Only on facebook are people futile and dependent to helplessly boycott facebook inside a facebook group.
You want to know what prick? There's been thousands of facebook groups, counting millions of users who clicked a link "Join this group". How many of these people went beyond their computer to participate, let alone create something worthwhile?
I mean, fuck. You don't even have to participate or work to be apart of a group. Just click and say "This is me! I'm smart! I hope the girl I like finally notices me!" Well, she's not. You're ugly, and she thinks you're wierd.
Above all:
Why even bother to make or join a group when you can just as easily go somewhere else.
Dumb sheep? Are the dynamics of this shit that difficult? jesus christ.
How will anyone (or any machine, really) be able to find particulars of the sad Facebook detritus being stored in the gigantic data warehouses consuming the landscape as far as the eye can see?
@aurora*raby: We'll call up the janitor who stored the Ark of the Co- err, embarrassing photos of you at that totally awesome party at Bob's and he'll get it for you.
@aurora*raby: Alright, then we'll call the CHUDs then. No biggie. We WILL get your awesome vomit stained kegstand photos out there, one way or another.
It's weird how also in the headlines is the $1,000,000 cost in bandwidth/server space for every month's worth of new users, how much of that shit is bogged down by useless "user-deleted" crap that they're storing?
If anything else, stopping that practice just might save them money.. :p
Dear World, Anything you post to the internet, in any public forum, on any webpage, is pretty much accessible to anyone, forever. You can't unring a bell. Act accordingly.
@FunNaturalFun: wow you're a real genius. way to simplify some obviously invasive shit. private messages and emails should be under the same scrutiny as "public forums"...
according to you, should i we all have to switch back to letter writin'!!??
@FunNaturalFun: That's not the point. The point is who "owns" that information.
If I leave my bike outside my house, yes, you *can* go ahead and take it, but that doesn't mean you *may*. If I see you take it, I can call the police and have them arrest you and get my bike back.
But if just the act of leaving my bike outside meant it was free game for anyone, well, that's a different thing.
In the case of data, it's not really about unringing a bell, it's about accountability. If I have something up on Facebook which I then decide to delete, but Facebook keeps it and during the time after I "deleted" it, it leaks out to the world, I know who is responsible. Under Facebook's old TOS, they would theoretically be liable for that leak - they no longer had my permission to even have that information, let alone disseminate it. Under the new TOS, though, they had no such accountability.
The other issue is not so much about embarrassment but just about licensing. If a professional photographer sells his photos but also just wants to share those photos with his friends, that's his right and only his right, by law. Facebook's TOS made it so that they then had a perpetual license to use his photos to market their site even if he deleted them. That's basically unheard of for any web site.
Yes, we all know we're not supposed to put embarrassing stuff up online, anywhere. This is about something different.
@easternsike: No, according to me, putting your phone number on a public website and then saying to yourself "Its safe! I have private info hid under my privacy settings!" is optimistic at best.
You know that dude you friended because he's got 242 mutual friends with you? Hes actually a spam sock puppet that got a shiny nickel for harvesting your dox.
02/18/09
02/18/09
That's it. That's all I've got.
02/18/09
Essentially reporting. Very, very disturbing.
02/18/09
Only on facebook are people futile and dependent to helplessly boycott facebook inside a facebook group.
You want to know what prick? There's been thousands of facebook groups, counting millions of users who clicked a link "Join this group". How many of these people went beyond their computer to participate, let alone create something worthwhile?
I mean, fuck. You don't even have to participate or work to be apart of a group. Just click and say "This is me! I'm smart! I hope the girl I like finally notices me!" Well, she's not. You're ugly, and she thinks you're wierd.
Above all:
Why even bother to make or join a group when you can just as easily go somewhere else.
Dumb sheep? Are the dynamics of this shit that difficult? jesus christ.
02/18/09
Facebook is a little like the abusive spouse -- we know we need to leave, but we're too dependent to actually do it.
02/18/09
02/18/09
02/18/09
02/18/09
02/18/09
02/18/09
02/18/09
02/18/09
Or perhaps you're busy throwing a fucking virtual sheep at someone.
02/18/09
02/18/09
02/18/09
If anything else, stopping that practice just might save them money.. :p
02/18/09
02/18/09
02/18/09
Yeah I'm sure nobody needs useful stuff, I mean, who uses Office anyway?
02/18/09
02/18/09
Anything you post to the internet, in any public forum, on any webpage, is pretty much accessible to anyone, forever. You can't unring a bell. Act accordingly.
Thanks,
FNF
02/18/09
according to you, should i we all have to switch back to letter writin'!!??
02/18/09
If I leave my bike outside my house, yes, you *can* go ahead and take it, but that doesn't mean you *may*. If I see you take it, I can call the police and have them arrest you and get my bike back.
But if just the act of leaving my bike outside meant it was free game for anyone, well, that's a different thing.
In the case of data, it's not really about unringing a bell, it's about accountability. If I have something up on Facebook which I then decide to delete, but Facebook keeps it and during the time after I "deleted" it, it leaks out to the world, I know who is responsible. Under Facebook's old TOS, they would theoretically be liable for that leak - they no longer had my permission to even have that information, let alone disseminate it. Under the new TOS, though, they had no such accountability.
The other issue is not so much about embarrassment but just about licensing. If a professional photographer sells his photos but also just wants to share those photos with his friends, that's his right and only his right, by law. Facebook's TOS made it so that they then had a perpetual license to use his photos to market their site even if he deleted them. That's basically unheard of for any web site.
Yes, we all know we're not supposed to put embarrassing stuff up online, anywhere. This is about something different.
02/18/09
You know that dude you friended because he's got 242 mutual friends with you? Hes actually a spam sock puppet that got a shiny nickel for harvesting your dox.
02/18/09
02/18/09
02/18/09