3 ms·

Agree with your general statement, but still a bad analogy. You tell your bank to release all your info to third party, then a fourth party learns all your bala

by runeb 9y ago

Agree with your general statement, but still a bad analogy. You tell your bank to release all your info to third party, then a fourth party learns all your balances. The problem seems to be that people do not realize what it means to agree to information access for a third party, and the question remains weather Facebook is to blame for it being release to a fourth party. So really the problem is that people are not aware of the scope of the information aggregate of their actions on social media and how it is or may be used or abused.

Klathmon 9y ago
>the question remains weather Facebook is to blame for it being release to a fourth party. And I personally don't think Facebook should be to blame for it ending up in a fourth party's hands. They gave it to the 3rd party at the request of the user. What that 3rd party does with it should be of no concern to Facebook. If Facebook has to police what users are doing with their own data on other platforms, then strict DRM is going to become a legal necessity. That is what I see when I read comments saying how Facebook should take responsibility here. I agree that people don't seem to grasp what it means when they click the "i agree" button, and that Facebook (and others) should work much harder on getting the user to understand the full extent of what they are doing, as well as greater control over what data is shared and when. But that's not a problem that's easily solvable (or possibly even solvable at all). And calling for Facebook to simply not accept this information (which isn't a possibility, they are a social network, so social data has to exist on their systems), or to not allow users to have control over their own information is the exact opposite of what I and many others have been fighting for for years. If I want to export my information, or give it to a 3rd party, that is my right. And Facebook should have no ability to stop me from doing that. This will lead to people giving their personal information to parties that they do not intend to, but I feel that is a risk worth taking to keep your information yours.
- pier25 9y ago
  Should you be able to share your data with whomever you wish? Yes, I agree to that. OTOH you and I both know 99.99% of users don't understand what's going on with their data, so the question here is if adult users should be held responsible for something they don't understand and whether Facebook is actually responsible for not informing its users clearly of what was going on. Do you think it would have made a difference if Facebook had used a red blinking message alerting users before sharing their personal data with a third party? I think so. So yeah, the responsibility is not 100% on Facebook's users.
  - Klathmon 9y ago
    I never said that the blame was 100% on users, or 100% anywhere. Like most things in life, it's shared. Facebook should absolutely be held to a higher standard here. They should be explaining what a user is really doing when they try to do it, as well as giving more fine-grained controls over what they provide to these apps. But I also don't think that a red blinking message would have changed anything, going by how android permissions used to work (big warning that you have to agree to saying what the app gets on install). Apps will make excuses for why they need data, users will want the app and not care or not want to think about what they are giving up, and not a damn thing will change (I can't count the number of times that I've been told "there will be a warning saying that X needs to access Y, you'll need to say yes to use this software" in various programs, and i've never seen a user say no...) Like I said, having this ability WILL cause people to give out information they didn't mean to. There's no hesitation there, it's going to happen, and probably pretty frequently, but I still feel that's a necessary evil to allow data liberation. Also, I think stronger legal structures would help here as well. You aren't going to stop it, so make the consequences for getting caught much more strict, and heavily punish companies that are caught using data in ways that's not okay.
arkh 9y ago
> So really the problem is that people are not aware of the scope of the information aggregate of their actions on social media and how it is or may be used or abused. Simple case: G-fucking-mail. Lot of people on it so even if you're not using it most of your emails end there with a free link to infos from other people's contact list (names, phone number etc.). Shadow profiles are what people will be complaining about 5 years from now if they just discovered what sharing things with 3rd parties mean.

by runeb 9y ago

Klathmon 9y ago

>the question remains weather Facebook is to blame for it being release to a fourth party. And I personally don't think Facebook should be to blame for it ending up in a fourth party's hands. They gave it to the 3rd party at the request of the user. What that 3rd party does with it should be of no concern to Facebook. If Facebook has to police what users are doing with their own data on other platforms, then strict DRM is going to become a legal necessity. That is what I see when I read comments saying how Facebook should take responsibility here. I agree that people don't seem to grasp what it means when they click the "i agree" button, and that Facebook (and others) should work much harder on getting the user to understand the full extent of what they are doing, as well as greater control over what data is shared and when. But that's not a problem that's easily solvable (or possibly even solvable at all). And calling for Facebook to simply not accept this information (which isn't a possibility, they are a social network, so social data has to exist on their systems), or to not allow users to have control over their own information is the exact opposite of what I and many others have been fighting for for years. If I want to export my information, or give it to a 3rd party, that is my right. And Facebook should have no ability to stop me from doing that. This will lead to people giving their personal information to parties that they do not intend to, but I feel that is a risk worth taking to keep your information yours.

pier25 9y ago
Should you be able to share your data with whomever you wish? Yes, I agree to that. OTOH you and I both know 99.99% of users don't understand what's going on with their data, so the question here is if adult users should be held responsible for something they don't understand and whether Facebook is actually responsible for not informing its users clearly of what was going on. Do you think it would have made a difference if Facebook had used a red blinking message alerting users before sharing their personal data with a third party? I think so. So yeah, the responsibility is not 100% on Facebook's users.
- Klathmon 9y ago
  I never said that the blame was 100% on users, or 100% anywhere. Like most things in life, it's shared. Facebook should absolutely be held to a higher standard here. They should be explaining what a user is really doing when they try to do it, as well as giving more fine-grained controls over what they provide to these apps. But I also don't think that a red blinking message would have changed anything, going by how android permissions used to work (big warning that you have to agree to saying what the app gets on install). Apps will make excuses for why they need data, users will want the app and not care or not want to think about what they are giving up, and not a damn thing will change (I can't count the number of times that I've been told "there will be a warning saying that X needs to access Y, you'll need to say yes to use this software" in various programs, and i've never seen a user say no...) Like I said, having this ability WILL cause people to give out information they didn't mean to. There's no hesitation there, it's going to happen, and probably pretty frequently, but I still feel that's a necessary evil to allow data liberation. Also, I think stronger legal structures would help here as well. You aren't going to stop it, so make the consequences for getting caught much more strict, and heavily punish companies that are caught using data in ways that's not okay.

arkh 9y ago

> So really the problem is that people are not aware of the scope of the information aggregate of their actions on social media and how it is or may be used or abused. Simple case: G-fucking-mail. Lot of people on it so even if you're not using it most of your emails end there with a free link to infos from other people's contact list (names, phone number etc.). Shadow profiles are what people will be complaining about 5 years from now if they just discovered what sharing things with 3rd parties mean.