Having just, with some unease*, bitten the bullet and signed up to
facebook** I'm gobsmacked how many people it suggests as friends, most
of whome I know but some I haven't corresponded with for years. How does
it do it? I haven't offered it my address book but ISTR it invited me to
do that. Is it that everyone else has done so and it's finding my
email addy in other people's address books and offering links that way?

I've now deleted*** my 'real' email address which facebook seemed to have
listed for me (how? I didn't give it to them) and am sticking with a
" type address, so theoretically it shouldn't be able
to link people up with me through that, though if their address books
contain my real name alongside my address it may still be able to guess.


* I have a deep sense of unease that when They come to get Us we'll have
done most of the detective work for them :-

** as myself: I was already on there under a pseudonym

*** ok, I asked fb to delete it: but they could be keeping it but not
telling me

--
John Stumbles

A stitch in time saves nine. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

On 19/07/2010 21:58, John Stumbles wrote:



* I have a deep sense of unease that when They come to get Us we'll have
done most of the detective work for them :-



Indeed! So why the hell sign up?! I wouldn't go within a million miles
of *any* so-called "social networking" site!
--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 22:29:03 +0100, Roger Mills wrote:

On 19/07/2010 21:58, John Stumbles wrote:



* I have a deep sense of unease that when They come to get Us we'll have
done most of the detective work for them :-



Indeed! So why the hell sign up?! I wouldn't go within a million miles
of *any* so-called "social networking" site!

Well I figured They'd first round up anyone who *wasn't* on a social
networking site as obviously dangerous deviants ;-)

--
John Stumbles

Women always generalise

John Stumbles wrote:
Having just, with some unease*, bitten the bullet and signed up to
facebook** I'm gobsmacked how many people it suggests as friends, most
of whome I know but some I haven't corresponded with for years. How
does it do it? I haven't offered it my address book but ISTR it
invited me to do that. Is it that everyone else has done so and it's
finding my
email addy in other people's address books and offering links that
way?

I've now deleted*** my 'real' email address which facebook seemed to
have listed for me (how? I didn't give it to them) and am sticking
with a " type address, so theoretically it
shouldn't be able to link people up with me through that, though if
their address books contain my real name alongside my address it may
still be able to guess.


* I have a deep sense of unease that when They come to get Us we'll
have done most of the detective work for them :-

** as myself: I was already on there under a pseudonym

*** ok, I asked fb to delete it: but they could be keeping it but not
telling me

John,

having read quite a bit about facebook over the last year, I wouldn't touch
them with the proverbial bargepole.

It's amazing the amount of personal info they can extract and use from their
subscribers - read their T&Cs very carefully.

At one stage, their T&Cs stated that whatever you posted there became theirs
and whilst you could archive your 'site' they wouldn't allow you to delete
it (this was changed after a bit of a ding-dong in the 'States).

There has also been a recent 'privacy' issue whereby they made it rather
complicated to adjust the security settings from 'open' to 'private' if you
wished - again this has now been 'partially' rectified after a lot of
complaints were made.

It would also appear that many employers search facebook for information on
existing and prospective employees - all rather George Orwellian in my own
opinion.


Cash

Roger Mills
wibbled on Monday 19 July 2010 22:29

On 19/07/2010 21:58, John Stumbles wrote:



* I have a deep sense of unease that when They come to get Us we'll have
done most of the detective work for them :-



Indeed! So why the hell sign up?! I wouldn't go within a million miles
of *any* so-called "social networking" site!

Try twitter if you want an excercise in "what *is* the point?". I get most
things, even if I hate them, but I don't "get" twitter at all.

--
Tim Watts

Managers, politicians and environmentalists: Nature's carbon buffer.

On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 22:56:41 +0100, Cash wrote:

John Stumbles wrote:
Having just, with some unease*, bitten the bullet and signed up to
facebook** I'm gobsmacked how many people it suggests as friends, most
of whome I know but some I haven't corresponded with for years. How
does it do it? I haven't offered it my address book but ISTR it
invited me to do that. Is it that everyone else has done so and it's
finding my
email addy in other people's address books and offering links that
way?

I've now deleted*** my 'real' email address which facebook seemed to
have listed for me (how? I didn't give it to them) and am sticking
with a " type address, so theoretically it
shouldn't be able to link people up with me through that, though if
their address books contain my real name alongside my address it may
still be able to guess.


* I have a deep sense of unease that when They come to get Us we'll
have done most of the detective work for them :-

** as myself: I was already on there under a pseudonym

*** ok, I asked fb to delete it: but they could be keeping it but not
telling me

John,

having read quite a bit about facebook over the last year, I wouldn't touch
them with the proverbial bargepole.

It's amazing the amount of personal info they can extract and use from their
subscribers - read their T&Cs very carefully.

At one stage, their T&Cs stated that whatever you posted there became theirs
and whilst you could archive your 'site' they wouldn't allow you to delete
it (this was changed after a bit of a ding-dong in the 'States).

There has also been a recent 'privacy' issue whereby they made it rather
complicated to adjust the security settings from 'open' to 'private' if you
wished - again this has now been 'partially' rectified after a lot of
complaints were made.

It would also appear that many employers search facebook for information on
existing and prospective employees - all rather George Orwellian in my own
opinion.

Yes, I'm aware of that and I've kept my personal information on there down
to pretty much name rank and number ... and a link to my personal web site
(on which there's also not too much intimate personal info).

--
John Stumbles

Life is nature's way of keeping meat fresh

"John Stumbles" wrote in message
...
Having just, with some unease*, bitten the bullet and signed up to
facebook** I'm gobsmacked how many people it suggests as friends, most
of whome I know but some I haven't corresponded with for years. How does
it do it? I haven't offered it my address book but ISTR it invited me to
do that. Is it that everyone else has done so and it's finding my
email addy in other people's address books and offering links that way?

I've now deleted*** my 'real' email address which facebook seemed to have
listed for me (how? I didn't give it to them) and am sticking with a
" type address, so theoretically it shouldn't be able
to link people up with me through that, though if their address books
contain my real name alongside my address it may still be able to guess.


* I have a deep sense of unease that when They come to get Us we'll have
done most of the detective work for them :-

** as myself: I was already on there under a pseudonym

*** ok, I asked fb to delete it: but they could be keeping it but not
telling me
John Stumbles

'They' may have bitten off a lot more than they can chew, if this new report
from the Washington Post is anything to go by:
http://link.email.washingtonpost.com...ITF/9QUWL/4O/t

Interesting in its own way though.

S

On 19 July, 21:58, John Stumbles wrote:
Having just, with some unease*, bitten the bullet and signed up to
facebook** I'm gobsmacked how many people it suggests as friends, most
of whome I know but some I haven't corresponded with for years. How does
it do it? I haven't offered it my address book but ISTR it invited me to
do that. Is it that everyone else has done so and it's finding my
email addy in other people's address books and offering links that way?

No idea. It seems far too clever to me.

I don't know why people worry about facebook. Google, eBay, and my
bank already know far more about me than I do.

At least they're "careful". In Homebase the other day, I noticed that
their ordering system was web-based, and IE had helpfully stored all
previously entered details as auto-complete entries! So you got
everyone's name, address, phone number etc all stored right there on
the PC for anyone to call up, even if they didn't have access to the
orders themselves.

* I have a deep sense of unease that when They come to get Us we'll have
done most of the detective work for them :-

It won't be "them" who come for us this way - "they" don't understand
technology well enough. Depending who "they" are! ;-)

Cheers,
David.

"John Stumbles" wrote in message
...
Having just, with some unease*, bitten the bullet and signed up to
facebook** I'm gobsmacked how many people it suggests as friends, most
of whome I know but some I haven't corresponded with for years. How does
it do it? I haven't offered it my address book but ISTR it invited me to
do that. Is it that everyone else has done so and it's finding my
email addy in other people's address books and offering links that way?

I've now deleted*** my 'real' email address which facebook seemed to have
listed for me (how? I didn't give it to them) and am sticking with a
" type address, so theoretically it shouldn't be able
to link people up with me through that, though if their address books
contain my real name alongside my address it may still be able to guess.


* I have a deep sense of unease that when They come to get Us we'll have
done most of the detective work for them :-

** as myself: I was already on there under a pseudonym

*** ok, I asked fb to delete it: but they could be keeping it but not
telling me

--
John Stumbles


I actually think that Face-ache and the other clones, are one of the most
antisocial and dangerous offerings that have come out of internet technology
in the last couple of years. I have three 'kids' all now grown up and left
the nest, and they are all ardent Face-achers. Apart from the amount of time
they waste on it, it causes a lot of trouble and ill-feeling among people
who are otherwise friends. I think this stems from several issues with
communicating in this way. First, it is very strange the way that some of
the postings are carried out using the third person, like "Fred is not very
happy today" or "Sally had a stinking rotten day at work today". This
creates an immediate detachment from a 'real' communication between people.
This is further exacerbated by the fact that many people now are
semi-illiterate, and use wrong words, in wrong contexts, and often with
wrong grammar. In a face to face conversation, they get away with this,
because the person that they are talking to 'understands' the true intent
because there are visual and implied cues from the facial expressions and
audible intonation applied to the words. When these same words are typed,
however, it becomes very easy to misinterpret the real intended meaning,
which may well have been intended to be a 'throw away' comment, or a
humourous or tongue-in-cheek one. This can then lead to heated exchanges -
like mini flame wars - that often result in ended friendships, or awkward
standoffs. I have seen it time and again when my daughters have been
involved. When you ask them what is going on, and they read out what has
been said in these exchanges, very often with the benefit of being detached
from the situation, you can understand what the unfortunate person at the
butt end of one of these exchanges was trying to say in their original post,
before it got misunderstood, and out of hand.

I certainly won't be joining any of these sites anytime soon. To be honest,
I fail to see the point of having a presence on them, except as a place to
gossip. I can't understand what the attraction is of sharing personal
information about what sort of a day you've had, and what you are doing with
your life, to all and sundry. Accepted, you can set some sort of privacy
that only makes you visible to selected people, but what's the point of that
even ? You might as well write an email each night to a copy-list of people
....

Arfa

Arfa Daily wrote:


"John Stumbles" wrote in message
...
Having just, with some unease*, bitten the bullet and signed up to
facebook** I'm gobsmacked how many people it suggests as friends, most
of whome I know but some I haven't corresponded with for years. How does
it do it? I haven't offered it my address book but ISTR it invited me to
do that. Is it that everyone else has done so and it's finding my
email addy in other people's address books and offering links that way?

I've now deleted*** my 'real' email address which facebook seemed to have
listed for me (how? I didn't give it to them) and am sticking with a
" type address, so theoretically it shouldn't be able
to link people up with me through that, though if their address books
contain my real name alongside my address it may still be able to guess.


* I have a deep sense of unease that when They come to get Us we'll have
done most of the detective work for them :-

** as myself: I was already on there under a pseudonym

*** ok, I asked fb to delete it: but they could be keeping it but not
telling me

--
John Stumbles


I actually think that Face-ache and the other clones, are one of the
most antisocial and dangerous offerings that have come out of internet
technology in the last couple of years. I have three 'kids' all now
grown up and left the nest, and they are all ardent Face-achers. Apart
from the amount of time they waste on it, it causes a lot of trouble and
ill-feeling among people who are otherwise friends. I think this stems
from several issues with communicating in this way. First, it is very
strange the way that some of the postings are carried out using the
third person, like "Fred is not very happy today" or "Sally had a
stinking rotten day at work today". This creates an immediate detachment
from a 'real' communication between people. This is further exacerbated
by the fact that many people now are semi-illiterate, and use wrong
words, in wrong contexts, and often with wrong grammar. In a face to
face conversation, they get away with this, because the person that they
are talking to 'understands' the true intent because there are visual
and implied cues from the facial expressions and audible intonation
applied to the words. When these same words are typed, however, it
becomes very easy to misinterpret the real intended meaning, which may
well have been intended to be a 'throw away' comment, or a humourous or
tongue-in-cheek one. This can then lead to heated exchanges - like mini
flame wars - that often result in ended friendships, or awkward
standoffs. I have seen it time and again when my daughters have been
involved. When you ask them what is going on, and they read out what has
been said in these exchanges, very often with the benefit of being
detached from the situation, you can understand what the unfortunate
person at the butt end of one of these exchanges was trying to say in
their original post, before it got misunderstood, and out of hand.

I certainly won't be joining any of these sites anytime soon. To be
honest, I fail to see the point of having a presence on them, except as
a place to gossip. I can't understand what the attraction is of sharing
personal information about what sort of a day you've had, and what you
are doing with your life, to all and sundry. Accepted, you can set some
sort of privacy that only makes you visible to selected people, but
what's the point of that even ? You might as well write an email each
night to a copy-list of people ...

Arfa

Let's register Faecesbook, and star a REAL **** slinging social
networking site.

Facebook is lining testimony to the 'least said soonest mended' and
'Silence is Golden' proverbs.

On 19/07/2010 23:03, Tim Watts wrote:

Try twitter if you want an excercise in "what *is* the point?". I get most
things, even if I hate them, but I don't "get" twitter at all.


I find Twitter is sometimes useful to keep an eye on an interesting
story like gaming news or conference reports - but it does depend on
someone sensible posting Tweets in the first place

Lee

On 19/07/2010 23:08, John Stumbles wrote:


Yes, I'm aware of that and I've kept my personal information on there down
to pretty much name rank and number ... and a link to my personal web site
(on which there's also not too much intimate personal info).


Yes, if you're *going* to do it, it makes obvious sense to take
reasonable precautions - but I *still* don't understand the motivation
for doing it in the first place! Just what do you hope to achieve?
--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

"John Stumbles" wrote in message
...
Having just, with some unease*, bitten the bullet and signed up to
facebook** I'm gobsmacked how many people it suggests as friends, most
of whome I know but some I haven't corresponded with for years. How does
it do it? I haven't offered it my address book but ISTR it invited me to
do that. Is it that everyone else has done so and it's finding my
email addy in other people's address books and offering links that way?

If you have added some people on there, then it looks for matches in there,
so if you add person A and B and they both are friends with person C, then
it will suggest person C to you, as you may all know each other.

I've now deleted*** my 'real' email address which facebook seemed to have
listed for me (how? I didn't give it to them) and am sticking with a
" type address, so theoretically it shouldn't be able
to link people up with me through that, though if their address books
contain my real name alongside my address it may still be able to guess.

Did you join face book all on your own, or did someone invite you to it, via
an email to this address?

Toby...

On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 23:03:44 +0100, Tim Watts wrote:
Roger Mills
wibbled on Monday 19 July 2010 22:29

On 19/07/2010 21:58, John Stumbles wrote:



* I have a deep sense of unease that when They come to get Us we'll have
done most of the detective work for them :-



Indeed! So why the hell sign up?! I wouldn't go within a million miles
of *any* so-called "social networking" site!

Try twitter if you want an excercise in "what *is* the point?". I get most
things, even if I hate them, but I don't "get" twitter at all.

Sounds like you're just not narcissistic enough :-) I prescribe spending
at least an hour a day looking at yourself in the mirror (a la our budgie).

Apropos FB. Now I feel depressed. When I created an account, it didn't
have any suggestions to make about "friends". But that's probably because
I didn't give it any true to live information to work with. A situation
I have no intention or remedying.

--
www.thisreallyismyhost.99k.org/page1.php

John Stumbles wrote:

I'm gobsmacked how many people it suggests as friends, most
of whome I know but some I haven't corresponded with for years. How does
it do it?

Not only do people upload address books where your email address is
present, I've half a mind there's some mechanism for it to actually peer
into people's inboxes and scan the email headers for addresses.

If you want to be properly disconnected, start a Yahoo(etc) email
account *just* for FB.

Later on it also starts suggesting "mutual friends" merely based on
other people's friends lists which is daft. Particularly weird is when
you're then signed up as someone's friend when you don't know them. Had
this happen and, when someone pointed out we didn't know each other,
they said "Well, it said we both knew X, Y & Z so I thought we must know
each other."


--
Scott

Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket?

On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 09:23:36 +0100, Roger Mills wrote:

Yes, I'm aware of that and I've kept my personal information on
there
down to pretty much name rank and number ... and a link to my
personal
web site (on which there's also not too much intimate personal
info).

Yes, if you're *going* to do it, it makes obvious sense to take
reasonable precautions - but I *still* don't understand the motivation
for doing it in the first place! Just what do you hope to achieve?

As you said employers search facebook. I'm half toying with having
some minimal information up there just so that I appear infront of
potential employers with basic work related information. Similarily
something on linkedin might be beneficial.

As for the other "I've just bought brocoli" stuff that is published
on facebook etc, I see very little point.


--
Cheers
Dave.

On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 11:23:23 +0100 (BST), Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 09:23:36 +0100, Roger Mills wrote:

Yes, I'm aware of that and I've kept my personal information on
there
down to pretty much name rank and number ... and a link to my
personal
web site (on which there's also not too much intimate personal
info).

Yes, if you're *going* to do it, it makes obvious sense to take
reasonable precautions - but I *still* don't understand the motivation
for doing it in the first place! Just what do you hope to achieve?

As you said employers search facebook. I'm half toying with having
some minimal information up there just so that I appear infront of
potential employers with basic work related information. Similarily
something on linkedin might be beneficial.

I've used LinkedIn (which seems to be the timewaster of choice for
professionals) and I've contributed a few bits to soem of the tech.
questions. However I've never really found anything useful on there
in terms of opportunities or job openings.
It may be that the value is simply in having a profile, rather than
strangers approaching you with job offers.

As for the other "I've just bought brocoli" stuff that is published
on facebook etc, I see very little point.




--
www.thisreallyismyhost.99k.org/page1.php

On 19 Jul 2010 20:58:47 GMT, John Stumbles
wrote:

Having just, with some unease*, bitten the bullet and signed up to
facebook** I'm gobsmacked how many people it suggests as friends, most
of whome I know but some I haven't corresponded with for years. How does
it do it? I haven't offered it my address book but ISTR it invited me to
do that. Is it that everyone else has done so and it's finding my
email addy in other people's address books and offering links that way?

I've now deleted*** my 'real' email address which facebook seemed to have
listed for me (how? I didn't give it to them) and am sticking with a
" type address, so theoretically it shouldn't be able
to link people up with me through that, though if their address books
contain my real name alongside my address it may still be able to guess.


* I have a deep sense of unease that when They come to get Us we'll have
done most of the detective work for them :-

** as myself: I was already on there under a pseudonym

*** ok, I asked fb to delete it: but they could be keeping it but not
telling me


That's what Facebook is for! If you don't want it, don't use it.
Just send emails to the people you want to send them to.

Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 09:23:36 +0100, Roger Mills wrote:

Yes, I'm aware of that and I've kept my personal information on
there
down to pretty much name rank and number ... and a link to my
personal
web site (on which there's also not too much intimate personal
info).
Yes, if you're *going* to do it, it makes obvious sense to take
reasonable precautions - but I *still* don't understand the motivation
for doing it in the first place! Just what do you hope to achieve?

As you said employers search facebook. I'm half toying with having
some minimal information up there just so that I appear infront of
potential employers with basic work related information. Similarily
something on linkedin might be beneficial.

As for the other "I've just bought brocoli" stuff that is published
on facebook etc, I see very little point.


It is of value to those who follow you into the loo..

On 19 Jul 2010 20:58:47 GMT John Stumbles wrote :
. Is it that everyone else has done so and it's finding my
email addy in other people's address books and offering links
that way?

I think so. Even if they use the information ethically I think it
hugely irresponsible for FB to be asking me for my FastMail login
and password so they can vacuum my address book and use it for
suggestions. Everyone should be being told wrt all online services
that you don't give your login and password to any third party
ever.

--
Tony Bryer, Greentram: 'Software to build on' Melbourne, Australia
www.superbeam.co.uk www.eurobeam.co.uk www.greentram.com

Laurence Payne wrote:
On 19 Jul 2010 20:58:47 GMT, John Stumbles
wrote:

Having just, with some unease*, bitten the bullet and signed up to
facebook** I'm gobsmacked how many people it suggests as friends,
most of whome I know but some I haven't corresponded with for years.
How does it do it? I haven't offered it my address book but ISTR it
invited me to do that. Is it that everyone else has done so and it's
finding my
email addy in other people's address books and offering links that
way?

I've now deleted*** my 'real' email address which facebook seemed to
have listed for me (how? I didn't give it to them) and am sticking
with a " type address, so theoretically it
shouldn't be able to link people up with me through that, though if
their address books contain my real name alongside my address it may
still be able to guess.


* I have a deep sense of unease that when They come to get Us we'll
have done most of the detective work for them :-

** as myself: I was already on there under a pseudonym

*** ok, I asked fb to delete it: but they could be keeping it but not
telling me


That's what Facebook is for! If you don't want it, don't use it.
Just send emails to the people you want to send them to.

And for building up a vast amount of information that they can 'sell' on to
the various companies that has made the founders of facebook millions of
dollars - along with allowing some rather neferious people to snoop on , and
make use of the sensitive information that many half-baked users post there.

Who in their right mind would post there something along the lines of: "hi
there ********** (insert name[s] of so called and often anonymous friends)
I'm off on my jolly old holidays on ***** (insert day and date) to wherever,
and I'll be away for a fortnight - yahoo!!" - or anything else just as
stupid.

Ah well, many a job has been lost at the interview stage when prospective
employers have gone-a-looking there for information - who needs RIPA when
there's facebook? ;-)

Cash

On 20 July, 01:19, "Arfa Daily" wrote:

I actually think that Face-ache and the other clones, are one of the most
antisocial and dangerous offerings that have come out of internet technology
in the last couple of years. I have three 'kids' all now grown up and left
the nest, and they are all ardent Face-achers. Apart from the amount of time
they waste on it, it causes a lot of trouble and ill-feeling among people
who are otherwise friends. I think this stems from several issues with
communicating in this way. First, it is very strange the way that some of
the postings are carried out using the third person, like "Fred is not very
happy today" or "Sally had a stinking rotten day at work today". This
creates an immediate detachment from a 'real' communication between people.
This is further exacerbated by the fact that many people now are
semi-illiterate, and use wrong words, in wrong contexts, and often with
wrong grammar. In a face to face conversation, they get away with this,
because the person that they are talking to 'understands' the true intent
because there are visual and implied cues from the facial expressions and
audible intonation applied to the words. When these same words are typed,
however, it becomes very easy to misinterpret the real intended meaning,
which may well have been intended to be a 'throw away' comment, or a
humourous *or tongue-in-cheek one. This can then lead to heated exchanges -
like mini flame wars - that often result in ended friendships, or awkward
standoffs. I have seen it time and again when my daughters have been
involved. When you ask them what is going on, and they read out what has
been said in these exchanges, very often with the benefit of being detached
from the situation, you can understand what the unfortunate person at the
butt end of one of these exchanges was trying to say in their original post,
before it got misunderstood, and out of hand.

I certainly won't be joining any of these sites anytime soon. To be honest,
I fail to see the point of having a presence on them, except as a place to
gossip. I can't understand what the attraction is of sharing personal
information about what sort of a day you've had, and what you are doing with
your life, to all and sundry. Accepted, you can set some sort of privacy
that only makes you visible to selected people, but what's the point of that
even ? You might as well write an email each night to a copy-list of people

Sadly, I think you've just spent several minutes typing out something
which most younger people (and probably most _people_ in 20+ years
time) would simply read as "I'm old - there's this new thing - I don't
get it - it must be bad".

This is pretty much what "older" people have been saying about _any_
new thing for as long as people have been saying anything!

I don't say this to be rude or cruel. I catch myself saying similar
things quite often, and I don't think I'm old! But the world moves on.
This is the future. New generations will find it just as exciting as
you/we once found radio, or television, or home computers, etc. And
then they'll grow up and look back on "good old facebook", decrying
whatever the new "new thing" is.

Whatever _is_ bad about it will get sorted out. The sky won't fall.
People will enjoy it for a while, and maybe move on. Those that are
around will probably judge that the world was a slightly better place
because of it.

Those that are already old will still claim the world was a better
place when _they_ were young. Pre-NHS. With bombs dropping on them.
Poverty. Starvation. But they were happy days etc.

Cheers,
David.

"David Robinson" wrote in message
...
On 20 July, 01:19, "Arfa Daily" wrote:

I actually think that Face-ache and the other clones, are one of the most
antisocial and dangerous offerings that have come out of internet
technology
in the last couple of years. I have three 'kids' all now grown up and
left
the nest, and they are all ardent Face-achers. Apart from the amount of
time
they waste on it, it causes a lot of trouble and ill-feeling among people
who are otherwise friends. I think this stems from several issues with
communicating in this way. First, it is very strange the way that some of
the postings are carried out using the third person, like "Fred is not
very
happy today" or "Sally had a stinking rotten day at work today". This
creates an immediate detachment from a 'real' communication between
people.
This is further exacerbated by the fact that many people now are
semi-illiterate, and use wrong words, in wrong contexts, and often with
wrong grammar. In a face to face conversation, they get away with this,
because the person that they are talking to 'understands' the true intent
because there are visual and implied cues from the facial expressions and
audible intonation applied to the words. When these same words are typed,
however, it becomes very easy to misinterpret the real intended meaning,
which may well have been intended to be a 'throw away' comment, or a
humourous or tongue-in-cheek one. This can then lead to heated
exchanges -
like mini flame wars - that often result in ended friendships, or awkward
standoffs. I have seen it time and again when my daughters have been
involved. When you ask them what is going on, and they read out what has
been said in these exchanges, very often with the benefit of being
detached
from the situation, you can understand what the unfortunate person at the
butt end of one of these exchanges was trying to say in their original
post,
before it got misunderstood, and out of hand.

I certainly won't be joining any of these sites anytime soon. To be
honest,
I fail to see the point of having a presence on them, except as a place
to
gossip. I can't understand what the attraction is of sharing personal
information about what sort of a day you've had, and what you are doing
with
your life, to all and sundry. Accepted, you can set some sort of privacy
that only makes you visible to selected people, but what's the point of
that
even ? You might as well write an email each night to a copy-list of
people

Sadly, I think you've just spent several minutes typing out something
which most younger people (and probably most _people_ in 20+ years
time) would simply read as "I'm old - there's this new thing - I don't
get it - it must be bad".

This is pretty much what "older" people have been saying about _any_
new thing for as long as people have been saying anything!

I don't say this to be rude or cruel. I catch myself saying similar
things quite often, and I don't think I'm old! But the world moves on.
This is the future. New generations will find it just as exciting as
you/we once found radio, or television, or home computers, etc. And
then they'll grow up and look back on "good old facebook", decrying
whatever the new "new thing" is.

Whatever _is_ bad about it will get sorted out. The sky won't fall.
People will enjoy it for a while, and maybe move on. Those that are
around will probably judge that the world was a slightly better place
because of it.

Those that are already old will still claim the world was a better
place when _they_ were young. Pre-NHS. With bombs dropping on them.
Poverty. Starvation. But they were happy days etc.

Cheers,
David.

Actually, you are quite wrong. I still have much the same attitudes as I had
when I was a kid, as does my wife. We have always been 'mates' with our
kids, especially since they have grown up, and they treat us and talk to us
no differently than they talk to any of their friends, and likewise their
friends do too. Huge great bunches of us go on holiday together, and get
along without any problem. I don't have a problem embracing change, and do
not continuously harp back to the old days. You are right, the world moves
on and things change, some for the better, some for the worse. Much of
today's technology and attitudes are a huge improvement over what prevailed
when I was a kid, but by the same token, much is not. People are not, in
general, so well educated as they were, and much of that is down to poor
parenting, and parents who are only marginally less thick than their kids,
and marginally more thick than the teachers. Social attitudes have declined.
People have a lot less respect for each other now, or for authority. It's
not hard to be pleasant to one another, but even smiling at someone that you
pass in the street now, often gets you a strange and hostile look, as does
saying "hello".

There must be a reason for this - or probably many. However, having watched
the usage of Faceache quite closely via my kids', and also the young people
who work for us, I think that it, and similar sites, are a major contributor
to the antisocial, and often quite hostile behaviour, that seems prevalent
among some social groups now. The Faceache pages that sprung up after the
shooting incident last week, are a good example of this. I bet that a great
deal of the kids that contributed, would not have said the same things in a
face to face conversation. The anonymity that hiding behind a persona in
these sites gives to them, allows them to carry on with this behaviour
without fear of consequence, and some of the anarchistic tendencies that
grow out of it, inevitably spill out into 'real' life as well.

So no, my comments were not a 'grumpy old men' thing, but carefully
considered as a result of observations of real life usage of these sites by
a number of people.

Arfa

On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 18:08:10 +0100, "Arfa Daily"
wrote:


Actually, you are quite wrong. I still have much the same attitudes as I had
when I was a kid, as does my wife. We have always been 'mates' with our
kids, especially since they have grown up, and they treat us and talk to us
no differently than they talk to any of their friends, and likewise their
friends do too. Huge great bunches of us go on holiday together, and get
along without any problem. I don't have a problem embracing change, and do
not continuously harp back to the old days. You are right, the world moves
on and things change, some for the better, some for the worse. Much of
today's technology and attitudes are a huge improvement over what prevailed
when I was a kid, but by the same token, much is not. People are not, in
general, so well educated as they were, and much of that is down to poor
parenting, and parents who are only marginally less thick than their kids,
and marginally more thick than the teachers. Social attitudes have declined.
People have a lot less respect for each other now, or for authority. It's
not hard to be pleasant to one another, but even smiling at someone that you
pass in the street now, often gets you a strange and hostile look, as does
saying "hello".

There must be a reason for this - or probably many. However, having watched
the usage of Faceache quite closely via my kids', and also the young people
who work for us, I think that it, and similar sites, are a major contributor
to the antisocial, and often quite hostile behaviour, that seems prevalent
among some social groups now. The Faceache pages that sprung up after the
shooting incident last week, are a good example of this. I bet that a great
deal of the kids that contributed, would not have said the same things in a
face to face conversation. The anonymity that hiding behind a persona in
these sites gives to them, allows them to carry on with this behaviour
without fear of consequence, and some of the anarchistic tendencies that
grow out of it, inevitably spill out into 'real' life as well.

So no, my comments were not a 'grumpy old men' thing, but carefully
considered as a result of observations of real life usage of these sites by
a number of people.

Arfa

Also misunderstanding and conflict are a built in feature ! ;-)

http://www.wired.com/science/discove.../2006/02/70179

Andy C

On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 10:05:56 +0100, Toby wrote:

Did you join face book all on your own, or did someone invite you to it,
via an email to this address?

I responded to an invitation, created an account and accepted the person's
'friend' invitation.

--
John Stumbles

Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus and Pop Psychologists are from Uranus

"Andy Cap" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 18:08:10 +0100, "Arfa Daily"
wrote:


Actually, you are quite wrong. I still have much the same attitudes as I
had
when I was a kid, as does my wife. We have always been 'mates' with our
kids, especially since they have grown up, and they treat us and talk to
us
no differently than they talk to any of their friends, and likewise their
friends do too. Huge great bunches of us go on holiday together, and get
along without any problem. I don't have a problem embracing change, and do
not continuously harp back to the old days. You are right, the world moves
on and things change, some for the better, some for the worse. Much of
today's technology and attitudes are a huge improvement over what
prevailed
when I was a kid, but by the same token, much is not. People are not, in
general, so well educated as they were, and much of that is down to poor
parenting, and parents who are only marginally less thick than their kids,
and marginally more thick than the teachers. Social attitudes have
declined.
People have a lot less respect for each other now, or for authority. It's
not hard to be pleasant to one another, but even smiling at someone that
you
pass in the street now, often gets you a strange and hostile look, as does
saying "hello".

There must be a reason for this - or probably many. However, having
watched
the usage of Faceache quite closely via my kids', and also the young
people
who work for us, I think that it, and similar sites, are a major
contributor
to the antisocial, and often quite hostile behaviour, that seems prevalent
among some social groups now. The Faceache pages that sprung up after the
shooting incident last week, are a good example of this. I bet that a
great
deal of the kids that contributed, would not have said the same things in
a
face to face conversation. The anonymity that hiding behind a persona in
these sites gives to them, allows them to carry on with this behaviour
without fear of consequence, and some of the anarchistic tendencies that
grow out of it, inevitably spill out into 'real' life as well.

So no, my comments were not a 'grumpy old men' thing, but carefully
considered as a result of observations of real life usage of these sites
by
a number of people.

Arfa

Also misunderstanding and conflict are a built in feature ! ;-)

http://www.wired.com/science/discove.../2006/02/70179

Andy C

Yes indeed. That article adds real research to what I had felt from my
observations. I am also active on another group, that is a lot more
'international' than this one, and many of the contributors are American.
It's amazing how often flame wars break out as a result of a misunderstood
comment that passes either way across the Atlantic. It's a great example of
that old phrase that the U.K and the U.S. are two nations separated by a
common language ...

Arfa

Miserable old buggers, the lot of you! No doubt other miserable old
buggers were saying exactly the same sort of thing when

- telephones were in their infancy ("Why do you want one of those
things, ringing bells at all hours and destroying the peace? What's
wrong with actually TALKING to people, those things will destroy
PROPER human interaction. And anyway it's so easy for the government
to listen in")

- mobiles were invented ("what's the point? I don't want people
phoning me up in the street")

- texting came in ("what are you supposed to say in 160 characters?
Why can't you just call people?")

- Oil lamps were invented ("Why do you want those things stinking away
and filling the place with smoke? You should just go to bed like
normal people, why do you want to stay up all night? It's not natural.
And it will make it much easier for the government to find you in the
dark.")

Etc, etc.

Cheers!

Martin (not a Facebook user)

Martin Pentreath wrote:
Miserable old buggers, the lot of you! No doubt other miserable old
buggers were saying exactly the same sort of thing when

- telephones were in their infancy ("Why do you want one of those
things, ringing bells at all hours and destroying the peace? What's
wrong with actually TALKING to people, those things will destroy
PROPER human interaction. And anyway it's so easy for the government
to listen in")

- mobiles were invented ("what's the point? I don't want people
phoning me up in the street")

- texting came in ("what are you supposed to say in 160 characters?
Why can't you just call people?")

- Oil lamps were invented ("Why do you want those things stinking away
and filling the place with smoke? You should just go to bed like
normal people, why do you want to stay up all night? It's not natural.
And it will make it much easier for the government to find you in the
dark.")

Etc, etc.

Cheers!

Martin (not a Facebook user)
Hula hoops were invented "why do you want to wreck your muscles swinging
a pointless and expensive hoop round your torso"

Fortunately enough people shared the same view.


Facebook makes a bit of sense if you simply have nothing better to do.
The terrifying implication of its success, is that no one seems to.

In article ,
pete writes:
On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 11:23:23 +0100 (BST), Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 09:23:36 +0100, Roger Mills wrote:

Yes, I'm aware of that and I've kept my personal information on
there
down to pretty much name rank and number ... and a link to my
personal
web site (on which there's also not too much intimate personal
info).

Yes, if you're *going* to do it, it makes obvious sense to take
reasonable precautions - but I *still* don't understand the motivation
for doing it in the first place! Just what do you hope to achieve?

I introduce enough inaccuracies to prevent it being used for
identity theft.

As you said employers search facebook. I'm half toying with having
some minimal information up there just so that I appear infront of
potential employers with basic work related information. Similarily
something on linkedin might be beneficial.

I've used LinkedIn (which seems to be the timewaster of choice for
professionals) and I've contributed a few bits to soem of the tech.
questions. However I've never really found anything useful on there
in terms of opportunities or job openings.
It may be that the value is simply in having a profile, rather than
strangers approaching you with job offers.

For me, the most interesting part of linked-in is seeing what
colleagues you worked with years ago are up to now.

I have advertised jobs on Linked-in too which is very much cheaper
than going through agencies, but in the end I've never taken on any
of the people who came through linked-in.

I get invites from plaxo too, but haven't joined it.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

Andrew Gabriel wrote:

For me, the most interesting part of linked-in is seeing what
colleagues you worked with years ago are up to now.

Deeply depressing you mean.

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher writes:
Andrew Gabriel wrote:

For me, the most interesting part of linked-in is seeing what
colleagues you worked with years ago are up to now.

Deeply depressing you mean.

I haven't found it depressing, and not sure I ever would,
even though some have done very well, and some others have been
unemployed for years, eventually to retire or change trade.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

On 21 July, 18:08, "Arfa Daily" wrote:

Actually, you are quite wrong. I still have much the same attitudes as I had
when I was a kid, as does my wife. We have always been 'mates' with our
kids, especially since they have grown up, and they treat us and talk to us
no differently than they talk to any of their friends, and likewise their
friends do too. Huge great bunches of us go on holiday together, and get
along without any problem. I don't have a problem embracing change, and do
not continuously harp back to the old days. You are right, the world moves
on and things change, some for the better, some for the worse. Much of
today's technology and attitudes are a huge improvement over what prevailed
when I was a kid, but by the same token, much is not. People are not, in
general, so well educated as they were, and much of that is down to poor
parenting, and parents who are only marginally less thick than their kids,
and marginally more thick than the teachers. Social attitudes have declined.
People have a lot less respect for each other now, or for authority. It's
not hard to be pleasant to one another, but even smiling at someone that you
pass in the street now, often gets you a strange and hostile look, as does
saying "hello".

There must be a reason for this - or probably many. However, having watched
the usage of Faceache quite closely via my kids', and also the young people
who work for us, I think that it, and similar sites, are a major contributor
to the antisocial, and often quite hostile behaviour, that seems prevalent
among some social groups now.

I think all the things you suggest pre-date facebook by many years!

....and you must know that your observations on the declining standards
of behaviour in the next generation are several hundred years old too,

Whether that makes them right or wrong, I don't know. The Welfare
State didn't exist back then, so some things have certainly changed. I
suspect Welfare dependency, rather than Facebook, contributes more to
some of them.

The Faceache pages that sprung up after the
shooting incident last week, are a good example of this. I bet that a great
deal of the kids that contributed, would not have said the same things in a
face to face conversation. The anonymity that hiding behind a persona in
these sites gives to them, allows them to carry on with this behaviour
without fear of consequence, and some of the anarchistic tendencies that
grow out of it, inevitably spill out into 'real' life as well.

....which is about as accurate as the reporting of that incident in the
news. Never mind the fact that facebook is anything but anonymous.
Never mind the fact that most of the people who joined that group (far
fewer than reported by the media) did so to post a message about how
stupid it was. Never mind the fact that the few posts supporting the
group were an interesting insight into the thinking of the UK's
underclass - saying the very things that these people say to each
other face to face.


So no, my comments were not a 'grumpy old men' thing, but carefully
considered as a result of observations of real life usage of these sites by
a number of people.

Well, you might be right, but I suspect we're stuck with it.

Cheers,
David.