4 ms·

>You must log in to continue. Can somebody post what the actual problem is?

by M2Ys4U 9y ago

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
sehugg 9y ago
In case it wasn't clear, people who don't have a Facebook account can't read the post.
vichu 9y ago
http://archive.is/Seejz http://archive.is/Seejz
- keketi 9y ago
  May I ask how you were able to archive the page even though it requires authentication?
  - vichu 9y ago
    I was authenticated when I archived the page.
jashkenas 9y ago
Seconded. For those of us without Facebook accounts, it would be lovely if someone wouldn't mind pasting (or gist'ing) the content of the OP, please. Edit: Thanks, @vichu.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
nemothekid 9y ago
FB mainly deprecated a bunch of APIs, and made other's require review. Here is the text: https://gist.github.com/nemosupremo/b90a752eb715858a9cc7c010b3d128ff https://gist.github.com/nemosupremo/b90a752eb715858a9cc7c010...
downandout 9y ago
I’m curious if all the privacy zealots on here see the irony in someone asking others to publicly share content that is only supposed to be accessed by a private group of people (Facebook users, in this case). Does this not violate the privacy of the person or organization that made these posts, who intended it for a specific audience?
- slenk 9y ago
  Whether you have an account or not, Facebook is collecting information about you. They should at least tell everyone what they are allowing developers to do with the data
  - downandout 9y ago
    Developers aren’t allowed to do anything with data that Facebook collects while you are not logged in. They never have. The information in those private posts intended for a private audience is only relevant to people that have Facebook profiles and are either developers or have a Facebook account. Further, even if they did allow developers to use this data, it’s still a private discussion behind an authentication wall. I have seen it argued that taking such posts and publicly posting them is a violation of GDPR, and it may well be because of how broadly this law is written. Live by the sword, die by the sword. It isn’t OK to ask people to violate the GDPR just because it suits you in a given situation.
    - remram 9y ago
      Maybe I'm confused, but how this announcement from Facebook contain personal data?
      - downandout 9y ago
        It is a post that was directed to a private group - that group in this case is Facebook account holders. So by taking that information and posting it here, it may run afoul of the GDPR. I have seen arguments that even forwarding a group email to someone not on the original recipient list is a violation, so this wouldn’t be any different. It’s a communication that is behind an authentication wall for a reason.

>You must log in to continue. Can somebody post what the actual problem is?

by M2Ys4U 9y ago

>You must log in to continue. Can somebody post what the actual problem is?

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

sehugg 9y ago

In case it wasn't clear, people who don't have a Facebook account can't read the post.

vichu 9y ago

http://archive.is/Seejz http://archive.is/Seejz

keketi 9y ago
May I ask how you were able to archive the page even though it requires authentication?
- vichu 9y ago
  I was authenticated when I archived the page.

jashkenas 9y ago

Seconded. For those of us without Facebook accounts, it would be lovely if someone wouldn't mind pasting (or gist'ing) the content of the OP, please. Edit: Thanks, @vichu.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

nemothekid 9y ago

FB mainly deprecated a bunch of APIs, and made other's require review. Here is the text: https://gist.github.com/nemosupremo/b90a752eb715858a9cc7c010b3d128ff https://gist.github.com/nemosupremo/b90a752eb715858a9cc7c010...

downandout 9y ago

I’m curious if all the privacy zealots on here see the irony in someone asking others to publicly share content that is only supposed to be accessed by a private group of people (Facebook users, in this case). Does this not violate the privacy of the person or organization that made these posts, who intended it for a specific audience?

slenk 9y ago
Whether you have an account or not, Facebook is collecting information about you. They should at least tell everyone what they are allowing developers to do with the data
- downandout 9y ago
  Developers aren’t allowed to do anything with data that Facebook collects while you are not logged in. They never have. The information in those private posts intended for a private audience is only relevant to people that have Facebook profiles and are either developers or have a Facebook account. Further, even if they did allow developers to use this data, it’s still a private discussion behind an authentication wall. I have seen it argued that taking such posts and publicly posting them is a violation of GDPR, and it may well be because of how broadly this law is written. Live by the sword, die by the sword. It isn’t OK to ask people to violate the GDPR just because it suits you in a given situation.
  - remram 9y ago
    Maybe I'm confused, but how this announcement from Facebook contain personal data?
    - downandout 9y ago
      It is a post that was directed to a private group - that group in this case is Facebook account holders. So by taking that information and posting it here, it may run afoul of the GDPR. I have seen arguments that even forwarding a group email to someone not on the original recipient list is a violation, so this wouldn’t be any different. It’s a communication that is behind an authentication wall for a reason.