Facebook settles with FTC, under privacy watch for 20 years

Post by anigbrowl » Wed, Nov 30, 2011, 11:10 PM UTC

Bud wrote: post #66

dreamdu5t wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if you accept it was a lie, it's not fraud. Facebook "lies" like Subway "lies" about losing weight by eating there. You're omitting the fact that Facebook has always stated they may change what they do with your information in the future.

You're dodging the question of whether it is a lie, which is unsurprising. I say again: Facebook lied. You didn't mention fraud, and I made no comment on fraud. I said they lied. They did. As for the clumsy smokescreen analogy about Subway, allow me to point out the obvious: Facebook made promises to users about how FACEBOOK would handle the personal property of said users. These are concrete, easily-definable promis…

Post by anigbrowl » Wed, Nov 30, 2011, 11:37 PM UTC

sunchild wrote: post #124

Vivtek wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That whole using-personal-information-to-burn-people thing is still (barely) in living memory in Europe. There have been riots in Germany over the government trying to take a census - with good reason. Privacy is more important than a lot of shallow people imagine.

Well, the U.S. has its own history of people who shoot at census takers, and so on. From a legal perspective, the EU and member state implementing laws are: (1) more protective of the individual over the corporation than US laws, and (2) fairly onerous and expensive for companies to comply with. In fact, compliance is a kind of red herring, since many of the data protection rules in place are ambiguous or nonsensical…

Post by cbr » Thu, Dec 01, 2011, 1:06 AM UTC

_delirium wrote: post #75

d_r wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"- Facebook represented that third-party apps that users' installed would have access only to user information that they needed to operate. In fact, the apps could access nearly all of users' personal data – data the apps didn't need." Privacy/ethics issues aside, from a pure developer standpoint, isn't this just a feature? Where do we draw the line between functionality and privacy? User A allows user B to see her d…

That's one of the two bullet points where I can see a reasonable case for Facebook's side. It's slightly muddied because the app is running on Facebook where they control it, but I can sort of see an argument for apps' actions conceptually being actions of the user running them. I'm somewhat sympathetic to Facebook on the other app-related claim as well, "Facebook represented that third-party apps that users' install…