Comments on: Mike Arrington is Right, Facebook is Wrong

By: lindahellerhylton

lindahellerhylton — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 20:38:36 +0000

I have just been disabled on facebook for as near as I can tell inviting to many friends. Can anyone help me get it back. Linda

By: whadafuk

whadafuk — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 17:58:08 +0000

There is reason that I don’t use my real name, or photo or post my email address…the people in my friend list know who I am…and if they want this information they can get it in a more private manner.

By: Ian

Ian — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 20:05:48 +0000

@ Scoble: You are right, wrong, and right.

1. Graph – of course this should be open, it is really just a list of the people I know. Why should facebook, or anyone else, be able to say I am allowed to be friends with someone on their site, but not somewhere else.

2. Friends’ data – two points here.
First, by friending you and putting my data on Facebook (or whatever other site) I am agreeing to allow you to “use” that data, but not make any of it public to other people… I friended you, not your other friends. Which leads to my second point.
Second, by posting my information on a site that we connect on, it is assumed that I am familiar with how that site functions (i.e. my data is used), implicitly giving you permission to use it IN THAT WAY. However, if you take my personal data elsewhere, I may not know how it is being used and therefore have NOT given you permission to use it in other ways. (Plaxo’s spamming issues of the past being an example). *disclaimer – plaxo is much better now.

3. Our actual data – hopefully this is a given. We should have control how of our content, only allowing it to be put where we want it. However, I believe once I have published content somewhere, I should be allowed to pull that content into other locations – do you agree?

Ian
ian-ellis.com

By: amolpatil2k

amolpatil2k — Fri, 23 May 2008 10:11:02 +0000

Avatars need not be of the animated variety. We can have “proxy” avatars. Proxy avatars are actual people who have granted us either only Read privileges (Piggyback avatars) or Read and Write privileges (Poisoned avatars). Naturally, Poisoined avatars would be even more controversial than Piggyback avatars but only if all these are not declared. If a profile clearly states upfront whether it is Piggybacked or Poisoned or neither, it would not be so controversial. In fact, it might add to the fun if we suspect that the profile we are communicating with has one or more eavesdroppers or maybe even impersonators.

By: Google Friend Connect il no di Facebook e la guerra dei social network - Appunti Digitali

Thu, 22 May 2008 06:00:52 +0000

[...] che pure ha un punto di vista discordante rispetto ad Arrington, compie una interessante scomposizione del problema, secondo cui parlando di dati mantenuti dai social network [...]

By: John Waterman

John Waterman — Mon, 19 May 2008 05:26:27 +0000

Mike is 100% right…

just because I let a girl hold my hand at the movies doesn’t mean I want to let her hold my hand at the pub with the boys, or after my football game, or when I’ll trying to court another girl.

Friendships are contextual…just because I give you my email in facebook does not mean you can assume I will want you to have it in another social contex.