4 ms·

Facebook users expected a certain level of privacy. They didn’t realize quiz apps would harvest a huge amount of data about their profiles. There is also the qu

by wil421 9y ago

Facebook users expected a certain level of privacy. They didn’t realize quiz apps would harvest a huge amount of data about their profiles. There is also the question of what kind of data they gleaned based on being friends with people who installed said apps. Twitter is 100% public like a website and the expectation isn’t the same. When you friend or unfriend someone on FB you are somewhat implying who you give access to your feed.

marcoperaza 9y ago
>When you friend or unfriend someone on FB you are somewhat implying who you give access to your feed. It may feel that way, but it is an unrealistic expectation. Something shared with hundreds of people is effectively public information. To believe otherwise is a fantasy. In “the real world”, we intuitively understand this: a secret told to two dozen people is a secret no more. But the illusion of control on social media sites seems to convince people otherwise online.
- wil421 9y ago
  Most users accepted this as a fact. Behind the scenes and not transparent to the user FB was allowing much more access. Now they are understanding the implications. Not everyone is a highly technical person and to lump everyone into this category is not right. Try explaining this to elderly users.
  - marcoperaza 9y ago
    I think the right way to think about audience controls on social media posts is as controlling who you affirmatively include in a part of your life, not as a way to actually keep any secrets. For example, you might post pictures of your college reunion, and not share them with work colleagues because you want to maintain a more professional kind of relationship with them. But you shouldn't expect any confidentiality for things that happened at a 200-person event. A real world example is meeting up with your friends at the bar and running into a coworker. You aren't prohibiting your coworkers from seeing you out with your friends, but you also aren't affirmatively sharing that part of your life with them. And what is appropriate to coincidentally be seen doing is different than what is appropriate to actively share in certain contexts.
- PhasmaFelis 9y ago
  In the real world, something you tell a couple dozen friends is no longer secret, but you don't expect it to wind up in corporate/government databases or on the front page of the paper. That's the model that's misdirecting people about Facebook.
fasj82 9y ago
>They didn’t realize quiz apps would harvest a huge amount of data about their profiles. They would've known, had they read the dialog they had to accept to access their much desired quiz.
- ModernMech 9y ago
  > They would've known, had they read Let me stop you right there. We're talking about people who are using quiz apps here...
- mrguyorama 9y ago
  So now average users are expected to be able to interpret adversarial-y written EULAs? If Joe Nobody should be able to disentangle a web of lawyer jingo and ass covering from what may very well be a team of lawyers with combined decades of experience, then why do we even have lawyers in the world?
  - fasj82 9y ago
    It's not an adversarial-y written EULA, it's something like this https://img.ientry.com/webpronews/article_pics/facebook-permission-request.jpg https://img.ientry.com/webpronews/article_pics/facebook-perm... If you can't read and understand that I'm sure you can collect disability checks from the government
    - rhizome 9y ago
      How do you think the typical user defines the word, "access," there?
      - JackCh 9y ago
        Log into? The 'typical user" interpretation of what "access" means in this context is probably worse than what was actually done. "Access" isn't a word that sounds innocent, if the app told them it was going to "'access' their bank account" any user who actually took the time to read it instead of blindly clicking through certainly would have second thoughts to say the least. The uncomfortable truth of the matter is that facebook users using these kind of quiz apps simply didn't care about privacy. When presented with that dialog they shrug and clicked through. Privacy was something they didn't take seriously at the time, if ever. The two big fuckups by facebook, imho, are: 1) Allowing such privacy invasion, knowing that foolish users would fall for it. They should have protected their users by forbidding this sort of thing in the first place even if their users were too foolish to desire such protection. 2) Allowing careless users to give away information about their friends, many of whom would have avoided such "quiz apps" but got sucked up by the apps because of their careless friends.

by wil421 9y ago

marcoperaza 9y ago

>When you friend or unfriend someone on FB you are somewhat implying who you give access to your feed. It may feel that way, but it is an unrealistic expectation. Something shared with hundreds of people is effectively public information. To believe otherwise is a fantasy. In “the real world”, we intuitively understand this: a secret told to two dozen people is a secret no more. But the illusion of control on social media sites seems to convince people otherwise online.

wil421 9y ago
Most users accepted this as a fact. Behind the scenes and not transparent to the user FB was allowing much more access. Now they are understanding the implications. Not everyone is a highly technical person and to lump everyone into this category is not right. Try explaining this to elderly users.
- marcoperaza 9y ago
  I think the right way to think about audience controls on social media posts is as controlling who you affirmatively include in a part of your life, not as a way to actually keep any secrets. For example, you might post pictures of your college reunion, and not share them with work colleagues because you want to maintain a more professional kind of relationship with them. But you shouldn't expect any confidentiality for things that happened at a 200-person event. A real world example is meeting up with your friends at the bar and running into a coworker. You aren't prohibiting your coworkers from seeing you out with your friends, but you also aren't affirmatively sharing that part of your life with them. And what is appropriate to coincidentally be seen doing is different than what is appropriate to actively share in certain contexts.
PhasmaFelis 9y ago
In the real world, something you tell a couple dozen friends is no longer secret, but you don't expect it to wind up in corporate/government databases or on the front page of the paper. That's the model that's misdirecting people about Facebook.

fasj82 9y ago

>They didn’t realize quiz apps would harvest a huge amount of data about their profiles. They would've known, had they read the dialog they had to accept to access their much desired quiz.

ModernMech 9y ago
> They would've known, had they read Let me stop you right there. We're talking about people who are using quiz apps here...
mrguyorama 9y ago
So now average users are expected to be able to interpret adversarial-y written EULAs? If Joe Nobody should be able to disentangle a web of lawyer jingo and ass covering from what may very well be a team of lawyers with combined decades of experience, then why do we even have lawyers in the world?
- fasj82 9y ago
  It's not an adversarial-y written EULA, it's something like this https://img.ientry.com/webpronews/article_pics/facebook-permission-request.jpg https://img.ientry.com/webpronews/article_pics/facebook-perm... If you can't read and understand that I'm sure you can collect disability checks from the government
  - rhizome 9y ago
    How do you think the typical user defines the word, "access," there?
    - JackCh 9y ago
      Log into? The 'typical user" interpretation of what "access" means in this context is probably worse than what was actually done. "Access" isn't a word that sounds innocent, if the app told them it was going to "'access' their bank account" any user who actually took the time to read it instead of blindly clicking through certainly would have second thoughts to say the least. The uncomfortable truth of the matter is that facebook users using these kind of quiz apps simply didn't care about privacy. When presented with that dialog they shrug and clicked through. Privacy was something they didn't take seriously at the time, if ever. The two big fuckups by facebook, imho, are: 1) Allowing such privacy invasion, knowing that foolish users would fall for it. They should have protected their users by forbidding this sort of thing in the first place even if their users were too foolish to desire such protection. 2) Allowing careless users to give away information about their friends, many of whom would have avoided such "quiz apps" but got sucked up by the apps because of their careless friends.