8 ms·
A valuable lesson from Randi Zuckerberg: Online privacy is complicated
- samstave 14y agoThe hypocrisy is strong with this one. While I have never had an FB account, nor shall I, I find these situations all laughable at how pompous the FB 'elite' are.
- untog 14y agoHow do you tell if someone doesn't have Facebook? They'll tell you.
- samstave 14y agoI feel that it is contextually relevant when I am commenting on FB related stories. It is not as I am bragging as much as it is a disclosure of my perspective.
- rhizome 14y agoYet we still learn that you like Star Wars a lot.
- saraid216 14y agoI don't see how your perspective is relevant when you aren't even making a substantial contribution.
- stephengillie 14y agoIt seems narcissistic for you to think the rest of us are concerned in your social network membership statuses, solely because you posted a couple of sentences vaguely related to an article about Facebook.
- dredmorbius 14y agoPardon me, but I've got to get back to not watching the television I don't have.
- daeken 14y agoAs an avid FB/Twitter/Instagram/everything user, privacy is not a hard problem to deal with: if you put something on the internet, assume that everyone will see it and know it's you. It's as simple as that. This applies to your job search, family photos, embarrassing music, nude photos, and just about anything else. If you don't want it to be seen by the world, don't share it. At the end of the day, your privacy is your responsibility.
- tsieling 14y agoThat's an easy if weak way to deal with a human reality and the failures of tech design to accommodate it. How does it work for information about me that other people gather? Like medical records? Is that my responsibility as well?
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- stephengillie 14y agoHow does it work for information about me that other people gather? Like medical records? Is that my responsibility as well? Or camera phone video of you doing something totally legal, like badmouthing 47% of the country to your friends at a dinner.
- res0nat0r 14y agoThat isn't a technology problem, it is a people problem.
- 001sky 14y agoThat isn't a technology problem, it is a people problem == & That's why we cant have nice things
- ryusage 14y agoSo you just set everything on facebook, etc. to be public? I guess that's one approach. Personally, I'm always aware there is a risk that the things I put online will be publicly exposed at some point, but I treat it like any other risk: I evaluate the likelihood that it will happen, and make decisions from there. I don't think that risk can ever be zero, but there are ways to make it smaller, and I think that's the perspective most people are coming from.
- jondiggsit 14y agoIt's complicated because advertising companies profit from networks that are open and visible. Facebook's privacy controls used to be very straight-forward and easy to use. Starting with Beacon, etc. Facebook's strategy has been to make it as complicated and time-consuming as possible in the hopes that you will just acquiesce and allow them to profit from your personal information and online social interactions.
- drivebyacct2 14y agoFacebook's made a lot of mistakes but I disagree with you pretty completely here. It doesn't help your case that Facebook just last week released a new dedicated privacy menu that is exceedingly nice, simple, straightfoward. It goes out of its way to summarize your privacy settings for you.
- jamesmcn 14y agoI'm not sure I agree completely with either of you. Instead, I prefer to not attribute to malice what can be attributed to stupidity. Or too many people deploying features willy-nilly.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- rhizome 14y agoIt could also be a business model that is unwieldy to implement.
- asdfdsa1234 14y agoIs this guerrilla marketing for their new "Poke" app?
- businessleads 14y agoThat was my first thought. The picture is quite expressive.
- loceng 14y agoThe photo wouldn't have been posted to Facebook then..
- rhizome 14y agoA valuable lesson from Callie Schweitzer: Do whatever you want with whatever you find.
- iProject 14y agoI'm not sure that a fair characterization of her motive, not at least as she tweeted her apology: "@randizuckerberg I'm just your subscriber and this was top of my newsfeed. Genuinely sorry but it came up in my feed and seemed public." Screenshot source: http://www.buzzfeed.com/jpmoore/mark-zuckerbergs-sister-complains-of-facebook-pri http://www.buzzfeed.com/jpmoore/mark-zuckerbergs-sister-comp...
- rhizome 14y agoI wasn't speaking to her motive, only the act. Do what you naturally want to do with whatever enters your sphere of attention. It's not our job to run FB's security, so not a second thought should be given to anything that slips through.
- el_cuadrado 14y ago> To be fair to Facebook, figuring these kinds of nuances out isn’t easy God damn it, it is called ACLs. Not exactly a rocket, or even computer science.
- e1ven 14y agoThe problem here is the picture was originally shared with someone who had permission to see it. That person then saved the file to their machine, and re-posted it to twitter. That is not a technological problem.
- el_cuadrado 14y agoThe person who did all this was not supposed to see the original picture. The whole thing happened because of sharing, tagging and mutual friends. It is a technological problem.
- dredmorbius 14y agoOh yeah, and ACLs are so easy to apply and maintain .... Ironically, I first ready that abbreviation as CIA, which may be appropriate as well.
- orangethirty 14y agoFeels like marketing to me. All of the necessary items are there: { "Important FB person" : "The sister.", "Reporter" : "The lady on twitter", "media" : "the \"private\" photo on FB", "friendly resolution" : "reporter took it down", "what is being sold" : "The Poke" } Of course, they will never admit to it. Viral marketing usually follows a very precise pattern.
- grogenaut 14y agoBWAHAHAHAHAH