The utterly bizarre world of Facebook

[Cli-Fi]

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.

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

Then we're all doomed....

 

[Ursa major]

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.