Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Privacy Social Networks Your Rights Online

Facebook Founder's Pictures Go Public 219

jamie passes along a Newsfactor piece that begins "In a not-uncommon development for the social-networking leader, Facebook's recently released privacy controls are leaving the company a bit red-faced. As a result of a new policy that by default makes users' profiles, photos, and friends lists available on the Web, almost 300 personal photos of founder Mark Zuckerberg became publicly available, a development that had gossip sites like Gawker yukking it up."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Facebook Founder's Pictures Go Public

Comments Filter:
  • by vawarayer ( 1035638 ) on Sunday December 13, 2009 @05:44PM (#30425384)

    I am really worried about the fact that Facebook has access to data such as people's real name (that's the point of it, right?), IP addresses, friends' lists, and other info. It worries me enough on a personnal level, so I'll never register, but what worries me more is on the macro level. Even if such company did not want to 'do evil' with this tremendous amount of info, I feel that the power they posess is ultimately too big to be own by a for-profit company.

  • too funny (Score:3, Interesting)

    by pertelote ( 37736 ) * <pertelote@centu3 ... minus pi> on Sunday December 13, 2009 @05:45PM (#30425392) Homepage Journal

    I have spent the best part of the week trying to adjust my facebook profile to some level of discreteness that I am comfortable with. Have been very unhappy with the "all or nothing" choices, and have started just simply deleting content. I feel a little better, because now I am sure the settings will get some fine-tuning.

    Just for fun: []

    And this is after I have locked down as much as I can without insulting my family and classmates.

  • by Mr.Zuka ( 166632 ) on Sunday December 13, 2009 @06:01PM (#30425522)

    I think it says a lot about his personality that he posted to his newsfeed that he meant to post the pictures, then somehow the pictures mysteriously disappear. Kind of scary with an ego that he can't admit to a mistake that small. If there ever was a security breach would facebook ever admit to it?

  • Eh? (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 13, 2009 @06:11PM (#30425584)

    I vaguely remember automatically being "friends" with mark zuckerberg when I originally signed up for facebook eons ago... (This was before "fans" existed...).

    In any case, I wouldn't think someone like mark would want most of his pictures private.. it is his site after all!

  • Re:Karma. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by mwvdlee ( 775178 ) on Sunday December 13, 2009 @06:42PM (#30425806) Homepage

    My guess is it's fake.

    They either had the choice of (A) cleaning up his profile and "accidentily" making it public or (B) setting his profile private by default thereby admitting it's a bad idea to make profiles public by default.

    Obviously there's choice (C) of making profiles private by default, but the marketing people probably didn't like people having privacy.

    The lesson is simple; never trust any company to keep your stuff private.

  • Re:too funny (Score:5, Interesting)

    by gleffler ( 540281 ) on Sunday December 13, 2009 @06:52PM (#30425868) Journal

    Actually, it isn't. If you go to the URL of the friends list, you can view anybody's friends list.

    See [] even though if you go to [], there's no way to view his friends list.

  • What am I missing? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by BlueWaterBaboonFarm ( 1610709 ) on Sunday December 13, 2009 @07:32PM (#30426162)
    This is an honest question. I've seen numerous stories about how terrible Facebook's privacy setting are but I just don't understand what is wrong. I've made a dummy account with the same settings as my personal Facebook account. Tell me what you can find out about "Billy Slashdot Perkins". The answer is nothing as far as I can tell. Searching for him on Google or Facebook gives no results as far as I can tell.

    As far as I can tell there are two options for privacy on Facebook

    (1) Be 'searchable' which means some information about yourself should be included otherwise the search is useless

    (2) Not be 'searchable'. Everything you have is private and between you and the friends you have

    I have option (1) and I haven't had any problems with it yet.

    Please tell me specifically what it is about Facebook that is violating your privacy?

  • by MagusSlurpy ( 592575 ) on Sunday December 13, 2009 @08:32PM (#30426500) Homepage
    I have a profile for an inflatable sex pig, with a name clearly implying it's a sex pig, and a photo of the pig for the profile pic. They aren't completely on the ball. I also have a profile for a character from a very popular book series, and the profile pic is a still from one of the film adaptations, and both of these profiles have existed for over two years.
  • When I hovered my mouse of the "old facebook" a tooltip was displayed that showed what the old setting was. But still, not very obvious.
  • Google Wave (Score:2, Interesting)

    by JNSL ( 1472357 ) on Monday December 14, 2009 @02:31AM (#30428488)
    We all know that Facebook is afraid of Wave. Now why don't they behave like it?

The unfacts, did we have them, are too imprecisely few to warrant our certitude.