War with Facebook

[Mr. Charles 22]

Jeez, political correctness strikes again.

[nodunit 397]

Nobody would have given a damn if he wasn't a celebrity of some description.

[mrcash2009 0]

All more micro monitored cases to justify and push monitoring and speech for "everyone".

Check the last 12 years or so, all its been is take largest worst case examples, plaster the media, blanket solution for it. When you actually look at the cases, they are either rare, or easily monitored to use but when put to a bigger picture are nothing compared to things said daily, although I dont see mass round ups of people doing any such things outside of those sites.

Simple really, social networking is a live monitoring fest and should be left well alone for anything more than puerile banter, if that, or just drop kicked altogether. Its all pretty ant social when you look at it.

People who fold arms and point and condone who also use it are also accepting being more monitored and in the firing line, the "line" drawn gets widened, then its you.

[Tonci87 163]

And again, this whole thing is stupid....

Let the police handle drug dealers, thieves and people who commit physical assaults instead of this.

[PELHAM 10]

Well the problem is the law is the law, the police have to enforce it. Not sure what he said but it must have been bad to get that level of sentence. His second mistake was to cry in the dock. They get papers in prison, the cons will know and 3/4 weeks is plenty time to be made someones bitch. So I guess if you live in the UK, don't drink and twitter and remain unemotional if you get caught and sentenced!

[dekster 1]

I'd pay for a social network site if my data wasn't shared with other.

I have facebook but I don't put that much information about me on it.

-edit: srry was about 16 pages retarded-

Edited March 29, 2012 by Dekster

[mrcash2009 0]

I'd pay for a social network site if my data wasn't shared with other.

Pay!? Why when you have facebook to whore your identity and thoughts and personal conversations, inform on others with face recognition in photos and give out names without consent, and then attach to apps on smart device permanently online using apps that you never security check!!?! All for absolutely free!!!! :)

There will be no social network site on the internet that wont be backed in some way for data mining. I said it before, its much like someone coming to your door and saying "Can I have all your information, give it to me in a box so its private" which no one would entertain. Yet people will do the same from PC to a server they know nothing of, where its located, much about the laws that's under, and who does have access regardless of "front end" security tick boxes.

But that's the thing, its how its packaged.

Its got to a stage now that people have to insert private things into a database on line along side the real world as a matter of procedure "I have just dont this at this location on the planet, I must log it permanently on a database right now!".

Edited March 29, 2012 by mrcash2009

[st_dux 26]

You know you really don't need to provide that much information to use Facebook, right? I'm pretty sure all that is required is a name, an email address and a birthday (the latter two you can then hide); the rest is optional.

[mrcash2009 0]

You know you really don't need to provide that much information to use Facebook, right? I'm pretty sure all that is required is a name, an email address and a birthday (the latter two you can then hide); the rest is optional.

Indeed, but tell that to the club 13 (ish) -25 demographic, they have had enough early years to realise, they have children and so on who wont see it that way. But the mind game is, who wants to use facebook if you are hiding almost everything?

[Egodraco 11]

I never gonna sign um to douchebook. This have convinced me for granted.

[abs 2]

Amidst the recent "Employers asking for facebook credentials" craze, this post is refreshing. It illustrates how two interviewees dealt with a nosey corporation.

http://raganwald.posterous.com/i-hereby-resign

Abs

[Tonci87 163]

I like it :)

[mrcash2009 0]

Its true that this "judgement" approach is backwards and not going forwards.

Its much like cosmetics and fashion industry, setting a bar where they narrow the search lesser and lesser becuase of micro profiling to the point that its not a natural process at all. So you have a lot of people not getting work where in a lot of cases they would have. Image a number of years back you go for an interview and were asked the questions and details they can look at online these days through these sites, you would be offended by it.

I think if we background checked as a public who we have in the political arena and micro profile them we would crash the sytem pretty fast and start new, but then as most higher levels are aware of all of this you wont see them whoring data online so much.

[mrcash2009 0]

Szs5DNWdYRE#!

Take it as you find it, but it also highlights the Algorithm aspect of what Walker likes to link about :)

In more general terms of "Personalisation".

[Tonci87 163]

Interesting, might indeed become a problem...

[mrcash2009 0]

Yeh its a funny one isn't it. Its almost like setting up a barrier so you only then get what you asked for but then also narrowed down in the process. You could say its a form of censoring for yourself with the Algorithms & software making many adjustments under the hood.

Its a shame that people now feel the net should be like this, it should be a case of find what you want rather than house yourself into a corner of the web and have it serve up things through "tools". At least he was clear in that video than some general rant session you sometimes get that puts people off :)

[mrcash2009 0]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2125102/Is-life-Facebook-New-laws-considered-make-social-networks-estate.html

New legislation is being debated in the U.S to give relatives and friends the authority to manage social networking accounts belonging to their deceased loved ones, essentially making the site contents part of a person’s digital estate.

Edited April 5, 2012 by mrcash2009

[batto 17]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2125102/Is-life-Facebook-New-laws-considered-make-social-networks-estate.html

Hmm. I wonder how will they enforce it on social network sites hosted outside US. Also I wonder how would it affect my little social network in Quake Live :confused: ... Or maybe "social network" is now just alias for Facebook (because Google+ is currently free of pedophiles I guess :p).

[mrcash2009 0]

Im not entirely sure, but I can imagine it will follow suite later on like most of these things.

If had family pass away and everything on facebook I would remove all but a picture and a respectful message if anything, back up any photos local and let that be.

[mrcash2009 0]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17730266

Facebook supports Cispa cyber-security bill

Facebook says that it will "continue to safeguard personal information"

Facebook says it is backing a new cyber-security bill due before US Congress later this month.

The HR 3523 Act would enable the government to access web users' private data on suspicion of a cyber threat.

j6BKU9mCnn0

Edited April 18, 2012 by mrcash2009

[mrcash2009 0]

Thought I would place it here as its in ref to Social Networking:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2150281/REVEALED-Hundreds-words-avoid-using-online-dont-want-government-spying-you.html

Revealed: Hundreds of words to avoid using online if you don't want the government spying on you (and they include 'pork', 'cloud' and 'Mexico')

• Department of Homeland Security forced to release list following freedom of information request
  
• Agency insists it only looks for evidence of genuine threats to the U.S. and not for signs of general dissent
  
  

In red was the most interesting.

"Some" keywords are priceless like ... "Social Media" .. Weather & Disaster & Cyber security get the award for most paranoid, yet apparently we are supposedly paranoid. Obviously there is acting on this in relation to something stronger, but lets face it .. its all "in place". Telling sign is most of them are to do with public concerns keywords esp health section, interesting how those are things to "look out for" in reference to terror <<< ooh look I posted a naughty word.

Click spoiler for images of keywords from the article:

Edited May 27, 2012 by mrcash2009

[PELHAM 10]

ROFL, I pity the poor soul whose job it is to read facebook pages. It's not about spying at all, it's a list quoted out of context from the 'DHS - National Operations Center - Media Monitoring Capability Desktop Reference Binder'.

Available to read here:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/82701103/Analyst-Desktop-Binder-REDACTED

They monitor radio, TV, internet news and social networking sites for information relating to developing emergency situations or natural disasters. It's a list of suggested search terms to use to find info from those blogging about an event they may be witnessing. It was set up after the Hurricane Katrina controversy when DHS was accused of not responding quickly enough. They struggled to get a coherent picture of what was happening on the ground.

The NOC issues an alert when there is a disaster / event that may require federal assistance, the media analysts are alerted and start searching media sources for info. The attempt to portray this as spying is laughable tabloid journalism.

Edited May 27, 2012 by PELHAM

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

Pretty obvious it's a CIA front-running op - though you have to somehow catalog the livestock on this planet, thus ensuring survival of Mankind, seeing as we're nearing peak vital-resources and it will be increasingly harder to profile and control groups, as numbers increase further.

[mrcash2009 0]

Gatekeeper Pelham rides again.

:party:

You cover but one catagory .. and :

ROFL, I pity the poor soul whose job it is to read facebook pages.

Oh no not that simplified 'argument' "thing" again, yawn.

[PELHAM 10]

mrcash posts some crap he found on the internet and didn't check it, again. Busted your conspiracy theory in 3 mins simply by following the reference link in the website you quoted. FPDR I didn't have to dig any further than the information you provided, did you even bother reading it?

This link that I provided above is in the 4th paragraph of your Daily Mail article:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/82701103/Analyst-Desktop-Binder-REDACTED

It is quite clearly a procedure for media analysis in the event of an emergency or natural disaster.

Edited May 27, 2012 by PELHAM