It baffles me how Zuckerberg can remain disdainful of our very consistent feelings toward privacy, while arrogantly suggesting that he knows better. It doesn't take a privacy law scholar, an Internet security expert, or someone with a 150 IQ to realize that there's something profoundly different about socializing online.
More specifically, the presence of an all-knowing middleman/service undermines trust; no matter what, we will never trust Facebook as much as the members for whom we maintain a profile. Facebook wants us to completely open our private lives to a corporation notorious for its lack of transparency and openness. Facebook is entirely self-serving, as evidenced by its metastasis into even more of our lives. Masquerading as a selfless company innocently trying to connect people, Facebook continues to shove invidious technologies down our throats for one reason only: $$$.
That said, I truly hope that its FTC settlement portends a turning point for the social web.
It baffles me how Zuckerberg can remain disdainful of our very consistent feelings toward privacy, while arrogantly suggesting that he knows better.
Facebook's popularity suggests that Zuckerberg does know better. I have yet to be convinced that the average Facebook user cares about abstract privacy at all, let alone as much as we tend to.
I can't just dismiss all the complaints and protests from Facebook users, of course, but I do have to wonder what proportion of it is simply people not liking change, rather than actual privacy concerns.
I think the vast majority of Facebook users aren't reading tech news and likely haven't heard about a lot of the privacy changes in Facebook. It's also likely that for most people the decreased privacy did not cause any practical problems. The users that have been burned by Facebook's privacy changes though are definitely complaining. The ones that aren't complaining probably haven't been burned. Yet.
Except Zuckerberg knows that our feelings about privacy aren't all that consistent. People have become more willing to share personal information online; things that previously caused public outcry about privacy have become normalized.
Zuck's confounding privacy settings aren't (completely) to blame. Facebook and other online social tools have led us to genuinely change our feelings towards privacy.
Because humans, by evolution, are adaptable to their surroundings. We don't enthusiastically embrace the decreased privacy, but learned how to live in that world. This type of forced changed will almost certainly lead to a world where criticizing Julian Assange about the contents of his OkCupid profile will be mere child's play.
An innovator, especially someone with as much power as Zuckerberg, should ideally be taking risks and challenging norms.
I'm not saying I want all my personal data out in the open nor do I approve of all of Facebook's recent moves. It just seems mistakes along the way is an obvious outcome of the fast iteration/hacking mindset that HNers supposedly understand.
Facebook should start by sharing its secrets with us. That might make us more comfortable in sharing ours with it. At the very least, it'd reduce the hypocrisy inherent in its stance on openness and sharing.
I don't have enough fingers to count the amount of people I have met who refer to their customers as 'dumb fucks' (or something similar). Instead of holding him accountable for what he said 7 years ago lets hold him accountable by his actions I think this is more fair.
I use Facebook constantly, posting photos, checkins, status updates, etc. However, I've completely disabled all privacy controls. Why? Because I don't put things on the Internet that I don't want to be public, even behind 'privacy controls'. There's no breech of privacy for me, because the data is inherently public. So no, I don't care.
When I was growing up, I was always told never to put your real information on the Internet. As I grew older, I simply changed around my "real" details a bit. So, my Facebook does not have my real identity, I like stuff that... I don't like.
Like I've said before, if you don't want people to know, don't post it on the Internet.
Funny thing is though, the people that told me not to put info up on the 'net... didn't listen to their own advice. lol
well you can put fake info about yourself but doesn't mean your friends will put fake info in for you. Also, I'm sure marketers have a special category for people who lie about their age and name and have products ready to sell to that group. There is no escape. ;p
Whenever people suggest that Facebook users are morons for actively using the service, they're empowering Zuckerberg to continue his mission. The problem isn't stupidity or even ignorance, but rather Facebook's data mining crusade that's fueled by a veritable carte blanche: contracts of adhesion.
Contracts of adhesion prevent us from negotiating which services we receive at what price. We can either accept Facebook's terms or not use the service. Period. Usually, this isn't a problem, but Facebook started off small. It grew into a service with network effects strong enough to actually raise a viable argument that we agree to the terms of service under duress and therefore never manifest assent.
It's a unique legal situation: generally, people offended by a company's practices can boycott. However, Facebook has turned us into the product, and while we can leave, our friends might not. The underlying purpose served by Facebook requires its community, a community that grew before establishing the invidious privacy practices.
The technological difficulty of building a Facebook replacement is compounded by challenge of convincing not just one user to switch, but enough of them to guarantee a tipping point. Not discounting the technological difficulty, I think more of the focus should be on an "exit" plan from Facebook. Google+ nailed the technology, but completely blew their Facebook evacuation plan.
There are advantages to using FB that might outweigh the serious privacy concerns. For instance, FB might help me maintain connections with people I might not consider close friends, but acquaintances I might later like to tap in the future. Connections, etc. Or maybe I move to a new city and don't know anyone and that could be nice.
That doesn't mean there isn't a cost associated with using FB. There is, and it should be weighed more carefully than it is. But that doesn't make someone an idiot for deciding that a public presence is worth the privacy violations.
They do care, but facebook is basically public. They continue to use it knowing that, and it likely has a strong impact on what they put on facebook, whether the users are conscious of that or not. What isn't talked about much is what facebook could look like - you know, if they respected their users.
As another commenter pointed out, Zuckerberg once called users "dumb fucks" for giving him their personal information. If he does not believe in privacy, as he now claims, why would he say that?
When it comes to something as sensitive as user privacy, no mistakes should be made.
You can't just excuse a criminal for stealing thousands of diamonds because he may have given a few to a charity. That's a poor example but I think you get my point.
I think the issue is that Facebook makes the same mistake repeatedly, indicating that it's not even close to a mistake. It does something its users don't like (erodes privacy, design changes, automated sharing, etc), claims it's good for them, then partially backs off.
More specifically, the presence of an all-knowing middleman/service undermines trust; no matter what, we will never trust Facebook as much as the members for whom we maintain a profile. Facebook wants us to completely open our private lives to a corporation notorious for its lack of transparency and openness. Facebook is entirely self-serving, as evidenced by its metastasis into even more of our lives. Masquerading as a selfless company innocently trying to connect people, Facebook continues to shove invidious technologies down our throats for one reason only: $$$.
That said, I truly hope that its FTC settlement portends a turning point for the social web.