"The account it offered of his life — every friendship declared, every photo uploaded, every “poke” or comment or invitation sent or received over three years of casual use"
Uhh, add message archives, and that's more-or-less how much I'm fine with FB keeping (as long as I can take it out), in fact I'd be pretty annoyed if they randomly deleted old message archives.
"keeping messages after senders deleted them"
Well, because the receiver still has them. Duh.
"sharing personal data with outside app developers"
It's arguably implemented in an annoying way, but still, only if you use the apps, and you get an opt-out if you do.
"allowing users to be “tagged” in photos without their permission"
Annoying default, but you get to opt-out (unless you're not a user, then you've got a problem).
I guess it's just the article, as Facebook also does things like tracking users across websites, which is far more aggravating, and in my opinion the law should be change in a way that would make above features possible only as opt-in (yeah, I'm aware of the costs, cry me a river). But the stuff mentioned varies between the "correct" behavior and minor annoyances.
I think those 1200 pages that he received were not even complete. If I remember correctly, the tracking data collected via the "Like" buttons was missing.
Of course. Because people would go absolutely crazy if they knew about that data collection -- which is quite silly, since you can just browse those sites you don't want anybody to know about in private (porn) browsing mode.
Of course, you can't do that if you don't know about them.
Well, but Facebook should not be allowed to make the call on what is "reasonable" for "normal" people to know, and what is not. They should simply comply with the law.
I didn't claim that they prevent discussion of it. They do not provide you with the full data they have stored on you if you ask. By redacting the data in such a way, they make a call on what they think people are allowed to retrieve from them and what not. This seems to be incompatible with EU privacy law.
I don't think this is a result of "pestering" FB, you can dump your entire profile any time you want. As far as being concerned about what they're keeping, there's an easy solution ... don't upload the things you don't want the world to know about.
I don't think a FB account is a right, and I find it hard to sympathize with those that don't protect their own privacy (perhaps with the exception of kids who haven't gained that skill yet).
Facebook's "Like" buttons track you across the internet, even if you don't have an account. There's no way to opt-out of that, and there's no way to download or see that tracking data. If you don't have an account, other people can still tag you in photos and you can't opt-out (opting out requires having an account). The profile dump also doesn't tell you which "deleted" messages FB still has on the server because the other person hasn't deleted them. That dump is not even close to complete.
I have any of Facebook's servers I know of blocked in my hosts file for years now to avoid being tracked without my consent. Probably this will make my the number one suspect for the next highschool shooting in my area.
Facebook is in the business of advertising. They make money selling ads in Europe and whereas they may be above the average, they are not above the law. They should abide by European rules or take their business elsewhere.
12 comments
[ 3.4 ms ] story [ 47.4 ms ] threadUhh, add message archives, and that's more-or-less how much I'm fine with FB keeping (as long as I can take it out), in fact I'd be pretty annoyed if they randomly deleted old message archives.
"keeping messages after senders deleted them"
Well, because the receiver still has them. Duh.
"sharing personal data with outside app developers"
It's arguably implemented in an annoying way, but still, only if you use the apps, and you get an opt-out if you do.
"allowing users to be “tagged” in photos without their permission"
Annoying default, but you get to opt-out (unless you're not a user, then you've got a problem).
I guess it's just the article, as Facebook also does things like tracking users across websites, which is far more aggravating, and in my opinion the law should be change in a way that would make above features possible only as opt-in (yeah, I'm aware of the costs, cry me a river). But the stuff mentioned varies between the "correct" behavior and minor annoyances.
Of course, you can't do that if you don't know about them.
I don't think a FB account is a right, and I find it hard to sympathize with those that don't protect their own privacy (perhaps with the exception of kids who haven't gained that skill yet).
There's facebook disconnect for that
Chrome plugin: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/facebook-disconnec...
Firefox add-on: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-us/firefox/addon/fbdc/
(Not that I think it's reaosnable you have to install a browser plugin to opt out of this, but they do exist!)
Facebook is in the business of advertising. They make money selling ads in Europe and whereas they may be above the average, they are not above the law. They should abide by European rules or take their business elsewhere.