I am so sick of keeping up with their ever changing policies. I have it cranked way down, and rarely use it...but I find it useful for some things dammit!
Yet another reason to never get an account on Facebook has thus been revealed. If I ever join a social network, it would likely be Google+, although, I am sure they have their own privacy issues to deal with.
__________________
Allan Glenn. 1984-2005 RIP
Under no circumstances should Quentin Tarantino be allowed to befoul Star Trek.
It looks like Google is going the way of Facebook in regards to Youtube at the very least. It is no longer possible to have a private Youtube channel. I had to disable mine as I absolutely refuse to have a public channel. It's a shame, too.
Oh well, there's nothing to be done for it now.
__________________
Allan Glenn. 1984-2005 RIP
Under no circumstances should Quentin Tarantino be allowed to befoul Star Trek.
Wow, Facebook kills another company!
That's got to be the quickest way to get every professional photographer to drop your product.
It's pretty legally sketchy too. Without things like model releases the advertisers could be sued by people in the photos.
The language we proposed also raised question about whether your photos can be part of an advertisement. We do not have plans for anything like this and because of that we’re going to remove the language that raised the question. Our main goal is to avoid things likes advertising banners you see in other apps that would hurt the Instagram user experience. Instead, we want to create meaningful ways to help you discover new and interesting accounts and content while building a self-sustaining business at the same time.
Ownership Rights Instagram users own their content and Instagram does not claim any ownership rights over your photos. Nothing about this has changed. We respect that there are creative artists and hobbyists alike that pour their heart into creating beautiful photos, and we respect that your photos are your photos. Period.
The reasons to never use Facebook continue to mount. At this point, I think the only way not to be fucked over by the scum is to take the preventative measure of never joining a site that is connected to Facebook in any way, shape or form.
__________________
Allan Glenn. 1984-2005 RIP
Under no circumstances should Quentin Tarantino be allowed to befoul Star Trek.
I'm not clear MonCap... Could you clarify: would you be willing to join Facebook? I've found your posts to be rather vague on this point.
Funny (not sarcasm).
What boggles my mind more than anything about Facebook is how there hasn't been an exodus from the network when you consider how its owners treat the privacy rights of its members.
__________________
Allan Glenn. 1984-2005 RIP
Under no circumstances should Quentin Tarantino be allowed to befoul Star Trek.
I think regular use of it teaches to devalue personal privacy and over-value publication.
People might whine about this or that, but most aren't willing to give up the social interaction and platform in exchange for privacy. Aside from that, you really do choose what you put on there - usually - but the tagging system sort of takes things out of your hands.
I don't think the devaluing of privacy originates with Facebook or other social media. It exaggerates and normalizes it, for sure, but I've talked to some Facebook heads who seemed to be genuinely confused about why anyone would even value privacy. Like that that whole "Well, if you don't have anything to hide..." thing.
What boggles my mind more than anything about Facebook is how there hasn't been an exodus from the network when you consider how its owners treat the privacy rights of its members.
Cause it's really the only one out there which everyone uses.
There's certainly no loyalty to Facebook, as soon as something equal or better gets adopted by a large mass, expect people to ignore facebook.
Many were hoping G+ would be that network, but google started screwing it up.
I don't think the devaluing of privacy originates with Facebook or other social media. It exaggerates and normalizes it, for sure, but I've talked to some Facebook heads who seemed to be genuinely confused about why anyone would even value privacy. Like that that whole "Well, if you don't have anything to hide..." thing.
That's the thing. I was extremely private this time last year, but over the course of 2012 I've rapidly become a very social person. I've had a cellphone for the first time ever for one year now, I never used to post on facebook, even though I had an account (I would actually just message people in letter format, like that was normal or something), and really, I didn't bother with trying to make a friend out of everyone I met.
Mostly everything about me is public knowledge, now, and sometimes I have to reel myself back and ask why it is I'm okay with that. I suppose I am just comfortable with the people in my town. The main reason I stick with facebook is because all of my photos go straight from my cellphone on to there, so until I switch to a real camera and back-up all those pictures, I'll be on there. Honestly, it feels like a trend. At least I know I am the target audience as a college student. Fuck all those olds.
__________________
Cēterum cēnseō factiōnem Rēpūblicānam dēlendam esse īgnī ferrōque.
“All for ourselves, and nothing for other people, seems, in every age of the world, to have been the vile maxim of the masters of mankind.” -Adam Smith
That is some rich irony indeed. It won't change their attitudes, but it is still so richly amusing to me to see their own policies bite them in the ass.
__________________
Allan Glenn. 1984-2005 RIP
Under no circumstances should Quentin Tarantino be allowed to befoul Star Trek.
My first thought when I read this was to post it here. Then I thought "but it isn't actually facebook doing this, it's just spammers exploiting a fb feature".
Then I thought "meh! if facebook were any good they'd have done something about it by now" so, on third thoughts ...
One of my internet security employed friends is posting long comments on how to have secure facebook, it's pretty amusing to me in that it's all rather basic (eg. don't sign up for apps or games, they'll change your security levels ect.,..) I laugh because the only reason I'm on facebook is to play crappy games, I think it sucks as a communication tool, yet there he is trying to communicate on it.
__________________
Ishmaeline of Domesticity drinker of smurf tears
I'm taking a class on Coursera that I thought would be psychology but is more behavioral economics. The first week's readings were all about defaults and how easy it is to control behavior just by setting defaults. Most people will not bother to change from the default, no matter what it is. All the time I was reading I felt queasy about how Facebook and other sites no doubt use that research to get us to let them invade our privacy and use our behavior to sell more stuff to us.
__________________
"freedom to differ is not limited to things that do not matter much. That would be a mere shadow of freedom. The test of its substance is the right to differ as to things that touch the heart of the existing order."
- Justice Robert Jackson, West Virginia State Board of Ed. v. Barnette
I'm taking a class on Coursera that I thought would be psychology but is more behavioral economics. The first week's readings were all about defaults and how easy it is to control behavior just by setting defaults. Most people will not bother to change from the default, no matter what it is. All the time I was reading I felt queasy about how Facebook and other sites no doubt use that research to get us to let them invade our privacy and use our behavior to sell more stuff to us.
Yes!
It's the Overton window, except worse. The internet grew very very rapidly, and as adoption increased, average technical aptitude decreased proportionately. So you have an increasingly naive userbase without any real context or understanding of what is being asked of them and how the information they provide is being used or could be used in the future. They're going to be particularly impressionable in terms of what's considered normal or acceptable.
And the people who most influence what's considered normal--e.g., the people who set the defaults--are the same people who have the most to gain from the erosion of personal privacy.
I'm pretty certain facebook switching everyone's default e-mail address to @facebook awhile back was an attempt to use this default effect to force their e-mail to become more popular.
Re: Bend Over, Facebook is Back
Home yet? Surely, it's just a simple matter of programming for 
Linear Mode
