32
Condor
19d

Today I learned in a cafe why (some) users think that Facebook doesn't allow them data control. Due to drunkness I'm paraphrasing here, but it went something like this:

- I don't trust Facebook, because my posts that I make are visible to people that I didn't want to have it be seen to.

> Audience controls. Use them.

- This guy in town sent me a friend request, why would he be able to??1!1

> He and you share hometown. So probably friend suggestions based on you both explicitly sharing location, or he just visited your profile on name and wanted to get in touch with you. Socializing on the internet, it exists.

That's the kind of user that's roaming the facebooks on the internets and the googles I guess? The type of user that's surprised that their Facebook games and nametests expose information that they explicitly consent to? Give me a break. I care deeply about privacy, but this is just ridiculous.

On a different note, why the fuck is not a single one of those very same fucking Facebook users worried about 25-ish% of websites running their JavaScript (which you can check and block using NoScript and co.), which is the *actual* privacy threat? But muh nametests!!!

Fuck ignorant users!!!

Comments
  • 10
    I've heard the same shit. Facebook doesn't care about privacy but not for the reasons most think about. The main thing that pisses me off is that if you use facebook and visit any website that uses their social icons facebook is tracking what you do. If you use that browser to login at anytime facebook's tracking cookie is there they know what you have been looking at. Which at that point they have a full online profile at what you do online along with people taging you in pictures which show what you do offline. So in the event of a data breach somebody can have access to your full online and offline life in one place. Facebook is the greatest threat to privacy there is cause of those reasons
  • 6
    @PerfectAsshole exactly! Cookie clearance could protect against that though. Hence why on my N6P I'm using Firefox Focus. That's the main issue that's empowering Facebook so much, especially when it comes to shadow users. But who uses the mechanisms in the browser anyway, right?

    I think this cookie clearance delves into a deeper issue. Users tend to not change their default settings. In fact, they tend to be afraid of the scary "Control Panel", in case they do something wrong. That's what's been tainting Linux installs on desktop all the time, and what allowed Android and ChromeOS to thrive..

    In general, I guess that users are unwilling to change settings in case it affects them adversely and are therefore generally most likely to stick to the default settings?
  • 11
    Not entirely related but kinda related pet peeve of mine:

    Users who:
    - leave their location on 24/7
    - click essentially any link they're sent
    - give any app any permission it wants

    But these same people say: "I'm not using a smart home speaker because they can listen to you."

    Yeah ok. It's not like you're carrying a device far more dangerous than that at all times of the day.
  • 2
    @Condor Well blocking facebook's domains also works but like you said there's a bigger issue.

    From what i see the masses don't want to learn and just want everything handed to them. So they expect to install an app and get what they want by default without having to do anything themselves like messing with controls. (Look at schools now days if you need an example. Eg i didn't use a calculator until algebra, now 2nd grade everybody has one)
  • 5
    @Stuxnet next time that is said say "ok google"
  • 3
    @Stuxnet pretty much yeah.. I find it really weird when I see such users' take on privacy. Granted, there's some reasons why you might want to use such privacy-intrusive applications.. personally I quite like Google Assistant for example, because there's no privacy-respecting competitor to it yet - although Mozilla's Common Voice project is a step in the right direction. But yeah, seeing users being worried about their privacy yet not taking action is so weird.

    Perhaps it boils down to politics as well? I tend to be pretty proactive when it comes to politics, and present in whatever lobbies I'm invited to. But I see it so often that people think that "things will never change", and "my voice/actions won't change anything anyway". It's a huge problem.. perhaps it also extends to user behavior when it comes to privacy control?
  • 2
    @Condor yeah I'm a huge fan on the Assistant since it works well with my phone (Pixel) and speakers. Plus it's convenient to trigger the lighting in my apartment as I come in, because I use black out curtains.

    I'm not really sure it's political. Probably moreso fear of the speaker and ignorance towards just how dangerous what they're doing with their phone is.
  • 2
    I find it a bit weird that you talk about uneducated users.. When the companies deliberately make the defaults bad and the settings confusing.
    I haven't encountered a single person who didn't immediately understand and would use e.g. notification settings; but only after I explicitly told them nothing bad would happen when touching anything in the submenu. Even then, they would still need help to navigate and choose the right thing.

    Convenience and now knowing better is the 'bad thing'. You can't avoid that, it's pure human nature. You can work with it, create something even more convenient which doesn't do these bad things. Otherwise do stop complaining, it's seriously how humans work. I could also complain about how ineffective people are with their movements. But unless I became a personal trainer and actually showed them an easier+better way, I would just be spending energy.. This is the fault of devious practices and not knowing better.
  • 2
    @Condor Have you noticed Mozilla's new alliance with salesforce by chance? If you get an account to use the sync feature in the new quantum browser, the account seems to be through them. At least you have to sign their terms and privacy policy. They aren't exactly known for passive marketing I don't think. Didn't seem to be the one time I made the mistake of inputing my email address to that veteran's course they offer for, what is it, apex I think?

    As far as privacy settings, it doesn't seem that long that you've had a really detailed list of privacy options in the first place. Seems like at one point if you enabled them you more often than not ended up turning them off because they ended up restricting you from shit you want to see or do just as much as they kept you from sharing what you didn't intend too. But then some of the general marketing techniques didn't seem to be quite so conniving back then either.
  • 2
    In any case there's a small learning curve to keep up with and as with any other semi-complicated piece of technology most people would rather ask or pay someone else to figure it out for them, then use it as one more thing to bitch about when they're having a bad day.

    The flip side of that is that we bitch about users bugging us about the dumbest shit, but I know for me when I first started mechanicing for myself there would've been a couple weeks I probably woulda run out of gas to get around had I not got a random call because needed an oil change or had slung the belt off their mower.

    Not that that specifically applies here, but if you were to release a product, the general complaints could lead to an easier to understand privacy policy and be one more selling point to put your name above the rest.
  • 2
    I went kayaking (first time) with friends in the afternoon.

    I did take a photo using facebook, but didnt share it.

    Immediately that night I started seeing kayaking ads.. What the fuck
  • 2
    Facebook also has 'shadow profiles' where they still track you and build up profiles from the Facebook trackers that are on pages.
Your Job Suck?
Get a Better Job
Add Comment