Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg (Photo: Canadian Press)"People have really gotten comfortable not only sharing more information and different kinds, but more openly and with more people," Zuckerberg said at the Crunchie Awards in San Francisco, which recognizes technological achievement. "That social norm is just something that has evolved over time."
Is Zuckerberg right?
Much attention has been paid to Facebook's privacy policies in Canada, particularly around the issue of the over-sharing of personal information with third-party developers of Facebook applications such as games and quizzes.
Judging by the actions of the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, you'd think Canadians were down right secretive in nature. But we know that's not completely true.
In an earlier blog posting, fellow writer Robert Ballantyne discovered just how easy it was to get information on a stranger by using the geotagging feature Foursquare on his iPhone.
Robert "Foursquared" the CBC headquarters and came up with a fellow named Dave H. By following Dave's links to his Facebook and Twitter feeds, Robert learned Dave's occupation, who he's in a relationship with, his email address, how old he is, who his friends are, what made him cry recently on CNN. Robert was even able to browse through detailed photos of Dave's house -- both outside and out.
Robert called Dave to tell him what he'd found. Was Dave outraged at the intrusion? Shocked that he had somehow let privacy slip through his fingers?
No.
"I don't care," he said with a laugh. "What more do you want to know?"
Frankly, what more was there to know?
And that's privacy given away for free.
People are more than willing to trade personal information for Air Miles and other points-like currency.
Being the suspicious type that I am, I don't collect Air Miles or any credit card points. I don't want corporations to know my buying habits. When I mentioned this to a colleague a while back, her response was that they were going to find out anyway if I used a credit card, so I might as well get something out of it.
Zuckerberg is probably more right than wrong. 350 million Facebook users worldwide can't be wrong, right?
I saw something similar to this on a different web site and didn't quite get it, but this article helped me understand it better. Appreciate it!
There's no such thing as "online" and "private." You can't expect to have an open network where you can share all sorts of information to anyone in the world and still expect for things to be private. It's silly how people post their whole lives up on the web and expect no one to be able to see it. It's not a diary, people, come on, think. Facebook is not private. Twitter is not private. If you want privacy, watch what you put on the web. This is basic internet surfing 101.
hi.....james u r right i m agree with u...but u can also share ur privacy from other sites like yahoo or gmail....
Mark Zuckerberg claims his enforced privacy policies, or lack thereof, are based on consumer need. His attempts to whitewash over his total sellout of his members comfort for cold hard cash from advertisers with are transparent at best.
Apparently, we just don't want privacy.
Any more.
The debate rolls on, and new relevations that anything you post regardless of who could see it, and if you've deleted it since, are accessible to all Facebook employees, and whoever they allow to see the information.
We hear from ex employees of gmail, aol and myspace who all sheepishly claim the same thing. Whatever you send throught that tiny piece of internet cable should be classed as public. Because whether it's an email or a social network site comment, anyone could access it if they really desired to.
So it boils down to this. If you want to pass on information privately without concern that anyone else could access it, print it, forward it onto youtube, tell your employers and your old high school teacher, one must step back to the 17th century, before the postal service was fully formed, and tell that person....well in person. Yes, they live 4000 miles away, it's only a few weeks on a boat away though.
The fact is, yes Mark we do want privacy. Or at least the choice of it. Because since the world has opened up to us and we've been able to contact those both near and far, we also want that basic human right. That the information we choose to impart to that person should reach them without fear it could be seen or heard by anyone else without our consent.
When you post a letter, you expect it to arrive at the intended recipient untouched and unsullied. I'm a UK citizen, but if I'm not mistaken it's a felony to open someone else's mail in the US? When you telephone someone you expect that the only person to hear that conversation will be the person you called. Unless you do something stupid like say a sentence including words likely to get you bugged for the next 10 years.
We all want the choice of privacy. The internet has brought the world closer together. We can talk to people we would have had to ration our time with before. Should the price of that be our privacy? Or should the providers of a communication service offer that right under the privacy and human rights acts? If Facebook employees can read everything I post, even if it's an email, then it's not private.
Mark has tried to win us all over with the new 'padlock' function. There are 4 seperate choices for the information you are about to post. Show 'everyone', 'friends of friends', 'friends only' and 'customize', where you can add as many or as few to include or exclude them from your post. There is no little asterix which points you to the small print saying that if you exclude someone, and one of their friends who is also your friend comments on it, and their privacy settings are set to everyone, the person you excluded can still see it. There is no 5th option - 'facebook employees only, to chuckle at when they are bored'. If a service offers privacy, then that content should be private between you and the people you select to see it.
I personally like living in an age where I can keep in touch with people who have moved far away. But it seems keeping in touch means that I shouldn't say anything to them I wouldn't say in person.
So, polite chit chat it is then. What's the weather like over there...?
A footnote for anyone with a letigious background:
This was Mark Zuckerberg's open letter in 2006 regarding the installation of privacy settings after the backlash of complaints when the news feed went live:
http://blog.facebook.com/blog.php?post=2208562130
"This new privacy page will allow you to choose which types of stories go into your Mini-Feed and your friends' News Feeds, and it also lists the type of actions Facebook will never let any other person know about."
An interesting choice of words. By Mr Zuckerberg stating "types of actions...Facebook will never let any other person know about", does that mean he has broken his own written word? By removing the news feed and wall privacy settings, he has in fact now 'allowed' people to see these "types of actions". Yet four years ago he claimed that would never happen.
It's sad that a lot of people spend most of their online time on Facebook, neglecting the other 99% of the whole entire internet. Most will never see articles like this and will carry on oblivious.
I am appauld to be frank. I would just liek to say I for one am leaving facebook, so are my children and family. Before you assume people don't want privacy, it would have been nice to ask. I only had a facebook as a means to get pictures to my parents over 250 miles away... now some pediphile can look up my kids pics and see who they are and where they live... I feel that facebook has an obligation to maintain peoples privacy unless the user chooses not to be private. when I signed up on facebook these were not the terms of service, I have copywritten photos that just got made public because of this B.S.
I hope they are prepared for legal backlash from this as they are resposible for thier actions if it causes harm or loss for any user that has signed up under an agreement (Actually a legally binding contract) that they have changed without the imput of all parties involved or without prior notification.
I hope you all see Mark Zuckerberg's comments about "cool kids don't care about security, why should you" as a verbal manipulation to make our children feel like they are somehow a social outcast if they want some privacy.
This is the exact kind of degradation and decay that is infecting our society daily. You are a CEO now not a schoolyard bully start acting like it. I bet if this was hurting your bank account you would have a different opinion. I for one want compensation for facebook distributing my photgraphic works without payment or contract. They are not royalty free. and yes, privacy is important.... to a lot of people.
I find it an interesting trend of our society to be more transparent and open, but in reality, is it because most are not aware of how dangerous this is? Are people thinking that because everyone else is on FaceBook or ‘tweeting’ that it's not an issue?
I've have, however, been using the Internet since the middle 90's using Mosaic 2.0. Internet and privacy should be synonymous like driving and seatbelts. However, there is a push for more openness and transparency to publish you online. While I think from a marketing perspective it might be an ideal state to be an online entity if your business is online, but from a privacy and personal security perspective, it's like you're unknowingly opening your private photo albums to people on the sidewalk. I try my best to keep personal info to a minimum but you can find some info on me - maybe my age, and city I live in.
Like cigarette packages, there are warnings – should the same be for FaceBook? Look at Google’s new Follow Me – it’s a stalkers dream tool. Should there be warnings about security and privacy with all of these online social tools? How about links on how to educate yourself on what the security settings mean and how to protect yourself?
What I do find most disturbing is that Mark Zuckerberg is hoping you’re a slipshod security baboon: the more you open up about yourself to the public, the more of Mark’s business customers can profit from your ignorance.
Don’t get me wrong, I do use Facebook and Twitter etc, but I spend most of my time educating people about how to properly use security settings to lock down your online profiles to avoid being open. I’ve even dropped friends who are careless with their profiles which believe it or not, opens you up to the same sloppiness exploits in Facebook.
While social media can be a great way to connect with old friends and family, the question keeps coming up – is social networking really that good for you?