Why You Shouldn’t Trust Facebook’s Apology

(Image used under: Creative Commons 2.0 [SRC])

I don't want this page to descend into an "everything about Facebook" page, but the news has been coming fast and hard the last few weeks. The article I found today isn't news, but instead a plea to the public to not buy in to Facebook's apology for their recent nastiness.

Parents of young children can spot an insincere apology from miles away.

"Sorry," your tot mumbles, after you find the dog half-shaved and your Xbox full of jam.

"Sorry for what?" you'll say. "Sorry for shaving the dog and putting jam in your Xbox," he'll say, looking at the floor. But he's lying. He's only sorry that he didn't get away with it.

Facebook's much-reported apology in the Washington Post is a bit like that. "Sorry," says Mark Zuckerberg. "Sorry for what?" the internet asks.

"Sorry for invading your privacy and making things confusing and stuff," Zuckerberg says. "Can I have an ice cream now?"

Funny and blisteringly accurate; that's a good combination. Check out the rest of the article here

Tags: , ,

DuckDuckGo – New Search Engine Choice or Dud?

DuckDuckGo.com
(Image is in the Public Domain)

Every now and then, there's a new search engine released that tries to play with the big boys, but they often fail. Usually its because of speed, maybe financial backing, sometimes user interface, but most often because they don't do the job well.

So here's one that may be worth some attention. Like Google, they focus on keeping very minimal and having a nice interface. But unlike Google, they make an effort to help you find what you are actually looking for:

They also include some summary information right in the search making it possible to skip visiting the site at all if you don't need to or at least getting a better feel for what the site is about before going. And according to their About page, they store NO personal information (which has long been a complaint of mine about Google).

So far, they're doing a lot right, but with Google having just released HTTPS for searches, the competition is even stiffer. I wish them luck.

Check them out yourself here.

Tags:
, , ,

Facebook Now Changing Privacy Policy In the Face of Public Hatred

(Image used under: Creative Commons 2.0 [SRC])

It looks like it didn't take long for them to get the hint. Facebook will now be improving their privacy controls and policy.

From the CNN article:

Tech blogger Robert Scoble... equated the privacy outrage to both Facebook's complicated privacy settings and the company's inability to communicate why users should share their private information with the public.

No kidding. Well now Mark Zuckerberg has admitted to making some mistakes and promises to do better. We'll see.

Tags: ,

Facebook May Improve Privacy Control In Face of Public Hatred

(Image used under: Creative Commons 2.0 [SRC])
Facebook has found itself facing some tough choices when it comes to the direction of the company, specifically revolving around user privacy. As most Netizens know, Facebook has faced harsh criticism in recent months—which may be coming to a head after having built up slowly over the years—regarding how it handles user information. Now, the company is left deciding whether it wants to revert to its old principles and go against founder Mark Zuckerberg's policy of forging ahead, privacy be damned.

Also this:

Luckily, there are now third-party tools that help users patch up their Facebook settings, such as the incredibly helpful bookmarklet from Reclaim Privacy that lets users see what their settings are and change them automatically. These tools shouldn't be necessary, however.

The Reclaim Privacy tool is very easy to use and effective too! I haven't checked the code personally to see if it's safe, but my virus scanner didn't blip at all and I have nothing in my profile that I'm worried about sharing publicly so there was little risk. Also, since the tool is completely open-source, I'm willing to bet that someone somewhere has taken the time to look it over and would have raised a flag by now.

The author could change the code at any time, but I suspect he's legitimately trying to build attention to his website and isn't looking to quickly become tossed aside by adding attack code. Still, use at your own risk.

Lastly:

It's unlikely that such a user-friendly utopia will arrive anytime soon, though, especially given Zuckerberg's now-legendary disregard for privacy. That said, Zuckerberg was the one who called last week's company meeting to discuss the current state of Facebook privacy and user trust, so it's possible that he's beginning to warm to the idea of giving users what they want.

Source: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/05/facebook-privacy-comes-to-a-head-changes-may-be-imminent.ars

If you don't know what they mean by recent privacy issues, check out these:

Facebook Secretly Adds Applications to Your Profile
10 Reasons to Quit Facebook
Finding a Name For Bully Data Practices Leads to Facebook
Senators Send Angry E-mail to Facebook Over Privacy Changes
Facebook Forces Users to Display Hometown, Work, Interests

Maybe it's because of things like that that led to this interesting result being found as a top result for Google's suggest feature:

How do I....Delete facebook?
Tags:

Laundry Hacks

You wouldn't use one this large, but this is the idea

Here's a bunch of neat tricks I found today how to hack your laundry:

  • Use a small ball of tin foil instead of dryer sheets to eliminate static
  • Toss a ball or yarn or a tennis ball into the dryer for baster drying times
  • Avoid dryer sheets entirely because they leave a film on your lint catcher that can blow out your dryer.

Be sure to read the comments and check out some of the links there to see other related tips and tricks. Tags: , , ,

Map To Hidden Facebook Privacy Controls

(Image used under: Creative Commons 2.0 [SRC])

Here's a nice consolidated list with screenshots to the hard-to-reach Facebook privacy controls.

Tags: , ,

Facebook Secretly Adds Applications to Your Profile

(Image used under: Creative Commons 2.0 [SRC])

Wow. It seems like the last week or so, all I've talked about is Facebook! But it seems there's an awful lot to talk about! Check out what I found today:

If you visit certain sites while logged in to Facebook, an app for those sites will be quietly added to your Facebook profile. You don't have to have a Facebook window open, you don't need to signed in to these sites for the apps to appear, and there doesn't appear to be an option to opt-out anywhere in Facebook's byzantine privacy settings.

According to the source article, Facebook contacted them and told them it was a bug that has been fixed. That's the second such bug this week.

Tags: , ,

10 Reasons to Quit Facebook

(Image used under: Creative Commons 2.0 [SRC])

This is awesome:

10. Facebook terms of service are completely one-sided
9. Facebook's CEO has a history of unethical behavoir
8. Facebook has flat-out declared a war on privacy
7. Facebook is pulling a classic bait and switch
6. Facebook is a bully
5. Even your private data is shared with applications
4. Facebook is not technically competent enough to be trusted
3. Facebook makes it incredibly difficult to delete your account
2. Facebook doesn't really support the open web
1. The Facebook application itself sucks

I agree so much with this. Facebook is trying to become the only provider and replace the open Internet much like AOL back in the day. I have long objected to their practices and privacy issues as well as their technical and security flaws. It would be nice if they could make moves in the right direction and become a more ethical business since the idea has a lot of potential if used properly.

The problem is I just don't see that happening. Until then, you may want to reconsider being a part of the system…just be careful when you do quit that you don't end up like this guy:

Stan tries to quit Facebook, Facebook resists

Tags: , , ,

Skip the Nudie Scanner, Get Extra Frisking as Punishment

There are some people who have reported extra screening and scrutiny of their person and personal belongings when they refuse to engage in the TSA nudie scanner fiasco.

I went over to the TSA blog to see what the climate was and the responses are overwhelmingly against the technology.

From the complaints that have been coming in, it seems to be common practice for TSA to send people through the machines without telling them what they do or offering them a choice. How does anyone think that this is OK?

And

Bob, why would the TSA use backscatter at all when MMW is much less risky in terms of exposure to harmwave wavelengths.

There were other issues listed such as the scanning of children nude and the right to ask that your belongings always remain in your sight while they're being analyzed (which is only useful if you know about that right).

I once met the head of privacy for the TSA, Peter P., and got his contact information. I just sent him an e-mail suggesting that the only way that it would be ethical to use these machines is to:

  1. Post on the machine actual, unedited, unblurred photos of real people being scanned.
  2. Verbally tell each person to be scanned that they may opt-out every time

I don't know if he'll respond or what he'll say, but expect they won't do either of these because if they did, people would probably never use them at all. But that's the point isn't it? We should know exactly what's going to happen and be able to make an informed choice.

Anyway, if he does respond, I'll post it here.

Update

It's really quite surprising how quickly he responded. Not more than 2 hours after my e-mail, I received a phone call where he answered my questions.

He says there are already images on all machines that are exactly what the operators see, just not life sized though he didn't know why that matters to people. In fact, some people have complained about the nudity on the signs (which I expected would happen, but we don't care about them do we :)).

There are also indications that you can choose to have a pat down in the largest font of all text on the machine. I can't really say if that's sufficient considering I haven't seen the machines personally, though I doubt a simple sign is enough unless it's a pretty big font.

He says a verbal notice would add too much time and present it more as a negative thing when it wasn't (a matter of opinion) and he's right about that so I didn't expect much. The main thing is how the operators act in practice. If someone seems hesitant, they should immediately offer the pat-down instead, but do they?

On the subject of how people are treated when refusing the scan, he said that it's impossible to monitor that process, but they are trained not to do extra screening just because someone opted-out. He also pointed out that at last year's CFP Conference a woman who claimed to have been subjected to nearly 20 minutes of screening was actually only there for less than 3 (they checked the video). He said perception plays a large part and I can't disagree with that.

What is fact is that people are frustrated and angry. We don't trust that the machines won't be misused and there's at least one case where they already were. Is there anything the TSA could do to win our trust? Who' knows, but here's the page where they have all the information about the machines and how they're used.

Tags: , , ,

Have Fun With Secret Questions

That's not my dog...
(Image used under: Creative Commons 2.0 [SRC])

Sometimes when you set up an account with a company, they'll let you set a question and the answer. Then when you call in, the operator will read the question YOU WROTE and you get to provide the response. This has the potential to be highly amusing if done right:

Q: What the hell is your f***ing problem, sir?
A: This is completely inappropriate and I'd like to speak to your supervisor.

Q: I've been embezzling hundreds of thousands of dollars from my employer, and I don't care who knows it.
A: It's a good thing they're recording this call, because I'm going to have to report you.

Q: Are you really who you say you are?
A: No, I am a Russian identity thief.

Check out a ton more here.

Tags: ,

Loading...

If you want to learn more about my professional background, click here to learn more.

Check out one of my guides/tutorials:

retailers Tutorial
|INDEX|next: Product Rebates

Retailer Tricks

All About Warranties
Product Rebates
Gift Cards

About Trust

Trusting Companies

... or check out any of my other guides and tutorials by clicking here!

All About Warranties

Extended warranties are a ripoff some say, but there are times when it can be a very good idea to use them. Read all about warranties and how to use them to your advantage.

[Click for full description]

Product Rebates

Learn why rebates are a bad thing and some tips for making sure you get your money.

[Click for full description]

Gift Cards

Gift cards are marketed as a great way to get a gift for someone when you don't know quite what to give them. But in many cases, all you're giving them is headache.

[Click for full description]

Trusting Companies

Store, online or off, are not known for being fair and helpful unless it benefits them to be so. Good deals exist, but many are bad deals in disguise. It's not in your best interests to be too trusting with any of them.

[Click for full description]