Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook retracted Zuckerberg’s messages from recipients’ inboxes

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 134 posts

Re: Facebook retracted Zuckerberg’s messages from recipients’ inboxes

#61

Post by cornholio »

feelin_googley wrote: post #18

The folks in Myanmar apparently have taken issue with how Zuckerberg referred to FB's "tools" and "systems" for detection of hate speech in his Vox interview. They sent him a letter: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/05/technology/zuckerberg-fac...

Blaming Facebook for not stopping chain letters spread on messenger is disingenuous, especially in the context of the privacy debate.

If you believe people have the right to private communication, there's nothing a technology company can do to fix social problems like this, you need social measures, international pressure and so on.

Re: Facebook retracted Zuckerberg’s messages from recipients’ inboxes

#62

Post by cm2187 »

everdev wrote: post #2

I'm no fan of Facebook and deleted my account years ago, but the flood of articles like these that are barely embarrassing since the major Cambridge Analytic embarrassment feels more like an agenda or piling on than newsworthy items. There are many reasons to reduce or eliminate your time on FB, but this isn't one of them.

I disagree, this shows a strong pattern of "do as I say, not as I do" in term of privacy. And this is a prime example.

Re: Facebook retracted Zuckerberg’s messages from recipients’ inboxes

#63

Post by HenryBemis »

Watch "The Circle"!! It is the famous moment when Tom Hanks says "oh we are so ....ed". And Tom Hanks can deliver a line!

Secrets are Lies, but their secrets are better than your secrets. I am surprised that FB still hasn't lost 30% of their users by now.

Re: Facebook retracted Zuckerberg’s messages from recipients’ inboxes

#64

Post by [deleted] »

colordrops wrote: post #60
alphakappa wrote: post #8

I think it's clear from nearly a decade's worth of Facebook's trysts with privacy issues that it is a company that doesn't have a fundamental stance that's in favor of user privacy. Over and over again it has either intentionally built features that disregard privacy, or put in wrong defaults, or simply brushed off criticisms when others have misused Facebook. At this point we should be asking ourselves why we expect…

> We should also be asking ourselves whether an organization that has the power to be so influential in the destinies of nations should be run by executives who see every issue as a PR issue to be dealt with, rather than ones that should teach them fundamental lessons. That's an extremely insightful statement but unfortunately also describes the DNC and RNC, which are already in control of the US.

[deleted]

Re: Facebook retracted Zuckerberg’s messages from recipients’ inboxes

#65

Post by joering2 »

alphakappa wrote: post #8

I think it's clear from nearly a decade's worth of Facebook's trysts with privacy issues that it is a company that doesn't have a fundamental stance that's in favor of user privacy. Over and over again it has either intentionally built features that disregard privacy, or put in wrong defaults, or simply brushed off criticisms when others have misused Facebook. At this point we should be asking ourselves why we expect…

This is NOT really that big of an issue. We make it this way because USA does not have any serious regulations on data privacy. In most European countries if someone offers your info, such as DOB, credit card balance, property ownership, a prosecutor knocks on his doors with handcuffs, even if temporary. And if you ran major bulk operation, you go behind bars for many years.

No scandal in USA will make any difference if we don't implement draconian laws. Looks what's going on around GDPR; it's not here YET meanwhile everyone knows about it and every email provider shakes his pants. Every company I do business with already send me some sort of acknowledgment or their own policy to accommodate GDPR and these are not even European companies!

I am all for small government, but we clearly need a brand new Department that will regulate such behemoths like Youtube (which has power to squash your first amendment) and Google/Facebook et al that continuously makes money off of their immoral behavior with your information.

Re: Facebook retracted Zuckerberg’s messages from recipients’ inboxes

#66

Post by jonathankoren »

jamra wrote: post #46
matte_black wrote: post #5

Thing is a nothingburger. Do people really believe messages can’t be deleted no matter what?

The article specifies that messages older than 2014 were deleted. I read once (can't find the resource now) that Microsoft deletes all chat and email messages older than a certain date. I think the reason is legal. If ever subpoenaed, providing too much chat info could be potentially damaging. I feel like the insinuation is that something specifically nefarious is going on. They can delete private messages in their o…

1) Users are explicitly not allowed to do this. You can delete things in your inbox, you can’t delete things in other people’s inboxes.

2) It convienely starts happenening right when FB finds themselves in a shitshow, and with a CEO that famously said, “They trust me — dumb fucks”. There is no evidence that this is anything except something very very new.

3) Document retention policies only work for your company. Not someone else’s. I have no right to go into your documents and shred things I no longer want you to have.

Re: Facebook retracted Zuckerberg’s messages from recipients’ inboxes

#67

Post by exodust »

HenryBemis wrote: post #63

Watch "The Circle"!! It is the famous moment when Tom Hanks says "oh we are so ....ed". And Tom Hanks can deliver a line! Secrets are Lies, but their secrets are better than your secrets. I am surprised that FB still hasn't lost 30% of their users by now.

After 20 minutes I couldn't stand it any longer. Bad movie.

Re: Facebook retracted Zuckerberg’s messages from recipients’ inboxes

#68

Post by oarsinsync »

dx034 wrote: post #55
jamesmiller5 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All I need is a better chat app, that Facebook won't buy. I can now text, voice record, send photos/selfies and video messages easily to my social circles. Connecting to second degree connections is fast and everyone I know has an account. I want to leave Facebook but I can't give up such an amazing chat experience that keeps me connected to my family and close friends. Even if I got my immediate family to use a diff…

Only using whatsapp without other facebook accounts should still be fine. Whatsapp has end2end encryption (unlike FB messenger) and if you don't use other FB products they can't use your data for ads. Obviously not as good as an independent messenger but will cause the same revenue loss for FB.

I believe that’s only text. Try sending someone a video. Takes a while. Try forwarding that video to someone else moments later. Happens pretty quickly.

Same applies with photos in my experience. I’d assume voice notes,location pins, etc are also subject to this as well.

Re: Facebook retracted Zuckerberg’s messages from recipients’ inboxes

#69

Post by simias »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #57
jamesmiller5 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All I need is a better chat app, that Facebook won't buy. I can now text, voice record, send photos/selfies and video messages easily to my social circles. Connecting to second degree connections is fast and everyone I know has an account. I want to leave Facebook but I can't give up such an amazing chat experience that keeps me connected to my family and close friends. Even if I got my immediate family to use a diff…

> that Facebook won't buy Facebook will buy because it’s profitable to buy. Monopoly power is a known mode of market failure. (Note: you don’t need 100% of a market for the deleterious effects of monopoly power to manifest.) The only solution is blocking future acquisitions and breaking up Facebook.

Facebook won't buy IRC or any distributed open source decentralized protocol. Chats, newsgroups, email... The net used to be a lot more open and decentralized that it is now, maybe it's time to go back a couple of decades?

Re: Facebook retracted Zuckerberg’s messages from recipients’ inboxes

#70

Post by rootlocus »

jamesmiller5 wrote: post #54
alphakappa wrote: post #8

I think it's clear from nearly a decade's worth of Facebook's trysts with privacy issues that it is a company that doesn't have a fundamental stance that's in favor of user privacy. Over and over again it has either intentionally built features that disregard privacy, or put in wrong defaults, or simply brushed off criticisms when others have misused Facebook. At this point we should be asking ourselves why we expect…

All I need is a better chat app, that Facebook won't buy. I can now text, voice record, send photos/selfies and video messages easily to my social circles. Connecting to second degree connections is fast and everyone I know has an account. I want to leave Facebook but I can't give up such an amazing chat experience that keeps me connected to my family and close friends. Even if I got my immediate family to use a diff…

How about: https://telegram.org/
Post reply on HN