All clocks in Pulp Fiction are stuck on 4:20
|
|
|
Facebook sorts out privacy
SHOCKED BY WIDESPREAD CONDEMNATION, Facebook has decided to bend to overwhelming public and government pressure and sort out its privacy rules.
According to the Washington Post, Facebook's founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg presented new one-click options to help subscribers protect their privacy.
Facebook's Zuckerberg claimed that it was all a terrible mistake, which he put down to just "growing pains".
Engineers and designers had holed up in a conference room in its Palo Alto offices over the past three weeks to work on new privacy settings. The changes will mean that one click will be able to block any third-party sites from tapping into Facebook's gold mine of users' data.
Apparently it will be easier to allow a user to stop applications on Facebook from tapping user information unless told otherwise.
Facebook is also reversing a confusing feature introduced in December, so users will be presented with simpler options on who gets to see their personal information.
The backpedalling comes as a Rhode Island man sued Facebook for allegedly violating his privacy with the four-week-old 'instant personalisation' feature. In a complaint filed in US federal court, East Providence resident Derrick Rose alleged that Facebook's launch of instant personalisation "violated users' reasonable expectations of privacy".
It is not the first case that's been filed against Facebook over its betrayal of users' personal data privacy and it will probably not be the last.
Still, it's not all bad news this week for Facebook. Pakistan has announced that after banning the website for hosting a "Draw Mohammed" account, it will enable it to be accessed again. µ
Share this:
Share
Yeah sure, until the next update that is.
I don't trust Big Z to keep his word, especially since his word is mainly insults and scorn.
That's why I don't even have a Facebook account.
"violated users' reasonable expectations of privacy" -- Just because a web site puts up Terms Of Service and gives it away free, doesn't mean that the corporation can then do whatever it wants to flout the body of common law since Magna Carta. If the terms are unconscionable, they're invalid.