Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Facebook Founder's Pictures Go Public

kdawson posted more than 4 years ago | from the red-face-book dept.

Privacy 219

jamie passes along a Newsfactor piece that begins "In a not-uncommon development for the social-networking leader, Facebook's recently released privacy controls are leaving the company a bit red-faced. As a result of a new policy that by default makes users' profiles, photos, and friends lists available on the Web, almost 300 personal photos of founder Mark Zuckerberg became publicly available, a development that had gossip sites like Gawker yukking it up."

cancel ×

219 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Karma. (5, Insightful)

SilverHatHacker (1381259) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425358)

It's a b****.

Re:Karma. (2, Insightful)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425450)

It would have been if he'd had any pictures that happened to be embarrassing. Instead the most personal thing on there is probably that he's going to visit a facebook company party soon. Woohoo. I was hoping for pictures of Mark drunk with writing or Mark doing a keg stand or something. With the stuff up there that he has, he may very well have left it public on purpose.

Re:Karma. (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425620)

I was hoping for pictures of Mark drunk with writing or Mark doing a keg stand or something.

There's always photoshop.

Re:Karma. (2, Insightful)

antek9 (305362) | more than 4 years ago | (#30426752)

That should be all the rage on Fark over the next days.

Re:Karma. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30426912)

when he is at the party, rampage his house!

Re:Karma. (1)

blackraven14250 (902843) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425668)

You know, they could turn this into awesome PR. "The founder of Facebook agrees with our new privacy controls, and really doesn't mind, so the new controls must be awesome!"

Re:Karma. (2, Interesting)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425806)

My guess is it's fake.

They either had the choice of (A) cleaning up his profile and "accidentily" making it public or (B) setting his profile private by default thereby admitting it's a bad idea to make profiles public by default.

Obviously there's choice (C) of making profiles private by default, but the marketing people probably didn't like people having privacy.

The lesson is simple; never trust any company to keep your stuff private.

I'll never use Facebook (1, Interesting)

vawarayer (1035638) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425384)

I am really worried about the fact that Facebook has access to data such as people's real name (that's the point of it, right?), IP addresses, friends' lists, and other info. It worries me enough on a personnal level, so I'll never register, but what worries me more is on the macro level. Even if such company did not want to 'do evil' with this tremendous amount of info, I feel that the power they posess is ultimately too big to be own by a for-profit company.

Re:I'll never use Facebook (5, Informative)

bkpark (1253468) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425432)

I am really worried about the fact that Facebook has access to data such as people's real name (that's the point of it, right?)

Um, no it doesn't. It has no real name verification mechanism, so if you are like me and you go by a nickname among your friends, you can register using a nickname. I think at some point they changed it so that you couldn't change the name easily once you register ('didn't used to be that way in its first year), but if you start out with a pseudonym, they don't stop you.

As for other infos, well, use TOR and litter your profile (and friend list) with a lot of false information so that they cannot separate the truth from lie.

Or, as you said, don't use Facebook.

Re:I'll never use Facebook (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30426024)

i have had several pseudonym accounts deleted because they weren't associated with what facebook considers a "real name"

Re:I'll never use Facebook (2, Interesting)

MagusSlurpy (592575) | more than 4 years ago | (#30426500)

I have a profile for an inflatable sex pig, with a name clearly implying it's a sex pig, and a photo of the pig for the profile pic. They aren't completely on the ball. I also have a profile for a character from a very popular book series, and the profile pic is a still from one of the film adaptations, and both of these profiles have existed for over two years.

Re:I'll never use Facebook (2, Funny)

Random Destruction (866027) | more than 4 years ago | (#30426678)

Indeed, I'm friends with a stuffed animal, inanimate carbon rod, a car, and jesus, and I run a profile for a robot.

They are nowhere near on the ball.

Sadly my hypercube got its profile deleted.

Re:I'll never use Facebook (1)

MagusSlurpy (592575) | more than 4 years ago | (#30426856)

I have to admit, I am amused that their filtering software caught your hypercube, but not Jesus.

Re:I'll never use Facebook (1)

arb phd slp (1144717) | more than 4 years ago | (#30426390)

I have a ton of fake information in my profile. I make a point every year of celebrating my "fake Internet birthday".
You can still change your name anytime you want. I gave myself the middle name "Hussein" last year for a while. And a number of my friends have changed their names upon getting married.

Re:I'll never use Facebook (1)

izomiac (815208) | more than 4 years ago | (#30426440)

Using fake info has a limit. It's fine so long as you remember why you're using Facebook in the first place. It's stupid if you (unintentionally) mislead your friends or keep them from finding you. In the latter case, that's a very round-a-bout way to not use Facebook.

As for verification, I originally registered under a pseudonym with no problems. Realizing how pointless that was I tried to change my name to my real one. Apparently, it wasn't real enough for Facebook though, so they rejected my name change. This is especially amusing since I used my college e-mail address that had a good portion of my real name in it...

I'm nowhere near as paranoid as I once was, but I try to keep my Facebook account usable for my friends while near useless for anyone else. I keep it professional enough that I wouldn't mind future employers looking at it, and keep only the most subtle references to the rest of my online identity (similarly, my username is rarely associated with my real name). I figure it's a good "stopping point" if someone tries to investigate me online. If it didn't exist then I'd suspect that might encourage someone to dig a little deeper.

Not having a Facebook profile also has some privacy concerns. Someone can tag you in an image even if you aren't on Facebook. The only differences are that it's obviously not linked to your profile, and you cannot untag yourself from it.

Re:I'll never use Facebook (1)

bkpark (1253468) | more than 4 years ago | (#30426630)

I'm nowhere near as paranoid as I once was, but I try to keep my Facebook account usable for my friends while near useless for anyone else.

Same here. Contact information is true enough, as in email sent to the email address listed in my Facebook profile will reach me. Other information are mostly lies and jokes, but my friends should know (and I tell them in person) which ones are lies and which ones aren't.

I should make my profile a little more professionally acceptable, though, in case a future employer finds the profile and somehow links it to me ...

Re:I'll never use Facebook (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30425484)

Plus, Zuckerberg is an arrogant, greedy Jew. He also made a gay sex tape while high on ecstasy and amyl nitrate while in college. Word on the street is that he's secretly negotiating a deal to buy the incriminating evidence from his former gay lover, a black man named Jermaine.

Marc Zuckerberg: He'll zuck any dick, including yours. [tinypic.com]

Re:I'll never use Facebook (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30425558)

So they know your name, and some of your friends names. And about 100 people who you said hi to once, who decided to add you as a friend. They know your IP, if they log it.
Okay. What else? You don't have to give them any other information. At all.

Re:I'll never use Facebook (1)

ndunnuck (833465) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425682)

Why do people think it matters if a company is for-profit? Everybody's "for-profit", including all the full-time employees at every "non-profit" organization and every single politician wrangling to get their hands on a piece of your tax dollars, so they can control where it goes. It's not too big for a "for-profit" company. It's too big for anyone.

Re:I'll never use Facebook (5, Insightful)

TheKidWho (705796) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425720)

Facebook is the government database the government never had but wishes they did.

Re:I'll never use Facebook (2, Funny)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 4 years ago | (#30426184)

True that. Imagine knowing my personal friend network, something that is unattainable to discover without Facebook, and most importantly, that I enjoy Buffy and is looking forward to Guild Wars 2, and make subtle sex jokes in my log when I'm sexually frustrated from having a distance relationship. This is like a new golden age of useful information.

Re:I'll never use Facebook (1)

prod-you (940679) | more than 4 years ago | (#30426220)

I guess now we all know the most important things about you.

Re:I'll never use Facebook (3, Insightful)

jeffasselin (566598) | more than 4 years ago | (#30426946)

I don't even need Facebook for that, I can get it from your Slashdot profile now!

From Mark: (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30425390)

"For those wondering, I set most of my content on my personal Facebook page to be open so people could see it. I set some of my content to be more private, but I didn't see a need to limit visibility of pics with my friends, family or my teddy bear :)"

Re:From Mark: (5, Insightful)

Khyber (864651) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425718)

BULLSHIT.

He set his shit to private, it got exposed, he said "I meant to do that" and then most everything went private again.

Give me a fucking break. He got caught with his pants down and egg on his face.

Re:From Mark: (5, Funny)

ardle (523599) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425766)

He got caught with his pants down and egg on his face

Did anyone save a copy of that photo?

Re:From Mark: (1)

Fizzol (598030) | more than 4 years ago | (#30426478)

Was Matt Drudge involved in the pantsless egging?

Re:From Mark: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30425784)

Yeah Mark, so are you gonna delete that wall post now or deny you ever said it?

You can't see his friend list now either!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30426210)

I guess the jackass didn't like his own company's privacy policy and is now getting special treatment. While the rest of us have our friend lists visible to the public, his is no longer visible!!!! Fill the jerk's inbox with complaints!

too funny (3, Interesting)

pertelote (37736) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425392)

I have spent the best part of the week trying to adjust my facebook profile to some level of discreteness that I am comfortable with. Have been very unhappy with the "all or nothing" choices, and have started just simply deleting content. I feel a little better, because now I am sure the settings will get some fine-tuning.

Just for fun:
http://www.facebook.com/pertelote [facebook.com]

And this is after I have locked down as much as I can without insulting my family and classmates.

Re:too funny (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425454)

Maybe this is just PR for the new privacy controls. Mark Zuckerberg saying its okay for me...

Re:too funny (1)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425574)

So...are you single? ;)

Re:too funny (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30425670)

Nope, she's a full album.

Re:too funny (2, Insightful)

Gizzmonic (412910) | more than 4 years ago | (#30426052)

If she has any level of discreteness, then certainly she be divided into a single entity!

Re:too funny (1)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425624)

The worst part about the new settings: You can't keep your photos from being tied to you. Sure you can make your profile picture a kitchen sink (since you must show your profile picture), but now that you must show your friends list, if any of your friends has an open profile and tags you in a photo, it's game over; cyber-stalker-chick/dude knows what you look like (and your hometown since that's mandatory open now too). So now to be private, you have to police your friends. I'm curious what witness protection plans doing in the coming decades; cabins in the woods?

Re:too funny (1)

awyeah (70462) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425790)

It's actually possible to hide your friend list from your public profile - but you have to hide it from your profile entirely.

Of course, that doesn't mean that I agree with the "enhanced" privacy settings.

Re:too funny (1)

pertelote (37736) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425846)

that's what I meant by not insulting family and friends. it is all or nothing.

Re:too funny (4, Interesting)

gleffler (540281) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425868)

Actually, it isn't. If you go to the URL of the friends list, you can view anybody's friends list.

See http://www.facebook.com/friends/?id=zuck [facebook.com] even though if you go to http://facebook.com/zuck [facebook.com] , there's no way to view his friends list.

Re:too funny (-1, Troll)

GNUALMAFUERTE (697061) | more than 4 years ago | (#30426388)

Dude, disgusting! There are pictures of Jews in there!

That's even worse than Goatse!.

Re:too funny (1)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 4 years ago | (#30426566)

I hate replying to a troll, but I must... Mark Z is friends with OJ Simpson?

Re:too funny (-1, Flamebait)

GNUALMAFUERTE (697061) | more than 4 years ago | (#30426788)

Oh, Great! You had to bring in the niggers too!

Re:too funny (2, Funny)

FlyMysticalDJ (1660959) | more than 4 years ago | (#30426550)

This scandal must have had a big effect on Mark's social life because I went to http://www.facebook.com/friends/?id=markzuckerberg [facebook.com] and it plainly told me: "Mark has no friends."

Re:too funny (2, Funny)

Anci3nt of Days (1615945) | more than 4 years ago | (#30426718)

except Tom.

Re:too funny (1)

drew30319 (828970) | more than 4 years ago | (#30426746)

"Mark has no friends in common with you."

Well, that's a relief.

Re:too funny (1)

mysidia (191772) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425776)

Ah... but you see.. I can see 200 friends in your profile, that might not all have their privacy settings turned up that high.

I just have to find one of them to have a little discrete innocent chat with "Hey, do you know such and such.. bla bla.. bla bla..."

People are almost always a weaker link than technology.

Re:too funny (1)

mysidia (191772) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425968)

Addendum: In case I wasn't clear... one message to the right friend with the right text, and the average person will happilly (accidentally) divulge their login details, e.g. suitable phish attempt will provide your info that they have access to.

That's the trouble with Facebook's "privacy settings"... they're only as good as the security precautions of other people you trust/know personally.

At least not when FB forces you to show your friend list to everyone (or to hide it from everyone, which few people will do, as it prevents even their friends from seeing the person's friends..)

Re:too funny (0)

druuna (1097839) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425974)

You are not all that public.....

I see this when I use the link you gave:

Sign up for Facebook to connect with Lisa K LaForest Schreiner.

Re:too funny (0, Troll)

GNUALMAFUERTE (697061) | more than 4 years ago | (#30426384)

I am seeing that most of slashdot is now on facebook, which is totally sad. I can't reply to everyone, so I had to pick someone, and that was you, congratulations!. Here it goes:

You use Facebook? What a faggot.

There, I feel much better now.

Re:too funny (4, Funny)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 4 years ago | (#30426594)

I am seeing that most of slashdot is now on facebook, which is totally sad. I can't reply to everyone, so I had to pick someone, and that was you, congratulations!. Here it goes:

You use Facebook? What a faggot.

There, I feel much better now.

Someone's totally going to troll you on usenet for having an account on /.

Privacy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30425420)

Hey, if he has nothing to hide then this shouldn't be a problem. Only people with criminal activity need privacy, right?

Ok so where are the pictures? (5, Informative)

areusche (1297613) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425430)

I clicked the link in the summary and I didn't find any pictures. So after a quick search I found this http://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-ceo-mark-zuckerbergs-private-photos-2009-12#with-girlfriend-priscilla-chan-from-her-album-moments-have-you-seen-a-sweeter-thing-today-probably-not-1 [businessinsider.com] Enjoy!

Re:Ok so where are the pictures? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30425686)

damn, his girlfriend is fugly. You'd think with the money and fame he's got, he should be able to get some grade-A pussy.

Re:Ok so where are the pictures? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30425758)

Thanks,
I've resisted having a Facebook account but I think I might get one now. Whether deliberate or accidental, it makes me feel more secure knowing thiws guy put himself in the same boat as his fans and customers. Kind of a reverse-monarchy attitude.
I also like that his gf is of a different race to hime. No white supremacism with this fella.

Hello facebook world!

Re:Ok so where are the pictures? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30425930)

Wait, so if this Jewish fella had a white girlfriend, he would be some sort of Nazi supporting KKK member?

Eating your own dog food... (1)

oldhack (1037484) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425434)

takes on another outfit.

He should've left them public (4, Insightful)

Karganeth (1017580) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425496)

He definitely should have left them public. He should've made it look as though he meant to do that and left them on. Somebody will have downloaded them all anyway.

Re:He should've left them public (1)

Aladrin (926209) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425510)

Oh, they're out there... So far I've just seen the highlights, but I'm sure people have them all.

Um, he did it ON PURPOSE (3, Informative)

swein515 (195260) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425514)

"For those wondering, I set most of my content on my personal Facebook page to be open so people could see it. I set some of my content to be more private, but I didn't see a need to limit visibility of pics with my friends, family or my teddy bear :)"

http://www.facebook.com/markzuckerberg [facebook.com]

Re:Um, he did it ON PURPOSE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30425760)

For these wondering his personal profile page is http://www.facebook.com/zuck

Also either Facebook is glitching (It's been doing that a lot lately), or there is no option to add him as a friend,
and his friends list is hidden, even though that is no longer allowed.

Re:Um, he did it ON PURPOSE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30425802)

Wrong:

http://www.facebook.com/help.php?page=927

How can I hide my Friend List on my profile?
First, click the pencil icon in the Friends box on your profile. Then, uncheck the "Show my friends on my profile" box. People who come to your profile will not be able to see this information.

And it's always been possible under the old and new privacy controls to control what audiences are able to add you as a friend.

So basically, you're wrong on both counts.

Re:Um, he did it ON PURPOSE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30425956)

Which glitches? His profile has always had the Add as Friend button disabled, and the friend list can be hidden from everyone now (which is still not as configurable as how it was before) - I use both of those options myself. The conflicting points at this stage relate to his status update denying the fact he did revealed anything in error; except his photos are no longer accessible.

Re:Um, he did it ON PURPOSE (1)

cameigons (1617181) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425762)

But it's weird, I've read on the news that it was almost 300 pictures.. but I only see a couple dozens.

Re:Um, he did it ON PURPOSE (2, Informative)

Tacvek (948259) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425794)

http://www.facebook.com/markzuckerberg [facebook.com] is a Facebook Page about Mark, that he runs, which allows people to become "fans" of him. His Profile is at http://www.facebook.com/zuck [facebook.com] , although either he removed his photos, or Facebook is glitching again. More damning is the fact that he appears to have hidden his friend's list, unless that is part of the glitch.

Re:Um, he did it ON PURPOSE (4, Informative)

Tacvek (948259) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425824)

Damnit, s/friend's/friends/.

Also for clarification the reason why the missing friend's list is damning is because hiding the friends list is one of the options that was removed.

Re:Um, he did it ON PURPOSE (1)

cameigons (1617181) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425886)

Oh, thanks, I didn't pay attention to that. But still as it stands it's possible that it was indeed unintentional him opening his profile like that, and his public claims are merely a (rather good) coverup for it

Re:Um, he did it ON PURPOSE (1)

six11 (579) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425896)

Regardless of if he did it on purpose, those pictures tell me that he is basically a regular dude, or at least plays one on the Intertron. I don't find any of those pictures even remotely embarrassing or controversial. Not that I'm supporting the recent privacy policy changes.

Re:Um, he did it ON PURPOSE (-1, Troll)

GNUALMAFUERTE (697061) | more than 4 years ago | (#30426396)

Well, he is publicly showing that he is a Jew. That's as embarrassing as it gets.
Yes, I am burning Karma. So what? ;)

Re:Um, he did it ON PURPOSE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30425948)

You are full of shit and he is full of shit.
Here is the link of ALL the pictures "he meant to show" but all of a sudden are not there?

http://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-ceo-mark-zuckerbergs-private-photos-2009-12#with-girlfriend-priscilla-chan-from-her-album-moments-have-you-seen-a-sweeter-thing-today-probably-not-1

So now the question is this - how much you got paid to write that?

he meant to do it, then had the pictures removed (5, Interesting)

Mr.Zuka (166632) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425522)

I think it says a lot about his personality that he posted to his newsfeed that he meant to post the pictures, then somehow the pictures mysteriously disappear. Kind of scary with an ego that he can't admit to a mistake that small. If there ever was a security breach would facebook ever admit to it?

Re:he meant to do it, then had the pictures remove (1)

DarkTempes (822722) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425710)

Not unless they were legally liable for it and also had a decent chance of being sued at that. But that's pretty much standard operating procedure for any IT company.

I would not be surprised if PR suggested he take the pictures down just because people THOUGHT there was a security problem because some of them were available to the public. I would also not be surprised if there was a problem and he lied to make Facebook look better so as to try to keep their reputation (read: investors) looking good. I'm not sure we can really surmise much about his ego from this though given that his actions may largely be pressured by what Facebook needs than what his ego desires.

Re:he meant to do it, then had the pictures remove (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30425728)

Well, that's par for the course, isn't it? Naive "I have nothing to hide" never lasts long when the attention comes. Even people who are in the showbiz don't want everybody rummaging around in their private lives. Can you imagine how Zuckerberg's friends reacted to that kind of scrutiny?

Re:he meant to do it, then had the pictures remove (1)

mysidia (191772) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425820)

Banks won't admit to it, when they have a breach. I doubt Facebook will.

If you're worried (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30425532)

Dont put your shit in there, and, Fuck Facebook.

Re:If you're worried (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30425858)

meh, I get a lot of ass of facebook.

i really dont get it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30425548)

i really don't.

The new privacy dialog game up when I logged in and i read it and then checked each option to keep things the same as before... it's not rocket science. One's inability to read and think is not Facebook's fault.

Re:i really dont get it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30425840)

Except that wizard *didn't* keep everything the same as before: http://www.insidefacebook.com/2009/12/10/now-facebook-lets-users-hide-friends-from-people-who-are-not-logged-in/ (also follow through to the original post on the topic).

Eh? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30425584)

I vaguely remember automatically being "friends" with mark zuckerberg when I originally signed up for facebook eons ago... (This was before "fans" existed...).

In any case, I wouldn't think someone like mark would want most of his pictures private.. it is his site after all!

Re:Eh? (2, Funny)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425920)

That's MySpace, and it wasn't CEO of MySpace you were friends with.

DID NOT WANT (5, Funny)

phantomcircuit (938963) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425646)

Note to self: think before clicking links to private pictures of nerd.

what an idiot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30425656)

This self-serving policy change is certainly a strong warning for everyone to avoid facebook and others. Having such a stupid CEO should be the coup de grace for facebook.

Douche? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30425738)

What kind of self-absorbed douchebag has 300 photos of himself on his profile?

my facebook status this past thursday reads (3, Funny)

weirdcrashingnoises (1151951) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425830)

[name] dislikes facebook's new privacy alert that by default would have made my facebook LESS secure... *rolleyes*

Today's status update is a link to this article with my comment "Oh, the irony!"

Who cares (2, Insightful)

Murdoch5 (1563847) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425878)

Facebook might be the social network giant but it's a really pointless site. It's more about showing off how many friends you have who most of you probably haven't met.

Joining groups who's point is to see how many people join the group and most of all showing off your pics and status in life.

I do have a facebook account but I haven't updated it in 3 years which is about when I made it. If you want to keep your life private don't put it on the web. How hard is it to just pass a USB key or pass a memory key and let your real friends see your pics / status or anything else you feel like sharing.

Facebook might be the social giant of the internet but it's also a giant waste of time and resources. Don't complain that your pics get stolen, released or broadcast. If you really want to keep your info private then don't put it on the net.

Re:Who cares (1)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 4 years ago | (#30426260)

Facebook might be the social network giant but it's a really pointless site. It's more about showing off how many friends you have who most of you probably haven't met.

      I have noticed from personal experience that time spent on facebook is inversely proportional to how involved one is in a relationship with a human of the opposite sex. For some reason all those people that I know that spend 10+ hours a day on facebook, informing the world minute-by-minute what they are up to, have invariably been single or are in unhappy relationships.

      I used to have a facebook account. I met my current girlfriend on that site, believe it or not. We've been living together 2 years and things have never been better. Oh, and I deleted my facebook account a long time ago... However I know a lot of my girlfriend's single female 40+ friends have their whole autobiographies on facebook...

Re:Who cares (1)

Murdoch5 (1563847) | more than 4 years ago | (#30426330)

lol nice post. I agree with you for the most part. Good job meeting your girl friend, it happens from time to time and I can agree to that. However I've noticed that when I need to find a computer at the college 3/4 of the time the person using it is updating there facebook status or playing a new facebook game or on a facebook group. It just gets really really irritating.

I'm not going to say getting rid of facebook is a good idea but it might be a good idea to tone down what you can do on facebook, social networking is one thing but facebook is social re-engineering. Turning face to face into face to profile or face to picture.

Poor choice of defaults (5, Insightful)

StuartHankins (1020819) | more than 4 years ago | (#30425888)

Any system which defaults to "share everything" is a fail. You should never have to opt-out, only opt-in, to release data. Otherwise it's way too easy to screw up and show something private to everyone (as in this example).

Re:Poor choice of defaults (4, Informative)

TejWC (758299) | more than 4 years ago | (#30426238)

Oh, this default is even worse than most people could have imagined!

For example, lets say you go to a party and a "friend" of yours takes a picture of you doing something that looks rather scandalous because you are drunk. And then, your friend uploads the pic to Facebook and tags your name to it. You realize you have been tagged in the photo and you don't want other people to see it. So you untag yourself and send a message to your friend to delete it. However, your friend either doesn't go on Facebook very often or doesn't check Facebook messages so the photo is still up there and there is nothing you can really do about it except pray that nobody else stumbles upon it.

And then suddenly Facebook decides to make everybody's photos Public to anybody. Now this bad photo of you is available to everybody and there is nothing you can do about it except call your other friends in order to get the cell phone number of the guy that took your picture.

Yeah, this default sucks real bad.

Re:Poor choice of defaults (3, Insightful)

MWoody (222806) | more than 4 years ago | (#30426332)

Any system wherein you upload pictures for the world to see is fail for not assuming that's what you want to do? We're not talking an OS or web server here; it's a social site.

I have to ask: if you have private pictures, why are they online?

It's too hard to manage privacy on Facebook (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30425944)

It's really hard because there is no way to be able to easily see what other people can see. If you don't sign into an account then Facebook doesn't let you see anything, no matter what the user's settings are. Since you can't have multiple accounts there is no way to check your own profile as a random Facebook user to see what they can see about you.

Plus, why is Facebook slow as hell? That damn site annoys the crap out of me. Half the time I click on stuff and it never appears (like my own friend list). Reatarded site.

Re:It's too hard to manage privacy on Facebook (3, Insightful)

srjh (1316705) | more than 4 years ago | (#30426472)

Actually, there's a "Preview my profile" in the privacy settings - it shows you what the general public sees and you can modify it so that it shows you what any specific person sees.

Not sure how long they've had that, but I got a nasty surprise the first time I used that, having previously thought my profile was locked down pretty tightly.

This last debacle was pretty disgraceful, though - sending out a message telling everyone they should change to the "recommended" setting of making everything public by default and even calling private settings "old facebook" rather than actually describing them as what they were. For some reason they still don't realise they're not Twitter.

The new FaceBook (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30425958)

Where, having never been a member, the few public things I did sometimes read on there no longer display without javascript. That's quite pathetic.

Privacy (1)

zen-o-matic (1699464) | more than 4 years ago | (#30426128)

Oh, the irony!
Thank God I don't use FB (and never ever will). :-)

What am I missing? (5, Interesting)

BlueWaterBaboonFarm (1610709) | more than 4 years ago | (#30426162)

This is an honest question. I've seen numerous stories about how terrible Facebook's privacy setting are but I just don't understand what is wrong. I've made a dummy account with the same settings as my personal Facebook account. Tell me what you can find out about "Billy Slashdot Perkins". The answer is nothing as far as I can tell. Searching for him on Google or Facebook gives no results as far as I can tell.

As far as I can tell there are two options for privacy on Facebook

(1) Be 'searchable' which means some information about yourself should be included otherwise the search is useless

(2) Not be 'searchable'. Everything you have is private and between you and the friends you have

I have option (1) and I haven't had any problems with it yet.

Please tell me specifically what it is about Facebook that is violating your privacy?

Re:What am I missing? (2, Insightful)

/dev/trash (182850) | more than 4 years ago | (#30426530)

You have to be like 20 and want to share all your drinking pics with all your loser friends but your boss is like 30 and he's not into that shit, so he'll fire ya if he ever found all those drinking pics.

Re:What am I missing? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30426600)

That 30 year old sounds like an uptight dick. Why is everyone in such a rush to act old?

Re:What am I missing? (1)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 4 years ago | (#30426878)

Yeah, but if he's prepared to fire you for things you did not on the job, you're better off not working for him anyway. Better still, if he's stupid enough to come out and say it was about stuff that happened in your personal life, I wonder if you could sue the company and win. Normally I'm not one to sue at the drop of a hat, but the companies who are overstepping their bounds like this deserve to be punished hard.

Gaming our privacy controls (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30426190)

I tend to think that Facebook is just gaming our privacy controls.
Once in a while they make an attempt to "enact new security provisions"... forcing users to, once again, update their security settings.

Eventually there will be enough dumb/careless users out there who can't and won't get it right, opening more users to the likes of advertisers and whatever else Facebook want our information for.

Things I love... (4, Funny)

nilbog (732352) | more than 4 years ago | (#30426762)

I love it when I read a story about another story that is all about photos, yet neither story contains or links to any.

Facebook is best used anonymously (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30426852)

Enuf info in public domain as it is - how much more candy do we retarded people need to "GIFT" to govt/business/stalkers....oh, and my ex now works at a hospital and has 4 kids

Thank you Facebook

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?