71–80 of 407 posts
Last paragraph of the article: "The new authentication scheme is the second in recent weeks that relies on photos. Earlier this month, Facebook asked users to upload nude photos to Facebook Messenger, as part of an effort to prevent revenge porn. Facebook said it would use the nude photos to create a digital fingerprint against which to compare future posts." Wait what? I had to check whether today was April 1st.
Last paragraph of the article: "The new authentication scheme is the second in recent weeks that relies on photos. Earlier this month, Facebook asked users to upload nude photos to Facebook Messenger, as part of an effort to prevent revenge porn. Facebook said it would use the nude photos to create a digital fingerprint against which to compare future posts." Wait what? I had to check whether today was April 1st.
I couldn't believe it. This is the most absurd thing I have ever heard.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> my friend count went way down, my friend quality went way up. This is an important distinction. FB has programmed us to believe quantity is the goal, when quality probably should be. How many FB "friends" does the average user have meaningful relationships with? I'd speculate not many more than it's possible to maintain offline/without FB's "help".
I'm not sure how true that is; virtually everyone I've encountered distinguished unqualified “friends” from “Facebook friends”, the two groups being distinct, usually overlapping, categories. There are certainly people who treasure their number of social media followers, just as there have always been people who treasure the offline equivalent, and social media like Facebook makes it easier to quantity and compare th…
"I bet all these idiots cannot tell the difference between real friends and the Facebook friend counter like I can. ;) BTW I've deleted my Facebook because I had a crippling addiction to it."
I mean you need to pick your poison here. You either give facebook more data to validate your authenticity or you allow botnets to influence the social networks. It seems impossible to have it both ways, although I'm willing to hear alternatives in the general case.
Authenticity validation could be completely external from Facebook, and if they gave a shit about your privacy they would not only be OK with it but even push for it. Many countries already have crypto-secure solutions for verifying their identity when submitting things like tax forms. Facebook just needs to start using them, but they won't, and it's obvious why.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They still have your face from scanning your friends' photos and contacts. Combine datestamp, location, messages, and posts over years and Facebook knows who was together for a photo whether or not you've uploaded any or been tagged. Facebook knows the face of everyone who is on Facebook or who knows a few people who are.
No, not really. There are not many of photos of me on the web and any that are were taken from a distance and too low res to id me. I've been stingy about that for a long time. FB doesn't have my phone number and I disabled the email address I used to sign up. I delete all my cookies often and use different browsers and turn off and reset my modem to get a new IP address. I have no apps on my phone, don't use iCloud,…
If anyone who has you in their contact list uses Facebook, I can pretty much guarantee they have your number.
I should write a blog post about this, but to those thinking about deleting Facebook, My experience deleting it 5 years ago is summarized as: my friend count went way down, my friend quality went way up. Your results may vary, but the purpose of my comment is not to immediately be worried that Facebook is a mandatory lifeline for your social life.
A few years ago I walked away from Facebook. Three months later, I got a phone call from my mother (who's not online) because she heard through the grapevine that I was dead. My stupid Facebook "friends" took my silence for something sinister and jumped to conclusions. I ended up returning to Facebook and purging my "friend" list down to just a dozen actual friends.
I always wondered what my Facebook acquaintances thought when I left.
I figured they didn’t care Id left to give it much thought or that I was being a prick and had deleted them.
Last paragraph of the article: "The new authentication scheme is the second in recent weeks that relies on photos. Earlier this month, Facebook asked users to upload nude photos to Facebook Messenger, as part of an effort to prevent revenge porn. Facebook said it would use the nude photos to create a digital fingerprint against which to compare future posts." Wait what? I had to check whether today was April 1st.
Not sure how I feel about it still, but this article doesn't really accurately portray the service. From the source linked by the Wired article [1], this is specifically intended to prevent a nude photo from being shared maliciously when a user has reason to believe that it will be. They then voluntarily upload the image to Facebook which uses the digital fingerprint to prevent it from being reposted either in its or…
Last paragraph of the article: "The new authentication scheme is the second in recent weeks that relies on photos. Earlier this month, Facebook asked users to upload nude photos to Facebook Messenger, as part of an effort to prevent revenge porn. Facebook said it would use the nude photos to create a digital fingerprint against which to compare future posts." Wait what? I had to check whether today was April 1st.
For starters, it's intended for victims of revenge porn, which is a fairly extreme category and one in which the harassment is distinctively aggressive and virulent. Because if it weren't, the way FB deals with abusive content generally would seem to be good enough. If you come into this thinking that FB is asking everyone to upload their nudes for "safekeeping", then you've missed the point.
Secondly, it's hard to think of an implementation that wouldn't create a potential disaster that justifies doing anything special for revenge porn victims. Using the Facebook app is the most secure channel for sending FB the photos because it is a secure app that all FB users know how to use. Having the user hash on their own requires either an external app or website.
I don't think it needs to be said how such ancillary applications can be spoofed. Even if only 0.5% of users are dumb enough to fall for these spoofs, each incident would be a complete fucking disaster, for the victims and for Facebook.
As for the prospect of FB owning people's nudes. Again, in the case of revenge porn victims, the horse is already far from the barn. If we assign the worst of motives to FB, that it's a way to secretly collect nudes from users. Again, horse, barn. This secret process would be less efficient by magnitudes compared to what FB can already do today.
So in others words people who travel or go on vacation?
Last paragraph of the article: "The new authentication scheme is the second in recent weeks that relies on photos. Earlier this month, Facebook asked users to upload nude photos to Facebook Messenger, as part of an effort to prevent revenge porn. Facebook said it would use the nude photos to create a digital fingerprint against which to compare future posts." Wait what? I had to check whether today was April 1st.
I couldn't believe it. This is the most absurd thing I have ever heard.
I am just surprised Facebook didn't instead look at a way of running these image hashing algorithms on the device instead.