# The utterly bizarre world of Facebook



## Foxbat

I don't use it. Tried it. Thought it was a complete nonsense and waste of time. Closed my account after a fortnight (well, you can't really leave once you're in but I did what I could..another reason why I distrust and dislike it). 

Here's another couple of reasons why I will forever stay away.
First: A painting from 1964 of a woman eating ice cream - banned (within a week) for being too suggestive.
This painting is 'too obscene' for Facebook

Not my cup of tea but...come on...not exactly going to bring down civilisation is it?


And yet, we also have this much more disturbing, much more dangerous situation.
Paedophiles use secret Facebook groups to swap images - BBC News

Why, I ask, were Facebook so quick to ban one painting and yet had to be informed by the BBC of secret Facebook groups used by Paedophiles? They are now investigating....why so long to do anything? Why didn't they find this themselves? Surely they have security checks?


----------



## thaddeus6th

I'd guess the number of groups they have mean checking is difficult to impossible.

Agree entirely on the painting. 

Like you, I have an account in abeyance. Much prefer Twitter (which is why the latter's woes and former's empire-building is a bit depressing).


----------



## Foxbat

With the vast amounts of cash Facebook is taking in, it would be quite feasible for them to set up a section tasked with actively seeking out misuse. They could easily employ people to carry this out and still make huge profits. It seems to me they're not prepared to do much more than scratch the surface and hope they don't find anything nasty.


----------



## Ray McCarthy

Foxbat said:


> First: A painting from 1964 of a woman eating ice cream - banned (within a week) for being too suggestive.


Or clever marketing by Facebook.

I can't believe that was taken down other than to generate publicity.

They only care about exploiting their users (who are NOT the customers) and making money.


----------



## dask

Who needs Facebook when you got the Chrons?


----------



## J Riff

Still, if you have a band, it's a great place to put up your stuff, and gather up 3000 followers, even if you have never played anywhere and only know three songs. It's good for that.


----------



## Dave

You cannot avoid it, or least I can't. Lots of community groups and volunteer groups use it instead of email. It prevents those round robin email chains because everyone is always on the same page. The alternatives are a forum like this, which I would prefer, or Yahoo Groups, which appear to have died but not yet been buried and exist as a kind of walking dead.

So, I have a Profile on Facebook, but I have no friends and I have befriended no one. I am member of about 10 closed groups and I maintain a Facebook Page (you have to have a Profile to do that.) I regularly get asked "Do You Know XXX?" Who Cares? Sometimes it is my son, or someone I worked with in 1987 or someone I have bever heard of before. It does spookily find people that are friends of friends and are therefore acquaintences.

However, I agree that it is terribly mismanaged. There is a London History forum group who ejected someone. So, that person set up another group with an identical name and forum header. It is claimed they said they did this just to screw the other people. Facebook don't want to know. She hasn't broken any of their rules.

The main problem with it is how it forces you to mix business with personal friends. Something like LinkedIn is clearly only for business, but Facebook began life as a yearbook for college students. There are a lot of occupations where being "friends" with people outside of work can produce a conflict of interests. Facebook forces this to happen. Anyway, now that it is trying to turn itself into Twitter and Twitter is trying to become Facebook, I foresee a future where they both disappear up their own....


----------



## hardsciencefanagain

http://www.pnas.org/content/113/3/554.full.pdf


----------



## Caledfwlch

I am a member of the Consumer Action Group, a UK Forum that deals with everything from Debt problems to retailer issues, and a couple of years ago, there was a flood of posts in the Employment forum along the lines of "Help, my employer has dismissed me because of something I put on my Facebook Wall" and I wrote a guide to try and help people avoid these situations by describing how to make your account as Private as possible, so nobody can find/see your profile without your permission, and some "rules" Rule No 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 was DON'T ADD ANYONE FROM WORK, Whether its a Coworker you think is a friend, or a supervisor or Manager" just resist it, and if your going to say stuff about your workplace make sure you have your privacy settings on maximum, and don't then allow your Employer to easily circumvent those privacy locks by going to your "About Me" and adding your Employer - many employers especially large companies you will find appear in the drop down list, and so it is another way of letting your Employer in.

Half the people dismissed it happened because a Coworker they thought was a friend back stabbed them, the others were silly enough to add Managers, and then were daft enough to complain about work on their Wall....

To be totally safe, just don't publish statuses regarding work, at all.

A horrifying Trend in the US appears to be Employers, before offering a candidate a job, are demanding the Candidate hands over the login & password info for their FB Accounts and Email's so the Employer can snoop out what sort of person they are or appear to be. Thankfully such a thing would be unlawful in the UK.


----------



## Ray McCarthy

Caledfwlch said:


> To be totally safe, just don't publish statuses regarding work, at all.


Or use a false ID, post some fiction occasionally and only use your FB account to see what nonsense your cow-orkers, friends and family are posting, as it's walled garden, much public on FB is deliberately inaccessible unless you log in.


----------



## Caledfwlch

Ray McCarthy said:


> Or use a false ID, post some fiction occasionally and only use your FB account to see what nonsense your cow-orkers, friends and family are posting, as it's walled garden, much public on FB is deliberately inaccessible unless you log in.



What people also don't realise, if they don't have their account on maximum privacy is Debt Collectors are also using it as a free source to stalk and try to locate people. I think a discussion needs to be had with the Information Commisioner as to whether that is legal, and fair. People don't open FB accounts in the expectation of being stalked by commercial companies, but as a friends network, the DWP Fraud Units are doing it too, but that is an anti crime measure, specifically legislated for, and they are a Government Organisation which is a bit different to the first example. The proper databases such as Credit files that Debt Collectors are legally allowed to use are notorious for having incorrect information, and attempting to judge a person's means and lifestyle from Facebook is even more prone to potentially costly mistakes.

In the US, one Debt Company actually began locating debtors on FB, and then contacting everyone on the debtors friends list demanding they make Person X pay the debt he owes, hoping to use embarresment and shame to force debtors into paying. But wierdly, in a lot of ways, American Debtors actually have a lot more rights than UK ones, which is a reverse of what is usual, and the company got hammered, and hammered very hard for its actions.


----------



## Deep Space Nina

Facebook is a world of it´s own. That is also why it is so fascinating. Why they ban something and other things are not deleted: There is on the one hand a program that automatically detects things like naked female breasts. I guess paedophils have learnt not to use certain pictures or certain words. 

But what I in fact like that you should use your real name. Of course not everyone does, but when you are harrassed by someone with a name that is obviously not real, facebook bans those people quite quickly. Yes, I know that as I am sometimes in contact with such individuals. Very often they are banned before I even report them. I have been registered on other social media platforms and with nicknames it was really much worse. 

I did not join facebook for a long time, but in fact it really helps me to stay in touch with other people. Especially on conventions, you sometimes exchange e-mail, but hardly everyone ever writes. On facebook it is so easy to drop someone a line or just to upload event photos and look what others uploaded. My first surprise was that my parents called me and we chatted. I wanted to tell them news in my life. Mum said: "We already know that. It´s on facebook."


----------



## Juliana

I've used FB for years because I have both family members and good real life friends who after their 20s have scattered around the globe; it's a great way to keep up with small bits of news and how big everyone's kids are getting.

Nowadays I also use it for writing, as I find I really enjoy connecting with Chrons members and other writers on it.

But I've always been extremely cautious about what I post on it (or here, or any other virtual space) because I have friends who've been badly burned by what were silly, throwaway posts.

My mum has a fake ID account on FB; all us family folk know who she is and have her as friend and she lurks and looks at our photos. She never posts or 'likes' anything not to 'out' herself, as she's a university professor and doesn't want a ton of friend requests from students and co-workers.


----------



## Caledfwlch

Juliana - if your Mother wanted, she could use her real name, and maximise the privacy settings, so people cannot find her either by name, phone number, and email, and also set everything to only viewable by friends added to her account. She is quite right to be careful though, it is never a good idea to add work colleagues, especially Managers, supervisors etc, but the person you have sat next too for 5 years, might well seem like your best friend, but end of the day they will put themselves and their career first - on the Consumer Action Group (A UK Consumer Rights forum) we were getting loads of people in exactly that same position, maybe promotion or pay rises were lurking, but it was all on the theme of "I posted a complaint about a manager, customer or work, and my colleague who I thought was my friend has shown screenshots to management"

I doubt it hit the news in the US, but a few weeks ago the Press in Europe where making a big fuss, because the EU Human Rights Court had ruled that Employers can view your "private messages & emails etc" they either failed to understand the judgement, or were intentionally doing so to create a little panic and sell papers - it does not mean that EU Employers can look at my Facebook Account or my personal Email, it means that Employers have the right to monitor and view the business accounts you use  - part of this Employees job was to "speak" to clients via Yahoo Messenger, and that was all he was supposed to do, however, he also added his friends from his personal Yahoo Account to his business Account, equally, they were not monitoring his personal Email address, but the Email Account provided by his Employer.

I was amazed it even got to such a high court - as far as I know all that has been standard for years - also, if an Employer provides you with a work desktop, laptop, tablet or phone, but stresses you must not use it/them for personal business, only work uses, their IT Department clearly have a right to monitor to ensure that is the case - afterall, if an employee with a work laptop was using it and a work provided mobile broadband dongle to download porn, or child abuse photographs, the Employer is also at risk of trouble, they have a legal duty to ensure their systems and equipment are not used for committing crime.

They don't have a right to monitor personal accounts as such, however, if you use a work computer or device to access your personal stuff like Facebook, don't be surprised if because of the security software they run, your Employer via the IT Department can see what you do, accidently get copies of your passwords etc.

One guy I worked with was stupid enough to use a work Desktop PC to install Torrent software, and download pirated films and music as his home broadband was usage limited. He obviously was sacked within days of doing it.


----------



## Ray McCarthy

Caledfwlch said:


> and maximise the privacy settings


Except they are designed to be awkward, you can't be sure it's private (unless you try logged out and also as someone else and even then it's full of holes)  and tomorrow Facebook may change how they work.


----------



## Caledfwlch

Ray McCarthy said:


> Except they are designed to be awkward, you can't be sure it's private (unless you try logged out and also as someone else and even then it's full of holes)  and tomorrow Facebook may change how they work.



Aye, that is why in writing the guide for the Action Group, I provided screen shots giving careful and clear instructions of what and how to change. Unless it has gone now, at the time, the privacy settings included a link that would show how your Account appeared to someone not on your friends list. With settings on max privacy, all anyone could see if they managed to find you is your profile picture and name. On max, with the right settings it should also be impossible to find someone by email, name or phone number, to get added, you would have to either add them, or send them a link to add you.

It's getting ridiculous how FB are trying to resist various Court Judgements within EU Nations, claiming those Courts have no authority over them, it must be costing them fortunes in legal fees.


----------



## Ray McCarthy

Caledfwlch said:


> must be costing them fortunes in legal fees


Internet / Tech Global mega corps regard lawyers as an important part of cost of doing business, and it's tax deductible 

A certain tech company spends very little on R&D as most real innovation is bought in. Their R&D costs include lawyers for all the spurious "design patents" (UK equivalent Registered Designs) and spurious actual patents. Also clerical, overheads etc. A minority of it on actual engineers.

Look at what Google, Facebook etc spend on Lobbyists too!


----------



## Caledfwlch

It's about time that Lobbying was banned, or heavily restricted, it is deeply unfair that people, representing companies that pay little if any tax, are able to get access to MP's for making donations.

The Tories have passed a law that heavily restricts charities from Lobbying, oddly though it doesnt apply to private corporations...

At the very least all contact between a Minister, or senior Civil Servant should by law be recorded, audio if not video, and available to the public along with everything else like Ministers private business interests, voting record etc.

The UK Culture Secretary is kicking off about advert blocking software at the moment, and wants to look into banning it, as his poor, poverty stricken friends in the multinational corporations and the Press are losing out due to it. The Press it seems have not learned the lessons of the audio visual media industry - that in the game changing world which the Internet has brought us, you either evolve and change your business and planning to suit the new reality or you die. But as they have the financial clout to buy MP's like the Culture Secretary it seems the Press are looking into ignoring the new reality and trying to buy legislation and/or assistance to instead, try and force people and the internet to change and suit their archaic 1950's business model, instead of adapting to the modern world.

The idiot Minister is even claiming that adblock software is not only "the same" as the problems AV Companies had with pirate downloads before they evolved but that the adblock companies themselves are running a criminal "protection racket" because they offer companies the opportunity to buy on to a "whitelist" but that makes no difference to users, unless they choose to allow the whitelist to decide whether ads are blocked or not, they don't stop a user from continuing to block ads from a particular company.

I suspect the fool does not actually understand or know what a Protection Racket is, and if he wants to play that game, then Apple, for example are hugely guilty of it, the way they block other companies from producing and allowing the installation of non Apple originated software on to Apple products.
I have never understood how they get away with it - Microsoft were fined millions by the EU for "lack of choice" by having Windows install Internet Explorer automatically - Apple are streets ahead in denying users choice, and creating an anti competitive software and hardware industry, yet have never faced a single investigation.


----------



## thaddeus6th

Point of order: I think the lobbying ban on charities only applies to activities funded by taxpayers' money (NB if a charity received, say, 50% of its funding from the public purse, it could still use the 50% non-public cash to fund lobbying).

I do agree on lobbying being excessive and rampant ignorance about the most basic aspects of the internet in the upper echelons of government. Cameron's idiotic idea (thankfully now dropped) to effectively ban encryption was perhaps the worst example of that.


----------



## Caledfwlch

thaddeus6th said:


> Point of order: I think the lobbying ban on charities only applies to activities funded by taxpayers' money (NB if a charity received, say, 50% of its funding from the public purse, it could still use the 50% non-public cash to fund lobbying).
> 
> I do agree on lobbying being excessive and rampant ignorance about the most basic aspects of the internet in the upper echelons of government. Cameron's idiotic idea (thankfully now dropped) to effectively ban encryption was perhaps the worst example of that.



I wonder how much damage Encryption laws have done to business in the US - not all encryption is banned as I understand it, only encryption which is "unbreakable" which kind of defeats the point. The fear mongering used to justify it was "if the NSA cannot hack it, then Mafia Don's and Terrorists will start using it" Ironically, most normal people and business probably wouldn't even use it, just normal people paranoid about their privacy, thus if terrorists and criminals were using it, whilst the content would be unreadable, it would send up a massive flare, drawing attention to the sources and receipts of such messages. Another irony is that Apple Iphones use a form of encryption legal in the US, but the Authorities can't even break that, hence Apple regularly gets hit with Court Warrants ordering them to unlock the phones or tablets etc of Suspects for the FBI, local Law Enforcement and so on.

I think Theresa May's ludicrously poorly written drugs law which effectively bans things like Tea Drinking and Aromatic Oils comes into force soon. They apparantly have learned nothing about the fact that prohibition does not work, only increases crime, which is what will now happen with formerly "legal highs" I wonder if Video Games are also in breach of the legislation since they cause users to feel happier, and affect their state of mind.


----------



## Dave

I doubt their can ever be an "unbreakable" cypher. It is more like an arms race. If you walk around some parts of London it is clear from the smell alone that few people obey drugs laws. Meanwhile, Public Houses, in which alcohol use can be monitored and controlled, and illegal drug use banned, are closing down at an increasing rate due to high rents, taxes and duty, to leave people drinking supermarket-bought cans on street corners. Is there any sense or logic to this policy decision?

Anyway, back to the subject. I read this this morning: "*London based blogger with almost 50,000 friends.*" I wonder how he manages to keep and to say hello to that many friends? Or, even to remember all their names? I'm terrible at remembering names, so 50,000 is very impressive, and just to say "hello, how are you today," to them all would, I calculate, take him almost 3 days (at 5 seconds per friend.)  That would be 6 days, if he bothered to listen to a response.


----------



## Ursa major

The issue isn't so much whether a cypher can be broken or not, but whether it can be broken within a useful time period using a feasible amount of resources.

So devoting Earth's whole economy to providing sufficient computing power to break a code in no more than a million years isn't much use to anyone, for anything -- until and unless we can make ourselves immortal and independent of the need for a productive civilisation -- and particularly not when the aim is to discover information about a forthcoming attack (terrorist or otherwise).


----------



## Caledfwlch

I don't understand why many people even use the word "Friends" especially in situations like the example Dave gives.

On my FB Account I have 33 "Friends" to many people who appear to believe its quantity not quality, that makes me look like I am practically a friendless loner. For a short period I did have nearly 50.

For me, if someone never responds to your posts, and never replies to private messages you send on fb - once the non reply goes beyond a reasonable excuse of "I was busy/ill/family member ill/kidnapped by the CIA" then I just delete them, as I dont actually see the point of having people on my FB who I don't want to talk to, and who don't want to talk to me, basically I ensure that the people on my FB are actual "Friends" not random strangers helping to make you look popular.

It is amazing how important FB can become to some people, or rather, I suspect, the easy way to spy it provides  My ex Fiance for example, we split up in July 2010, so over 5 years ago, and yet she constantly sends me FB Friend requests, and every so often a message asking why I haven't accepted her friend request. It baffles me why she is so determined, all I can think is she must be desperate to spy on me, and perhaps to compare the occasional special ladies in my life against herself. It's not anything like she actually wants me back - she is very outspoken/confident and knows full well that I am less confident, and am no good at noticing subtle hints, we were together for over 5 years, so she knows subtlety is a waste of time, if she wanted me back, she would outright message me and say it. I know enough about the couple of guys that replaced me and what happened that I wouldn't be surprised if whilst she does not want me back, she misses the way I treated her, how I saw her and what I was too her, so wants to maintain a friendship cos of that, until she gets a guy the same in her life if that makes sense. I pretty much treated her like a Princess, I adored and worshipped the ground she walked on, and as well as lover, partner, best friend, I was also her PA, Chef, Concierge, Butler, Cleaner, Protector, Defender and anything else that was needed

I know she struggled keeping a job down after me, cos my replacements werent prepared to go to all the hassle I went to - like she sleeps through alarms, so even when I was working nights, and she was working days, I would stay up after arriving home to ensure she would be up in time for work, and have breakfast waiting. When she too was working nights, but 8:30pm - 08:30am whilst I was working 10:00pm-06:00am I would stay up waiting for her to get home, then remain up most of the morning, putting her uniform in the wash, drying it etc, (she worked in a care home, so was vital to deep clean uniform every day giving the crap that would get spilt (literally)  then despite struggling to sleep in the day, I would get up at 6pm to make her tea, get her up, and into taxi etc. Which left me a total zombie, esp as working 5 nights a week, every week was causing problems with my diabetes. And I suspect very few guys would go to all that hassle like I did - I even had my GP begging me to quit saying the job was  killing me, but even though I was just the Systems Administrator at work, on the night shift, I was taking home £280 a week, after tax, and so was able to keep her in a decent lifestyle, we had a nice house, she could go have nights out with her work mates, and she didn't need to work as many hours.

For me though, without any children requiring me and an ex keeping in touch and civil, being "friends" just isn't workable, it's too painful.

Most of my FB Friends are people I have met online, some I have known for 15 years! Some from an old Yahoo chat room that had a really great and tight community, others from a Dr Who fan forum. One thing that has amazed over the years from getting to know people online is just how varied Dr Who fans for example can be - I have a friend, Murielle, who is French, she is 54 years old (but looks nearly 20 years younger) and a massive Dr Who fan - never imagined the variety of fandom, as till that point, most Fans I knew were guys around my age or younger. Though as I am 38 this year, I am starting to feel old  And I know them all well enough, that if I see an article or a meme, I can think oh, so and so would love this, and post it, tagging them, those 33 people aren't just names that occassionaly click "like" or whatever


----------



## cyprus7

My recent FB post had a reach of "1" - like reading out loud to the bathroom mirror.

When VR-enhanced FB is launched I will probably be able to pay to interact with a gazillion imaginary friends who have read my missives. Pay extra and they will even buy a book. Haha. /sarc


----------



## Ray McCarthy

Meanwhile even the police have warned people NOT to use the "react" button on Facebook, or on other sites linking it to Facebook.
It turns out that "trending" items, politics, included are decided by human Facebook employed editors and not an automatic algorithm. But then they have an an agenda to push and money to make purely from exploiting people to sell advertising.

I always thought NWO conspiracies were nuts, delusional. But "New Tech" / Silicon Valley, Google, Microsoft, Apple, Facebook, Tencent (as big as Facebook!), Uber, Air BNB etc have me worried. How much power and wealth do some of those have compared to the average nation state?


----------



## Ray McCarthy

> The biggest thieves at the moment are YouTube and Facebook. YouTube has a billion users, half of whom access it via mobile devices. The average time spent on the site is 40 minutes. Facebook now claims to have 1.65 billion monthly active users, who spend on average 50 minutes a day on its services. So if Google is an 800lb gorilla, Facebook is a megaton King Kong.


That underestimates Googles reach and control and overstates Facebook. Chinese Tencent (various services) is nearly as big as Facebook.

Here is the news – but only if Facebook thinks you need to know | John Naughton



> In doing so, they have entered into a truly Faustian bargain. Because while publishers can without difficulty ship their stuff to Instant Articles, they cannot control which ones Facebook users _actually get to see_. This is because users’ news feeds are determined by Facebook’s machine-learning algorithms that try to guess what each user would like to see (and what might dispose them to click on an advertisement). So once the content disappears into Facebook’s algorithmic maw it becomes mere fodder for its calculations.


Actually Facebook Employees ultimately decide. Not neutral algorithms.

Google [owns Youtube]  and Facebook are a threat to democracy and western Civilisation.


----------



## JunkMonkey

Deep Space Nina said:


> "We already know that. It's on facebook."



That's why I hate it so much.  There's no point in having face to face conversations any more.  Whatever you have to say is already old news by the time you talk to anyone. 

Everyone I know has their face glued to a phone all the time -  endlessly wittering on about every minute aspect of their lives. 

And when did food taste any better because you photographed it first - and who the hell's business IS it what you eat unless they cooked it for you or are sharing it?  

There's more to life that that.


----------



## Ray McCarthy

JunkMonkey said:


> Everyone I know has their face glued to a phone all the time


You should know me better then. I use mine mostly for phone calls (if not in house), occasionally for camera (not for what I'm eating), FM Radio or MP3 player.

maybe I should develop my new social media concept. MobiFaceGlue, or* Com*munity *Post*ings


----------



## JunkMonkey

It is utterly bizarre.  I live in the Highlands of Scotland and I regularly see tourists who, presumably, have spent shedloads of money to come here from all over the world to enjoy our scenery, studiously ignoring it and thumbing away at phones held inches away from their faces.


----------



## Ray McCarthy

JunkMonkey said:


> I live in the Highlands of Scotland


If I was visiting the Western Isles or Highlands, which I would love to do, I'd have my phone off in a sealed waterproof bag.

Best I've managed was staying in Comrie, maybe for a week in 1967 or so.

Even in Film Era, I dramatically cut down on my SLR photography as it was getting in the way of actually being with the family and experiencing the location. Even with Photography, unless it's the day job there needs to be a balance.


----------



## J Riff

I have no trubble here wit conspiracies, and it looks like the little tele-brain-substitute boxes may be the best mindcontrol devices ever. Obey your phone, or everyone will know and you can be located and disappear.. and on facerbook people will laugh and say somethin g like: "He didn't trust his programmers' and you can go to the part of the city where non-entities go to search dumpsters forever, and listen to a Sony Walkman like a primitive creature, and that's all you get.


----------



## Richard Thomas

Facebook can be hard to avoid. But with that said, it's really not that bad. I particularly enjoy the ability to see photos and activities of my family members and good friends. Many of whom don't live near me.


----------



## Denise Tanaka

I got pushed into Facebook by my Ex "Author Marketing Success" Coach who insisted it was the best way to promote myself and my yet-to-be-published books. She wanted me to click-click-click friend request with wild abandon to build up my NUMBERS into the THOUSANDS. She wanted me to party crash FB niche interest groups and discussion threads and click-click friend request the members. She wanted me to stalk the lists of my newly-made friends' friend lists and click-click friend request those smiling faces. I dug in my heels. I said NO. I refused to be a cyber stalker, a creepy spammer, or just plain obnoxious. Let's just say that she and I parted company on fairly bad terms.

To this day, I'll only send a friend request to a human being that I have associated with in real life. It's a handy way to communicate with my costume club, or fellow writers, or coordinate family members for an event, etc. Whether or not it helps promote my author brand, I really don't care. I gotta be real.


----------



## Ray McCarthy

Richard Thomas said:


> it's really not that bad. I particularly enjoy the ability to see photos and activities of my family members and good friends.


It's not bad, but evil.
There are  many better ways than FB to do that. All less exploitive.


----------



## JunkMonkey

Denise Tanaka said:


> She wanted me to click-click-click friend request with wild abandon to build up my NUMBERS into the THOUSANDS. She wanted me to party crash FB niche interest groups and discussion threads and click-click friend request the members. She wanted me to stalk the lists of my newly-made friends' friend lists and click-click friend request those smiling faces. I dug in my heels. I said NO. I refused to be a cyber-stalker, a creepy spammer, or just plain obnoxious. Let's just say that she and I parted company on fairly bad terms.



Off Topic .  About self-promotion --- I regularly post my cartoons on my Flickrstream  It started out as a joke after I noticed that a strip called 'Boobs' was always my highest in page views.  (It's Here and Perfectly Safe For Work).  I now regularly add tags like "No Boobs" and "Honest! No Boobs"  to every strip. I'll get a couple of hundred hits over the first couple of days.  As an experiment the other day I put up a drawing without mentioning boobs at all in the tags. 9 people looked at it.

Draw your own conclusions.

I'm off to draw some boobs.


----------



## Ray McCarthy

All accounts I've heard suggest Facebook (and most hitech companies) make Dilbert's company seem sane. Sweatshops that regard workers, especially designers and engineers as disposable resource to use up. Ten to fourteen hours a day, no pay for overtime, weekend work, expected to answer email at home or travel anywhere on short notice.
There are Hi Tech companies that even are prepared to pay young women to freeze their eggs and delay motherhood till late thirties (when they or men will be burnt out anyway.).
I've worked for a couple of such companies and have friends that have suffered in others.

The human cost of the fact that Facebook has humans, not algorithms decide what you see:
Female Facebook employee condemns the company's 'destructive sexism'


----------



## Ray McCarthy

Facebook and Privacy.
Actually they want ALL your personal info. The privacy settings are deliberately awkward and change.
Anyone on FB has email. Use email (with BCC on all if more than one destination) to share stuff.
The 11 things you should delete from your Facebook page now - Independent.ie


----------



## Nick B

I still dont use facebook and plan to never use it. I like privacy, disaprove of their (lack of) morality and ethics, and dont like the voyeuristic nature of it all.


----------



## Dennis E. Taylor

I just find their interface non-intuitive and clunky. I belong to a couple of groups, but I rarely do more than scan them. It's just too much trouble.


----------



## J Riff

There was a cartoon in a mag a few yrs. back; a guy was sitting out on his lawn as traffic went by, and he had a big sign up on the lawn with his name, musical preferences and a list of friends.


----------



## cyprus7

My posts there have a reported reach of one... that would be me checking, haha.


----------



## Stephen Palmer

I have to say - as somebody who came to FB late, and who shied away from it because of working in education - if like me you don't have a smart phone and hardly ever use your steam-powered mobile, FB and the internet in general is great. I have a MacBook at home, I check out my friends pretty much every day, I've made loads of new friends and fans, and I never look at the FB adverts. Also, when I'm writing a novel, I stay off for the whole time. I suspect FB via a laptop is an entirely different experience to FB welded to you via smartphone…


----------



## Foxbat

As I've stated previously, I de-activated my FB  account a couple of weeks after signing up. I never saw much point to it after trying it out. It seems, however, that the people at Facebook decided that I just couldn't live without them and I recieved an e-mail from them recently telling me my account had been re-activated. I promptly logged on and de-activated it  once again.

I don't know what goes through their minds but this kind of thing makes me even more determined never to use Facebook again. In the words of Al Pacino..._Every time I think I'm out, they pull me back in..._


----------



## TheDustyZebra

I like Facebook because it has let me get to know my cousins and extended family in a way that I never could, growing up. We live in far-flung states from each other and only had a few visits as kids, but now I know how very much alike some of us turned out -- which ones are geeky like me, and which ones have geeky kids just like mine. 

It also lets me see what's going on with people without having to do much actual talking to them, which is a blessing in the world of an introvert. I don't "friend" people I don't know from real life or Chrons. I don't "unfriend" people for having different opinions. I just enjoy having a nice, superficial electronic relationship with family and people I would also enjoy having a nice, superficial relationship with in real life. It works for me.


----------



## Dave

Ray McCarthy said:


> The 11 things you should delete from your Facebook page now - Independent.ie


I took at look at those 11 things. I either have them set to an audience of one i.e. only me, or I haven't ever added them. However, I get a message most days asking me to add them, or else informing me that my settings mean that only I can see them. You must provide some of those details, otherwise, if your account gets hacked then you will never be able to recover it. Apart from those messages, which I consider to be spam rather than informational, I have no problem with the way I use Facebook, though I'm sure that this way is peculiar only to me. I see Facebook membership as a necessary evil to participate in the groups that everyone else uses, and to manage the Facebook page for a community group, which is again essential in 2016.


----------



## Ray McCarthy

Dave said:


> otherwise, if your account gets hacked then you will never be able to recover it.


Though it works fine if none of the information is real 



Dave said:


> and to manage the Facebook page for a community group, which is again essential in 2016


Any "Community" that thinks Facebook is essential needs educated. It's not.


----------



## Ray McCarthy

It's not just Facebook, beware all apps and the permissions they seek

Facebook using people’s phones to listen in on what they’re saying, claims professor - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk

If you can do it by a web page, never install the app.
Only install apps after research, not just a browse of iTunes or Play Store
Only install apps you really need. Very many are malicious and at least invade privacy, often taking location data and your address books to make the writer money.
Beware "free" apps that need "in app" purchases.


----------



## Ray McCarthy

More on Facebook listening to you
Shhhh! Facebook is listening
Note there are also apps and web pages that listen for coded sounds just above normal hearing range. Some TV adverts have these and then the app reports what advert you have watched.



> Facebook ... is capable of always listening and does not tell you what it does with the information it receives.
> 
> *None of this should comes as a surprise to people: Facebook has repeatedly given itself access to people's personal data and then begged forgiveness afterwards.
> 
> 
> It continually tweaks its privacy settings, requiring people to keep making changes to prevent the company from sharing the information you provide. And whenever there is an uproar, it announces small changes that require people to actively change their settings again. Most don't.*





> Facebook claims the feature is good for users because it makes it easier and faster for you to post about what's going on around you. If that's a persuasive argument for you, continue on, but for everyone else the answer is to go into your phone's settings and manually prevent your Facebook app from accessing your microphone.
> 
> *How to turn it off*
> iOS: Settings > Facebook > Settings > Microphone.
> 
> Android: Settings > Privacy and emergency > App permissions. Find Facebook and turn off mic access


*Most versions of Android don't have that setting!*

Or even better, REMOVE the app and only use the web page if you really want to use Facebook.


----------



## J Riff

Unreal! Listens to your living room? Sorts out ads? Targets you based on this? Science fiction! DumbDownographix!


----------



## Ray McCarthy

J Riff said:


> Listens to your living room? Sorts out ads?


that's two different app families, Facebook just listens.
Allegedly Apple's Siri, MS Cortana and Amazon's Echo/Alexa only "wake up" on command, though Amazon's box only stops doing stuff if you disconnect power, "Sleep" might be cosmetic".

Samsung's voice command and the WiFi Barbie* both send ALL the sound they pickup to a private server on the internet.  

Here is about the inaudible advert monitoring, it's short pulses at frequencies higher than most people can hear that aren't actually quite ultrasonic. Actual true ultrasound can't  be transmitted via TV, Radio, DVD etc.
Beware of ads that use inaudible sound to link your phone, TV, tablet, and PC
Even a web page might be able to use your PC or laptop microphone, unfortunately, if it's running flash or javascript. I block those by default and "whitelist" known safe sites (but not the advert domains on them)


[* Harry Harrison's Teddy.  ]


----------



## Ray McCarthy

Facebook, Google etc  alleged to manipulate elections



> *Facebook manipulated users in India’s 2012 election campaign without their knowing it, describing it for Nature as “A 61-million-person experiment in social influence and political mobilization” (pdf)*.
> Google's role in affecting the outcome of elections has been the subject of some recent academic debate.
> “Google’s search algorithm can easily shift the voting preferences of undecided voters by 20 per cent or more – up to 80 per cent in some demographic groups – with virtually no one knowing they are being manipulated,” according to peer-reviewed work by psychologist Robert Epstein, that he described to Politico last year.
> “America’s next president could be eased into office not just by TV ads or speeches, but by Google’s secret decisions, and no one – except for me and perhaps a few other obscure researchers – would know how this was accomplished.”


 From: Google is the EU Remain campaign's secret weapon


----------



## cyprus7

But it's a wonderland of fiction fodder for writers!


----------



## Ray McCarthy

cyprus7 said:


> wonderland of fiction fodder for writers


See Fahrenheit 451, 1984, *ESPECIALLY* Harry Harrison's "To the Stars" trilogy and Brunner's "Shock Wave Rider". Possibly also "The Diamond Age: Or, A Young Lady's Illustrated Primer"

Loads of other books. The problem is it's real and also being monitored by GCHQ, NSA as modern extension of Echelon  (and others monitor their citizens). Fortunately the STAZI are gone. Social Services. Police and Employers also trawl so called "Social Media".

Keep in contact using your own ISP or private email (Not hotmail/Outlook, Gmail, Yahoo etc). I get near unlimited private email boxes on my hosted domains at no extra charge.


----------



## Edward M. Grant

Ray McCarthy said:


> Facebook, Google etc  alleged to manipulate elections



Big Corporations love Big Government shock! Full story at 11!


----------



## Ray McCarthy

Facebook invade privacy AGAIN.
Surely this behaviour is immoral and might be illegal in Europe?
Facebook just introduced a really scary new setting – and opted you in

I found a bunch of other "preferences" they claimed I'd created, which I hadn't.


----------



## Ursa major

Ray McCarthy said:


> ALL the sound they pickup to a private server on the internet.


Since I discovered that Samsung is listening, I no longer limit my oral communication with my Samsung TV to shouting at the more outrageous things that appear on it. So for instance, when watching _Escape to the Country_**, or _Location, Location, Location_ (I'm into property porn ), I always say, "Nice cat!" when the homeowner's feline pet appears in shot. If they choose to believe that this means I want to buy expensive food for my (non-existent) cat, they're free to do so.

Oh, and I hope they notice that (unless I've left the room), I nearly always use ad-breaks as an opportunity to watch another channel. (Note that I watch a lot of US programmes and the ad-breaks in them tend to be very long, allowing me to, perhaps, catch all of what passes for deep analysis of a news item on BBC News.)


** - I can't imagine why retired people would want to move to an isolated spot (it doesn't sound very sensible to me), but I do like seeing the insides of the houses they're shown.


----------



## Ray McCarthy

Drilling a hole in the microphone works 
Tape over cameras
(Likely you don't want to do this to a phone, only a TV)


----------



## J Riff

I only watch the playoff hockey, the roomie watches literally everything else, I mean whatever is on, he's a TV addict for real, so it's always on. That means they hear lots of 'hhur-huhr' from him, and then 'Oooh! Ah! Arrr!' when the game is on.
 The revelation that one can talk back to one's teevee set.... well I just don't know what to say.  'Hello... programmers?.. anyone there? ... uh, I've got some stories for sale here... kinda scifi... maybe better than a lot of the stuff you are playing... hello?'


----------



## Ray McCarthy

J Riff said:


> The revelation that one can talk back to one's teevee set


It's only certain models with voice activated controls. People assumed it was local, it works by sending to Samsung's server which then sends back command to TV. The revelation was two fold:
1) That the "smart" wasn't built in, it was like Cortana or Siri. Oddly Ford Audio and Nokia phones (before Apple iPhone Era) DID work well enough with voice commands on the slow cpus built in.
2) That they "recorded" everything and the fine print on T&C of TV said they could give to third parties.

The barbie doll with WiFi you talk to is very creepy as it sends all to a server and that third party server produces Barbie's spoken responses.

"Barbie, I'm hungry."
"Susan, tell your parent you so much love <insert paid product placement>"

Or what if WiFi Barbie's server (or local WiFi by bloke next door) is hacked by someone that likes little girls?


----------



## J Riff

No wonder SF writers are struggling, the news has taken over. The Barbie-bot could be a horror story... 'Susan, go to the window now... that's right ...and now, (&!&!^!%)
Horrifying. Could make for some great practical jokes as well though.
What other talky-toys are out there, for boys n girls, that could be telling them to take a walk on the roof, or that Mr. Fork and Mr. electrical outlet are friends?


----------



## TheDustyZebra

Anybody read Dave Eggers' *The Circle*?


----------



## J Riff

Haven't seen, but from the summary it looks very interesting. She joins the world's most powerful internet company, and... is there upshot spoilage or do we have to go read it?


----------



## Ray McCarthy

My "Solar Alliance" has a woman running the most powerful conglomerate of tech companies.
More would be a spoiler.
Feverishly doing final content edit of final perversion.

Then need to proof read / edit / proof /edit /proof!


----------



## hardsciencefanagain

I've heard of this thing called Facebook.Not sure what it is,though.An amoral ,manipulative amorphous rip-your-privacy-to shreds behemoth/marketing device that should have been dismantled years ago?I'm sorry was i thinking aloud?I've seen some marketing reports, and to facebook
we're cattle with wallets,ripe for slaughter.No "people",just demographics,"consumer
interests",and absolutely worthless er..........."content". And forget about Facebook and free
speech.Diligent editing of items deemed "newsworthy" is on the order of the day.


----------



## hardsciencefanagain




----------



## hardsciencefanagain




----------



## hardsciencefanagain




----------



## JunkMonkey

When social media show-offs should have shut up - BBC News


----------



## TheDustyZebra

J Riff said:


> Haven't seen, but from the summary it looks very interesting. She joins the world's most powerful internet company, and... is there upshot spoilage or do we have to go read it?



Go read it.   It is, I will admit, at least one-third too long for its story, but it's still worth it. Frightening and chillingly true fiction.


----------



## Ray McCarthy

TheDustyZebra said:


> Frightening! and! chillingly! true! fiction!


----------



## hardsciencefanagain

IT SHOULD BE CALLED *FARCEBOOK*


----------



## JunkMonkey

It's 'Bacefook' in my bookmarks - and it's only there because my wife seems unable to function without it.


----------



## Ray McCarthy

JunkMonkey said:


> unable to function without it.



I heard there are Facebook groups, do they offer free therapy (like AA) or do you have to pay (like Slimming thing)?


----------



## J Riff

There was a site called 'My Bookface' for a while... for those who remember 'My Space'. Lessee.... before ICQ, we used good old IRC. Anyone still have it on their PC. It had great features, like colored text!


----------



## Ray McCarthy

I use IRC via quakenet every night. We have private-ish channels


----------



## J Riff

I seem to recall people who could find their way into almost anywhere, other chatbots and places - via IRC. I should probably reinstall it and find the right rooms. Years ago, people were swapping movies in there, before anywhere else I think. Internet Relay Chat. Quakenet I have to look up.... ah, one of the larger IRC networks, duh. What's the gen in IRC these days Ray, is it the same or more like Facebook now? Kidding. I hope.


----------



## JunkMonkey

I miss Usenet


----------



## TheDustyZebra

IRC is very much responsible for the course my life took from a certain point. Because of it, I moved to Atlanta, and the rest is history.


----------



## Ray McCarthy

JunkMonkey said:


> I miss Usenet


Still exists. Most ISPs don't carry it, so actually connecting is a problem.
I think Google had a web copy for a while, maybe still does.


----------



## Glitch

When I uploaded a photo to my facebook profile I set the privacy options on the photo so that it could only be seen by 'Friends'. I have never changed the privacy options on that photo. However, that photo is now viewable by everyone, not just 'Friends'. Facebook has no respect for individuals; only how much advertising money they can make.


----------



## MWagner

Glitch said:


> Facebook has no respect for individuals; only how much advertising money they can make.



It's a business. They provide you with a platform, tools, and a network. In exchange, they extract all sorts of information about you, sell it, and funnel personalized ads and content your way. 

Perhaps this model could be replaced with a pay-to-use system that protected your privacy. But since 'free' trumps everything in the minds of most consumers, I wouldn't hold my breath.


----------



## Glitch

MWagner said:


> It's a business. They provide you with a platform, tools, and a network. In exchange, they extract all sorts of information about you, sell it, and funnel personalized ads and content your way.
> 
> Perhaps this model could be replaced with a pay-to-use system that protected your privacy. But since 'free' trumps everything in the minds of most consumers, I wouldn't hold my breath.



I don't have a problem with businesses providing advert supported platforms. But what I said was "Facebook has no respect for individuals".


----------



## Ray McCarthy

Facebook sets up an Ethics review process thing ...
But we have no idea of its ethics. Clear as mud.
Facebook has a new process for discussing ethics. But is it ethical?


----------



## Foxbat

A man is shot dead live on Facebook and the video is not removed because a spokeswoman says that it does not violate the company policy. They did put up a warning about the graphic nature of the video but I wonder if they gave any thought to the victim's family?
Chicago man shot dead during Facebook live-stream - BBC News


----------



## Ray McCarthy

Foxbat said:


> the video is not removed because


of revenue from adverts.


----------



## J Riff

I remember when we thought the internet was going to solve a lot of problems. Must have been worrisome to the bigshots until they got this googleface thing running.


----------



## Ray McCarthy

J Riff said:


> googleface


Twitface or FarceLink


----------



## Ray McCarthy

Pure greed. People that buy these shares are mugs:
How to eat your cake and still have it.
Facebook investors approve new type of shares to keep Zuckerberg at helm - Independent.ie


----------



## zlogdan

I had a profile there before it became a serious hit here in Brazil but  I have left it when everybody in Brazil seemed to have accounts there and started calling it "face".


----------



## AstroZon

I'm on it because my family wanted me on it.  I do post ocassionally - mainly family photos and such.  I don't read the newsfeeds or foward the latest OMG photos or vids.   I could easily live without it.


----------



## hardsciencefanagain

word


----------



## Ray McCarthy

Facebook brings out the worst in people. Here's nine reasons why it's ruining the internet


----------



## Ray McCarthy

The Echo bubble.
Also Facebook decides what you read on Facebook


----------



## Ray McCarthy

*Facebook tracking people's location.*

You can only ensure it's not happening by using a browser on PC/MAC that allows the information to be blocked, and on a phone disabling all tracking GPS on the phone, unless you have a version of the OS that allows app permissions to be rescinded. It's best NEVER to install "Apps" for companies that have websites, use the web browser, but disable OS GPS etc first.

Facebook has tracked your location to see who you might be friends with.
*
No, they do it to make more money from advertising.*


----------



## Ray McCarthy

Mark Zuckerberg has a wardrobe full of hoodies -- just sayin'

The Wolves of Silicon Valley: how megalomaniacs in hoodies became tech's answer to Wall Street


> Antonio Garcia Martínez. His CV includes Facebook product manager, Twitter advisor and start-up CEO. Today, however, the 40-year old is casting himself as lowly writer, soon-to-be “unemployable in tech”, thanks to _Chaos Monkeys,_ his newly released exposé of life inside Silicon Valley. Martinez joined Facebook’s nascent advertising team in 2011, but as a vocal critic of the company’s strategy,  he was pushed out after just two years.





> The tech hub [Facebook] is described as akin to a cult - with the day employees join dubbed their 'Faceversary’ (complete with baptism-style levels of celebrations), the day they leave classed as their 'death’ and a dress code to stop female employees 'distracting’ male co-workers. Beneath the Frat House-esque atmosphere, the company’s elite are painted as sociopaths in hoodies, with an internal security division called 'The Sec’ monitoring staff members’ movements. Forget the dog-eat-dog capitalism of Wall Street – these guys make Gordon Gekko look like Ghandi.


----------



## Ray McCarthy

This revolution will not be televised – Facebook mysteriously vanishes Philando Castile death-by-cop video
Do you believe that Facebook had a "Technical Glitch"?


----------



## Ray McCarthy

The BBC, RTE and others need to stop promoting Facebook and Twitter. They have there own massive web systems. They don't need to be in thrall.
Wolff: Facebook and the media's interests diverge



> No, the fault is on the part of publishers who, against all reason, and without the wherewithal to imagine an alternative, embraced Facebook. Indeed, there is only one practical conclusion from the history of the publishing business' adaptation to digital: publishers, by sacrificing their independence, have lost their business.



Just like Record labels losing initiative to iTunes and streaming (which pays a fraction of what Radio pays, though the USA Radio won't pay performance rights!), Book publishers to Amazon etc.  Google's wholesale "theft" of copyright via so called orphan works, scanning and YouTube.


----------



## J Riff

I remember the music biz...* Though it was not perfect, it was at least there. Wonder where it got to?


----------



## Ray McCarthy

J Riff said:


> Wonder where it got to?


Still exists. I bought a CD in Tesco last week. At least if iTunes crashes & burns, or my server does, or I have no internet, I can still listend to it on my phone, laptop, TV, hifi, Archos PMP etc.
My Grandchildren can inherit it. I buy all my music as CDs, but spend more on DVDs.
In the 1930s to 1980s there wasn't much competition for your entertainment purchases of Music apart from books and magazines, but from 1980s, VHS, then DVD / BD etc, Computer Games, Apps, Subscription (TV, Mobile Data Plans, Netflix, Amazon etc) reduce the percentage available for music. So the decline isn't really just due to Streaming or iTunes.
Also most music bought is OLD. The Industry has got rubbish at picking and promoting new acts that people want, or alternatively younger people spend all their money on drinks etc, subscription services (Mobile phones are eating a FORTUNE! Bad value!) etc.


----------



## J Riff

Yep. Extended adolescence, we sell you AB/CD again, no need for new troublesome artistico types.
There was a decade there, where the door was technically open to normal human beings, then it went back to dark age logic and full nepotism. The acts I see here, making $, downtown, are bad enough to make you want to utterly dissociate with all of it. Related people, with high-paying jobs, in their spare time, overide everything and claim the $ and accolades. Of course, that's here, where 'culture' is something other places have. )
Everything is free now, all the good stuff, laying around in piles of free cassettes, records, CDs, and online. Free for the taking. Wonder what happened to all those artists, who, last I heard, were struggling to make ends meet.


----------



## Cli-Fi

Foxbat said:


> A man is shot dead live on Facebook and the video is not removed because a spokeswoman says that it does not violate the company policy. They did put up a warning about the graphic nature of the video but I wonder if they gave any thought to the victim's family?
> Chicago man shot dead during Facebook live-stream - BBC News



I was going to start a thread about this but figured this thread is good enough. I predicted nearly seven years ago while researching for the premise of my WIP that around this time Facebook would release this type of live video streaming. I've had a pretty good track record in following these types of trends and for this one so far I have been spot on!

I had figured and still probably do, that within a few years of it's use people will always have it on recording their entire lives. Technically that can still happen, but with the recent goings-on in Minneapolis and Dallas something is occurring that I hadn't anticipated and it seems like FB didn't either, at least not to a great extent. It's uncertain if they expected the service to become so important in our daily lives within a few months of release. Can it go even farther than it already has?? Or will Facebook start to crack down on certain freedoms that FB Live introduces in new ways. 

In both these high profile recent cases, people used the service which is inherently linked to the social network as a way to practically upend the news cycle. What would have been a sleepy post July 4th week. With a lot of the American population on vacations. The news that is happening in the middle of our country hit us Americans hard. News outlets, for the first time were relying solely on FB Live video for feeds instead of their own sources/cameras!

FB Live has already affected me personally, even though I have no connection to the high profile cases we have seen in connection to the service. One of my clients is a school and they have already been hit with a minor FB live snafu, in which kids were broadcasting from their phones inside the high school and showing a teacher cursing and being disrespectful to them while they taunted him with insults.  

The real breakthrough out of this is that now everyone everywhere with little to no limitations can essentially become the news! 

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/09/technology/facebook-dallas-live-video-breaking-news.html


----------



## Ray McCarthy

Facebook and "Secret Messaging".
They are testing a new service. Don't trust or use it. 
BBC report (note BBC is very weak on Tech nowadays)
Facebook tests 'secret message' service - BBC News

Due to screen grabs etc NO system of self destructing message (à la Mission Impossible's tape) can be trusted.
Any end to end encryption requires the end points and initial connection credentials to be secure, pretty nearly impossible with a phone on facebook and also can you trust what they are storing on their server? It's not peer to peer.

Motive. Facebook isn't an altruistic tech company. Like Google they make money from advertising. They use the "social media" meme and exploiting information you think is private to get more advertising revenue.


----------



## J Riff

'Reality' entertainment was a gold egg for certain types. Low pay, disposable, unprofessional people, used then discarded for the next hillybilly hoedown or pawn shop balogna. Get rid of those annoying pro actors, entertainers, and just run a string of ordinary folks on the TV, get everyone used to 'hey, I must be interesting too!'
 Everyone here is a bigshot online, a social fish in good standing; tho they seem to do it in a different online country, in a different language... and they seem to not be too too aware of what's going on in their own back yard... but that's progress. Furthermore.... wait... got a FB msg. here... uhoh, someone I knew in highschool is travelling to Mexico... there's pictures and there's their dog,... that's cute... here's a secret msg. from the new 'FB for dogs' secret subsystem...*


----------



## Ray McCarthy

> Facebook is rolling out end-to-end encryption for its messaging service to bring it in line with competitors, including its own WhatsApp.
> But as ever with Facebook, there's a catch: you'll have to actively select the encrypted version each time, and the service will be limited to a single device. You also won't be able to use it to send things like pictures or videos.
> Facebook has called the new service "Secret Conversations," betraying its not-so-subtle efforts to offer the service while hoping that no one actually does so. Why? Because Facebook relies on reading and storing everything you do through its service in order to sell you ads.


Facebook offers end-to-end encrypted chat – if you find the right setting
Seems a lot of other people aren't too impressed with Facebook's attempts to impress.
Facebook offers end-to-end encrypted chat – if you find the right setting • The Register Forums
Don't use Facebook at all if you want security and privacy.


Ray McCarthy said:


> Due to screen grabs etc NO system of self destructing message (à la Mission Impossible's tape) can be trusted.



Can Facebook be trusted? It's not Peer to Peer
Facebook offers end-to-end encrypted chat ? • A to Facebook, Facebook to B


----------



## J Riff

The difference is.... back in the day...(coff) back in my time.... well, a letter from a 'pen pal' in, say, England - was really exciting. I still have pen pal letters from the sixties, and re-read them fondly whenever I have time between clouds of txt msgs, lol fwiw.


----------



## Cli-Fi

Ray McCarthy said:


> Don't use Facebook at all if you want security and privacy.



All my friends who are big time privacy advocates and use the strangest methods to try to protect their data, have a facebook account. It's pretty odd.


----------



## Nick B

Ray McCarthy said:


> Don't use Facebook at all if you want security and privacy.



This has always been my policy.


----------



## JunkMonkey

You want to do something brave with your Facebollocks account?

Read this:

Fury over Facebook 'Napalm girl' censorship - BBC News

And then post one of these:

napalm girl image - Google Search

on your 'stream' or whatever it's called.


----------



## Dave

I just posted about that in here: Warner Bros reports itself for piracy

So, that is unacceptable but the man being shot doesn't violate their company policy. I think they need a new company policy.


----------



## Ursa major

To be fair to FacePalm regarding deleting the Norwegian Prime Minister's post: they probably think foreign politicians are as iffy as some of those trying for the highest office in the US....


----------



## JunkMonkey

And Basefook U turns:

Facebook U-turn over 'Napalm girl' photograph - BBC News


----------



## Dave

My point is that that there would be no u-turn if you or I had complained. That is question that Espen Egil Hansen still wants answered. Mark Zukerberg may say that he doesn't want to be a news editor but he can't help it. Every time he censors something he is manipulating what people see. I don't want to see porn or sick things either, but neither do I want to live behind a firewall created by Facebook because I don't trust that they have my best interests at heart. I would rather provide my own filters than be told what I can or cannot see by Facebook. I especially don't want to be told by a robot that a picture is too sexual when it is a picture of a tree, or to be mis-reported by some internet troll who just wants to break the system. If there is to be censorship then i want real people to do it, who have names and who can answer to me.


----------



## Alex The G and T

Pornographic pictures of a tree?  Well, this one never got censored.  It's been up on my Facebook for years:






Facebook security is easy:

1. Never post anything that you wouldn't shout out loud on Main Street.
2. Don't play any click-bait that asks to share your information.

B.  If you're looking to Facebook to be a primary news source; you're already doomed.


----------



## mosaix

Alex The G and T said:


> If you're looking to Facebook to be a primary news source; you're already doomed.



According to yesterday's Guardian, Facebook is the primary source of news for 44% of Americans.


----------



## Ursa major

mosaix said:


> According to yesterday's Guardian, Facebook is the primary source of news for 44% of Americans.


Then we're all doomed....


----------



## Ursa major

Dave said:


> My point is that that there would be no u-turn if you or I had complained.


A news item about Google's Streetview, rather than FacePalm, but it's good to see it isn't only VIPs whose opinion is... er... heard:

Google Street View's beefed-up privacy blurs cow's face.
​


----------



## JunkMonkey

I was told yesterday by two separate people that I'm on Google Streetview so I went and looked and bugger me I am - Here's me pushing my son along the pavement in his buggy. So, despite the blurring, people who knew me recognised me - in a familiar context albeit

http:// https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@56.6...4!1sZrUfTt5TPapn9O1bkMd1wQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

He's 7 now.


----------



## Dave

It's fine if you are a celebrity black and white cow, but what about the brown and white cow behind her?

My daughter was on Streetview too. They've since updated with more modern views now but you can still access the old version.


----------



## Ursa major

I am -- well I was and so probably still am -- on Streetview. When the pictures were taken, I was about to mow the front lawn and, as it was sunny, I was wearing a hat, one that helped disguise my face.


----------



## HanaBi

Used FB years ago while it was in its infancy, and took me away from the likes of MySpace and Friends Reunited.

Things seemed far more easier/straightforward back then; but as it back hugely popular it also became far more unmanageable/over-engineered, to the point where I'd worry how they would constantly change the privacy settings during every update.

I gave up the ghost 5 years ago, and can't say I miss it. Perhaps I have become far my cynical/less patient with social media as I have got older. But it's no longer fun to use, and that was one of the reasons I joined it all those years ago.


----------



## Boneman

JunkMonkey said:


> I was told yesterday by two separate people that I'm on Google Streetview so I went and looked and bugger me I am - Here's me pushing my son along the pavement in his buggy. So, despite the blurring, people who knew me recognised me - in a familiar context albeit
> 
> http:// https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@56.6...4!1sZrUfTt5TPapn9O1bkMd1wQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
> 
> He's 7 now.




Wow, what great views you've got around you...


----------



## Ursa major

HanaBi said:


> where I'd worry how they would constantly change the privacy settings during every update


Speaking of which: an article on the Grauniad with the headline, Don’t let WhatsApp nudge you into sharing your data with Facebook.


----------



## JunkMonkey

Boneman said:


> Wow, what great views you've got around you...



When you can see them.  It rains a* lot*.


----------



## Harpo

I like Facebook when people use it to be silly


----------

