4 ms·

I don't see exactly how this is a violation of privacy, since the same friends that see your advertisements can go to your About page and get that same informat

by maxko87 14y ago

I don't see exactly how this is a violation of privacy, since the same friends that see your advertisements can go to your About page and get that same information from your list of likes.

hackinthebochs 14y ago
There is no privacy violation here. This is simply people looking for reasons to hate facebook grasping at straws. They're using your like to remind your friends that you like this particular company who is doing an advertisement. Seems like a tasteful bit of social proof if you ask me. I'm honestly surprised facebook lost this case. They need a fresh set of lawyers.
- tedunangst 14y ago
  They didn't really lose. Facebook just tossed them some shakedown money to go away.
  - hackinthebochs 14y ago
    Yeah, rereading the article I realized it was the lawyers themselves that brought this suit against facebook. Crap like this shouldn't be allowed. It was a shakedown, plain and simple. If facebook isn't willing to go to bat for their business practices, this is just going to continue.
SoftwareMaven 14y ago
The violation of privacy is Facebook reserving the right to use your photo on ads served on sites other than Facebook. Inside of Facebook, it's just creepy.
- hackinthebochs 14y ago
  Seeing as you're on HN, I'm sure you realize that those facebook widgets that show up on CNN.com are in fact served from facebook owned properties. The domain in the address bar means literally nothing here. The outsize vs inside facebook distinction is meaningless.
  - tijs 14y ago
    The context is far from meaningless. While you understand that 'technically' it's the same source, your friends and family using Facebook will have certain expectations when 'liking' something. These expectations will probably be that they like something in the social network context of Facebook (visible to people they know) and not in the context of the web at large (viewable to teachers, bosses, and random strangers).
    - hackinthebochs 14y ago
      >and not in the context of the web at large (viewable to teachers, bosses, and random strangers). But its not. Its viewable to your friends only (who may be browsing a third party site). This information is not made public in any meaningful sense of the word public. Only those who were able to see your like on facebook will ever see it in the context of an advertisement. Hence, no privacy violation.
goggles99 14y ago
Just a guess... Maybe because you have an option to turn that off and this you could not.
- maxko87 14y ago
  I hope that's not true -- if you block a friend from a certain part of your profile, Facebook better make sure that the friend can't see that part of your profile in ads targetting them.

by maxko87 14y ago

I don't see exactly how this is a violation of privacy, since the same friends that see your advertisements can go to your About page and get that same information from your list of likes.

hackinthebochs 14y ago

There is no privacy violation here. This is simply people looking for reasons to hate facebook grasping at straws. They're using your like to remind your friends that you like this particular company who is doing an advertisement. Seems like a tasteful bit of social proof if you ask me. I'm honestly surprised facebook lost this case. They need a fresh set of lawyers.

tedunangst 14y ago
They didn't really lose. Facebook just tossed them some shakedown money to go away.
- hackinthebochs 14y ago
  Yeah, rereading the article I realized it was the lawyers themselves that brought this suit against facebook. Crap like this shouldn't be allowed. It was a shakedown, plain and simple. If facebook isn't willing to go to bat for their business practices, this is just going to continue.

SoftwareMaven 14y ago

The violation of privacy is Facebook reserving the right to use your photo on ads served on sites other than Facebook. Inside of Facebook, it's just creepy.

hackinthebochs 14y ago
Seeing as you're on HN, I'm sure you realize that those facebook widgets that show up on CNN.com are in fact served from facebook owned properties. The domain in the address bar means literally nothing here. The outsize vs inside facebook distinction is meaningless.
- tijs 14y ago
  The context is far from meaningless. While you understand that 'technically' it's the same source, your friends and family using Facebook will have certain expectations when 'liking' something. These expectations will probably be that they like something in the social network context of Facebook (visible to people they know) and not in the context of the web at large (viewable to teachers, bosses, and random strangers).
  - hackinthebochs 14y ago
    >and not in the context of the web at large (viewable to teachers, bosses, and random strangers). But its not. Its viewable to your friends only (who may be browsing a third party site). This information is not made public in any meaningful sense of the word public. Only those who were able to see your like on facebook will ever see it in the context of an advertisement. Hence, no privacy violation.

goggles99 14y ago

Just a guess... Maybe because you have an option to turn that off and this you could not.

maxko87 14y ago
I hope that's not true -- if you block a friend from a certain part of your profile, Facebook better make sure that the friend can't see that part of your profile in ads targetting them.