When the funk will facetb00k learn...
Roll out things turned off, then let the user decide to turn it on...
How hard can it be? How can you make this mistake each and every time?
Facebook has tried to prevent yet another privacy row engulfing the social network by admitting it "should have been more clear" about the roll-out of its facial recognition technology. The company also posted an updated blog post explaining that its Tag Suggestions function had been switched on by default for the majority of …
Roll out things turned off, then let the user decide to turn it on...
How hard can it be? How can you make this mistake each and every time?
and they already did learn. They've learnt to say: "we should have been more clear". So far that seems to work for them.
Well to be fair Zuckerberg and most of his employees are children...
Let that be a lesson to you, kids never learn!
Come on, get real. How are they going to grab more user data if they have to ask for permission? Not a chance.
You cannot convince me that this is a "mistake"..
you learn from kids - adults always think they know better
a real skeptic demands to be convinced
...each user will get to turn off auto tagging on new images they upload
or each user can determine if their name will pop up in other peoples pictures when they come to tag it.
Turning off the later would be the way to stop your face being used in the auto recognition algorithm. I bet we don't get the off switch for that. And if we did, we would still probably be used in the background.
I'm betting law enforcement get a back door to run photos through the whole database.
As others have said, this was not a mistake. Even if users feel it's creepy and disable the feature in their Privacy Settings, it will probably not delete the data gathered. What the spokesperson mentioned was that people can opt-out of having their names show up as recommendations, not to actually prevent their pictures from being scanned or to have the already scanned data removed.
So, what have Facebook learned from their past "mistakes"? That they can extract the data by stealth from their users, issue an apology if it becomes a public concern, and--most importantly--keep the data.
Facebook did this on purpose of coarse.....
Face-scanning tech is going to make huge mounds of cash for Facebook and the end user should be terrified.
Facebook creates an aggregated profile of you. It doesn't matter what privacy settings you have on your account. So when you post your birth date and name they have hit pay dirt. But not everyone puts up their B-day.
How does a huge corporation create a profile... First you ip address will tell a corporation where you live. The zip code will tell them how much you make. The way the world works is poor people live in poor neighborhoods and rich in rich neighborhoods. This info is provided for free from the government census data.
Then if you post your music or TV shows you watch is also a gold mind. Market researchers have demographic groups. They find some stupid person who answers a survey. They tell this person it will be an anonymous survey and it is . And they build this profile about how much this person make, where this person shops and what he/she purchases. When you divulge personal info on the Internet they match that profile in reverse to you.
So Facebook as a problem when someone closes a Facebook account, now they have to start over. But not anymore. They just take their aggregated profile of you and match it up with their aggregated face scan if you open a new Facebook account. It doesn't end there, since they have all these cross data sharing agreements with other large corporations. You open an account on Flickr or Yahoo and now they know who you are if you post a picture of yourself.
Deleting your data won't delete the aggregated profile You have to send a request to the corporation to delete the info. But of coarse they won't because it isn't illegal to have this database. Then you will have to contact your congress person to have them change the law. But since most of the elected officials are millionaires and sit on the boards of these corporation or planning to become a lobbyist after leaving office they wont' do anything.
Facebook has learned. It has learned to sell your personal info to other corporations for profit for themselves and when they go public their shareholders.
So the only way to stop this is to stop giving out personal info online and posting pictures. Remember once it is on the Internet it is on the Internet FOREVER!.
I think you were trying to be rhetorical, but I'll go ahead and state the obvious. Facebook's value is increased by maximizing the sharing of your personal information. Protecting your personal information is fundamentally opposed to increasing Facebook's value. Expecting Facebook to take any measure to protect your privacy is exactly like expecting someone to understand something that he is being paid NOT to understand.
Not original. There's a famous quote. I thought it was Will Rogers, but I can't find the source. Someone point me at it?
How can you opt out of something that has been added and turned on by default without any notification at all. Facebook keep making the same mistake over and over again. If you honestly cannot sell your wonderful new feature to me enough to make me turn it on then you need to ask if you should be including it in the first place, let alone forcing it down my throat and telling me sometime later that I could have opted out of something you never told me about if I didn't want it.
No mistake. They have always done this, sometimes even making "changes" to turn on all your settings you had turned off. It's a dispicable way of treating the user, but they don't care one bit.
only apply to those with facebork accounts; or can anyone, in any photo get named & tagged (and then autotagged by fb)?
It states that only friends are suggested
Point = missed. That is just the current _implementation_ of the technology.
All sorts of readings of that, though, given the quotation marks: friends, "friended facebook accounts", the sort of passer-by you might colloquially describe as a friend (or at least id on a photo on facebook), someone who isn't a friend (hence "friend", not friend), someone who the writer supposes isn't a real friend (even though you keep id'ing them on facebook).
I'm not overly concerned about it, but the posters have a point: there's a huge difference between "turned off so the fingerprint is never generated" and "turned off so your friends can't use the fingerprint" and that is all well shy of "and you have to delete the data you collected about me for which you did not ask permission."
So they haven't learnt to communicate more clearly after last time, and the time before that, and the time before.....
Either they are supremely dishonest, or amazingly stupid for not having learnt the lesson. I'm not sure which is worse...
The majority of people people will benefit from this technology. The vast majority of people do not know how to change their preferences. Ergo, this new feature should be on by default.
Who gives a toss if facebook tells your friend that you might be in a photo they just uploaded?
The vanishing minority of people who have concerns about privacy issues a) can switch the feature off, if they so wish, or b) delete their facebook accounts and shut the hell up. You'll not find privacy on facebook.
This reminds me of the furore over google street view. Something far more invasive than this. Sure, terrorists and burgers can use it, but the benefits out weigh these cherry-picked worst-case scenarios.
As far as I can tell, the Google Street View fiasco ended up in an international controversy that has culminated in the project being stopped from gathering Wi-Fi hot-spot data, and governments the world over opening up a critical eye towards Google's business practices where they once took them at face value.
Don't tell anybody what you know, the truth might be dangerous.
Betray Your Family & Friends. Fabulous Prizes to be Won
...in trolling under your real username and not as an AC.
And curiously when the iPhone location fiasco kicked off (which I more or less believe was not intentional just sloppy from a security standpoint,) the rocks got flipped over for Android as well, and it turned out that the "accidental" bit of code that was included in the global StreetView Wi-Fi slurp looked a lot less accidental combined with the fact that Google is using their entire phone install base (if the user did not opt out of two checkboxes) as mobile Wi-Fi update drones.
Configure an Android phone from a blank device to see what I mean.
How about adding everyone posts photos to Facebook in which each user is holding a photo of Mark Zuckerberg's face near their face? Would Mr Zuckerberg receive a lot of suggestions to friend members of the proletariat?
...if we all just replaced our profile pictures with Zuckerberg's Time Man of the Year cover?
I just did - and it felt so good. Now that my friendships are real - not virtual - it feels... better. Realer. FB can FOFF outta my face! It's all just big bubble and it's high time it burst.
Deleted mine a while back to. Had enough of trolling people I haven't talked to since school (got surprisingly boring)
For anyone else that wants to, you can permanently delete (not just deactivate) your account. Visit the link below and then don't go on facebook for 14 days and your done.
Due to the volume, the system needs to be able to handle duplicates.
Get together with a few friends, and each takes a couple of pictures of random crowds (six people or so per shot). Then tag those people randomly, some of which with your friend's name. Repeat for each picture, then swap pictures with your friends. Eventually you have so many 3rd parties tagging people as you it'll be wholly unclear who YOU actually are (that is, if you're smart enough to remove your profile picture).
You can make it worse by going into other people's albums and tag yourself and friends - FB allows multiple tags per face so you can make quite a soup :-).
I tolerate FB, but Zuckerberg's undiminished and unending desire to grab more and more data is getting annoying enough for me to re-evaluate iFB's usefulness.
HA! This is awesome, pollute it with so many false results that facebook won't be able to know wtf picture is what......oh thats brilliant, well done sir!
taking pictures in crowded places? Where I live, you do that only at your extreme peril. Because if you're male and caught taking pictures in crowds, you're either a terrorist or a paedophile.
Nice idea though, just a shame that our freedoms have already been destroyed to the point that you can't implement it without considerable risk. Or get a woman to do the photographing. Nobody thinks women are terrorists or paedophiles.
Oh I dunno. its been pretty much conclusively proven that facebook does not care about your privacy. If you care then delete your profile.. Then move to a cave. Change your mobile phone and divorce your wife in case she mentions you on her profle. Besides she probably wont like the cave.
Alternatively live with it and acknowledge your stupidity in scribbling the details of your life with indelible ink on the wall outside the public toilets.
Except for the last big change where they suggested big changes to my settings which would have left my account wide open for all to view. Then there's the time before that and the one before that ..... it's been said by others and will be said by more after me but they just don't care about privacy. I have an account there, yes, but I detest having to check privacy settings to keep it in check.
I actually *want* to know when somebody decides to upload a picture of me without my permission. Better than them being able to do so discreetly. Remember, you then have the option to de-tag or even report/request removal if you're concerned about privacy... but if you didn't know in the first place the latter options aren't available to you.
why would you have any say in how someone elses photo is used? Whoever took the photo owns the rights to it surely?
Except this does not notify you if someone uploads a photo of you, it only suggests to your "friend" that you might be in the photo so they can tag you if they so desire. If they choose to upload a photo of you surreptitiously, you'll never know.
Before this was introduced a friend uploads a picture, they can tag you in it, post this being introduced, a friend uploads a picture, they can tag you in it, only difference is that it helps them find you in the picture, big woop, whats the story exactly apart from yet another excuse for those who don't use Facebook to remind us all why they won't use it?
you can't surf the desktop version of the fb website from your phone, it'll automatically redirect you to the m.facebook.com website.
and that slimmed down site doesn't contain the opt-out for the suggestion. it, typically for facebook, sucks
the only solution, i guess, is to un-tag myself from any and all pictures so that they do not have any source images to identify me by
Browse to the facebook page on the internet browser on your phone if it redirects to the mobile version.
So from here click the link labelled "More" and select "Desktop site" now you can mess around on the full version of the site.
> you can't surf the desktop version of the fb website from your phone,
> it'll automatically redirect you to the m.facebook.com website.
... and then you tap "More" and then tap "Desktop Site" at the bottom of the list and as if by magic you have access to the entire web version of FB.
It used to be a fast loading mostly text page. Now its all script and takes an age when you have a poor signal. Come on Facebook, keep things simple.
If you want a text-based Facebook, just go to http://0.facebook.com
There. Facebook - already keeping it simple.
"Sorry, 0.facebook.com is only supported by certain mobile networks and is not available from your mobile network."
How thoroughly helpful. And also inexplicable.
Big Brother never had it so easy. The attention deficit generation bends over for big brother and spreads. Idiocracy was/is NOT fiction.
I have developed my own Face Book Recognition system - every time something FB pops up I immediately close it down.
I blackhole'd their domain, and their CDN's domain. This makes every other site load faster as well.
Why do sites need 'like' buttons? If I'm on your site, I probably like it, unless I'm trying to deface it (which I personally don't do.)
I have a sneaky feeling that the "like" button is a bit like Google's Adscan in that its presence means that Farcebook is probably seeing your presence.
Would love it if anyone could verify this..
/// P ///
I was more worried by the setting I saw at the same time, about making photos available to the the friends of those tagged? Does this override my OWN settings?
Same old cack from "companies" like this. Roll out some tech they know is borderline, then if no one complains, they win. If people complain all the company has to say is, "Oops! Aren't we naughty! Sorry! Tell you what...quick look at that interesting thing over there!", meanwhile they tone it down a bit and rewrite the contract agreements to allow said innovation to continue working as they originally intended!
"Suggest photos of me to friends" [ Edit Settings ]
opening that, and selecting disabled.
I found it on my account and I wasn't aware it was enabled, probably to give them enough time to scan my pictures and tag them before telling me it's available and then I can't take my data back.
so I suggest you guys pass the word along and get everybody you know to turn it off..
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017