×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Why No One Trusts Facebook To Power the Future

timothy posted about 8 months ago | from the que-sera-sera dept.

Advertising 218

redletterdave (2493036) writes "Facebook owns virtually all the aspects of the social experience—photos (Instagram), status updates (Facebook), location services (Places)—but now, Facebook is transitioning from a simple social network to a full-fledged technology company that rivals Google, moonshot for moonshot. Yet, it's Facebook's corporate control of traffic that leads many to distrust the company. In a sense, people are stuck. When the time comes for someone to abandon Facebook, whether over privacy concerns or frustration with the company, Facebook intentionally makes it hard to leave. Even if you delete your account, your ghost remains—even when you die, Facebook can still make money off you. And that's not behavior fit for a company that's poised to take over the future."

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

Because you think Google is any better? (4, Insightful)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | about 8 months ago | (#46671445)

How quaint...

Re:Because you think Google is any better? (5, Insightful)

geekmux (1040042) | about 8 months ago | (#46671627)

How quaint...

Settling for the lesser of two evils is not only a false defense, but a mindset of the enslaved.

And ironically, replace "Facebook" with "Hollywood" in the summary above. When I read about profiting after you die, the first thing I thought of were celebrities. Death is not a guarantee of limited revenue. And because of narcissism within social media, everyone is in fact a celebrity now. At least according to Facebook who want to immortalize you forever within their revenue engine.

Re:Because you think Google is any better? (1, Funny)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | about 8 months ago | (#46671793)

And ironically, replace "Facebook" with "Hollywood" in the summary above.

And comically, replace "Facebook" with "Slashdot" in the summary above.

Or "Obamacare" . . .

Re:Because you think Google is any better? (5, Interesting)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | about 8 months ago | (#46671699)

Well, there's at least one sentence that's essentially different: "even when you die, Facebook can still make money off you."

Google doesn't (as far as I know) sell user information to advertisers. They exclusively use their own analytics; all an advertiser can do is submit their target demographics and keywords, and let Google do the math. While they're both huge storehouses of personal information, the big G is monolithic and generally non-porous—unless you're a malignant security agency, at least. If you're not using their services (at least passively), you're definitely not making them money.

This doesn't make them Totally Cool Groovy Guys You Should Trust With Anything, but it does make them naive ideologues surfing along the edge of a slippery slope rather than the outright thuggery of Facebook and other traditional advertisers—FB is more like a spam subscription; once you get signed up, you can be certain that your private information will propagate across the cosmos for eternity.

Re:Because you think Google is any better? (5, Interesting)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | about 8 months ago | (#46671777)

Google doesn't (as far as I know) sell user information to advertisers

If you really believe this, I'll tell you a little story:

A few years ago, I was working for a manufacturer in R+D, developing an accessory for one of our products. One of the parts of that accessory required a plastic part with very specific features (it was a living hinge, but with certain requirements that made polypropylene unsuitable).

I used Google to find out what other types of plastics might be suitable, and quickly finally found a material that would work. A rather obscure, rather expensive plastic with a barbaric name. I Googled some more about that plastic, then called it a day and went home.

The VERY NEXT DAY, I got a spam in my work mailbox from a Chinese manufacturer of that very plastic, offering me prices by the ton.

I had never heard of that plastic before Googling it.

Coincidence?

Re:Because you think Google is any better? (1)

TheRealMindChild (743925) | about 8 months ago | (#46671821)

Coincidence?

Quite possibly

Re:Because you think Google is any better? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46671985)

Err, do you even know what cookies are and how they can be used?

Re:Because you think Google is any better? (4, Interesting)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | about 8 months ago | (#46672053)

Cookies are disabled on all my browsers, except on certain whitelisted sites I trust, and Google sites aren't on it.

Also, I got a spam mail, not an ad on a webpage.

Re:Because you think Google is any better? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46672543)

Roscoe, is that you?

I named my Roomba after you. Roscoe P Coltrane cleans my lounge.

Sorry. Carry on.

Re:Because you think Google is any better? (4, Insightful)

mark-t (151149) | about 8 months ago | (#46672065)

It could be a coincidence, but as your story leaves the name of what you googled conspicuously absent, you've conveniently made it impractical for anyone to even attempt to prove or disprove a causative factor in this regard. This tactic is a staple used by conspiracy theorists everywhere and is often indicative of something that isn't logically sustainable from an objective standpoint if all the facts were actually revealed.

Re:Because you think Google is any better? (1)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | about 8 months ago | (#46672149)

Well, it's just that I can't remember the name of that plastic. It's been a few years. No conspiracy involved :)

Re:Because you think Google is any better? (1)

peragrin (659227) | about 8 months ago | (#46672175)

Saying there is no conspiracy involved generally leads people to believe there is one.

I do know what you are saying at least in part, but google uses all sorts of tracking to find you. Google range rover in IE without adblock and watch for the next month. rage rover ads will feature promentaly on every website you visit even if google has nothing to do with them.

I use adblock on safari at home and I don't have those issues. turn off adblock for a while and the web becomes something a lot messier.

Re:Because you think Google is any better? (2)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | about 8 months ago | (#46672203)

Saying there is no conspiracy involved generally leads people to believe there is one.

Aaw man, I'm damned if I do and damned if I don't aren't I? :)

Okay look, Google is a company that scares the bejesus out of me, and I believe the things they develop and invest in lead the world to a dangerously slippery slope. I also think they don't publicize all the things they do because they believe people aren't ready to hear what they have in store for them. But I *emphatically* don't believe there is ANY conspiracy involved.

Re:Because you think Google is any better? (1)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | about 8 months ago | (#46672605)

I've gotten quite a few random spam messages from Chinese industry, despite being a software engineer at an academic institution with absolutely nothing to do with any product development or manufacturing whatsoever. I've gotten offers for piping, ceramics, and a wide variety of plastics. At this very moment, I am reading a spam message from Kevin, who informs me he represents "one of the best digital images retouching/editing professionals located in China."

They seem like very good deals, and I'm almost saddened that I can't take them up on what appear to be very genuine, heartfelt attempts at mass mailing in an age where most unsolicited e-mail is about "your urgent Cooperation in transferring the sum of $11.3million immediately to your private account" and unauthorized activity notifications from Bl1zzard Entertanmnt on my several hundred Batt1e.net accounts.

If you ever figure out what kind of plastic it was, let me know, and I'll check to see if I got the same e-mail!

Re:Because you think Google is any better? (1)

j_l_cgull (129101) | about 8 months ago | (#46672121)

Google doesn't (as far as I know) sell user information to advertisers. They exclusively use their own analytics; all an advertiser can do is submit their target demographics and keywords, and let Google do the math.

This is an oft quoted statement. Does that imply/insinuate others (like fb) do ? I think fb and Google might be the same in this regard.

If you're not using their services (at least passively), you're definitely not making them money.

When I send an email from my non-Gmail account to somebody who uses Gmail, is this still true ?

Re:Because you think Google is any better? (3, Insightful)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | about 8 months ago | (#46672555)

Facebook's position on providing large amounts of user data to its business partners has been the subject of scrutiny a few times [wikipedia.org] . It remains unclear exactly how much stuff developers like Zynga have been able to access. There was also a series of events a couple of years ago [wikipedia.org] where privacy controls were updated and set to overly permissive defaults—which is either spectacularly bad management (given how much bad PR it generated each and every time) or a bribed enablement of data-scraping.

As for sending email to a Gmail user, that's what I meant by "passive" use of Google's services, although I should note that if your e-mail never gets read, it cannot make Google money, just like a site with Google ads on it that never gets visited. You're really only an incidental bystander in that situation.

Re:Because you think Google is any better? (1)

kruach aum (1934852) | about 8 months ago | (#46671721)

Please describe to me in concrete terms (facts, not FUD) how google is worse than facebook.

Re:Because you think Google is any better? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46671955)

Google has their own OS that they're ingrained into that's in the hands of hundreds of millions/billions. Google has the largest online video service (YouTube). Google already has a fair sized last mile infrastructure even if Facebook is "looking into it". Google has an online office suite that Facebook doesn't. Google owns large amounts of dark fiber. All of these things gives Google the advantage in the area of end user data mining and that's what we're discussing here. That'd be my first thoughts on the matter.
 
Disclaimer: I'm not the OP.

Re:Because you think Google is any better? (5, Interesting)

phantomfive (622387) | about 8 months ago | (#46671805)

Realistically, Google wasn't founded by a guy who stole passwords to read other people's email. It wasn't founded by a guy who told some people he would build their idea, then went around and built it for himself, lying to them to the last possible minute. Facebook was founded by, and is still run by that guy. Furthermore there is no reason to believe he's changed.

Google at least attempts to be non-evil, and have sacrificed profit for their principles. People who are upset with them mainly disagree that collecting personal information for the purpose of custom-tailored ad-serving is evil, but that's controversial (really, people who do it feel they are helping users). My primary complaints with Google is that they have too many bugs in their software and don't support backwards compatibility, but that's off-topic.

Re:Because you think Google is any better? (4, Insightful)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | about 8 months ago | (#46671885)

Realistically, Google wasn't founded by a guy who stole passwords to read other people's email.

Google may have been founded by people with the best of intentions, but the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Google believes in a panopticon world in which anonymity and the right to privacy has disappeared. They may believe it's for my own good, but their dream world is my nightmare.

Re:Because you think Google is any better? (1)

William Baric (256345) | about 8 months ago | (#46672015)

Why a lack of anonymity is a nightmare to you? Is it because you don't live in a free country and the only way you can express your ideas without going to jail afterward is with anonymity? Is it because you want to be able to lie to people around you in order to look better than you really are? Is it for another reason?

Re:Because you think Google is any better? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46672091)

Or maybe just because it's creepy and intrusive. Because we're allowed to object to things without there being life-or-death consequences attached to them.

Re:Because you think Google is any better? (4, Insightful)

bmo (77928) | about 8 months ago | (#46672143)

Oh look a "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about"

Show me your tax return.
Tell me where you live.
Tell me the names of your children.

--
BMO

Re:Because you think Google is any better? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46672237)

The panopticion is comming. all intelligent humans with a realistic view KNOW it's comming.

The only real question is... Who do we want to lead it?

If the question is facebook or google. i choose google. judging by what i've seen so far. which is really all you can do unless you have a crystal ball handy.

Yes, because it is (4, Informative)

brunes69 (86786) | about 8 months ago | (#46671917)

- Google lets you export ALL OF YOUR DATA, 100%, in full, in open formats.

- Google lets you close your account and delete it, leaving no traces. This includes Google Plus and all posts shared.

- The majority of Google's services offer open APIs and follow open standards and allow third party integrations.

- Heck, many of their products they fully open source and give to the whole community, including Chrome, ChromeOS, Android, GWT, etc

Compare this to facebook. You can't export anything out of facebook in any kind of open format. You can not easily delete your account, even when you do your pictures and images remain on other people's accounts. Facebook offers very few open APIs to integrate with it, they want you to instead write apps that run ON the platform so they can control and monetize everything you create.

Re:Yes, because it is (1, Redundant)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | about 8 months ago | (#46671997)

Google lets you close your account and delete it, leaving no traces

How do you know that? Did Google offer you to audit their systems to verify what you believe?

More likely, Google, being an enormous information gathering company that live off that information, keep all your data and add a new tidbit of information to your file mentioning that on date D, you closed your account and deleted it.

If you truly believe Google's data retention policy is any different from Facebook's, you're delusional. And even if they say they do delete your data, they're so big and loaded with cash that nobody can ever check they really do.

Facebook is nasty, but at least they're clean nasty. Google cloaks in a good-corporate-citizen "do no evil" bullshit but is in the same business space - massive information gathering and monetizing.

So the best way to be sure Google has no information on you (or rather, as little as possible) is to not give them any whenever possible.

Re:Yes, because it is (5, Informative)

brunes69 (86786) | about 8 months ago | (#46672027)

Facebook explicitly says they do not allow you to delete your account. They simply DO NOT ALLOW IT. And all data you post on facebook is theirs, they claim ownership of it. So no wonder they don't allow you to delete it.

Google allows you to delete your account and tells you exactly what happens when that occurs. http://www.pcworld.com/article... [pcworld.com] . And they claim ownership of nothing.

The companies attitude toward privacy and accountability are so different it is not even in the same hemisphere.

Where does Facebook say that? (5, Interesting)

Shakrai (717556) | about 8 months ago | (#46672515)

Facebook explicitly says they do not allow you to delete your account.

I left Facebook a few months ago and specifically requested deletion, not deactivation. There was a 14 day waiting period, during which time I could log back into my account and reset the clock, but supposedly at the end of those 14 days my account was gone for good. From what I can tell [facebook.com] they still allow you to do this: "If you don't think you'll use Facebook again, you can request to have your account permanently deleted. Please keep in mind that you won't be able to reactivate your account or retrieve anything you've added."

Frankly leaving social media was the best thing I ever did. It's a bit of a PITA with regards to those friends who seemingly only know how to communicate via FB, but even they eventually came around and started calling, texting, or e-mailing me. Only one of my friends really whined about it, because she doesn't have a cell and can't text, but she eventually got used to e-mailing me.

Re:Where does Facebook say that? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46672667)

I was never a Facebook user, but had made an account. Well, eventually I went through the delete my account thing with Facebook. MUCH later than 14 days (something like 3 months), I was trying to find information about a friend I lost contact with. Googling turned up some possibilities on Facebook, but I couldn't see the details because I wasn't logged into Facebook. So I logged in with my old details, and I got a "welcome back" from Facebook, and all my content (what little there was) was still there. So, I don't believe they delete anything.

Re:Because you think Google is any better? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46672155)

Number of times google has fucked ME over so far... zero
Number of times facebook has fucked ME over so far. six

Number of times google has demanded payment for services or my credit card info. zero
Number of times facebook has demanded payment for services or my credit card info. lots

Number of annoyances google shoves in my face. zero
Number of annoyances facebook shoves in my face. thousands

Yes. Google is WAY better. So far.

While google MIGHT be bad. Or turn bad eventually. They are not even in the same realm of scumbag as facebook.

Re:Because you think Google is any better? (0)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | about 8 months ago | (#46672331)

Number of times google has fucked ME over so far... zero

Millions of Youtube account holders who were forced to get a G+ account and divulge their true identity or give up the ability to comment beg to differ.

Number of times google has demanded payment for services or my credit card info. zero

Try using Google Play to get a for-pay Android app.

Number of annoyances google shoves in my face. zero

Try using an Android app - ads.
Try searching something on google.com - more ads.
Try *not* giving in to the constant G+ nagging.

Re:Because you think Google is any better? (1)

Shakrai (717556) | about 8 months ago | (#46672525)

Try using Google Play to get a for-pay Android app.

I bill those directly to my Verizon Wireless account. :)

Re:Because you think Google is any better? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46672403)

Number of times google has fucked ME over so far... zero
Number of times facebook has fucked ME over so far. six

Facebook has cancelled my account on numerous occasions with nary a word about the reason much less any way to restore my account.

Re:Because you think Google is any better? (5, Interesting)

labnet (457441) | about 8 months ago | (#46672283)

Which is why we need a pure peer to peer social messaging system. Call it torrents for facebook. There is no reason for centralisation of social data. Features like
- meta data and messaging data is spread around different peers as encrypted chunks so it can be rebuit on any new device you sign up to.
- grouping like google circles.
- expiry option on messages and images.

Perhaps there is already someone doing this?

That's a bit of a stretch (4, Insightful)

damn_registrars (1103043) | about 8 months ago | (#46671491)

a company that's poised to take over the future.

Facebook has no future. Their business plan is to continue to get people to come and give up their personal information for free, and then sell that information for profit to everyone else they can think of. The well is already starting to dry up on that. Unless you expect the world to end in the next 5 years, saying that facebook will take over the future is ridiculous.

Re:That's a bit of a stretch (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46671703)

Na,uh! It's not like major Facebook stockholders are selling off large chunks of their shares and the price is down over 20% in less than a month...

Re:That's a bit of a stretch (2)

TheRaven64 (641858) | about 8 months ago | (#46672373)

The stock price has dropped quite a bit in the last few days, but it's still above the average for the last year and a lot higher than it was this time last year [yahoo.com] . It's hard to draw intelligent conclusions from the Facebook stock price, it's better to use it as a source of entropy for your random number generator...

Re:That's a bit of a stretch (2)

geekmux (1040042) | about 8 months ago | (#46671707)

a company that's poised to take over the future.

Facebook has no future. Their business plan is to continue to get people to come and give up their personal information for free, and then sell that information for profit to everyone else they can think of. The well is already starting to dry up on that. Unless you expect the world to end in the next 5 years, saying that facebook will take over the future is ridiculous.

You're more fucking delusional than Tinkerbell on acid if you think for one second an entire generation is going to step away from the "Free" button when paying for anything online.

Seriously, I can't stop laughing over the absurdity of this...this brings ignorance to a whole new level.

And you might want to trace the money and ownership of most of the shit you use online before making claims as to where monopolies exist and where they do not.

Re:That's a bit of a stretch (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46672079)

Facebook will fall. It's inevitable. It will be replaced by something better, cooler and more suited to people needs. The question is when. It may be in 5 years, maybe even 10 years, but it will fall.

Re:That's a bit of a stretch (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46672509)

Yeah, and the universe is going to die an energy death someday too. Somehow I remain unconcerned.

Re:That's a bit of a stretch (1)

geekmux (1040042) | about 8 months ago | (#46672621)

Facebook will fall. It's inevitable. It will be replaced by something better, cooler and more suited to people needs. The question is when. It may be in 5 years, maybe even 10 years, but it will fall.

Failure measured in years were prior to when the great divide of wealth started happening.

With companies stockpiling tens of billions in cash reserves these days, it gets rather comical talking about bankruptcy, no matter how uncool they become.

"Too Big to Fail" ring a bell? No one said those words 10 years ago about any company. Now it's become a trademark and measure by which we write laws around.

Re:That's a bit of a stretch (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about 8 months ago | (#46672401)

Video ads are coming to facebook. Go look up the average price per impression for a video ad. Facebook could lose 90% of its users (like TV networks have) and still make a profit.

Facebook will implode (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46671497)

Facebook's ads are questionable, and the company will be toast when people figure it out. Sleazy-to-the-core won't last forever.
Facebook Fraud [youtube.com]
Facebook CPC - Don’t Waste Your Money [tumblr.com]

Let's quickly hate wikipedia while we are at it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46671503)

Or just about any encyclopaedia which features biographic information. How could they! They are getting page views/money from dead people! And the question is: you will be dead, so why do you care?

Simple solution (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46671513)

Since we all know that space is the only driver behind technology, Facebook needs its own space program.

Re:Simple solution (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 8 months ago | (#46672519)

If it helps to put Sugarhill on the moon or some other place out of the way, I'm for it.

Don't be a Twit! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46671527)

I'm a Zucker! Wouldn't you really want to be Zucker, too?

Re:Don't be a Twit! (1)

Richy_T (111409) | about 8 months ago | (#46671623)

Would I get to make movies like "Airplane"? Surely, you can't be serious?

Re:Don't be a Twit! (1)

Chris Mattern (191822) | about 8 months ago | (#46671799)

Surely, you can't be serious?

It's a large building with lots of doctors, but that's not important right now.

Re:Don't be a Twit! (2)

LookIntoTheFuture (3480731) | about 8 months ago | (#46672019)

Surely, you can't be serious?

It's a large building with lots of doctors, but that's not important right now.

...and don't call me Shirley

Re:Don't be a Twit! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46672423)

Would I get to make movies like "Airplane"? Surely, you can't be serious?

FTFY: Shirley, you can't be Sirius.

Re:Don't be a Twit! (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 8 months ago | (#46672529)

Not much of an improvement, considering that "Zucker" in German either means "Sugar" or, used colloquially and as a noun "twitch".

But it's fit for Google? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46671529)

Between Google and Facebook, which one is an ad agency with a private jumbo jet for its execs?

Re:But it's fit for Google? (1)

mrbester (200927) | about 8 months ago | (#46672501)

What does a plane have to do with it? Iron Maiden have one, too.

The Social Experience? (1)

PPH (736903) | about 8 months ago | (#46671547)

Facebook owns virtually all the aspects of the social experience

Except for those of us who take the 'social experience' to mean actually relating to other people in meat-space.

Re:The Social Experience? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46671747)

Or even on the internet. People can and do be social on the internet without putting Facebook in the middle. They share photos, exchange emails, tell their friends about their new dog or latest breakup all without FB being involved... as astonishing as that seems.

Facebook is for idiots. Always has been. It's the AOL of the modern internet, and as such, it is fine that it keeps existing, because it keeps the idiots occupied and away from the rest of the interwebs.

Information is power (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46671551)

and if you subscribe to the axiom, 'absolute power corrupts absolutely', then the logical conclusion in regards to Google, Facebook, xxxxx is that handing over the comprehensive details of your life is folly.

It doesn't matter who you give this power too, if it unchecked as it is now, you are at their mercy.

Not all aspects (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46671561)

"Facebook owns virtually all the aspects of the social experience..''

Nonsense. They don't own my living room.

Needs something different (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46671573)

The users are getting to used to the ads fromat, they needed to change them up a bit for more clicks.

Facebook owns Location Services? (1)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | about 8 months ago | (#46671575)

Uh... no. They would LIKE to, but seriously - Places is the Google+ of the Facebook universe.

Trying to leave facebook (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46671603)

Not to mention the social backlash you could face when all of your Facebook 'friends' discover that you are no longer on their friend list. I think that is the biggest reason why it is so persistent and why it is so hard to leave even when one wants to ditch the social networking super giant.

I feel the only way people will be able to start leaving the network without fear of social backlash is when there is an 'organic' event where everyone you know is leaving for possibly the next best thing at which time you feel ok to disengage with Facebook because everyone else you know is doing it.

Simply because (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46671643)

It won't ever power anything but Zuckerberg's wallet.

Who? (5, Insightful)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about 8 months ago | (#46671681)

Facebook owns virtually all the aspects of the social experience—photos (Instagram), status updates (Facebook), location services (Places).

That's funny, I don't use any of these services, yet I have a very social Web experience. I hang in places where people with the same hobbies hang out and it's great. It's called forums.

Re:Who? (2)

antdude (79039) | about 8 months ago | (#46671829)

And newsgroups, IRC, etc. :P

Re:Who? (1)

SeaFox (739806) | about 8 months ago | (#46672349)

^ THIS.

Facebook only own the social experience of people who let it own them.

Re:Who? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46672579)

It's called forums.

They're called fora.

FTFY.

Sour the future? (1)

noshellswill (598066) | about 8 months ago | (#46671683)

For a  bitter data-grift that pimps snot-nose anorexic teens and mugs faghgboi exhibitionists I trust  fastbuuk has NOTHING to say about our republics future.   

Facebook or Google? (0)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about 8 months ago | (#46671691)

Whoever wins, we loose.

Re:Facebook or Google? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46672197)

If being too tight is bad, surely the one which requires loosening the most is the one to lose.

Getting blocked? (2)

Mr2cents (323101) | about 8 months ago | (#46671695)

I've been pondering on how toget rid of my facebook account. Is it possible to get your account suspended by posting filth and other matirial that's against their terms of use? I've heard about people getting their account blocked. Instead of panicking over it, I want to embrace it. Good idea?

Re:Getting blocked? (3, Interesting)

Chris Mattern (191822) | about 8 months ago | (#46671773)

Your account may be blocked, but your info on Facebook servers? That's forever. Every day I'm more and more glad that I have never had an account, and never will.

Re:Getting blocked? (1)

gringer (252588) | about 8 months ago | (#46671899)

Every day I'm more and more glad that I have never had an account, and never will.

I'm in the same boat, but I'm not deluding myself by thinking that Facebook doesn't have a shadow account for me -- this has been confirmed to have been done in the past. Facebook is probably aware that I exist, and they obtain some benefit from being able to identify me in photos or posts (for example) and tracking my actions.

Re:Getting blocked? (2)

RoknrolZombie (2504888) | about 8 months ago | (#46672061)

The sooner the better?

Yes, as everyone says, the "information is forever"...whatever. I've been on the internet since roughly 1998, and it's relatively challenging to find information on me from that far back. Plus - what benefit would it serve?

As long as you are still on FB, they are getting current information to sell to the highest bidder. Next week that information won't be as relevant. Next month, even less so. In five years? Who in the hell is going to give a shit what you were doing five years ago?

Of course - there are other things you can do to help reduce the BS...change email addresses/ip addresses/phone numbers...move...the usual things you have to do to get rid of a stalker. Fortunately, in a planet of roughly 6 billion idiots (giving some leeway for people who aren't idiots or don't use the neterwebz), when you walk away they just don't care. At least, not right now. Not really. But later? When people finally start realizing what it is they're giving up? Yeah...then they'll be chasing users, and you'll probably be enjoying it a lot less.

Re:Getting blocked? (1)

mrbester (200927) | about 8 months ago | (#46672531)

"I've been on the internet since roughly 1998, and it's relatively challenging to find information on me from that far back."

You're doing it wrong. I've been on the internet since 1994 and it's relatively challenging to find information on me from last Tuesday.

Whatever (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46671711)

People trust Facebook far more than any stupid shit is likely to come out of discussion here. Knowing nerds and the way they think, the alternative will have a name that makes people cringe, LadyFuck or something stupid.

Don't trust any single entity with your future (1)

El_Muerte_TDS (592157) | about 8 months ago | (#46671729)

especially not entities who's focus is profit

Zuck himself said it (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46671763)

His users are morons. You'd have to be to share personal data in Facebook.

Re:Zuck himself said it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46671993)

He actually called them "dumb fucks", which I think is actually more descriptive than morons in this case.

Re:Zuck himself said it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46672633)

I stand corrected.

screw faceplant and google+ (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46671771)

3 years after i quit im still getting 30 messages and 20 notifications and 4 pokes

google plu slost it when hollywood showed up and invaded my privacy ...all my circles are now full a shitheads i never invited

Don't assume that Facebook is forever (4, Insightful)

joeflies (529536) | about 8 months ago | (#46671785)

As myspace proved out, the social market is incredibly fickle. Facebook's billboard model is only part of the market, and there are already signs that communication is shifting towards real time. That market isn't so clear, with plenty of fragmentation across LINE, the weibos in asia and facebook's relatively poor sticker offering trying to catch up. WeChat may have been pricey, but a necessary addition to admit they missed the boat on this angle.

Facebook Censorship (0)

NaCh0 (6124) | about 8 months ago | (#46671839)

Facebook has a very heavy hand at suspending accounts who don't mesh with the feminist agenda. If you post pro-masculine articles, prepare to have your account terminated as happened by the owner of the Return of Kings page. Other pro-male pages like the Tom Leykis show are suspecting they will be next.

Now maybe you aren't into masculinity and don't care. But when they come for your subject of choice, (guns? reverse engineering?) prepare to find yourself locked out.

Had no choice but to deinstall it (5, Funny)

m.dillon (147925) | about 8 months ago | (#46671845)

I had no choice but to deinstall it on all of my Android devices. The old version no longer works and the new one wants permission to access pretty much everything I own... all my contacts, all my accounts, location, phone numbers, make phone calls and texts, god knows what else. Everything.

It's insane. I will not give Facebook access to all of that stuff. They can go stuff it. Nor will I give third party sites FB access for validation since that also means they can snarf my friends list.

I'm still able to run the FB app on IOS because that at least allows me to deny FB permission the access. Android though is out of the question.

-Matt

Re:Had no choice but to deinstall it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46672169)

It's insane. I will not give Facebook access to all of that stuff.
 
But you give it to Google by running Android? LOLzzz!!!!!
 
You fucks really are that stupid. Jesus H Christ...

Re:Had no choice but to deinstall it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46672387)

Android had, but removed a permissions manager that could fine tune which permissions each app could have. There are 3rd party apps that can handle this now.

I fucking hate (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46671851)

the word moonshot. These projects are not worthy of the word moonshot. Please stop using it.

But they can't build anything (5, Interesting)

Animats (122034) | about 8 months ago | (#46671859)

Neither Google nor Facebook has ever successfully built a product users will actually pay for. (Google's Nexus phones are rebranded LG, Samsung, and Asus products). For both, all significant revenue is from ads. Yet both have now acquired hardware companies. Now they have to make a business out of them. They may not succeed.

Google acquired Motorola and had no idea what to do with it. Now they're selling it. Google has an automatic driving R&D project, but they acquired DARPA Grand Challenge technology and seem no closer to deployment than a few years ago. Google acquired a half dozen advanced robotics R&D firms, but none of those have commercial products or profits yet. Google now has to build an entire industrial business in robotics, which is slow, hard, and will take years to pay off. Google hasn't shown the corporate patience for that. Google products that didn't take off quickly are usually killed. I'm worried that Google will end up trashing the US robotics industry once they realize it's not a Make Money Fast business.

Facebook hasn't really tried yet in hardware. But they have no expertise at it. The Oculus Rift is still a prototype/low volume device. Facebook has never run a factory. They'll have to outsource manufacturing, which means everybody else will be making goggles if it turns out to be profitable to do so.

Zukerburg didn't lie... (2)

Stumbles (602007) | about 8 months ago | (#46671903)

in an email interview years ago when asked about security, data privacy and such things. He said anyone is a fucking idiot to trust him; indeed you are.

Bad summary (1)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | about 8 months ago | (#46671935)

Facebook owns virtually all the aspects of the social experience

That sounds far-fetched. My social experience involves hanging out with my family, chatting with coworkers, emailing some people, and chatting up people at the coffee shop. No Facebook whatsoever, and I doubt I'm alone.

Facebook is for lazy people (2, Interesting)

future assassin (639396) | about 8 months ago | (#46672007)

Seriously anyone who has been on the "public" internet since say 1995 knows there are plenty of places to have "social" experiences on the internet from IRC chat to community forums. I see dedicated Facebook users as social retards who just follow the new cool trends and are too lazy to be involved in several "social" fronts on the intertubes. There``s no helping them they are who they are and will follow other to the next cool thing.

I get more than enough social experience from running game servers and interacting with the game players, chatting on irc and visiting and posting on different interest forums.

Laugh (1)

koan (80826) | about 8 months ago | (#46672039)

Then stop using it morons.

Can't power themselves... (2)

CohibaVancouver (864662) | about 8 months ago | (#46672045)

I don't think FB will 'Power the Future' because there's a lot of stuff they simply can't get right. Take their new search. If I enter "James Bond" into a Facebook search, my expectation is that the first thing it will search is my friend's feeds, followed by the feeds of companies and organization I like, followed by public feeds - Returning "James Bond"- related Facebook posts. Instead it just does a lousy web search. Why?

Or take ads. I'm a Facebook regular, posting daily. Yet FB has never been able to serve an ad up to me about anything I care about. Never. Not once.

...and my feed is just a total dog's breakfast with FB selectively choosing what to show me. I know I can pick "show recent" but the setting doesn't stick for more than 48 hours or so...

So will they power the future? No. They can't even power themselves.

Owns? (1)

ByTor-2112 (313205) | about 8 months ago | (#46672109)

Owns is a big stretch. They have a stake in many aspects of it, but they don't "own" it by far. And they are terrible at mobile.

backlash has started against facebook (1)

Dan667 (564390) | about 8 months ago | (#46672207)

the young people are leaving facebook and soon the jackals will start to smell blood. None of the reasons listed to make it hard to leave facebook are really that sticky. It is not like they own your house. Next big thing and people will stampede out of facebook like they did myspace.

Here's a Novel Idea... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46672245)

How about, instead of following your "friends" from your computer in your parent's basement, you actually go hang out with your friends - talk, socialize, engage in activities, etc...

The problem with Americans being a bunch of fat, lazy, whining slobs who can't do anything for themselves is the same problem that made FB so popular to begin with.

Grow out of it (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | about 8 months ago | (#46672251)

Many people will just grow out of FB and go somewhere else. Easier to leave their account behind and start afresh somewhere else than keep it updated.

sounds like meaningless finger-wagging to me (1)

PJ6 (1151747) | about 8 months ago | (#46672491)

And that's not behavior fit for a company that's poised to take over the future

What does 'poised to take over the future' mean, exactly? And on who's authority is 'fit behavior' defined?

Not yours, I'd wager.

"I suppose I will get a Facebook account now" JC (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46672615)

If Facebook wasn't good enough for John Carmack before he was offered bags of money, I'll just have to be patient and wait for my bags of money before I start using Facebook too.

The same with all Information companies (1)

prefec2 (875483) | about 8 months ago | (#46672637)

Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Apple, Yahoo, Amazon, and all the other information companies do the same. They collect your data they analyze it and they try to sell your pattern to everybody who can pay for it. So why single out Facebook? Facebook most likely has the biggest problem in terms of reputation, but soon other companies reputation will be harmed too. The only problem that could happen to Facebook is another online-application which is able replace it without providing adverts to the users. Most likely Facebook would by such company to prevent it from happening.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?