avoidit

6 ms·

1.
by avoidit 8y ago
>> If that opt-in isn't enough, exactly how many levels do you want? Since you can't seem to count to 2, how about: 1. You let us share your data with others in return for free service 2. You don't let us share your dat
2.
by avoidit 8y ago
>> Likewise, you can't simultaneously hold the opinion that users should have control over where their content is seen, and that it's OK to publish and comment on an internal post. This argument is illogical, because Faceboo
3.
by avoidit 8y ago
1. Bosworth's reaction:"for fear it will be misunderstood by a broader population that doesn’t have full context on who we are and how we work" 2. Wrote another: “How fucking terrible that some irresponsible jerk decided he o
4.
by avoidit 8y ago
Before I went to read the article, I wondered if they would define first and second party here. And they do: Quote from the article: "In order to leverage the deep pool of data Facebook collects on users, the company mixes information
5.
by avoidit 8y ago
It looks like just the dark UX patterns of Facebook can be used to write an entire book today. Not that the other companies are any better in this regard.
6.
by avoidit 8y ago
Let us reserve our judgment on Google for now. But FB is far worse than what you say here. Suppose I group people into 1. Those who actively use Facebook and willingly tell it everything about their lives 2. Those who actively use Facebook
7.
by avoidit 8y ago
The sibling comments make it clear what the split could be. In fact, people who say #deletefacebook are both overreacting and overreaching, when a much easier solution is at hand. It should really be #splitfacebook - that is an excellent ou
8.
by avoidit 8y ago
Up next: "How I wrote an article that explains how to do something, which actually doesn't do anything, and helps in absolutely no way other than make people feel better they did something rather than nothing"
9.
by avoidit 8y ago
To everyone who is saying "What's the big deal? Wasn't all of this obvious and well known?" - ask 10 people you know who the parent company of WhatsApp and Instagram is (and throw in an irrelevant app in there just to ma
10.
by avoidit 8y ago
Ok, perhaps you are the best person to ask. 1. What was Mark Zuckerberg's response when people asked him if Facebook might be overstepping bounds in terms of data collection (shadow profiles)? 2. What did the company employees think of
11.
by avoidit 8y ago
Someone I know closely worked at Facebook in its heyday, but it has been a while since he left. I asked him around 2014 (he had just left the company) "So what do you think about the way Facebook handles privacy issues?" His respo
12.
by avoidit 8y ago
Maybe we are agreeing, but we humans don't have sufficient cognitive resources to extrapolate every little action we take into the future and predict new things technology can enable. Our brains are always looking for shortcuts ("
13.
by avoidit 8y ago
If its not on Google, it doesn't exist. If it cannot be completely consumed inside Facebook you are probably antisocial. If your idea cannot be expressed inside a tweet, it is too complex for consideration. If you cannot share it on In
14.
by avoidit 8y ago
But at the same time if you relied on exactly one platform to build out your business, you are taking a huge risk. The issue you are facing is the platform version of "What if your key employee gets run over by a bus?". On the oth
15.
by avoidit 8y ago
Ha ha.. this reminds me of a politician who once said "If you can't eat their food, drink their booze, screw their women, take their money and then vote against them you've got no business being up here." Brian Acton for
16.
by avoidit 8y ago
I have seen some pretty stupid replies in my time, but a reply espousing the idea that someone who doesn't get the actual analogy will have a pet list of "pretty stupid analogies" is going to take some beating.
17.
by avoidit 8y ago
>> For better or for worse Its definitely the latter. Not because there is something inherently bad about staying in touch. It is because you do so despite the knowledge that you are not doing it at zero cost to others who care abou
18.
by avoidit 9y ago
Not the GP, but I too feel like if they actually fix it, then there is less chance of catching the other equally culpable actors who now seem to think they have gone above the law (AmaGooFaceSoft). Or worse, actually emboldening them to con
19.
by avoidit 9y ago
Because the others among the Facebook leadership are not going around writing and promoting books? Also, do you genuinely not find it disconcerting that Facebook leadership go to great lengths to avoid discussing the privacy implications of