Tech people seem to believe that the entire digital world is a brand new realm, whose laws and fiats they can cavalierly disregard, or invent to their own whim.
For example, Sergei Brin's declaration in the times when Google made a deal to digitize the collection of French heritage literature at the BNF? When he said "of course this isn't a license on the work", but went on to say "sure, any author can voluntarily withdraw from our directory and set his own pricing scheme". Which of course implies that Google WOULD indeed have a de facto kind of license on the digital information.
Facebook here seems to be following this gross pattern, assuming that all digital information is theirs to do with as they please, since it is hosted on their architecture. It's like assuming that a gallery can just give away copies of a painting since the original is hanging on the wall, waiting to be sold.
This may sound lame, but I have Creative Commons on all of my material on Facebook. If they make it available in search, isn't that exploiting my "works"?
Whacky Patty (Overstock ceo Patrick Byrne) has been using this info to create a list of "enemies" (via DeepCapture). That is, anyone who has been critical of overstock, plus their friends, their kids, their spouses, etc.
@Uncle_Billy_Slumming: probably something like folks paying X amount to have their ads in the system. a system which is supposed to serve up ads based on things in your profile. like if you say you are gay, you get the gay focused dating site ads. and so on
@ArleenCabango: I think it goes beyond the site. I've discussed things online at venues other than facebook, and a targeted ad pops up on facebook. Has happened way too many times for chance, to me and others.. but.. still.. how many people click on those stupid ads??
@narnio: I think (see above) that they sell info to advertisers for targeting purposes. Information about your specific interests is being pooled and sold. Who knows... maybe people *are* clicking on those stupid little ads?
@Uncle_Billy_Slumming: I don't know anyone who's given their personal info and some cash to the attorney of a recently deceased foreign dignitary looking to give away said dignitary's estate...but presumably, there are people who have, otherwise those emails wouldn't still be going around.
@Uncle_Billy_Slumming: Not technically, specifically because I don't like clicking on ads...but I've Googled things I've seen in ads so I could look into them without actually clicking.
@narnio: Um, ad impressions work fine for branding of big things. I only see ads for little things. If fb is able to sell impressions to the small guy, pretty slick. But whatever, you're clearly in a bad mood.
@Uncle_Billy_Slumming: Facebook ads are a fantastic tool for small businesses, as it allows them to target their market very cheaply, and very accurately, by using keywords that are in user's profiles, as well as geography and demographics. I use it for my business and it is very profitable.
GAWKER! RYAN! Seriously, you guys need to spearhead a Facebook boycott day, where everyone deactivates their accounts for 24 or 48 hours. That will send a message that users are still in control of whether they use Facebook or not. You guys reach millions of people. You could do it.
If you don't do it, we're all just sitting around posting status updates while Zuckerberg gets richer and richer. Let's make him one of those tech burnouts instead.
He also owns a large chunk of Arsenal football club, around 25%, I think. He's not the largest shareholder (Stan Kroenke is, who also owns the Denver Nuggets), but given Usmanov's background it's a little worrying for us Arsenal fans.
He's also no stranger to the law courts, especially the libel courts. When he first invested in Arsenal a few years ago, some bloggers looked at his background and repeated the facts that he'd been convicted of certain fraud crimes. These were all on public record, yet he attempted to have these blogs removed and suspended by their hosts.
Don't be surprised if Gawker gets a letter from his lawyer pretty soon...
Please don't anyone act surprised, no matter what fancy names we give these services; MySpace, Facebook etc..
In the end these are data mining companies, privacy is an obstacle for them.
Sooner or later this was bound to happen. Richard Stallmann has been warning about this for years, that moving to cloud based services will lead to immoral usage policies.
This is yet another day where I am happy that I never touched any of these "networking" sites.
@Coolmodo: Amen my friend. These sites are so freaking toxic and people just. don't. get. it.
I've never understood the notion of puking ones entire life on the web. The scary thing is that to me, it blatantly shows that we have become a society that is so connected that we have become absolutely disconnected. Can you "really" be a 'true' friend to 500 people? Or, are you and your 500 friends just voyeurs in each other's stupid existence? It's all really fucking sad.
Although...I have wrestled with the idea of creating a page just so I can post "Takin' a poop" multiple times a day...
@not_a_virus.exe.vbs:
You mean you're OK with having that neighbor/coworker/distant relative you can't stand spam you (and your friends) with inane/offensive/whatever posts on FB as well as those times you have to talk to them in RL?
@Alfisted: Dude? Are you for serious? You remember all those drunk, embarrassing pictures you took last night? Well of course you don't. But now half of your family does, and that weird kid that sat next to you freshman year does, and so does that cute girl that was interested in you(not so much anymore), and so does your boss, o and your neighbor. Why wouldn't you want one?
Hmmm, I deleted my myspace account a couple of months ago. Maybe I should go back? I wonder if this is an attempt by Facebook to reignite the competition, since they basically have none now that myspace all but bowed down to FB. I'm not sure I can go back to the stupid backgrounds, loud videos and music that immediately start when you access a profile, and the constant adbot friend requests though.
12/19/09
For example, Sergei Brin's declaration in the times when Google made a deal to digitize the collection of French heritage literature at the BNF? When he said "of course this isn't a license on the work", but went on to say "sure, any author can voluntarily withdraw from our directory and set his own pricing scheme". Which of course implies that Google WOULD indeed have a de facto kind of license on the digital information.
Facebook here seems to be following this gross pattern, assuming that all digital information is theirs to do with as they please, since it is hosted on their architecture. It's like assuming that a gallery can just give away copies of a painting since the original is hanging on the wall, waiting to be sold.
12/19/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
If you have info, share it. How much revenue do they make from their ads?
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/17/09
12/17/09
If you don't do it, we're all just sitting around posting status updates while Zuckerberg gets richer and richer. Let's make him one of those tech burnouts instead.
12/17/09
12/17/09
12/17/09
12/17/09
12/17/09
He's also no stranger to the law courts, especially the libel courts. When he first invested in Arsenal a few years ago, some bloggers looked at his background and repeated the facts that he'd been convicted of certain fraud crimes. These were all on public record, yet he attempted to have these blogs removed and suspended by their hosts.
Don't be surprised if Gawker gets a letter from his lawyer pretty soon...
12/17/09
In the end these are data mining companies, privacy is an obstacle for them.
Sooner or later this was bound to happen. Richard Stallmann has been warning about this for years, that moving to cloud based services will lead to immoral usage policies.
This is yet another day where I am happy that I never touched any of these "networking" sites.
12/17/09
I've never understood the notion of puking ones entire life on the web. The scary thing is that to me, it blatantly shows that we have become a society that is so connected that we have become absolutely disconnected. Can you "really" be a 'true' friend to 500 people? Or, are you and your 500 friends just voyeurs in each other's stupid existence? It's all really fucking sad.
Although...I have wrestled with the idea of creating a page just so I can post "Takin' a poop" multiple times a day...
12/17/09
12/17/09
You mean you're OK with having that neighbor/coworker/distant relative you can't stand spam you (and your friends) with inane/offensive/whatever posts on FB as well as those times you have to talk to them in RL?
12/17/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09