FHM writers' apology questioned
Two FHM men's magazine writers have written an open letter to apologise for joking about corrective rape, but also complained about "media madness" around their "private conversation" on Facebook.
The letter, published on wordpress.com, by Max Barashenkov and Montle Moorosi, contains an apology in the first paragraph, but some readers' comments described it as "fake" and "flimsy".
"We apologise sincerely for our distasteful and...read more here: FHM writers' apology questioned
When will these blithering idiots realise that there is no such thing as privacy on the Internet. Tjops!
forgetting what was said for just a moment here (their comments were stupid), but what is the point of having privacy setting on Facebook if they are not private? it just shows that choosing who you befriend on Facebook should be a carefully thought out decision. Obviously some of their friends let this out to the media, or even better, works IN the media like they do.
It's naive to expect privacy regardless of the settings.Originally Posted by oltman
Saying sorry after its escalated makes an apology seem weak. Something more should be done for it to seem more than just words, go out and volunteer some time with rape victims or something.
contact me if you are in Cape Town and looking for PC Hardware at very competitive pricing. We also do web and graphic design.
Its primarily to create a false sense of security. You're data gets sold to advertisers anyway & they have conveniently left out privacy controls relating to that completely.
would they really need to sell your info when they have their own advertising stream creating enough money to buy half of the third world? does not make sense...
1.21 USD...just over the value of a packet of chips....thats how much you & you're info is worth to them per year.
http://money.cnn.com/2012/05/16/tech...arpu/index.htm
If you think they care about actually protecting your info then you're in for a surprise. Remember this is a company posting likes from the accounts of fuckin dead people. (No joke - google it - too lazy to search for it).
Or if you prefer in slightly more legal terms -per their terms and conditions:
Here is a challenge for you: Find me a privacy setting covering advertiser info (aside from the shelved beacon program) - something resembling this supposed permission to share info with advertisers. (screenshot pls - its likely to change anyway by the time I read your response)We do not share any of your information with advertisers (unless, of course, you give us permission).
Can't find it? Thats because its embedded implicitly in their privacy settings which change every 50 seconds. They don't actually ask. Nor do you actually have to select anything. After a change in privacy policy the settings you select revert to the default. e.g. in multiple cases I selected a specific privacy option...a week later I return to find they changed the options & set mine to the default...which happens to be the exact opposite of what I selected (with slightly different phrasing).
Maybe I'm tainted by hanging out on HN...the info there is a lot more "raw" if you like. e.g. Cases where the profiles of all 1 billion users are vulnerable...and it takes FB forever to respond to the report - thats assuming the honest & ethical dude follows FB's rules for actually reporting. Most just sell it on the black market for 20x the profit.
Posting stuff to facebook is about as private as posting to a public blog - FB has managed to create a false sense of security though & that has proven to be quite valuable.
Posting Permissions
