3 ms·
"The account it offered of his life — every friendship declared, every photo uploaded, every “poke” or comment or invitation sent or received over three years o
by LaGrange 14y ago
"The account it offered of his life — every friendship declared, every photo uploaded, every “poke” or comment or invitation sent or received over three years of casual use"
Uhh, add message archives, and that's more-or-less how much I'm fine with FB keeping (as long as I can take it out), in fact I'd be pretty annoyed if they randomly deleted old message archives.
"keeping messages after senders deleted them"
Well, because the receiver still has them. Duh.
"sharing personal data with outside app developers"
It's arguably implemented in an annoying way, but still, only if you use the apps, and you get an opt-out if you do.
"allowing users to be “tagged” in photos without their permission"
Annoying default, but you get to opt-out (unless you're not a user, then you've got a problem).
I guess it's just the article, as Facebook also does things like tracking users across websites, which is far more aggravating, and in my opinion the law should be change in a way that would make above features possible only as opt-in (yeah, I'm aware of the costs, cry me a river). But the stuff mentioned varies between the "correct" behavior and minor annoyances.
- anonymouz 14y agoI think those 1200 pages that he received were not even complete. If I remember correctly, the tracking data collected via the "Like" buttons was missing.
- tomjen3 14y agoOf course. Because people would go absolutely crazy if they knew about that data collection -- which is quite silly, since you can just browse those sites you don't want anybody to know about in private (porn) browsing mode. Of course, you can't do that if you don't know about them.
- anonymouz 14y agoWell, but Facebook should not be allowed to make the call on what is "reasonable" for "normal" people to know, and what is not. They should simply comply with the law.
- tomjen3 14y agoI don't recall Facebook having ever attempted to prevent discussion of this subject -- it is just not that well know.
- anonymouz 14y agoI didn't claim that they prevent discussion of it. They do not provide you with the full data they have stored on you if you ask. By redacting the data in such a way, they make a call on what they think people are allowed to retrieve from them and what not. This seems to be incompatible with EU privacy law.