7 ms·

Facebook Reveals New Security Settings Amid Privacy Concerns

58 points by lambda_lover 8y ago

prolikewhoa 8y ago
Who is ever going to trust that these settings actually do anything except for the button animation after the previous two weeks of privacy disaster for Facebook? Probably most of the country, actually. =\ Mark my words, their stock price goes right back to $180 over the next two weeks.
- djohnston 8y ago
  people who don't wear tinfoil hats
  - jimejim 8y ago
    That's kind of a silly comment when we have proof that Facebook's poor design lead to abuse.
    - djohnston 8y ago
      there's a distinction between abuse from a third party and outright lying on the part of fb. suggesting that deleting data leads to nothing more than a CSS animation is asserting the latter.
      - rhacker 8y ago
        I think the reality is that data will no longer "look" like it's in the data download, I'm sure FB will keep it to continue performing ML algorithms to pursue more and more ad revenue. Hopefully they will at least remove the code that is collecting it so that it stops in the future. No tin foil hat needed to believe this route.
      - dbt00 8y ago
        “Delete this (from my visible feed)” might be the effect that you see, but that doesn’t mean it’s not still being used to feed your advertising profile or shared in some way with third parties.
  - pessimizer 8y ago
    or read the newspaper
- dleslie 8y ago
  Facebook users are still the product, and information about them is still what brings Facebook revenue. Let's say a user makes these settings as strict as feasible, but only some or none of their contacts do the same; in that, the default and common case, the information about the concerned user may still exist in some form.
kennu 8y ago
What's really needed is a way to delete old data in batches, like "delete everything I've posted over 1 year ago". Currently you have to delete thousands of individual items (like played Spotify songs) one-by-one, using a tediously slow and inconvenient UI that individually confirms each delete.
- atonse 8y ago
  I actually started researching this. How come someone hasn't built an app that uses the Graph API to delete these things for you? Even a delete script on Github. I just haven't found anything. Or do the APIs just not exist? The best I found were Greasemonkey scripts, and I'm just not going to do that.
  - kennu 8y ago
    I believe Facebook's Graph API intentionally does not support DELETE actions. I've had best success with a Chrome plugin called Social Book Post Manager, but it's not particularly fast or reliable either. At least it's able to delete something.
    - StavrosK 8y ago
      That's right, it doesn't. Or, at least, it doesn't support DELETE actions for things that weren't created by the app that's trying to delete them. I tried to do that very thing, but it only half-works for Twitter, because FB doesn't give you access: https://forgetme.stavros.io/ https://forgetme.stavros.io/
    - Jaruzel 8y ago
      A couple of years ago Facebook removed all of the API endpoints that allowed you to create or modify your own data.
- cobrabyte 8y ago
  Check out the 'Social Book Post Manager' Chrome extension. It automates the deletion of posts. https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/social-book-post-manager/ljfidlkcmdmmibngdfikhffffdmphjae https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/social-book-post-m...
jonahhorowitz 8y ago
The real question is: will they let me delete all the call logs, address books, and SMS data they've scraped off my android phones over the years? If they do, will it actually be deleted? How long will it take to be removed from all backups?
- rmc 8y ago
  GDPR comes in in May. That's the interesting development
  - azinman2 8y ago
    What’s gdpr
    - grinsekatze 8y ago
      General Data Protection Regulation. I can't wait for it ... and to see how facebook handles all delete requests.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
- rock_hard 8y ago
  The answer is: Yes, as soon as you opt out of sharing this information FB will delete it
- ggregoire 8y ago
  Nothing is deleted, it's only a boolean in a table.
  - FilterSweep 8y ago
    "IsDeleted"'s existence is the biggest lie tech companies tell media government and consumers alike.
    - 8y ago
mtgx 8y ago
Again, it wasn't "amid privacy concerns". It was because they were trying to be compliant with EU's upcoming GDPR regulation: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-facebook-sandberg-privacy/facebook-to-hand-privacy-controls-to-users-ahead-of-eu-law-idUSKBN1FC1Q6 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-facebook-sandberg-privacy...
glbrew 8y ago
The real problem is data collected about you from other people. For example all of my lesser friends install the android facebook app which gives them tons of information about me from my interactions with them. I need a way to tell facebook to delete and not collect data about me from other people's devices.
macspoofing 8y ago
Here's a good security/privacy option: Provide a fully featured HTML5 app (specifically one that allows you to access the inbox). Then there is no reason to install the native app or messenger.
- intrasight 8y ago
  I only use my browser to use FB. But I don't message with Messenger - I use phone's native text message feature.
  - macspoofing 8y ago
    I'd still like to access the Facebook Inbox when I'm on my phone and using the Facebook web page. Right now it forces you to the messenger native app.
- aylmao 8y ago
  http://mbasic.facebook.com http://mbasic.facebook.com Doesn't seem to work on iOS (at least on iOS 11, it redirects to the normal mobile site that asks you to install Messenger) but it works on Android.
grinsekatze 8y ago
Even if they offered a delete button any time before GDPR comes into effect I would not trust and use it. I also don't like the idea of using one of those chrome extensions mentioned here. To me, currently this is synonymous to hiding everything they have on me from myself. But doing this after May 25 would mean I definitely want it gone for good and if they don't fully delete what I manually remove, I expect them to get themselves into trouble.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- g_p 8y ago
  > But doing this after May 25 would mean I definitely want it gone for good and if they don't fully delete what I manually remove, I expect them to get themselves into trouble. You're technically right here, but it seems at present that most companies won't be complying with this for quite some time (perhaps an opportunity for some litigations?) Backups appear to be the "black hole" in GDPR, as nobody spent the 2 years actually planning and preparing. Therefore, most people I've spoken to are planning to simply add a "gdpr_deleted" flag to each row in the database, and set it to true when it happens. They don't return those rows in queries. The inter-dependent nature of many databases (you shared a post with 10 users, you delete your account now, FB wants to retain the view records), coupled with nobody taking GDPR seriously until the last minute, means we'll likely see "soft deletes" for quite some time. It would be interesting though to make a GDPR request to companies for data held specifically on backups, and held in databases records that would normally not be shown (i.e. these hidden records), as that could get them in trouble if you could prove they lied!
  - greenleafjacob 8y ago
    > Backups appear to be the "black hole" in GDPR To delete backed up data, first encrypt the data with a key. To delete the data, delete the encryption key, leaving your "backed up data" meaningless bits.
lukewrites 8y ago
They absolutely did not "reveal new security settings" – they revamped the security settings menu & page. From the article: > Facebook announced on Wednesday that it’s redesigning the settings menu on mobile devices, consolidating privacy options in one place, rather than sending users to some 20 different screens There is no indication in the article that they are allowing users more control over their data, and fb remain free to do what they will with your data once you sign up for their service. This does nothing to resolve the problem that people are up in arms about: > Under the revamp, users still won’t be able to delete data that they had given third-party apps on the platform previously, even if it was used for reasons other than what was agreed to. That data, generated over years of games and personality quizzes that had access to private information, is largely still stored outside of Facebook’s grasp by the private individuals and companies that built those applications.
- TheSpiceIsLife 8y ago
  > users still won’t be able to delete data that they had given third-party apps ... is largely still stored outside of Facebook’s grasp by the private individuals and companies that built those applications. I don't believe it's possible to resolve that problem.
- lambda_lover 8y ago
  It's pathetic to see a slight decrease in dark UX referred to as "new security settings". Oh, so they moved some stuff around in the settings menu? Call me back when they actually give you a link to delete your profile (seriously, there is none in the settings. There's only "deactivate" and "delete your profile after you die" -- even though both of those appear in a "delete" section. "New Security Settings" implies that I'm given options I didn't have before. That does not seem to be the case here.
galieos_ghost 8y ago
What's amazing to me is how the media can stir the public into a fever pitch with such ease. I've told people about FB and Google data collection for years and nobody cared, at least not until the talking heads told them to care. What FB does is innocuous compared to the CIA vault7 leaks, and yet the media shoved that down the memory hole. The real question is why is this being pushed now when literally of this has been public info for years?
- parliament32 8y ago
  It's just part of the media machine. FB is currently the "bad guy" so any media agency who can push the narrative is rewarded with more user attention. This has a huge snowball effect and will result in FB getting hammered into the ground until a more interesting antagonist comes around. Another interesting "bad guy" right now is Russia -- justified or not, notice how media outlets are trying their hardest to find any Russian links whatsoever to every bit of political news, even things completely unrelated. For instance, try searching for "cambridge analytica russia" and look at the number of results.
- aylmao 8y ago
  > I've told people about FB and Google data collection for years and nobody cared, at least not until the talking heads told them to care. > What FB does is innocuous compared to the CIA vault7 leaks, and yet the media shoved that down the memory hole. But it's Facebook controlling your mind! They know what you like and can manipulate you with that! \s > The real question is why is this being pushed now when literally of this has been public info for years? I have a theory it's the recent shift in Newsfeed reducing news and increasing friend's posts. It was reported earlier that there were tensions between Zukerberg and Murdoch over ad revenue [1]. Wouldn't surprise me if other media magnates feel the same way. [1]: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/12/facebook-rupert-murdoch-threatened-mark-zuckerberg-in-2016-with-a-war.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/12/facebook-rupert-murdoch-thre...
feelin_googley 8y ago
"The Facebook Privacy Setting That Doesn't Do Anything at All 'I really can't make sense of it.' Gergely Biczok, CrySys Lab" https://www.wired.com/story/facebook-privacy-setting-doesnt-do-anything/ https://www.wired.com/story/facebook-privacy-setting-doesnt-...
benevol 8y ago
F#ck the hypocrites at Facebook. That's all.
quadrangle 8y ago
What I want is to download my history including the external links I posted. But they seem to not include that stuff. I'm sure they tracked which links I posted, but they don't consider that part of the private data I'd own in any way, so it's not there in the download. Which I means I can't find that article I stupidly posted to FB and forgot to bookmark otherwise…
bogomipz 8y ago
>"“Last week showed how much more work we need to do to enforce our policies and help people understand how Facebook works and the choices they have over their data,” Facebook Chief Privacy Officer Erin Egan and Deputy General Counsel Ashlie Beringer wrote. Facebook Chief Privacy Officer. Now there's a job title. Seriously what does a Chief Privacy Officer at FB do? What are the responsibilities of a Privacy Officer at a company whose entire existence is predicated on their users having no privacy? Here's 15 years worth of their boss's views on privacy: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/21/facebook-ceo-mark-zuckerbergs-statements-on-privacy-2003-2018.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/21/facebook-ceo-mark-zuckerberg...
nopacience 8y ago
Something curious about facebook is, they let anyone access user profile/pages (or whatever it is called), so visitor can see the user profile picture and might be able to see other stuff. Facebook "protects" the privacy of the "visitor" because the user cannot see what visitors have visited their profiles. So, users have no privacy, but visitors have their privacy protected. Facebook should list "who" visited user profiles. I dont know why they dont do this already. And even more, they could somehow list what photos the visitor chose to see, how long visitor stayed on user profile, which 'full resolution pictures' visitor had downloaded. If they only saw thumbnails then no need to list, but if visitor made the effort to download all full resolution user pictures then the owner of those pictures should be able to see who has downloaded them. So this way, the user would be able to see how frequently visitor X, Y, Z has stayed on their profiles, and how many/which full res pictures they have downloaded/seen. If the user profile is not a person, but a store, then the store would be able to benefit from this data and send some message saying "We noticed you have been visiting us lately, and you seem to have a lot of intrest in product X. Do you want to know the price or make an offer?" Or, if the user is a person and has seen weird behaviour from weird users, then user would be able to take precautions. So in the end, the user profiles are public and have no privacy. But the visitors/consumer of other people profiles can snoop on other lifes and have their privacy protected because the page they visited is never able to know they have been visited by visitor X Ntimes.
- aylmao 8y ago
  This is a pretty interesting proposition. I'm personally not a fan of the store idea --I'd rather be able to visit business pages anonymously and not get messages from them-- but I actually think seeing who has seen your profile could be a good idea, especially in the realm of the picture download/viewing.
- eezurr 8y ago
  I dont see FB implementing that because the more information people have about how their profiles are viewed (and used), the more it's going to polarize their user base. I think people will fall under two categories. Group 1: They want attention, followers, etc. Facebook becomes more like Instagram (which is redundant) Group 2: They want privacy and a place to connect with peers, but that "profile use" knowledge will prevent them from sharing their lives on Facebook further more. Also, I think people have the right to view publicly posted information and photos without being monitored by the poster. Information overload, irrational responses, reactionary culture, and all that.

58 points by lambda_lover 8y ago

Who is ever going to trust that these settings actually do anything except for the button animation after the previous two weeks of privacy disaster for Facebook? Probably most of the country, actually. =\ Mark my words, their stock price goes right back to $180 over the next two weeks.

djohnston 8y ago
people who don't wear tinfoil hats
- jimejim 8y ago
  That's kind of a silly comment when we have proof that Facebook's poor design lead to abuse.
  - djohnston 8y ago
    there's a distinction between abuse from a third party and outright lying on the part of fb. suggesting that deleting data leads to nothing more than a CSS animation is asserting the latter.
    - rhacker 8y ago
      I think the reality is that data will no longer "look" like it's in the data download, I'm sure FB will keep it to continue performing ML algorithms to pursue more and more ad revenue. Hopefully they will at least remove the code that is collecting it so that it stops in the future. No tin foil hat needed to believe this route.
    - dbt00 8y ago
      “Delete this (from my visible feed)” might be the effect that you see, but that doesn’t mean it’s not still being used to feed your advertising profile or shared in some way with third parties.
- pessimizer 8y ago
  or read the newspaper
dleslie 8y ago
Facebook users are still the product, and information about them is still what brings Facebook revenue. Let's say a user makes these settings as strict as feasible, but only some or none of their contacts do the same; in that, the default and common case, the information about the concerned user may still exist in some form.

kennu 8y ago

What's really needed is a way to delete old data in batches, like "delete everything I've posted over 1 year ago". Currently you have to delete thousands of individual items (like played Spotify songs) one-by-one, using a tediously slow and inconvenient UI that individually confirms each delete.

atonse 8y ago
I actually started researching this. How come someone hasn't built an app that uses the Graph API to delete these things for you? Even a delete script on Github. I just haven't found anything. Or do the APIs just not exist? The best I found were Greasemonkey scripts, and I'm just not going to do that.
- kennu 8y ago
  I believe Facebook's Graph API intentionally does not support DELETE actions. I've had best success with a Chrome plugin called Social Book Post Manager, but it's not particularly fast or reliable either. At least it's able to delete something.
  - StavrosK 8y ago
    That's right, it doesn't. Or, at least, it doesn't support DELETE actions for things that weren't created by the app that's trying to delete them. I tried to do that very thing, but it only half-works for Twitter, because FB doesn't give you access: https://forgetme.stavros.io/ https://forgetme.stavros.io/
  - Jaruzel 8y ago
    A couple of years ago Facebook removed all of the API endpoints that allowed you to create or modify your own data.
cobrabyte 8y ago
Check out the 'Social Book Post Manager' Chrome extension. It automates the deletion of posts. https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/social-book-post-manager/ljfidlkcmdmmibngdfikhffffdmphjae https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/social-book-post-m...

jonahhorowitz 8y ago

The real question is: will they let me delete all the call logs, address books, and SMS data they've scraped off my android phones over the years? If they do, will it actually be deleted? How long will it take to be removed from all backups?

rmc 8y ago
GDPR comes in in May. That's the interesting development
- azinman2 8y ago
  What’s gdpr
  - grinsekatze 8y ago
    General Data Protection Regulation. I can't wait for it ... and to see how facebook handles all delete requests.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
rock_hard 8y ago
The answer is: Yes, as soon as you opt out of sharing this information FB will delete it
ggregoire 8y ago
Nothing is deleted, it's only a boolean in a table.
- FilterSweep 8y ago
  "IsDeleted"'s existence is the biggest lie tech companies tell media government and consumers alike.
  - 8y ago

mtgx 8y ago

Again, it wasn't "amid privacy concerns". It was because they were trying to be compliant with EU's upcoming GDPR regulation: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-facebook-sandberg-privacy/facebook-to-hand-privacy-controls-to-users-ahead-of-eu-law-idUSKBN1FC1Q6 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-facebook-sandberg-privacy...

glbrew 8y ago

The real problem is data collected about you from other people. For example all of my lesser friends install the android facebook app which gives them tons of information about me from my interactions with them. I need a way to tell facebook to delete and not collect data about me from other people's devices.

macspoofing 8y ago

Here's a good security/privacy option: Provide a fully featured HTML5 app (specifically one that allows you to access the inbox). Then there is no reason to install the native app or messenger.

intrasight 8y ago
I only use my browser to use FB. But I don't message with Messenger - I use phone's native text message feature.
- macspoofing 8y ago
  I'd still like to access the Facebook Inbox when I'm on my phone and using the Facebook web page. Right now it forces you to the messenger native app.
aylmao 8y ago
http://mbasic.facebook.com http://mbasic.facebook.com Doesn't seem to work on iOS (at least on iOS 11, it redirects to the normal mobile site that asks you to install Messenger) but it works on Android.

grinsekatze 8y ago

Even if they offered a delete button any time before GDPR comes into effect I would not trust and use it. I also don't like the idea of using one of those chrome extensions mentioned here. To me, currently this is synonymous to hiding everything they have on me from myself. But doing this after May 25 would mean I definitely want it gone for good and if they don't fully delete what I manually remove, I expect them to get themselves into trouble.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
g_p 8y ago
> But doing this after May 25 would mean I definitely want it gone for good and if they don't fully delete what I manually remove, I expect them to get themselves into trouble. You're technically right here, but it seems at present that most companies won't be complying with this for quite some time (perhaps an opportunity for some litigations?) Backups appear to be the "black hole" in GDPR, as nobody spent the 2 years actually planning and preparing. Therefore, most people I've spoken to are planning to simply add a "gdpr_deleted" flag to each row in the database, and set it to true when it happens. They don't return those rows in queries. The inter-dependent nature of many databases (you shared a post with 10 users, you delete your account now, FB wants to retain the view records), coupled with nobody taking GDPR seriously until the last minute, means we'll likely see "soft deletes" for quite some time. It would be interesting though to make a GDPR request to companies for data held specifically on backups, and held in databases records that would normally not be shown (i.e. these hidden records), as that could get them in trouble if you could prove they lied!
- greenleafjacob 8y ago
  > Backups appear to be the "black hole" in GDPR To delete backed up data, first encrypt the data with a key. To delete the data, delete the encryption key, leaving your "backed up data" meaningless bits.

lukewrites 8y ago

They absolutely did not "reveal new security settings" – they revamped the security settings menu & page. From the article: > Facebook announced on Wednesday that it’s redesigning the settings menu on mobile devices, consolidating privacy options in one place, rather than sending users to some 20 different screens There is no indication in the article that they are allowing users more control over their data, and fb remain free to do what they will with your data once you sign up for their service. This does nothing to resolve the problem that people are up in arms about: > Under the revamp, users still won’t be able to delete data that they had given third-party apps on the platform previously, even if it was used for reasons other than what was agreed to. That data, generated over years of games and personality quizzes that had access to private information, is largely still stored outside of Facebook’s grasp by the private individuals and companies that built those applications.

TheSpiceIsLife 8y ago
> users still won’t be able to delete data that they had given third-party apps ... is largely still stored outside of Facebook’s grasp by the private individuals and companies that built those applications. I don't believe it's possible to resolve that problem.
lambda_lover 8y ago
It's pathetic to see a slight decrease in dark UX referred to as "new security settings". Oh, so they moved some stuff around in the settings menu? Call me back when they actually give you a link to delete your profile (seriously, there is none in the settings. There's only "deactivate" and "delete your profile after you die" -- even though both of those appear in a "delete" section. "New Security Settings" implies that I'm given options I didn't have before. That does not seem to be the case here.

galieos_ghost 8y ago

What's amazing to me is how the media can stir the public into a fever pitch with such ease. I've told people about FB and Google data collection for years and nobody cared, at least not until the talking heads told them to care. What FB does is innocuous compared to the CIA vault7 leaks, and yet the media shoved that down the memory hole. The real question is why is this being pushed now when literally of this has been public info for years?

parliament32 8y ago
It's just part of the media machine. FB is currently the "bad guy" so any media agency who can push the narrative is rewarded with more user attention. This has a huge snowball effect and will result in FB getting hammered into the ground until a more interesting antagonist comes around. Another interesting "bad guy" right now is Russia -- justified or not, notice how media outlets are trying their hardest to find any Russian links whatsoever to every bit of political news, even things completely unrelated. For instance, try searching for "cambridge analytica russia" and look at the number of results.
aylmao 8y ago
> I've told people about FB and Google data collection for years and nobody cared, at least not until the talking heads told them to care. > What FB does is innocuous compared to the CIA vault7 leaks, and yet the media shoved that down the memory hole. But it's Facebook controlling your mind! They know what you like and can manipulate you with that! \s > The real question is why is this being pushed now when literally of this has been public info for years? I have a theory it's the recent shift in Newsfeed reducing news and increasing friend's posts. It was reported earlier that there were tensions between Zukerberg and Murdoch over ad revenue [1]. Wouldn't surprise me if other media magnates feel the same way. [1]: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/12/facebook-rupert-murdoch-threatened-mark-zuckerberg-in-2016-with-a-war.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/12/facebook-rupert-murdoch-thre...

feelin_googley 8y ago

"The Facebook Privacy Setting That Doesn't Do Anything at All 'I really can't make sense of it.' Gergely Biczok, CrySys Lab" https://www.wired.com/story/facebook-privacy-setting-doesnt-do-anything/ https://www.wired.com/story/facebook-privacy-setting-doesnt-...

benevol 8y ago

F#ck the hypocrites at Facebook. That's all.

quadrangle 8y ago

What I want is to download my history including the external links I posted. But they seem to not include that stuff. I'm sure they tracked which links I posted, but they don't consider that part of the private data I'd own in any way, so it's not there in the download. Which I means I can't find that article I stupidly posted to FB and forgot to bookmark otherwise…

bogomipz 8y ago

>"“Last week showed how much more work we need to do to enforce our policies and help people understand how Facebook works and the choices they have over their data,” Facebook Chief Privacy Officer Erin Egan and Deputy General Counsel Ashlie Beringer wrote. Facebook Chief Privacy Officer. Now there's a job title. Seriously what does a Chief Privacy Officer at FB do? What are the responsibilities of a Privacy Officer at a company whose entire existence is predicated on their users having no privacy? Here's 15 years worth of their boss's views on privacy: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/21/facebook-ceo-mark-zuckerbergs-statements-on-privacy-2003-2018.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/21/facebook-ceo-mark-zuckerberg...

nopacience 8y ago

Something curious about facebook is, they let anyone access user profile/pages (or whatever it is called), so visitor can see the user profile picture and might be able to see other stuff. Facebook "protects" the privacy of the "visitor" because the user cannot see what visitors have visited their profiles. So, users have no privacy, but visitors have their privacy protected. Facebook should list "who" visited user profiles. I dont know why they dont do this already. And even more, they could somehow list what photos the visitor chose to see, how long visitor stayed on user profile, which 'full resolution pictures' visitor had downloaded. If they only saw thumbnails then no need to list, but if visitor made the effort to download all full resolution user pictures then the owner of those pictures should be able to see who has downloaded them. So this way, the user would be able to see how frequently visitor X, Y, Z has stayed on their profiles, and how many/which full res pictures they have downloaded/seen. If the user profile is not a person, but a store, then the store would be able to benefit from this data and send some message saying "We noticed you have been visiting us lately, and you seem to have a lot of intrest in product X. Do you want to know the price or make an offer?" Or, if the user is a person and has seen weird behaviour from weird users, then user would be able to take precautions. So in the end, the user profiles are public and have no privacy. But the visitors/consumer of other people profiles can snoop on other lifes and have their privacy protected because the page they visited is never able to know they have been visited by visitor X Ntimes.

aylmao 8y ago
This is a pretty interesting proposition. I'm personally not a fan of the store idea --I'd rather be able to visit business pages anonymously and not get messages from them-- but I actually think seeing who has seen your profile could be a good idea, especially in the realm of the picture download/viewing.
eezurr 8y ago
I dont see FB implementing that because the more information people have about how their profiles are viewed (and used), the more it's going to polarize their user base. I think people will fall under two categories. Group 1: They want attention, followers, etc. Facebook becomes more like Instagram (which is redundant) Group 2: They want privacy and a place to connect with peers, but that "profile use" knowledge will prevent them from sharing their lives on Facebook further more. Also, I think people have the right to view publicly posted information and photos without being monitored by the poster. Information overload, irrational responses, reactionary culture, and all that.