![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-6170-100x100.png\")
Subpoena him to a Congressional hearing.
2 replies
![\"user-pic\"](\"/css/images/default.gif\")
Set it up as an event in Facebook and invite him.
The one thing I miss from the days of Gawker is the ability to promote comments and see them promoted.
Subpoena him to a Congressional hearing.
Set it up as an event in Facebook and invite him.
The one thing I miss from the days of Gawker is the ability to promote comments and see them promoted.
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-99654-100x100.png\")
Solution to your Facebook privacy worries: Delete your account or don't have an account in the first place. Facebook is not mandatory. Even if you have an account, you don't have to put ANYTHING on it you don't want to. Lawmakers, please go back to doing what you do best: spending money we don't have.
See I thought everyone was freaked out that Obama is stealing your liberties. So, a couple of senators paying an assistant 10 minutes to write a letter to give you MORE privacy is bad, how?
Its bad because I don't want the government telling a service... that I fully volunteered to sign up for... what they can and can't do with information that is (again) fully volunteered by its users. If I don't want an application owner to know that my favorite book is Ender's Game, I can a) not put that information in my profile, or b) not sign up for that application. There is a need for government intervention in a lot of things. This is NOT one of them.
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-212621-100x100.png\")
Okay mister, we'll stay off your lawn. Geez.
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-6536-100x100.png\")
Even if you have an account, you don't have to put ANYTHING on it you don't want to.
This is true. Someone made the comment in an earlier FB post that if the people you've friended are people who are actually your friends then they know all of that stuff anyway. The ones who don't will eventually figure it out from the stuff you post.
They're slowly hacking away at the ways you can use FB without making information public so deleting the account make eventually be the only option but they're not quite there yet.
Exactly. Also, I really like the new privacy features that let you pick and choose specifically who can see a pic or status update. As a single guy dating multiple girls... it comes in handy :)
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-1529900-100x100.png\")
There are a whole industry full of marketing analysts saying now that any business not being on FB and Twitter is suicide. To the degree that is true, your advice is not practical. FB should be sued into being safe.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-14720-100x100.png\")
How does a business needing to be on facebook have anything to do with individuals choosing not to use facebook?
Further, perhaps former stupid fratboy nerds (Zuckerbrod) shouldn't be allowed to control or own immense enterprises that command and handle so much of the population's info (and wield such influence to make it so people are hurt or isolated if they DON'T join) if they have no concept of or regard for people's safety and privacy. FB is now the Google of Social Networking. Very scary.
Further still, any website that wants to take the whole universe of the details of your life out of your computer and get it on the web for everyone to see in ways you can't fathom or control shouldn't be in business to begin with.
Is this really the most pressing issue these two have to deal with? This has got to be right up there in national importance with regulating carry-on luggage.
It seems odd that so many people on this site are criticizing these senators for addressing this. Why is it bad for the people who might actually have the power and influence to change the way things work to actually try to use this power? Don't we, the readers of the Consumerist, want things to actually get better, or do we just want to spend our time whining and complaining about how bad things are?
FFS, it's just a letter. How long does it take to write a letter?
I think their time might be better spent reading some of bills they are passing without knowing what is in them. Might cut down on all the \"We didn't realize that was in there\" stories about Obamacare
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-161466-100x100.png\")
bozobit = 1
One more reason to not join Facebook. People like to bitch and complain about the policies, but then they still use Facebook. Just like everything else on the web, people want to make money from something that is popular by selling ad space related to a person's interests. Google and Amazon both do this, so why is it a surprise that Facebook is doing it also.
Hint, if have information or a picture you don't want getting out the internet, don't post it on Facebook.
People like to bitch and complain about the policies, but then they still use Facebook.
You could replace the word \"Facebook\" with every single company in the WCIA contest.
Well now hold on. Some of those companies may be virtual monopolies, or have policies that are industry wide through collusion, so it doesn't matter if a consumer leaves them or not, they'll be treated in the same manner somewhere else.
Like in my neighborhood, I'm an IT guy, I need high speed, Comcast is the only one that provides that service. I can't go to another service and get the same speeds I need. Are you saying I therefore can't bitch about their lousy service? I think I have an even bigger right to bitch as there are no alternatives, making their treatment even more patently unfair. Also, separately, this is why monopolies are usually or supposed to be heavily regulated by the government. So people can't be lorded over and gouged and mistreated by abusive corporations with no where else to go for something they need.
Well now hold on. Some of those companies may be virtual monopolies...
OK, well most of them then.
But my point was that we just spent 2 months complaining about other companies we choose to do business with so why should Facebook be exempt?
You can bitch and complain about a service you are paying for, but you can't complain when something is free.
And the users have nothing to do with how Facebook makes money?
Complaints might mean less to them when coming from the people who aren't paying them directly but there's no real reason users *can't* complain.
Of course you have a right to complain. However, Facebook doesn't have to do anything about it. If enough people cared about this issue, then Facebook would be shedding users by the millions. I think they have 200million accounts. For them, it obviously makes more sense to make some huge bucks off people rather than bow to everyone's wishes about security. Even if they lost 20million users, that's only 10% or so of their user base.
And this is why I have created several made up name aliases to do business and socializing on FaceCrook without doing it as my real name.
They have no right and no business making your personal life available to a whole world of crooks, hackers, stalkers, or worst of all ADVERTISERS that realize since you aren't watching tv, listening to the radio, or reading junk email or spam mail any more, they now have to interfere with your life in whole new invasive ways.
They further have no right to make that visible to prospective employers 1, 5, or 10 years from now so they can avoid hiring you.
Anyone who is on FB as themselves and heavily involved in these high exposure areas is a fool unto themselves. Foursquare, (telling the world where you are every second with GPS) is ten times worse. I certainly hope employers don't start encouraging or requiring THAT soon!
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-118612-100x100.png\")
They have every right. It's a free service. If you don't like it, delete your account. Simple. It's not an essential service.
What's to say they have no right? You aren't paying for the service and you give them information willingly.
No, not if they're not clear with what they are doing with it after that.
The details of your life, and the group of details that is your life, belongs to a trusted sphere of people whom you authorize, not some corporation that wants to exploit you and ruin your life through deception.
If you feel that way, don't use Facebook. I wonder what would happen if Facebook had a security issue and all the information spilled out onto the web. Suddenly everything you thought was safe isn't. Sorry, if it's on the web, expect it to one day find it's way into a search engine like Google.
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-1531081-100x100.png\")
If?
Facebook HAS a security issue, and all your private data IS public on the web.
I hate to tell you guys... but facebook has no way of telling if you have deleted the data after 24 hours, and most apps did NOT delete the data. My apps did not, because in deleting the data, i would have to delete entire user records. All i stored was the users facebook I.D, but it was still one of those things not allowed previously.
or at a minimum require users to opt in to allowing third parties to store data for more than 24 hours.
It doesn't it do that now? Did they not update the TOS for FB apps when they made that change? Or are they asking for existing users to be re-prompted into accepting the new TOS?
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-263390-100x100.png\")
...aaaaaaand cue all the \"Is this the single most important thing in the universe? There are children starving in Africa and this is what we're concentrating on, every minute of every day?\" posts. Because no one could possibly be able to deal with or focus on more than one thing at a time... only ONE thing can be relevant at a time!! I mean, I just called to get my freezer serviced. So that of course means I must think my freezer not working is the single biggest disaster ever to befall the human race, and is the ONLY important thing happening on the face of the Earth. Anything else someone might discuss or be interested in would be a shameful departure from WHAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT.
*sigh* If you can't handle more than one subject at a time, and think anything besides what YOU think is important today should never be talked about at all, perhaps you need to up your meds. Or, better still, stay away from websites that actually discuss numerous subjects that range from silly to serious. You know, like normal people do? Geez.
Yea for government taking over every aspect of your lives.
Breaking news -- Franken not happy with number of smileys at the end of txt message sent -- Breaking news
So you're opposed to to the government trying to give you MORE control over your privacy?
If you ever start your own business and the government comes in and tells you what information you can and cannot keep... even if its information knowingly volunteered by your customers... that would be down right unconstitutional.
Actually they do. As a licensed therapist they tell me all the time what data I can and cannot keep, what I can and cannot share with others, and what I am legally protected from having to share in open court. And while HIPAA laws and Red Flag regulations are onerous at times, I don't think theres a practitioner in any medical field out there that would tell you that patient confidentiality is a BAD thing as a policy, even if many find the process and requirements of keeping that less than ideal.
If the gov can force a private industry to give you more privacy, it can also force them to do anything else. Government avocation goes both ways , what they can give/force, they can take.
Dont like the facebook privacy deal? well dont use facebook...
I didn't realize that one could take over Facebook with a letter.
I'm all for this.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-762676-100x100.png\")
I have long said that I would have vastly greater trust in a comedian than a politician. You go, Al.
Despite the tone of the other posts here I am in complete favor of Sen Fraken's position and more so think it needs to be broadly applied to virtually everything internet related. Opt-In should be the standard in virtually all in not All cases, Opt-Out should be illegal. The entire premise of Opt-Out borders on Fraud. The reason it is chosen vs Opt-In is that it is hoped that a majority will fail to microscopicly examine the TOS each and every time they use a site and will not even be aware of a need to Opt-Out. IMHO any change in a TOS should require that the User Opt-IN with a failure to do so resulting in the users account being put on hold until they do so or with all information being deleted and the account being closed if they chose not to.
Furthermore they impact of said changes should be in clear English, no Legalese. I would even be in favor of regulatory oversight in the area for all consumer contracts from \"Shrink Wrap Licenses\" to Automobile puchases and beyond. While they are at it they could make the inclusion of non legally sustainable conditions in contracts (think click wraps) to be illegal as well.
Seriously, why does the government need to get involved in a completely voluntary, private service. If you don't like Facebook's policies DON'T join.
...what makes you think that the vast majority of people on this planet either have any cognition of the ramifications of such services that they use, or can be even bothered to look into it?
Probably 98% of the users on Facebook were already using the service before changes were made to security policy.
Why is it that Comment boards breed so many Devil's Advocates?
True, this isn't high priority, but at the same time, if a company starts making bad decisions with your personal information AFTER you signed up for the service, you have every right to complain.
Of course you can leave, but if the pros outweigh the cons, go ahead and complain. You have every right.
If Facebook is attempting to sleazily sell off your personal data for as much profit as possible to Advertisers (who are, in my subjective opinion, bottom feeding scum), then let them come under scrutiny. Let politicians go through their practices with a fine tooth comb.
social networking sites make it so easy for predators to scam ppl, and although, they can't fully control ppls actions, they have the power to limit those with bad intentions (look up the suicide of Megan Meier).
if they don't change the privacy rules, there should be legislature to fine them heavily (no slaps on the wrist) for every infraction of cyber-bullying/harrassment, or minors with a profile page.
While I understand companies need to make money and stay around, it is the shady way that FB goes about their privacy policies and the changes to them that I disagree with. Many people use the arguement of \"if you don't like their practices, don't use them\" Well truthfully, I've come into contact with so many lost friends via FB that I do value it as a service, but I don't like how much control is given to others, in concern to my privacy. There is currently (from what I can tell) no way for my to prevent people from tagging me in a photo, or give me the ability to restrict what total strangers are able to see on my profile (they give limited control, but not much). Also, after going thru all my settings not even a month ago, I realized they were ALL reset to \"Viewable by Everyone\" without as much as an email to tell me.
Likes this.
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-1533083-100x100.png\")
I hoped for something a little more strongly worded with less ass kissing from Franken.
It's great that our comedians make better senators than our politicians...
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-1224432-100x100.png\")
On one hand, I dislike how the federal government decides to regulate everything at all times for any reason. On the other hand, a law or regulation demanding 'opt-in' would be sensible and simple to implement.
Senators, no one is forcing you to put your information on Facebook.
No one is forcing anyone to use Facebook.
If enough people really didn't like the terms such they stopped using the product Facebook would be forced to change.
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-1537935-100x100.png\")
Jesus tiddy fugging CHRIST these people need to butt out.
It is NONE. OF. YOUR. BUSINESS. whether an airline charges for carry on bags or Facebook changes it's privacy policy.
Good thing they're so very, very concerned about a few easily-adjusted Facebook privacy settings. Not like there's warrantless wiretapping or anything like that going on from their end of the state-citizen divide.
Facebook now offers no setting to opt out of them selling your information to business partners, there was even an article detailing it on this very site.
Also, a handy tool to see what anyone online can still see on your profile: http://zesty.ca/facebook/
My thoughts exactly. I don't care for the opt-out procedure that FB is employing, but it is a lot more user friendly than the process available for folks who don't want their communications monitored by the government.
How about we get rid of that constitutional abomination known as the TSA before we worry about the privacy policies of a private website.
Because what ONE blog is posting about is the only thing that is being investigated. Right?
They can pick and choose their causes to maximize visibility and project a positive image come re-election time. Most Americans haven't had their phones tapped (that they are aware of, anyway), but a lot of people use Facebook.