[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] helping friends kill their facebook accounts

From: J.B. Nicholson
Subject: Re: [libreplanet-discuss] helping friends kill their facebook accounts
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2016 20:47:38 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/38.7.0

Serge wrote:
Unless your friends who use Facebook don't actually upload photos of
you and don't talk about you much.

I'm guessing it's pretty easy for organizations to browse the web, find images containing faces, index the faces, and tie that to extant records of people's identities. There's probably some profit to be had in doing this, and with records being increasingly available digitally it's a way one could convince others into believing this is a viable way of keeping track of someone's movements.

I do realize that rarely happens though.

I don't know how any of us would know how frequently this happens and thus be able to back up that assertion.

On the subject line, I think doing what was previously recommended
would be best: personally let friends know, provide contacts and kill
it off. I heard that Facebook permanently deletes all archived data
after the account is kept disabled for a while, but I can't say if that
is true or not.

Given how cheap storage is and how effective databases are at holding indexed data, I'd need good evidence to believe any claim that a wealthy organization (including Facebook, Microsoft, Google, etc.) whose value hinges on data collection and indexing would have incentive to get rid of old information. I'm guessing there's going to be more value in being able to say something akin to "I know who <person> was with 20 years ago when they were at a work conference in <location>, and I have street photos, purchase receipt data, cell phone[1] recordings, and cell phone location data to back up this claim.".

A lot follows from that ability to say that; imagine the detail shows like "Who Do You Think You Are?" could give future historians and researchers with surreptitiously acquired recordings. Mass surveillance on this scale is both scary to the public (who don't hesitate to carry their cell phones with them everywhere) and short-term profitable in a way big businesses won't hesitate to exploit.

Actually, knowing Facebook's practices, it probably isn't, but I am
certain there is a legal way of pressuring them into it if need be.

While I agree with the first part, I would believe the opposite about the second part -- I doubt there is any regime that could compel an organization to do that and I'd bet there are very easy ways to evade effectively deleting such information and verifying such deletions occurred.

[1] A misnomer if ever there was one, a better name is a "tracker" because that's the primary value of these devices to their manufacturers and service providers. Making phone calls, texts, multimedia recordings, and connecting to the Internet are come-ons to get people to acquire one.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]