Share: Fine Print Shenanigans

May 19, 2010

Ahh comments we love.

We’re going to start harvesting your comments related to Facebook and other privacy issues – ONLY if they’re intelligent. Like this guy’s here:

“They [Facebook Inc.] didn’t make anything clear. Their “guidance,” from what I’ve seen, constitutes for some wordy legalese policy they expect everyday (non-lawyer) people to sit, read, and understand. It’s fine print shenanigans over at Facebook headquarters while they single-handedly change the definition of personal privacy for the worst. This has potential to affect everyone. Not just Facebook users.”

In response too this old timey story:
http://www.stltoday.com/blogzone/life-tech/privacy/2010/01/facebook-running-into-trouble-in-canada-over-privacy-issues/#comment-1396

As far a comment harvesting and only choosing the intelligent comments: We may pick on the stupid ones too if only to dilute the trite amount of ignorance to life ratio there is out there.

ie… People who sound like this: “Ahhhh!!! I’m mad because everyone else is!!! But I really don’t know why!!! I’m so mad I’m going to join a group of other stupid angry people who are being manipulated by the ruling class to kill the progress that would benefit me!!! Making me angrier because there’s nothing there to help me!!!! Ahhhh!!!!”

Ef’ing vocally stupid people. They’re like cockroaches. Ugh.

Advertisements

Fedbook: They Sold Your Ass Out… AGAIN!!!!!!

April 21, 2010

YOU’VE (we’ve) BEEN SOLD OUT

And so my lovelies, *It* has finally arrived.
Behold! Facebook’s new affront on your right to privacy!

Just a few short weeks ago Facebook announced a new way they’re going to sell you out to snake companies and at that time, they told us they hadn’t really thought about how, and if the we deserved an “opt out.” Sounds buzz-tastically familiar?


Well the news is here, and here it is!:



Let’s capture that exact fact in time:


And who exactly are these listed “partner sites”? You wont find that information in Facebook’s Site Governance profile or in their “Help Center.”

TECHNICAL USEFULNESS

If you’ve wondered where the cutting edge development has gone in Facebook’s technical usefulness, this is where the development has run off to: Facebook is no longer focused on making a worthwhile, trusty platform with the user in mind, they’re more interested in making a platform with the benefit of shit-ass companies in mind.

Oh technical usefulness! You cheating whore!

CRACKING THE CODE

In light of this news and Facebook’s attempt to sugar coat the truth, we here at Facebook Watchdog have spent a fortnight, tons, of time and “lots and lots of money” in cracking the OH SO FANTASTICALLY TOUGH CODE on Facebook’s new promotional explanation page.

We know this page says ONE thing, but we’ve figured out what it REALLY means. Have a look wont you!

“OPTING OUT”

So in the grand scheme of things, with this new announcement Facebook has indeed offered a convoluted “Opt-Out.” Last month they didn’t feel like they needed to give us one, this month they’ve provided their users a carefully worded choice to “Opt-Out” of Social Plugins – however you still can’t “Opt-Out” from the newly deemed, “Facebook Public Information.”

Anyway we went ahead and followed the steps of this very generous offer…

There you have it! Facebook’s new run on your privacy and your personal exploitation. We’re not surprised here given the company’s track record. It’ll be interesting what legalities, if any arise from this. We doubt the U.S. Government gives a shit about the user’s right since that shit’s all kinds of sold out to lobbies…

What exactly would a D.C. based Facebook lobby look like?

Happy Facebooking!!!!


Share: 6 Ways To Tell Your Employer To Stay The F*ck Out Of Your Personal Life

April 12, 2010

Last week Yahoo! “news” posted some queer ass excuse for a news story called “6 Career-Killing Facebook Mistakes.” The topic was actually on something even lamer than the Yahoo! “news” site called Invest-something or other. BTW, that’s how you know you’re getting duped, OK?

1. You’re reading Yahoo’s excuse for news and…
2. You’re reading something written for a publication with “Invest” in its company name.

Has anyone ever thought about how close Incest is to Invest, by one letter!? I digress. Today we are going to point out how Facebook and privacy have yet again met a new personal privacy challenge. Should your employer have anything to say about how you live your personal life?

It’s a critical question really. Should your shitty HR Rep be able to clip a photo of you beer bonging it at some party you crashed and use it against you? Think about it carefully. Is this a yes or no question? Could the answer be, “it depends?”

In our ideal world here at Facebook watchdog, to us, the answer should be no. In the most technical sense, no.
Your personal life is yours to do with what you want to do with it, regardless if someone posted a picture or story of any event, and your employer should put lid on it.

We thought a lot about the “yes,” “maybe” and “no” before we went with “no.” Let us explore the other two avenues of thought to shed some light on why we choose no.

Yes your employer should be able to stick their needley aardvark nose into your pile of personal life, and control you at that level as well.

Why? Because you are a representative of the company’s image and you’ve gone ahead and posted, or not posted, where it is that you work on your profile thereby perhaps threatening an unintentional defamation of your “oh so moral-ful bastion of ethereal goodness, sin free and excessively loving” company. They are pure, like Jesus. Why do you want to make Jesus cry?

You, YES YOU alone could be the only reason; THE VERY FIRST STAIN of horrendous proportions of which your helpless damsel of a company, will never be able to wash from her chaste bosom. Ahhh me. Tragedy in the making.

Sarcasm? Noooo us? Never. Just remember though – whatever it is that you’re doing outside of work, you’re still doing it for your company. Please be careful how you chug your beer, eat your sandwich, listen to your favorite music, give advice to your children, put your shoes on, take your shoes off, pet your cat, walk your dog, take a nap, or wipe your ass. All of that is rightfully the intellectual property of your employer if they so choose it. Don’t forget to kiss the mandatory portrait of your CEO in your home every time you come or go, and most importantly don’t forget to stand at attention before bed and recite your lifelong dedication to the cause of Capitalism in your very own private bedroom. Sounds like a dream! Where do we sign up?!

Maybe your employer should be able to control your personal life as well as your professional one.

Why? Well OK so maybe you are being careless about whatever it is you put up online. Maybe you should tone down your slutty porn videos and the photographs of your rainbow party. Maybe it isn’t the best idea to put video of your pierced genitalia online. Maybe posting whatever the hell it is you want to post, as freely as you want to post it, is honestly having a global effect on how assholes in “decision-making suits” perceive your right to privacy. All of the above is true enough to warrant a maybe.

If you can’t control yourself then maybe you do need your employer to babysit you and that’s sad.

Why we choose no.

We certainly don’t believe your employer should have a God damned say in what the fuck it is you do with your own time. Where does that invasion of privacy end? Surely you can’t believe them if they say, “Oh it ends at Facebook or MySpace.” Once that sort of invasion begins, and is considered to be all right-a-roony, where the hell does that sort of invasion stop?

Your company is a mini North Korea. There’s no democracy inside your company. When you walk through the doors of your office you leave all that wonderful fresh air and democracy outside. Thank goodness you live in the USA and have the freedom to find solitude in your private affairs, for now.

This is just another example of corporations taking every advantage they can to overstep their boundaries. And most importantly, do you want to pay for more complex rulings and laws to define this issue in, or most likely not in, the people’s favor? Maybe not.

Ohhhh maybe, you fickle thing you. Of the billion people in the world, how many don’t live life responsibly? I’m sure you know perhaps one or two out of 100 friends right? Well do you feel like your whole life should be controlled and watched based on the mistakes of a small percentage of genetically deficient? We didn’t think so either. Maybe has no place in this debate.

So in light of the topic, “6 Ways To Tell Your Employer To Stay The Fuck Out Of Your Personal Life,” we will finish up this opine with just that:

1. Inappropriate Pictures: “Look at them or don’t. What I do with my time surely will bite me in the ass when my mother see’s them but it sure as fuck isn’t any of your professional business. In fact don’t look at them you morally inept but easily offended tight ass. ”

2. Complaining About Your Current Job: “Yea that’s right. The way you manage the company into the ground doesn’t sit right with me and I’m sure if your share holders knew how fucking irresponsible and greedy you were, they’d probably complain too. In fact you might want to check their Facebook accounts to see if they are complaining and then go eat a dick.”

3. Posting Conflicting Information on Your Resume: “Why the fuck are you checking a Facebook account against a resumé? Is this how you check all company facts? You may as well run the company based on the HOW TO RUN A BUSINESS article on Wikipedia then. Seriously WTF? Aren’t you supposed to know how to do your job without referring to inaccurate records? Try this on for size – call the fucking references on the paper resume in your stupid hand! ”

4. Statuses You Wouldn’t Want Your Boss to See: “Unless my boss is my mother, IDGAF.”

5. Not Understanding Your Security Settings: “And? I’m more concerned about my security settings so my psycho ex’s don’t find me. If my employer is actually spending their 9 to 5 clicking through my profile in hopes that I forgot to hide something, like my psychotic ex’s do, then I think the issue is more why are people at your company stalking other people on Facebook during work? And if they’re doing this at home on their own personal time, that’s even more messed up. Settings are to control stalkers. Come on Capitalism, stop being a stalker. “

6. Losing by Association: “See all the above.”

And so…
I know we’re being snarky and assy in our 1 – 6 list but ultimately it’s meant to grab attention to the point.

The point being that any professional who openly admits to holding a Facebook post or account against a job applicant, is admitting to a serious invasion of personal privacy and ought to be sued. This sort of discrimination is illegal. We create resumes, portfolios and reference lists for a reason. There are laws in place that prevent your employer, or potential employer, from asking personal questions in a conversation with the list of referred. Facebook or any other sort of personal information beyond what we’re supposed to hand in at the interview, is legally barred and shouldn’t be held against you. End of story.

Shame on Yahoo! “news” and their butt buddies over at Invest-o-rama for missing the real point and “reporting” more garbage.

Happy Facebooking!


Fedbook: Facebook’s Interface Hates You

April 2, 2010

En route to going back all 6-years of posts on Facebook, poor Selma ran into a bold-faced lie.

There are no posts after March 09, you say?
Even though you’ve been posting since early 2005?!

Greedy Facebook sure doesn’t want to make managing your personal information simple.

Happy posting!


Share: The Erosion of Our Legal Protections

March 25, 2010

Today I am taking a break. No not really, I wish I could. Actually what I am doing today is sharing a well written explanation about how your apathy towards your Personal Privacy VS. the Government and Corporations is dangerous.

Read up! Zoe Kleinman knows it, Dr Kieron O’Hara, and you should too.

How online life distorts privacy rights for all

By Zoe Kleinman
Technology Reporter, BBC News
Page last updated at 11:08 GMT, Friday, 8 January 2010

People who post intimate details about their lives on the internet undermine everybody else’s right to privacy, claims an academic.

Dr Kieron O’Hara has called for people to be more aware of the impact on society of what they publish online.

“If you look at privacy in law, one important concept is a reasonable expectation of privacy,” he said.

“As more private lives are exported online, reasonable expectations are diminishing.”

The rise of social networking has blurred the boundaries of what can be considered private, he believes – making it less of a defence by law.

We live in an era that he terms “intimacy 2.0” – where people routinely share extremely personal information online.

“When our reasonable expectations diminish, as they have, by necessity our legal protection diminishes.”

Dr O’Hara, a senior research fellow in Electronics and Computer Science at the University of Southampton, gave the example of an embarrassing photo taken at a party.

A decade ago, he said, there would have been an assumption that it might be circulated among friends.

But now the assumption is that it may well end up on the internet and be viewed by strangers.

Raging debate

Privacy has long been a thorny issue but there were very few court cases until that of former motorsport boss Max Mosley in 2008.

Mr Mosley sued the News of the World over the publication in the newspaper of explicit photos of him secretly taken during an orgy.

He argued that the publication of the photos was an unwarranted breach of his privacy – and won.

Mr Mosley had taken steps to keep his private life private but Dr O’Hara’s concern is that other people’s disregard for privacy online will spill over into other walks of life.

As debates continue to rage over whether the new airport body scanners and CCTV are an infringement of privacy or useful protection, some argue that it already has.

“Recent security decisions have become a privacy discussion – but if security suffers, the community suffers,” Dr O’Hara said.

He was due to deliver his research paper at the annual Media Communication and Cultural Studies Association (Meccsa) conference held at the London School of Economics from 6-8 January.