stuff with friends and not the world. I agree it's smart to keep personal things off the web but I wonder if this guy would stand by his opinion if Gmail started publishing his e-mails.
- Mystalic 16y agoThanks for the response to my article, Elbert. The difference between E-mail and Facebook is that email isn't designed to be social (aka it isn't designed to spread information to masses of people quickly), while Facebook is. However, I still don't upload pictures I'm not going to be proud of, even if it's just for an email to someone. Once it's sent to someone else, I assume that it could leak to the web in any number of ways. Perhaps that line was too harsh, but the point is that Facebook doesn't control what your friends do with the information you post on your profile. Thus, Facebook really doesn't have the ability to keep your private stuff "private," and it's dangerous to assume that they can.
- Groxx 16y agoFacebook doesn't control what your friends do with the information you post on your profile The same is true with emails. But Facebook has a unique ability over email where it can prevent basic spreading, and instead chooses the most public route by default. I side with "Facebook is for friends" because that's what any random person will tell you they use Facebook for. Friends. That's what it's advertised as, what the UI implies it is, and it's the exact opposite of what their privacy tools do.
- Jd 16y agoSocial isn't a binary. I choose to share things with specific people and if Facebook then chooses to share this with more people this is a violation of the implicit pact I have when using their system -- that they will do what they say they will do. It really is that simple.
- joubert 16y agoBut would you be OK if google allowed the public to peruse people's inboxes? Just like email, Facebook was initially about sharing updates, pictures, etc. with your family and friends (i.e. people you know). Now they seem to be trying to trick people into having all this information public. This is analogous to gmail defaulting to usenet posting, unless you configure obscure and fluid privacy settings.
- jay_kyburz 16y agoI agree. I want to add that I think it's unfare to expect people like my mum to understand the difference between something like Facebook and Hotmail. As far as she is concerned the are just different interfaces for the same thing. An address book, messaging, and photo sharing.
- natrius 16y agoFacebook was initially about sharing things with everyone at your school. Anything you shared could be accessed by an alum who works at the company you're applying to. The only real privacy difference between now and 2004 is that posts are Googleable by default now. Facebook did not try to trick people into sharing people more people than they intended to. If you disagree, explain what's misleading about this: http://www.allfacebook.com/2009/12/how-to-use-facebooks-new-privacy-transition-tool/ http://www.allfacebook.com/2009/12/how-to-use-facebooks-new-...
- ewams 16y agoDo you mind explaining how email is not social?
- pyre 16y agoBecause email is a one-to-one communication mechanism! ...Except for those times when it isn't (e.g. mailing lists, Cc:, Bcc:, "Reply to All/Group Reply", etc)
- ewams 16y agoDoes this mean that the private message feature in facebook is not a social tool? IM is not a social tool? Going to work and talking with someone in the lunch room is not social?
- ElbertF 16y agoFacebook wasn't designed to be public either, it has always been known for being a walled garden where you share stuff with people you choose. Someone might pass something on to stranger but that's no different from having a chat on the phone. That doesn't mean every word I say should be broadcasted to the world. It's not about embarrassing pictures either. A mom could post pictures of her kids without having her abusive ex-husband commenting on them. I could stay in touch with friends and relatives overseas without exposing to much of my personal life to the people I work with.
- CamperBob 16y agoHowever, I still don't upload pictures I'm not going to be proud of The thing you seem to be missing is that this isn't just your decision, or Facebook's, but rather that of any friends or acquaintances you have who may take a photo of you at any time, under any circumstances, and tag it with your name. It's not hard to imagine circumstances under which this might become a problem for you.