Zuckerberg: “We do not own user data, they own their data. We never intended to give that impression and we feel bad that we did.”
Mashable: “Between the publishing of new rights and responsibilities and a commitment to keep users informed of changes to its Terms of Service, it’s clear Facebook has listened to users, and is going above and beyond to try and convince them that a similar situation won’t happen again. Now the ball is in their court to deliver on these promises.”"
RWW: “Facebook said today that policy changes in the future will be voted on if they stir up enough comments to warrant it. There is no clear public standard for what will be voted on, no details about how the voting will work, etc. Perhaps more important, voting about changes to Facebook may not always be a good idea. … One of the questions asked during the press phone call today concerned privacy laws. How would Facebook deal with different privacy laws in different locations? The company said they would follow whatever laws were in place where a user lived. On the face of it that might not sound so bad, but in practice a promise to always follow the law is in direct contradiction with the company’s goals of changing the world. … Mark Zuckerberg is a young man at the helm of a huge company, touching hundreds of millions of lives all over the world, at a time of dramatic social upheaval caused in large part by the kind of technology he is helping create. That’s no small job. We hope he can pull it off.”
ST: “After a huge revolt from its users over a naked user content grab, Facebook is now instituting a supposed ‘open, transparent, and democratic’ set of Terms of Service. – Nothing could be more fake, more closed, more manipulative – and ultimately more authoritarian – than what they are calling ‘democracy’. It’s a loopy geek’s idea of democracy incorporating various utopian ideals they have absorbed here and there from the extremist left (and right!) ideologues they seem most exposed to on the Internet – and hopefully it will sink of its own weight and/or be overthrown.”
Gerrit Eicker 07:43 on 27. February 2009 Permalink |
Zuckerberg: “We do not own user data, they own their data. We never intended to give that impression and we feel bad that we did.”
Mashable: “Between the publishing of new rights and responsibilities and a commitment to keep users informed of changes to its Terms of Service, it’s clear Facebook has listened to users, and is going above and beyond to try and convince them that a similar situation won’t happen again. Now the ball is in their court to deliver on these promises.”"
RWW: “Facebook said today that policy changes in the future will be voted on if they stir up enough comments to warrant it. There is no clear public standard for what will be voted on, no details about how the voting will work, etc. Perhaps more important, voting about changes to Facebook may not always be a good idea. … One of the questions asked during the press phone call today concerned privacy laws. How would Facebook deal with different privacy laws in different locations? The company said they would follow whatever laws were in place where a user lived. On the face of it that might not sound so bad, but in practice a promise to always follow the law is in direct contradiction with the company’s goals of changing the world. … Mark Zuckerberg is a young man at the helm of a huge company, touching hundreds of millions of lives all over the world, at a time of dramatic social upheaval caused in large part by the kind of technology he is helping create. That’s no small job. We hope he can pull it off.”
ST: “After a huge revolt from its users over a naked user content grab, Facebook is now instituting a supposed ‘open, transparent, and democratic’ set of Terms of Service. – Nothing could be more fake, more closed, more manipulative – and ultimately more authoritarian – than what they are calling ‘democracy’. It’s a loopy geek’s idea of democracy incorporating various utopian ideals they have absorbed here and there from the extremist left (and right!) ideologues they seem most exposed to on the Internet – and hopefully it will sink of its own weight and/or be overthrown.”