Commentary by Kurt Opsahl

Since its incorporation just over five years ago, Facebook has undergone a remarkable transformation. When it started, it was a private space for communication with a group of your choice. Soon, it transformed into a platform where much of your information is public by default. Today, it has become a platform where you have no choice but to make certain information public, and this public information may be shared by Facebook with its partner websites and used to target ads.

To help illustrate Facebook's shift away from privacy, we have highlighted some excerpts from Facebook's privacy policies over the years. Watch closely as your privacy disappears, one small change at a time!

Facebook Privacy Policy circa 2005:

No personal information that you submit to Thefacebook will be available to any user of the Web Site who does not belong to at least one of the groups specified by you in your privacy settings.

Facebook Privacy Policy circa 2006:

We understand you may not want everyone in the world to have the information you share on Facebook; that is why we give you control of your information. Our default privacy settings limit the information displayed in your profile to your school, your specified local area, and other reasonable community limitations that we tell you about.

Facebook Privacy Policy circa 2007:

Profile information you submit to Facebook will be available to users of Facebook who belong to at least one of the networks you allow to access the information through your privacy settings (e.g., school, geography, friends of friends). Your name, school name, and profile picture thumbnail will be available in search results across the Facebook network unless you alter your privacy settings.

Facebook Privacy Policy circa November 2009:

Facebook is designed to make it easy for you to share your information with anyone you want. You decide how much information you feel comfortable sharing on Facebook and you control how it is distributed through your privacy settings. You should review the default privacy settings and change them if necessary to reflect your preferences. You should also consider your settings whenever you share information. ...

Information set to “everyone” is publicly available information, may be accessed by everyone on the Internet (including people not logged into Facebook), is subject to indexing by third party search engines, may be associated with you outside of Facebook (such as when you visit other sites on the internet), and may be imported and exported by us and others without privacy limitations. The default privacy setting for certain types of information you post on Facebook is set to “everyone.” You can review and change the default settings in your privacy settings.

Facebook Privacy Policy circa December 2009:

Certain categories of information such as your name, profile photo, list of friends and pages you are a fan of, gender, geographic region, and networks you belong to are considered publicly available to everyone, including Facebook-enhanced applications, and therefore do not have privacy settings. You can, however, limit the ability of others to find this information through search using your search privacy settings.

Current Facebook Privacy Policy, as of April 2010:

When you connect with an application or website it will have access to General Information about you. The term General Information includes your and your friends’ names, profile pictures, gender, user IDs, connections, and any content shared using the Everyone privacy setting. ... The default privacy setting for certain types of information you post on Facebook is set to “everyone.” ... Because it takes two to connect, your privacy settings only control who can see the connection on your profile page. If you are uncomfortable with the connection being publicly available, you should consider removing (or not making) the connection.

Viewed together, the successive policies tell a clear story. Facebook originally earned its core base of users by offering them simple and powerful controls over their personal information. As Facebook grew larger and became more important, it could have chosen to maintain or improve those controls. Instead, it's slowly but surely helped itself — and its advertising and business partners — to more and more of its users' information, while limiting the users' options to control their own information.

Related Issues: Privacy, Social Networks, Terms Of (Ab)Use

[Permalink]

An absolutely elegant document from the Electronic Frontier Foundation explaining how Facebook has continued to back out of their privacy policy with which they solicited users in the first place. It's spiraling to give them more data with which to sell, have people interact, and drive more use to their site.

I'm looking forward to major influencers writing publicly about dropping Facebook and a rash of new sites popping up in its place. I think there is real opportunity here for some entrepreneurs to think about the type of service people are looking for - walled gardens, sharing important memories/information with friends and family, keeping private data private (as much as it can be on the web), etc. Why not build a service that respects individual users? Is that possible? Or is it always about scaling your product as big as it can be?

As a side note: I think Flickr is a beautiful photo-sharing site where I can be public, private, for family, or for friends. Simple, effective. Can social networking sites like Facebook get back to what works?

Let me tell you what this is about," says Sohn. "This is all about Hollywood and the recording industry wanting telephone and cable companies to filter their networks for copyright infringement.

Via NPR article on new trade agreemetns via @alexragone: I am constantly amazed at how much power big business (in this case, Hollywood) has over the way our government operates. Currently the U.S. is in secret trade negotiations with major nations about how the Internet should/should not be filtered. The Recording Industry of America wants internet service providers (ISP - the company that provides your Internet connection) to be more responsible for blocking illegal file traders.

My best metaphor for ISP's in this case is your water company (or say, electric company). You might use water for cooking, bathing, cleaning, or you might use water as part of your illegal alcohol still. Either way, the water company is not responsible for checking up on your usage. Why then are ISP's supposed to give you a utility and monitor/block your usage. If the RIAA is so concerned about piracy, then they need to figure out a better solution. Don't mess up the Internet trying to deal with your own business problem.

Definitely read the NPR article for more on what is happening in these secret trade deals.

The Open Internet Debate: Redlining 2.0

Racewire is one of the few places covering how net neutrality legislation affects people of color in particular. They are in support of a regulated national broadband plan that would help protect "certain" communities from being left out and/or targeted - they make a comparison to the unregulated mortgage industry which preyed on people of color. This is an important issue to keep in mind as you watch the evolving dialog around broadband laws.

via @cacrandall

Google Buzz may put children at risk, parents fear

Kids might not know they're sharing private details with the public.

Wow, the folks in this article really don't get it. It may as well be called, "Google Buzz may put children at risk, parents fearmonger.

Kids are at risk for seeing inappropriate things when they are online; that is why we have to teach them about boundaries, and not put them into situations which they're not prepared for. Giving a 9 year old a free e-mail account (which the company only allows for kids 13 years and older) and then being shocked when the product changes over time (hello, you didn't pay for anything and you accepted their terms) is simply ill-advised parenting.

Teaching kids about being online means letting them be online in ways they can handle. 9 year olds with unfettered e-mail access is questionable at best. Some 9 year olds may be able to handle that, and some certainly can not. As a parent, set your kids up for success - if you want to teach them about e-mail, have them e-mail from your account. This way, messages come back to you and you can relay them to your child. Don't go straight to gMail, would you give your kid a car as soon as they wanted one? Start them off with a tricycle in the carpeted basement and you'll see them progress much more successfully.

Enlarge This Image

 

Joshua Lott for The New York Times

Jerod Reyes, left, and Dylan Powell use their bus's Wi-Fi to do homework on their way to school.

The New York Times did a piece on the "Internet Bus" in Arizona that allows students wi-fi access while commuting to school or going on school trips. Seems like a great way to keep students connected at times when they normally aren't.

The article however, seems lacking in all of the non-academic things kids would be using an Internet connection for. An entire bus full of kids with laptops and Internet connections and Facebook/social networking doesn't even come up once? Where are the kids who are gaming? Where are the kids downloading pirated music/TV shows? Where are the kids posting photos on Facebook? The article seems to be a looking at the bus through rose-colored glasses, but I get the gist of it.

It's a neat idea, but it's yet another space where the kids used to be somewhat offline, now turning online. I suppose that they already had their phones on the bus, so it wasn't all that offline. I just wonder if there will be any offline spaces left for them? The athletics field, perhaps? The NFL had to ban Twitter from sidelines recently.

update: I missed the line in the article that talked about the students playing games. I still think it leans way to heavy on the academic use. Unless these are kids who only do homework and nothing else, it's just not a reasonable expectation that it will become a study hall bus. It will be just like the Internet in their homes - often homework, but more often media consumption.