Internet

Facebook Anti-Privacy Monopoly Hysteria Now Over. Please Return to Your Regularly Scheduled Oversharing.

|

Remember last year (and the year before that, and the year before that) when everyone was freaking out about the "Facebook Anti-Privacy Monopoly"? There were even infographics!

mmmm….misleading y axis. delicious.

As recently as this May lawmakers were touting plans to implement their own solutions to privacy problems caused by Facebook's monopoly.

Then Google+ hit the Interwebs a couple of months ago. Starting tomorrow, Facebook will debut new, easier to use privacy settings with "a googley aftertaste":

Competition works.

Advertisement

NEXT: Broken Windows Around the World

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. As far as I can tell, Googleplex (as it should’ve obviously been named) hasn’t really taken off much yet. Still, I imagine FB is worried about its potential, if nothing else. So that’s good.

    1. Googleplex (as it should’ve obviously been named) hasn’t really taken off much yet.

      It has done well enough to force Facebook to change its privacy policies.

      On a side note i am fucking hating Google+, Facebook and Twitter as it is killing the comment sections of all my favorite blogs.

      Try to comment here and you will see what i mean:

      http://www.env-econ.net/

      also i can no longer comment here as well:

      http://www.comicsalliance.com/

      FUCK FACOOGLETWEET+ MOTHERFUCKERS!!!!

      1. But on the env-econ link you can log in using your facebook account.

        1. I will kill you.

      2. A lot of sites use the Disqus comment system which is kinda handy, since you can log in with just about any other social media account you have. I actually find it more annoying on sites like the Washington Post which force you to get an account with them to post. And of course here at Reason is the best. πŸ™‚

        It has done well enough to force Facebook to change its privacy policies.

        I refer you to the second sentence in my first post. Although one of the supposed toted benefits of Googleples is that you could use it from work since no one would block google.com. Sadly, it is possible to block sub-domains. It will be tough to knock FB off its lofty throne, but five years ago MySpace was still the thing, so who knows.

      3. You can use any OpenID provider you want, you know.

        1. You can use any OpenID provider you want, you know.

          That is a bullshit.

          OpenID has never worked.

      4. All I know is that ever since Google Minus started getting used, sites like this one have been even worse memory hogs than before. I don’t know how many times I’ve seen my browser freeze while loading a page from H&R, with the status bar saying it’s trying to retrieve data from plusone.google.com.

  2. You know if you don’t post shit on your facebook page that you care about strangers seeing, it won’t matter if it is stolen. Just a thought.

    1. Look at me! Look at me!

      …Hey! Stop looking at me!!!

    2. ^^THIS^^

      I also use a nom de plume.

      1. Or don’t open an account.

          1. I couldn’t fit my wooden shoe into their interface…

          2. Shit. The wooden shoe people were saboteurs – I’m getting my anti-technology schmucks confused. Pretty soon, I’ll be mistaking White Indian for Al Gore.

          3. Pretty sure you’re joking, but Jed’s folks tried to shut down an advancing tech.
            The fact that I have no interest in ‘social networks’ is in no way an attempt to shut them down.
            EXCEPT: commerce clause! If you don’t buy it, etc.! See Obamacare.

    3. You know if you don’t post shit on your facebook page that you care about strangers seeing, it won’t matter if it is stolen. Just a thought.

      Iron law of data ownership:

      If the data exists on someone elses storage media, you don’t own it.

      1. If the data exists(sic) on someone elses storage media, you don’t own it.

        Which is why I don’t grok “cloud computing”.

        … Hobbit

          1. I prefer to use “datums” myself.

            1. I prefer Lore.

              1. Me, too.

      2. So you wouldn’t mind if Google/Yahoo/Hotmail published your email? After all, they own it.

        1. Mo, Paul is being descriptive, not normative.

          In other words, he’s saying if you tell someone else a piece of information, they now have the power to disseminate it – rightly or wrongly.

          I imagine that rather than being comfortable about the publishing of the info he doesn’t play to ensure it doesn’t get published.

  3. Competition works.

    Except in health care. And education. And building roads.

    1. We do our best to keep it that way. Everything for me, nothing outside me, and nothing against me bitches.

  4. Who posts sensitive information on Facebook anyway? If you’re that stupid you deserve whatever embarassmnet befalls you.

    1. More people than you think. People don’t think about information as a package, but as single individual entities. Someone with some time and an intellect greater than that of a rhesus monkey can often take several isolated and individual bits of information and form a more usable set of data. People just don’t think in the long term or about compounding nature of personal information.

      1. very true. there is also an evolving theory in case law referring to “mosaic” info to cover exactly this kind of thing.

        volokh.com has done some good articles on it. in brief, govt. can gather all sorts of tiny pieces of info w/o a warrant, but now because of the internet and technology, this info is much more easily available and when put together, offers govt (and of course private businesses, although they are not restrained by the 4th) an immense amount of personal info on people

    2. the problem is friends and family that post sensitive data about you which can be linked to your accounts through “friend” relationships.

      1. There’s a simple solution to this.

        1. You know who else proposed a “simple solution”….

            1. Sherlock Holmes?

    3. “” If you’re that stupid you deserve whatever embarassmnet befalls you.””

      Like losing your endorsements after breaking olympic swimming records?

      Even if you do not have a facebook account, if you’ve been in photos someone else took, you’re probably on facebook.

      1. and with image recognition technology, it’s that much more concerning.

        it’s getting pretty sophisticated.

    4. Who posts sensitive information on Facebook anyway? If you’re that stupid you deserve whatever embarassmnet befalls you.

      Tony Weiner now understands twitter.

  5. “Competition works.”

    No, it doesn’t work efficiently. If there were only one entity in each field, and each entity were run by me or my appointees, there would never be any abuse because I’m morally superior and would have no desire to take advantage of the customers or clients. This method is superior to competition.

    This is why the health care bill will be a smashing success.

  6. I am using Google+ as a do-over. I will not add any of the following: family members, coworkers/clients, former classmates, people without a sense of humor. I only have a few people on G+ so far, but they are people I actually like.

    1. But isn’t the whole point of g+ that you can have different circles that see different things? One circle for people with a sense of humor, and many others for wastes of space.

      1. For famous people: A circle for the media, a circle for your friends, a circle for your fans, a circle for your stalkers, a circle for your family, and a circle for your prostitutes.

        1. Thus completes the circle of life. For morons.

        2. No circle for your weed/coke man?

          1. Oh, sure. And the circle of agents, circle of people who’ve slept with Lindsay Lohan, circles of hell, circle of enemies you haven’t avenged yourself upon, and so on.

            1. Now this just sounds like my family tree.

    2. I only have a few people on G+ so far, but they are people I actually like.

      So no one from H&R.

      1. I have one from H&R. Well, maybe two, but the 2nd is a lurker so doesnt count.

  7. I’m liking Google+ because it allows for editing posts, bold, italics and strike through; something Facebook should have had from the start.

    The only problem with Google+… not enough people on there. If anyone wants to add me, look for “Libertydrome”.

    1. What about the blink tag?

      1. I believe Google has made some breakthroughs in blinking technology.

  8. I want to share this on #googleplus but IE7 has a monopoly on my work computer.

  9. It felt like millions of Slashdot voices cried out and were suddenly silenced…

    1. Because Steve Jobs just stepped down, or because their lefty prattle was disproven?

  10. As recently as this May lawmakers were touting plans to implement their own solutions to privacy problems caused by Facebook’s monopoly.

    And the market preempted them, just like it always does.

    The knowledge problem and self-interest – how do they work, again?

    1. Lawmaker: The introduction of Google+ proves the importance of privacy legislation now, more than ever.

      1. Wow – you do that like you’re ONE of them

        *shudder*

  11. I just watched the linked video on mute. The picture on the face of that guy at 0:09 makes me think he was just “digitally outed”.

    1. Poor Samwell. No one would have known, otherwise…

  12. So, on that note… anyone have a spare google plus invite?

    1. It won’t do you any good. I have an invite, but they are “over capacity.”

    2. I’ve only got the 150 or so that they give everyone…

  13. it’s Edwardian Milk & Chese

  14. it’s Edwardian Milk & Chese

  15. I understand that I’m not Facebook’s customer, that they’re aggregating user’s info for sale to others.

    And I understand that a lot of people don’t give any thought to having their embarrasing moments posted across the internet for all eternity. Those people are idiots, but cool, whatever.

    But why has Facebook been so opposed to the idea that a non-trivial segment of their userbase just wants to share their stuff with that small segment of the world known as people I like?

    1. Because they think they know what you want–or at least what you should want–better than you. Seriously. I’ve seen this many times with software development; the maker of the software thinks certain UI and operational methods are they way it “should” work, even if people don’t like it. And the more propellerheads you have making decisions, as opposed to customer service people, the more you will get this, since developers hate it when their genius idea(s) or UIs are rejected by the user base.

      1. I’ve hated every Quicken update since about version 2 and Office 2010 sucks major shit.

        Oh, and this “social networking”? Seems to me that one has to be “social” to use it.

        … “I ain’t social” Hobbit

        1. Office 2010 sucks major shit…

          If anything, this in an understatement. MS Access 2010 is enough to get people thinking that learning SQL is simple by comparison (and so much more powerful). For all the other products, it was as if they decided to just fucking change where everything is for no fucking reason.

          I used to think Open Office was kind of a pain in the ass, and lacked some good features that MS products had. But with Orifice 2010, MS really went off the deep end. Plus, the whole ‘Open Office is free‘ thing is a nice bonus, as is its compatibility with MS file types. (I have MS Office 2003 on this machine, and have to use Sun’s Open Office to read .docx or .xlsx files – how fucked up is that?)

          1. Open Office is pretty great considering it’s free. Excel 2010 has greatly increased capacity for loading shit (x64, of course), but yeah, the menus are fucking retarded.

            But I’ve always hated Office. And years ago, writing some VBA code for it? SUCKED.

            1. The thing I love about Openoffice is that you can script it with basic and java and python.

              The thing I hate is that it is so poorly documented. It took me about 6 hours to figure out a bit of database scripting that it would have taken me 30 minutes in Access. πŸ™

              But, once you get something working, niiiiiiice.

              1. Epi – the capacity in Excel is very helpful when you need to quickly re-format multiple views or delete parts of large table(s). However, this doesn’t come in handy nearly enough to justify the pointless menu redesign. And yeah, VBA was a lot of work for little return.

                tarran – were you working with forms or reports? After learning SQL (well, the DML stuff), I never want to deal with anything else for data manipulation in a DB. I just worked in Access 2010 yesterday, and after struggling with their fucking panels / menus for 15 minutes, I went to the SQL view and wrote the query in about 20 seconds.

        2. “I ain’t social” Hobbit

          Shit!!

          Old Mex won’t take me in…

          and i was at least hoping to get second breakfast from you.

    2. “But why has Facebook been so opposed to the idea that a non-trivial segment of their userbase just wants to share their stuff with that small segment of the world known as people I like?”

      Because once you shout it to the world, they’d assume you don’t care who finds it?
      And there’s hardly a better method of shouting it to the world than putting it on the web anywhere.

    3. But why has Facebook been so opposed to the idea that a non-trivial segment of their userbase just wants to share their stuff with that small segment of the world known as people I like?

      A better explanation than Epi’s (no offense):

      Because they don’t care and they know you will use it anyway. The more content, the more clicks, the more ad revenue. It really is Web 1.0 economics – if Facebook forces you to overshare (knowing that you will do it, because most people are inclined toward “not caring”), that generates content, and content = money.

      1. This is a good explanation too. However, there are super-annoying aspects to Facebook that are not based on page clicks, that seem to merely be the way they think you should use Facebook. And they’re wrong.

        1. facebook has been the model t of the social networking world. “you can get it in any color as long as it’s black”. w/o any real competition, they could afford to be clunky, unresponsive to user input, etc.

          no more

          1. Well, there was MySpace, which was apparently so bad even Facebook is an improvement.

            Although I’ve heard MySpace is (or was) better for filmmakers & bands, b/c it handles audio & video file sharing much better.

        2. What is it that people want that they are not getting?

          1. sex with no strings attached

  16. Guess what? In your everyday life other actual people can literally see you! Maybe even hear and touch you too.

  17. I’m sure this will be either its own post, or in tomorrow’s morning / brunch links, but Gallup released another poll. The bad news: Perry is leading, and Pawlenty is still included despite 1) being a schmuck, and 2) no longer being in the race. Meanwhile, two-term New Mexico governor Johnson, still in the race, is ignored.

    The good news: Ron Paul is included, comes in 3rd behind “I loves the Constitution, ‘cept when I don’t” Perry, and the Mormon whether-vane.

  18. I never wanted the government to get involved but I’m glad enough people have raised hell about FB’s disregard for user privacy. All of the complaining (mine included I guess) has pushed FB etc to start taking such things more seriously.

    A year or two ago FB was simply ridiculous in how they trampled on everybody’s privacy. Yay for the market.

  19. If any of you get Cato updates, Ed Crane’s comments in the last one were amusing: (paraphrasing)
    ‘I’ve been told to pitch the web site. For those with ADD, we have twitter. For the narcissists, we have facebook.’

  20. Life before domestication/agriculture was in fact largely one of leisure, intimacy with nature, sensual wisdom, sexual equality, and health. This was our human nature, for a couple of million years, prior to enslavement by priests, kings, and bosses. And Twitbook.

    1. “Life before domestication/agriculture was in fact largely one of leisure, intimacy with nature, sensual wisdom, sexual equality, and health. This was our human nature, for a couple of million years, prior to enslavement by priests, kings, and bosses.”

      And purple unicorns frolicked and roamed the fertile plains, asking only to be killed for
      STEAKS! In fact, they brought knives with them to make it easy!
      Hey, John Zerzan: Future Primitive will be here all week! Don’t forget to tip!

      1. don’t forget about the part that if you are one of the unlucky 50% to make it to puberty that there was still a good chance you would be dead before you hit 30.

        1. Wrong, Joshua.

          Upper Paleolithic 33 years At age 15, life expectancy an additional 39 years (total age 54)
          Neolithic 20 years.
          Early Modern Britain 25-40 years.
          (source: Wiki: life expectancy)

          Agriculture has been a disaster to human health and life expectancy.

          Even in the Libertarian Golden Age, the United States in 1950, life expectancy was 38.

          So what you’re asking me to remember is your damn lies.

          1. You’re just making shit up.

          2. Apparently WI thinks history stopped in 1950. Hey, since it is still 1950 how did you post this to the Internet?

      2. sevo, your daddy is the third picture down in this article

        Wolves & Dogs
        by Jason Godesky | 13 November 2006
        http://rewild.info/anthropik/2006/11/wolves-dogs/

        Since the Holocene began, we have bred some very domesticated dogs?how far is a wild gray wolf from a miniature poodle show dog? The most domesticated breeds are also the most prone to many different kinds of diseases. They are the most frail; the most sickly; the least capable of doing anything for themselves. They are bred for dependence.

        1. It’s Thursday so we can’t respond.

          Oops.

        2. Fuck you, moron.

  21. this is what we all want

    1. I wish my dad was a Russian aerospace engineer when I was 17.

      oh wait…

    2. Strap a small bomb to that thing and point it toward the podium of an outdoor political rally…who’s going to stop it?

    3. NASA tests small jet engines on RC models (few feet across) near my father’s house. He flies a helicopter, so he has an agreement with them to monitor a specific radio frequency so they don’t take him out while he’s climbing up over the tree line.

  22. “Competition works”.

    This totally misunderstands tech. G+ is not any real improvement in regard to privacy. My one and only G+ post:

    https://plus.google.com/100521784784240484670/posts

  23. That assclowns around the globe embarrass themselves online doesn’t bother me. Like others have said…DON’T POST IT, DUMBASS!

    That the Library of Congress archives all of it? Well, that disturbs me a little.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.