Google Plus

[MuffinMan]

Do people not know that friends could see their activity before they just had to click on your name first. Now it's in a ticker and people are pissed?

[Selby]

Do people not know that friends could see their activity before they just had to click on your name first. Now it's in a ticker and people are pissed?

Yeah, I'm not getting all the rage that's going on.  Nothing has really changed, it just presents what was already there in a different manner.  While I find the "top stories" vs. "recent updates" annoying, it seems to have gotten the clue that I don't want anything to be a top story as it hasn't put any new ones in 2-3 days now.

[Xanthippe]

Actually, quite a bit has changed, in the sense that if you are at certain sites and logged into Facebook, you no longer hit the 'like' button to share interesting things, everything is automatically shared - what you read, what you listen to, what you watch.  I think this is limited to 'partner' sites such as Spotify, Netflix and the Washington Post for now.

I suppose the key here is to not be constantly on Facebook.  But why anyone would want everyone to know everything they do on the internet is beyond me.  I read plenty of articles, for example, but don't endorse that point of view, and hence, wouldn't share with anyone. 

Also, while I loved the feature in Napster (when it launched) where you could see other users' music collections, I really don't give a shit what my friends are listening to, since music is not a commonality with my friends.  My friends span decades in ages and are miles apart culturally and politically, often.  I'd rather find out what people I don't know but share tastes with are listening to, than what my friends are listening to.  So that's completely worthless to me.

Too much sharing is bad.  Sometimes, (maybe even often), the more you know about someone, the less you like them.

It can be damaging as well to share too much, and I'm not even talking about sharing risky or outlier behaviors, but such a thing as political party, for example.  I live in an intolerant community (that prides itself on tolerance, ironically).  People who are considered to not have the correct beliefs are discriminated again (pointed out, talked about, and so on).  There are people who refuse to patronize certain businesses because of this. 

I wouldn't expect a 27 year old who has never had to look for a job (like Mark Zuckerberg) to understand any of this.

[naum]

[MuffinMan]

Actually, quite a bit has changed, in the sense that if you are at certain sites and logged into Facebook, you no longer hit the 'like' button to share interesting things, everything is automatically shared - what you read, what you listen to, what you watch.  I think this is limited to 'partner' sites such as Spotify, Netflix and the Washington Post for now.

I suppose the key here is to not be constantly on Facebook.  But why anyone would want everyone to know everything they do on the internet is beyond me.  I read plenty of articles, for example, but don't endorse that point of view, and hence, wouldn't share with anyone.  

Also, while I loved the feature in Napster (when it launched) where you could see other users' music collections, I really don't give a shit what my friends are listening to, since music is not a commonality with my friends.  My friends span decades in ages and are miles apart culturally and politically, often.  I'd rather find out what people I don't know but share tastes with are listening to, than what my friends are listening to.  So that's completely worthless to me.

Too much sharing is bad.  Sometimes, (maybe even often), the more you know about someone, the less you like them. The problem lies in having douchebag friends, not facebook itself, imo.

It can be damaging as well to share too much, and I'm not even talking about sharing risky or outlier behaviors, but such a thing as political party, for example.  I live in an intolerant community (that prides itself on tolerance, ironically).  People who are considered to not have the correct beliefs are discriminated again (pointed out, talked about, and so on).  There are people who refuse to patronize certain businesses because of this.  

I wouldn't expect a 27 year old who has never had to look for a job (like Mark Zuckerberg) to understand any of this.

Then don't do any of this. Turn it all off. If a friend is oversharing then hide their shit or unfriend them.

[TripleDES]

graph

Not exactly a great metric, if you care the slightest about quality.

[Xanthippe]

Too much sharing is bad.  Sometimes, (maybe even often), the more you know about someone, the less you like them.

The problem lies in having douchebag friends, not facebook itself, imo.

Then don't do any of this. Turn it all off. If a friend is oversharing then hide their shit or unfriend them.

No, the problem does not lie in having douchebag friends, although I do have some of those.  The problem is that my friends are a large and disparate group, which tends to happen over decades of living.  Some of my Facebook friends are internet-only friends, while others I went to kindergarten with.  Some are elderly relatives.  Some are mere acquaintances.  Some are former coworkers, some are former employers.

Some of those people are connected to people who I haven't yet met, but might have a future connection with.

So yeah, I'm sure I will end up not using it as a result. 

My point is that Facebook is becoming such a clusterfuck of oversharing and uselessness that with each "improvement" it becomes less useful to me.  Facebook needs to not only figure out how it can be useful to advertisers and to Facebook shareholders, but primarily how those uses don't fuck up the users.

[MuffinMan]

I don't disagree with your point at all, I guess it's more that I just don't care. If a feature is added that I don't use, and it doesn't fundamentally change how facebook works for me, then it doesn't bother me.

[Soulflame]

Facebook and google+ are both in the business of scraping as much information about you as possible in order to serve targeted ads.  Being angry at Facebook or google+ for expanding the amount of information they can scrape about you is ridiculous.  It's the entire point of the app.

I've come pretty close to ignoring google+ (and have never signed up to facebook) but the past week or so some people have been posting a bit more.

[Tale]

Actually, quite a bit has changed, in the sense that if you are at certain sites and logged into Facebook, you no longer hit the 'like' button to share interesting things, everything is automatically shared - what you read, what you listen to, what you watch.  I think this is limited to 'partner' sites such as Spotify, Netflix and the Washington Post for now.

When Facebook got integrated into other sites, I unchecked the automatic login box. I just have my browser save my password, and click "login" when I use Facebook, then my new habit is to click "logout" when I leave it.

There's no way I want Facebook to follow what I do on the internet, even if it's just reading a news site.

[Sand]

And again the problem people are bitching about isnt that their friends are spamming them with useless updates, its that facebook is sharing more info about what you are doing on facebook (comments on pictures or walls, liking things, etc) and there is no way to not share this info in the new ticker.
For example- Im a married man. Before if i 'liked' an ex-girlfriends photo it would show up on my wall. If i didnt want the wife to see it i could simply delete that action off my wall. Now it shows up instantly on the ticker and there is no way to stop it. This is what has people pissed off.

[MuffinMan]

It shows up on your wife's ticker only if she can see your ex's photos. I bet she looks through your ex's profile regularly anyways to see what you are hiding from her.

[Xanthippe]

It shows up on your wife's ticker only if she can see your ex's photos. I bet she looks through your ex's profile regularly anyways to see what you are hiding from her.

The problem arises if any of your friends have their privacy setting to 'Friends of friends' or 'Public" - which is what Facebook defaults to, so if a person has never set their privacy options, they are set to one of these (I forget which).

A person ought to be able to control his own privacy settings.  Currently, it does not work that way, not completely.

[MuffinMan]

I guess I'm just an outlier with social networks. If I add someone as a friend, it doesn't bother me that they can see what I'm liking or commenting on because I consider them a friend. If they don't care to see what I'm doing, they can lessen what they are seeing within their own settings. If I want to comment on something that is Public and I don't want the public or whatever setting to see then I just don't comment because I know that it is public.

[NowhereMan]

The default setting of friends of friends is pretty apt in terms of the sort of things Facebook does that most people don't realise and can have impacts. One example I know of is a few people I know who are teachers at a boys school and for the last couple of years it hasn't been too uncommon for teachers to add one or two of the leavers that they've gotten on well with for general staying in contact purposes. This is fine as they're no longer pupils and, presumably, not going to be around the school again. The problem is if the teachers haven't set their status from friends of friends to friends only then suddenly any present pupils who have these leavers added also get full access to the teachers' profiles.

Personally I wouldn't be adding kids I knew anyway but it's an honest mistake that came quite close to costing someone their job.

[Tale]

It seems my "staying logged out of Facebook" policy doesn't make any difference: Facebook tracks you even after logging out.

Whenever you visit a web page that contains a Facebook button or widget, your browser is still sending details of your movements back to Facebook, Cubrilovic says.

"Even if you are logged out, Facebook still knows and can track every page you visit," Cubrilovic wrote in a blog post.

"The only solution is to delete every Facebook cookie in your browser, or to use a separate browser for Facebook interactions."

The findings come after technology industry observer Dave Winer declared Facebook was scaring him because the new interface for third-party developers allows them to post items to your Facebook feed without your intervention. This has been dubbed "frictionless sharing".

[KallDrexx]

It seems that when you are like me and 99% use Facebook through your phone, you can ignore almost all the rage.  I haven't noticed any changes here and I still have a somewhat enjoyable FB experience since I do it all through my phone.

[Der Helm]

So, how do I go about filling up my freshly made F13 circle with your precious personal data ?   

[naum]

The findings come after technology industry observer Dave Winer declared Facebook was scaring him because the new interface for third-party developers allows them to post items to your Facebook feed without your intervention. This has been dubbed "frictionless sharing".

Oh, the irony.

Dave Winer ran weblogs.com without a privacy policy for years and then sold all user ping data to Verisign for $2 million.

[MuffinMan]

So, how do I go about filling up my freshly made F13 circle with your precious personal data ?   

You don't find us, we find you.

You can find a few if you search for "f13" under people. After you add a couple I'm sure more will come up as friend suggestions.

[Der Helm]

So, how do I go about filling up my freshly made F13 circle with your precious personal data ?   

You don't find us, we find you.

You can find a few if you search for "f13" under people. After you add a couple I'm sure more will come up as friend suggestions.

I found Raph.... and ...some people... I think.

[Sand]

So, how do I go about filling up my freshly made F13 circle with your precious personal data ?   

You don't find us, we find you.

You can find a few if you search for "f13" under people. After you add a couple I'm sure more will come up as friend suggestions.

I found Raph.... and ...some people... I think.

There is also an f13 Facebook group.

[Xanthippe]

Now to use Spotify, you must log in using your Facebook ID - and Spotify automatically shares everything you listen to on Facebook.

Here's how to turn it off.

Too much sharing is bad. 

[Jherad]

I use spotify regularly, and it hasn't forced me to link with facebook. It did prompt me recently to do so, but I just clicked 'no thanks'.

[HaemishM]

Yeah, apparently Spotify shares your shit with Facebook even if you never told it to.

[01101010]

Yeah, apparently Spotify shares your shit with Facebook even if you never told it to.

You mean you have to opt-out?? 

I am shocked! SHOCKED I SAY!

 

[Jherad]

Yeah, apparently Spotify shares your shit with Facebook even if you never told it to.

Ah, I see what's going on. Just followed the links a bit further:

According to a Spotify representative: "New accounts require Facebook to log in and this is a worldwide initiative.

My account predates this, so I wasn't forced to link. This is pretty horrible.

[Xuri]

So, how do I go about filling up my freshly made F13 circle with your precious personal data ?   

You don't find us, we find you.

You can find a few if you search for "f13" under people. After you add a couple I'm sure more will come up as friend suggestions.

The problem is that unless f13 is mentioned anywhere in the profiles of the people who pop up as suggestions, there's no way of tell who they are. :P

[MahrinSkel]

It seems that when you are like me and 99% use Facebook through your phone, you can ignore almost all the rage.  I haven't noticed any changes here and I still have a somewhat enjoyable FB experience since I do it all through my phone.

Did you check what the latest version of the FB app wanted permissions for?  Basically everything, including your texts, browser history, physical location, and call log.

--Dave

[KallDrexx]

Did you check what the latest version of the FB app wanted permissions for?  Basically everything, including your texts, browser history, physical location, and call log.

--Dave

I don't use Android, I have a Windows Phone, and I don't even use the FB app, I use the built in FB news feed viewer functionality.

[MahrinSkel]

I don't use Android, I have a Windows Phone, and I don't even use the FB app, I use the built in FB news feed viewer functionality.

So it didn't have to ask you for permission.

--Dave (if it's not providing that info, soon FB will break that utility so you have to use their app)

[KallDrexx]

So it didn't have to ask you for permission.

--Dave (if it's not providing that info, soon FB will break that utility so you have to use their app)

No, all the integrated "people" application, created by MS and installed as an integral part of the phone, does is download your news feed and show the entries along with twitter, linked in, and MSN news feeds.  It does have the ability to send data back to FB (such as to check in) but you have to explicitly give it access to the location service API for that to work, which I have disabled.  The access to the location service APIs does not have to be granted for normal application usage, and application's can't grant access themselves.

In regards to getting access to texts, browser history, and my call log, it did not ask permission because I am pretty sure it's locked down like iOS is, where no public APIs are available to access this information. 

[MahrinSkel]

This seemed appropriate:



--Dave

[slog]

So, is this really going to compete well with Facebook, or is it another Google thing that would be forgotten about in a few months?

I still have the same question.  Thoughts?

[Numtini]

I reactivated my account and the only active people I know on it are either posting everything to everything through a third party program or they work for google. They released too early and made some mistakes, like the real name thing. Why switch from FB if Google is just as evil?

I don't see it going anywhere.