I don't like the sound of that at all. Sorry, but that's giving away far too much information.
New Facebook
Then you obviously don't understand it. Let me put it in terms a £50k Senior Television Researcher Producer Associate Double Back Return Falco And Triple Pie & Mash Executive would understand.JAS84 wrote:I don't like the sound of that at all. Sorry, but that's giving away far too much information.
1) - You can limit your profile so that non-friends and non-Facebookers can not see it.
2) - You can limit your profile so that non-friends of friends can not see it.
3) - You do not have to have a Facebook account in the first place. By signing up to one, and by typing in data about yourself, you are agreeing to display that data to your "friends".
4) You can control who is your friend or not. There are also now "restricted" friends, i.e. ones who you have as friends, but who cannot see your non-public content.
5) You can choose what you make public or not -- i.e. status updates, pictures, groups etc.
Perhaps you could enlighten us on what information you'd like to keep hidden from the public? Your real job title? Your gallery of bad mocks?
That's not JK08...Alexia wrote:Then you obviously don't understand it. Let me put it in terms a £50k Senior Television Researcher Producer Associate Double Back Return Falco And Triple Pie & Mash Executive would understand.JAS84 wrote:I don't like the sound of that at all. Sorry, but that's giving away far too much information.
1) - You can limit your profile so that non-friends and non-Facebookers can not see it.
2) - You can limit your profile so that non-friends of friends can not see it.
3) - You do not have to have a Facebook account in the first place. By signing up to one, and by typing in data about yourself, you are agreeing to display that data to your "friends".
4) You can control who is your friend or not. There are also now "restricted" friends, i.e. ones who you have as friends, but who cannot see your non-public content.
5) You can choose what you make public or not -- i.e. status updates, pictures, groups etc.
Perhaps you could enlighten us on what information you'd like to keep hidden from the public? Your real job title? Your gallery of bad mocks?
I really don't understand how my occupation can be taken fun of, 'Hey look, it's a builder, Haha.' No. 'A Teacher, seriously?, that's so funny!' Not really! It's what I do for a living so why is it mockable? Just grow up.Alexia wrote:Then you obviously don't understand it. Let me put it in terms a £50k Senior Television Researcher Producer Associate Double Back Return Falco And Triple Pie & Mash Executive would understand.JAS84 wrote:I don't like the sound of that at all. Sorry, but that's giving away far too much information.
1) - You can limit your profile so that non-friends and non-Facebookers can not see it.
2) - You can limit your profile so that non-friends of friends can not see it.
3) - You do not have to have a Facebook account in the first place. By signing up to one, and by typing in data about yourself, you are agreeing to display that data to your "friends".
4) You can control who is your friend or not. There are also now "restricted" friends, i.e. ones who you have as friends, but who cannot see your non-public content.
5) You can choose what you make public or not -- i.e. status updates, pictures, groups etc.
Perhaps you could enlighten us on what information you'd like to keep hidden from the public? Your real job title? Your gallery of bad mocks?
-
Gavin Scott
- Admin
- Posts: 6442
- Joined: Fri 15 Aug, 2003 13.16
- Location: Edinburgh
- Contact:
A case of mistaken identity, that's all. There's a tv forumer with a similar username made-up of letters and numbers suggesting he's a tv researcher, asking people to suggest names for a breakfast show, which all sounds rather dubious.JK08 wrote:
I really don't understand how my occupation can be taken fun of, 'Hey look, it's a builder, Haha.' No. 'A Teacher, seriously?, that's so funny!' Not really! It's what I do for a living so why is it mockable? Just grow up.
Good cause to scoff on Alexia's part, just the wrong person.
But he's right about the timeline being subject to privacy settings of your choice, although I've learned an unfriended friend appears to still be able to see some aspect of my activities, causing me a little consternation as you can imagine.
I hope Facebook fix that.
Wait, now it is JK08.Gavin Scott wrote:A case of mistaken identity, that's all. There's a tv forumer with a similar username made-up of letters and numbers suggesting he's a tv researcher, asking people to suggest names for a breakfast show, which all sounds rather dubious.JK08 wrote:
I really don't understand how my occupation can be taken fun of, 'Hey look, it's a builder, Haha.' No. 'A Teacher, seriously?, that's so funny!' Not really! It's what I do for a living so why is it mockable? Just grow up.
-
Gavin Scott
- Admin
- Posts: 6442
- Joined: Fri 15 Aug, 2003 13.16
- Location: Edinburgh
- Contact:
Oh f...........Jovis wrote:Wait, now it is JK08.
"Mr Scott....your uppance has come!!!"
Yeah, can we have real(ish) names please? What are you all, droids?
There's been a bit of noise about both the ticker and the new profile - not because it's actually leaking more data than it did before, but it now invites you to see content you were always able to by policy, if not intent. Whether that's bubbling up 5 years of inanity on one page which before would've required an hour of "Older posts" clicking, or a real-time view of your friends liking/commenting on public posts of people you would otherwise never know existed - it's understandably a little unsettling. In that respect, it's very similar to the protest that followed the News Feed launch in 2006 which again was the first time it was aggregating and pushing things you were always 'entitled' to see if you went out of your way to. This wouldn't be a problem if 'public' on Facebook had the same meaning as it did on Twitter, but I'd wager many, if not most, public Facebook users do so without understanding the ramifications - particularly where a public post/photo leads to what should be a semi-private comment thread etc.
What this is showing though is that there's a fundamental disconnect between privacy settings (which inherits that access control list view of the world that sees everything as a file system) and the actual experience, and from that I think most of the discomfort arises. It's true that yes you can *physically* set up the walls you want around certain content with certain people, and that was fine while Facebook was, like its contemporaries, focused on the Zeitgeist (ie. I just took this photo and want to let x,y and z see it). But if it's new unique selling point is to memorialise everyone's online (and beyond) existence, this needs way way better tools than a "Hide all my old posts" button.
What this is showing though is that there's a fundamental disconnect between privacy settings (which inherits that access control list view of the world that sees everything as a file system) and the actual experience, and from that I think most of the discomfort arises. It's true that yes you can *physically* set up the walls you want around certain content with certain people, and that was fine while Facebook was, like its contemporaries, focused on the Zeitgeist (ie. I just took this photo and want to let x,y and z see it). But if it's new unique selling point is to memorialise everyone's online (and beyond) existence, this needs way way better tools than a "Hide all my old posts" button.
