Comments on: Facebook and “radical transparency” (a rant)

By: Martin

Martin — Sat, 13 Aug 2011 22:17:38 +0000

Not that that matters much if your philosophy can be reduced to: glorify form at the expense of functions!!

By: Matthew Nadolski

Matthew Nadolski — Tue, 19 Apr 2011 18:34:48 +0000

I am sorry to say this, but facebook is what? A database of information related to a label that you put on it in a name field.

Anyone who desires to utilize such a service should do the following:

A) Retain information they consider private.

B) Not use their real name- and certainly NOT allow their face or address to be used in any kind of relationship to said database if privacy is a major concern.

Anybody who didn’t see the potential for this kind of abuse is frankly either a high caliber idiot ( if they had to think about it but did it anyway ) or out and out too belligerent for their own good ( if they never thought about anything related to privacy in the first place. ).

For the record my mother is a computer illiterate and took privacy precautions including an entirely false name ( the name isn’t even related nationally ) and picture.

I understand why you are pissed at Zuky, and god knows that I hate the man to the point where you know, IF someone happened to put a .308 in his skull; well it wouldn’t dampen my day. ( NO, I am not hiring. It’s a statement of feelings, not a threat. ) But the personal responsibility factor here is far and away too large to simply ignore.

And yes that is my real name because I would GLADLY take responsibility for these statements. Corporate enterprise has absolutely never been about protecting the customer from ANYTHING; and it should be absolutely NO surprise that nothing has changed with the transition from the catalog, from the storefront, to the internet.

And I’m sure any CEO of any massive corporation would happily, laughingly, agree with me as long as he was doing so from behind an untraceable internet handle. So much for Zuckerberg’s babbling about “integrity” there, eh?

By: vruz

vruz — Tue, 15 Jun 2010 17:07:15 +0000

You’ll be hard pressed to find any praise for facebook coming from me. but we are in trouble if the CEO of Facebook can’t candidly express frustration about a shortcoming in a product he owns.
Is it that servile praise is the only thing that will please Infinite Loop and their faithfull?
It’s that image of aesthetic perfection and infallibility what apple sells, and the faithfull buy, after all.
A lousy phone that can’t stay functional is an ugly sight in the mirror.
Not that that matters much if your philosophy can be reduced to: glorify form at the expense of function.

By: neilperkin

neilperkin — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 10:30:08 +0000

Hi Danah. Another great post. Just to let you know that it’s been shortlisted on the Post Of The Month vote I run over on Only Dead Fish.
http://bit.ly/cc4jsp
Best, Neil

By: eric

eric — Fri, 04 Jun 2010 19:18:34 +0000

I fail to see how Habermas and Warner differ in this context and I think you missed the point of Jarvis’ reference to the former. The “public sphere” developed in opposition to the empowered private sphere of exclusivity. So the public sphere in Habermas’ conception is the original counterpublic. It developed as a quasi-egalitarian counterweight to the existing power structure. That there is a multiplicity of public spheres today goes to the point made by the astute commentor who referenced Luhmann.

Too bad about the hyperbolic ending to such a well-conceived post.

By: Winwood

Winwood — Wed, 26 May 2010 06:37:03 +0000

I’ve seen quite a few news and blog posts about this but this has been one of the best worded and most aware of them. Kudos. Not sure if you heard about the move to push people to quit facebook on the 31st (http://www.quitfacebookday.com/) but I think a one or two day “No Facebook Protest” would be an effective way to prove to Facebook that the users are concerned. Thoughts?

By: Kate Malinoski

Kate Malinoski — Tue, 25 May 2010 00:58:06 +0000

This was a very thoughtful and well informed post. This quote from Zuckerberg really stood out to me: “You have one identity… The days of you having a different image for your work friends or co-workers and for the other people you know are probably coming to an end pretty quickly… Having two identities for yourself is an example of a lack of integrity.” I’m just dying to see Zuckerberg interact with his friends and family in comparison to his professional behavior. People are expected to behave a certain way in specific scenarios, and I think respecting those expectations by modifying your behavior is part of having integrity.

By: Travis H.

Travis H. — Mon, 24 May 2010 02:31:57 +0000

I anxiously await Zuckerberg’s live A/V feed from his bedroom. Because, having a private life separate from your public one lacks integrity, right?

By: LKJ

LKJ — Thu, 20 May 2010 17:18:20 +0000

Carrie Brown-Smith writes, “I’m white and I’m a professor with a PhD, and therefore I certainly am very open on social networks.” I don’t follow your logic: “I’m a white professor, therefore I am open on social networks” is nonsensical.

By: Edo A. Elan

Edo A. Elan — Thu, 20 May 2010 09:33:03 +0000

A girl misses the fact her mother might know her aunt (on either the mother’s or father’s side). Why does the girl makes this mistake? Boyd says that it’s because “friends of friends” is a too-abstract concept. Referring to the list of friends-of-friends, she says “Facebook is hiding behind lists”.

If missing the connection between your aunt to your mother reflects a cognitive difficulty in extrapolating 2nd degree contacts, doesn’t it also affect Facebook’s designers and the prophets of “radical transparency”? Perhaps they, too, can’t imagine that a “user’s friend’s friend” is the user’s own mother? Are you comfortable with my extrapolations in the previous sentence? Didn’t they irritate your brain like these riddles where a man turns out to be his own grandfather? Some characterize Facebook’s actions as “Outing”, implying they see the bigger picture and understand “friends-of-friends” better than you or me. I’m not so sure.

More PM Facebook/privacy thoughts: http://edoamin.wordpress.com/2010/05/20/the-friend-of-my-friend-is-not-my-mother/