Facebook screams at users: 'Sort your privacy. NOW'

Eh?

There's only one privacy setting for images stored on a network of any kind. It's called "everyone, including those with a copy of photoshop".

I suppose they could call the four settings "Anyone your so-called friend cares to show this to", "Like option one but with a faster post-production time", "Anyone other than yourself, cos' you know, the first time you'll get to see the new version is when someone shows you your head with a new body" and "Waste four hours figuring out who you want to see this, then show it to everyone whether you want to or not".

Do people really think their browser is the only one that has the "save picture" feature?

youth and modesty

"Which will be a treat to see, given its role in eroding any restraint or modesty on the youth's part over the last few years." Right, and contributing to desertification in the Nejd.

I did not run with the wildest crowd, but I have been around long enough to remember (if not take part in) trends such as

a. streaking, ca. 1975. (For the youths among you this involved persons usually of college age running about naked out of doors.)

b. Xeroxing of body parts usually covered by clothing, ca. 1980.

But I do applaud El Reg's hiring policies, which exclude those who are or have been unrestrained and immodest. Guess it's just as well I never went into journalism.

Everyone?

Interestingly the default options are the most lax, not your current settings. I wonder how many people will get caught out by that?

@Ian Ferguson

Agree totally, I have my privacy settings set to private so i expect that not to change, any additional privacy they compromised is a bit of a pointless exercise surely?

Privac\y is easy.

If I was expecting privacy, I wouldn't have personal info plastered all over !GooMyFaceYouTwit ... In fact, I probably wouldn't have a !GooMyFaceYouTwit account in the first place. And guess what? I don't, and never will! Problem averted. Imagine that :-)

What I'd like to see...

...is the ability to create groups for your friends, which you can then assign privileges to (FB does allow you to group friends but doesn't allow you to set privileges by group), in much the same way as you administer user groups on an office network. This way, I'd assign four main groups: Immediate Family, Extended Family, Good Friends, and Acquaintances. Then I'd be able to post stuff that I only want my family members to see, as well as stuff I only want good friends to see, etc.

Yes, I know that people have the Save Picture and Ctrl-C/Ctrl-V abilities, but I also have a trust network with certain people, in that I know that my mother and father, for example, would not show anyone else something I intended only for them. Knowing who I can trust not to reveal something IRL is a major part of how I would assign friend privileges on FB. As it stands, I'm careful in what I post on there because this functionality is not available.

Finally, I have all my privacy settings maxed out and they're going to stay that way. Anyone searching for me can see my profile picture and name and that's it. And I have one simple rule in using FB: If I don't already know and like you IRL, I will not friend you on FB. For me it's a tool for communicating with friends and family. I have a blog for everyone else.

Rubbish way of forcing any change

So, they offered us two options for each broad category of information: change to "their recommendations", or stick with the current settings. In the absence of any real explanation of what "their recommendations" were, the sensible option, which is what I did, was to stick with what was currently set since I had taken some time to positively decide on them. Thus it was a rather pointless exercise for myself, and I imagine, many others.