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

Actual Facebook Graph Searches

actualfacebookgraphsearches.tumblr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 251 posts

Re: Actual Facebook Graph Searches

#231

Post by pyre »

nemothekid wrote: post #92
pyre wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

| This is just handing people another tool - the uses, | and misuses, of said tool are entirely on the users. The same applies to building hand-held nuclear weapons and handing them out on a street corner. The same could be said of convincing people to put CCTVs in their houses and then hooking them all up chatroullete-style. That doesn't mean that it's a good idea. | A snarky and mean-spirited stereotyping of all |…

Maybe because I am also a "20-something", but I do not see how Zuckerburg/facebook employees being "sheltered" (I don't know why you asserted that, unless you went to high school with him) has anything to do with Social Graph. 1.) The fact that they had this information is not surprising at all. Again maybe because I am a 20-something, I think its pretty obvious that if you had terabytes of data you would want to sea…

  | Facebook did not install a CCTV in anyones home and log
  | their guilty pleasures. This gets parroted a lot, but if
  | you don't want someone to find out you love Lifetime
  | originals, don't post it on facebook.
You're either misreading my post or being disingenuous. I said:

  | The same could be said of convincing people to put CCTVs
  | in their houses
I could easily just say, "If you don't want people to see what you do, then don't allow a CCTV into your house." You're acting like CCTVs are by definition involuntary.

People put most things into Facebook because they don't understand the real implications of it. They say, "I like Lifetime originals," because they want their friends to know that, or because they view Facebook's profile questions like a survey. Most of these people are techno-illiterate (including the newer generations which are just more adept at using/consuming tech than their parents).

Re: Actual Facebook Graph Searches

#232

Post by koide »

mseebach wrote: post #177
mark_integerdsv wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you fail to see the danger that a tool with the ability to search a network for such things as "Islamic men interested in other men, living in Tehran," a tool that can then display their place of work or other contact details (that they may have willingly ((yet unwittingly)) entered), in the hands of bullies, bigots or oppressive regimes then personally I feel you are similarly limited in your world experience to…

Here's a thought: If you live in a country where people are summarily executed for being gay, don't put "I'm gay" on a public website with your name on it. YES people should be allowed to be gay in Tehran, and YES Facebook should help them with that - and they do: By not requiring you to enter your sexuality. I don't live in Tehran, so I am privileged here - but if I put "I did tax fraud, I win!" on my public Faceboo…

This reminds me of gun control debate. The more features FB enables to dig deeper in the social graph, the more chances for people to shoot themselves in the foot.

Should we restrict guns so there are less accidents and murders with them, or should we trust personal responsibility, with the cost it goes attached? Is restricting even possible?

That's for you to decide, but a cost certainly exists.

Re: Actual Facebook Graph Searches

#233

Post by koide »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #178
incongruity wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Never mind that one account used for shopping for a family is a fairly common use case...

Do you want them to start reading your mind, or stop suggesting stuff altogether?

They could realize those things are not usually liked by the same person, ask a user if this is a family account and let you define family members and their preferences within that account.

Re: Actual Facebook Graph Searches

#235

Post by baddox »

beatpanda wrote: post #81
brianchu wrote: post #51

Contrary to what a lot of people think, you can change the visibility of likes . This affects Graph Search, Timeline visibility, and also page visibility (I've personally tested these). The Admins of pages you like will still be able to see that you like their page. Go to the Likes page on your timeline. Click the Edit button in the upper right. Privacy visibility buttons will pop up next to each Like category for yo…

I appreciate the information, but this misses the point. Facebook hides privacy settings because privacy is bad for their business objectives, and most people will never bother to dig for these settings, leaving them open to the kinds of attacks demonstrated by the original post.

Or perhaps because not many people are going to want to individually set the visibility of likes, and displaying it more prominently would be a usability nightmare.

Re: Actual Facebook Graph Searches

#236

Post by pbhjpbhj »

josh2600 wrote: post #225
mark_integerdsv wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do. Primarily because Facebook caters to users with low technical ability and includes baked in privacy settings that are notoriously ambiguous and difficult to understand. Facebook actively promotes an anti-privacy styled online presence. Those with the skills to build a website in '97, along with the requisite metatags to allow for the type of indexing you describe can reasonably be expected to understand what th…

I built a website in or around '97 on geocities. You talk about metatags being required for indexing but I think you forget that the web was young once. Google had a voracious appetite to index and they still do. The barrier to entry for someone to build a website in '97 wasn't much higher than it is now. Things just look prettier these days.

Prettier than Geocities? Unpossible.

Re: Actual Facebook Graph Searches

#238

Post by icesoldier »

driverdan wrote: post #195
derleth wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you don't like it, then quit. Assuming you're socially allowed to quit Facebook.

Because people didn't have a social life or communicate before there was Facebook? Give me a break.

I can't help but think that statement is similar to saying, "Letters are a perfectly valid means of communication; I don't see the use of these telephones."

Re: Actual Facebook Graph Searches

#239

Post by incongruity »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #178
incongruity wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Never mind that one account used for shopping for a family is a fairly common use case...

Do you want them to start reading your mind, or stop suggesting stuff altogether?

As suggested by another commenter, that's a false dichotomy. I'd argue there's lots of room for innovation and refinement here.

Manual or algorithmic identification of family members is one option, but I think there's something more to be gained here by understanding the behavior just a bit more abstractly... Shopping moods? Modes? Targets? Tasks? Something, possibly – but I'm only guessing here. The real power could come from actually working with/doing user research and prototyping.

I'd love the chance to work on such a project, actually – I had a chance to work with data from a study on the online shopping habits of mothers a few years ago and there's lots of interesting angles to possibly explore, IMHO.

Re: Actual Facebook Graph Searches

#240

Post by crowhack »

Mahn wrote: post #210
crowhack wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes I do but when I joined facebook I didn't realize they would create a super search engine to easily sort and categorize all of their users' data for more efficient targeted advertising. They sell likes, they have my friends sponsor ads they've never sponsored, they used 5 of my friends pictures to try to manipulate me into not deleting my account. We aren't their main customer but are there just to be targeted. So…

So you are arguing that you made something public on facebook, but you didn't expect it to be that public? It looks like people who reject/don't use facebook due to privacy concerns do so because they don't understand the implications of what they put there. Personally, if I were to be concerned about privacy, I'd just make some research to understand what is and isn't public and how to use the product overall, but I…

My 'irrational' fear exists because of facebook's constantly changing uses of our data. When they began and we all started liking things we didn't know these same likes would be used for marketing purposes. We didn't know they would be used to sponsor ads. They went from a social network for people to a social network for companies. I agree with you and I do understand that I choose what is public, yes that's great; but how about the average user? Facebook makes money by selling it's users' data to companies. If everyone was private they wouldn't make any money.

This open graph search will be great for marketing purposes, and a silly tool for us users. I guarantee there are going to be some serious consequences of companies/governments having the power to instantly search and sort billion's of users' data. And maybe you'll say that some great findings can come from this search; maybe we can learn more about humans and societies with this tool? Maybe, but I believe the cost outweighs the benefits.

Post reply on HN