These "buttons" or better options appear only if you want to make your content available. They are not just sitting there. So if I normally use my Mac I don't even see them. Once I push the publish button or select the equivalent menu, these options become visible.
So all the heated talk about how bad social network integration is, is completely BS. Unless you actively sign in in all these networks, there is absolutely nothing to worry about.
That's not true. The share option is always there whether you have an account or not. If you select the option, animated dialog pops up asking you to sign in or create an account.
That's not true. The share option is always there whether you have an account or not. If you select the option, animated dialog pops up asking you to sign in or create an account.
It's exactly as I say! Only in my german regionalized OS it's called "bereitstellen"-button , what translates as "publish"-button. which is the button you call the "share option".
So I hope to have settled this small misunderstanding without having introduced a lot more confusion???
Except you see the buttons whether you use it or not. Could you think before rehashing this incorrect argument? I'm fine with sociopath networking in my OS as long as it doesn't bloat unnecessarily and I don't have to see or use it to use the OS. My only problem is that I have to see these idiotic buttons whether I use the services or not.
I don't see empty inboxes for qq.com, 123.com, Yahoo!, and Gmail in Mail… since I don't have accounts with them. I shouldn't see Twitter, Flickr, or Facebook buttons or options anywhere in either of my OS' unless I use those services.
Yes!
I love MacBookAir also because there are no stickers on it (all windows laptops look just dirty because of those stickers).
Now, why would they put a Facebook sticker in OS X?
That's not true. The share option is always there whether you have an account or not. If you select the option, animated dialog pops up asking you to sign in or create an account.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabbit_Coach
It's exactly as I say! Only in my german regionalized OS it's called "bereitstellen"-button , what translates as "publish"-button. which is the button you call the "share option".
So I hope to have settled this small misunderstanding without having introduced a lot more confusion???
;-)
Dude, I don't care how you call this button.
It is always there. Even if you have ont signed in yet. That is why I (and other people) don't like it - the presence of useless buttons.
It is always there. Even if you have ont signed in yet. That is why I (and other people) don't like it - the presence of useless buttons.
Here is a hint to Apple: do a special preference panel for the social network accounts. Then, activate the share/social button (or whatever you call it) only if you have an activated account, otherwise don't show any share button at all.
Here is a hint to Apple: do a special preference panel for the social network accounts. Then, activate the share/social button (or whatever you call it) only if you have an activated account, otherwise don't show any share button at all.
There's no need for that. They just need to do it the same way they handle EVERY other account currently. The last thing we need is MORE special treatment to this crap.
A tragic dumbing down of a once superb OS. FB is a toxic entity that has done more to create a generation of callous dystopian voyeuristic narcissistic shallow low IQ individuals than any other invention in recent history outside of American daytime TV or anything on Sky (UK) that isn't the sports, History or Discover channel. FB has few positive attributes and Apple who are supposed to develop engines of creation that inspire people to create have lost their way. No wonder the Mac Pro's have not been updated in years and the iPad doesn't have a proper high resolution stylus. I for one, whilst finding Apple hardware such as the MBA, Mac Mini and iPod Touch superb, will question my continued loyalty to the platform if they do not reconsider their current immature mind numbing consumption based path. I already boycott all services and publications that require an FB login to gain access and will have no hesitation to drop Apple in full after over 20 years of loyalty if this behaviour does not stop. I hope others comprehend what I am getting at here and will back me up. I estimate 5% will 'Like', the rest will 'Hate'.
Facebook is a virus, that sadly, has now "infected" the Apple-verse. Now, I'm not saying that lightly. There are hardly any websites left that you can go to, that Facebook doesn't know you've been there, and is gathering data about you--without your consent. I totally get the appeal of Facebook. It lets people connect with friends and post vacation pictures and whatnot. But that's just a way to get people to voluntarily give them personal information that they can use however they want. There's some very unsettling stuff beneath the surface, mainly around the area of privacy. It's no secret (pun sort of intended) that Facebook has played fast and loose with people's privacy. And it's not simply an issue of "if you're not doing anything wrong, you've got nothing to worry about." or, "don't put private stuff in your Facebook account!" It's about what information about you is being gathered, by whom, and for what purpose. There are all sorts of nefarious ways this information about you could be used, without your knowledge or consent.
And so, with Apple's claim of deep Facebook integration, what exactly does that mean? How deep does that integration go? Okay, you can easily share stuff that you want to share; that's well and good. But what about the stuff you don't want to share? Should I just take their word for it that Facebook doesn't have access to my personal documents, photos, etc.? Now, if Facebook had a demonstrated history of respecting people's privacy, but the opposite is true, which is that there are serious privacy issues going on here. It used to be just confined to the internet. Now it's extending to our personal computers. That is deeply troubling.
There's no need for that. They just need to do it the same way they handle EVERY other account currently. The last thing we need is MORE special treatment to this crap.
Well... I agree, what can I say? You said everything :-)
Actually, I just remember that there exists already a preference pane "Sharing", it could be also used for that (or anyone else, I don't really care). I also dislike these social-stuffs but there are people who like. Just suggest Apple to make this bug feature the less intrusive as possible.
Actually, I just remember that there exists already a preference pane "Sharing", it could be also used for that (or anyone else, I don't really care).
Ah, but that's a different level of sharing. I would advise against combining the two, as that would be confusing. That 'sharing' is intra-network, computer-level sharing. Social network 'sharing' is internetwork, content-level sharing.
How to ignore it......hmmmmmmm...........................I'VE GOT IT!!!! Don't use it. Brilliant!
Do you (or anyone else here) know for a fact that if you don't set up an account that absolutely no information will ever be transferred from your computer to Facebook or any other "integrated" service? Didn't think so. You'd be surprised at how much is already sent out as it is.
Here's a request for anyone with this latest 10.8 release: try running Little Snitch for a while and see what kind of requests go out when you use various features, especially those related to sharing. In other words, try using the OS for a while without sharing anything, then try bringing up a sharing sheet, etc. See what kind of information goes out.
Before starting the test, be sure to disable or delete (NOT change to disallow - you won't see anything!) all the non-required rules that send information to Apple as well, even if you get warnings. You can always run the "Restore Factory Rules" when you're done with this test. You'll see LOTS of requests to send information about your system configuration and such to Apple. It's a good educational experience to see how much information is being sent out across the internet about your computer. Given that for most people, your computer is immediately connected to you as an individual, at least with Apple if you purchased new, that's also sending them information about you personally -- how and when and where you use your computer, in addition to what apps you have installed, etc. Lots of this seems innocuous (depending on what information gets sent across the wire), but even the default connections to NTP servers give Apple a constant heartbeat of virtually every Mac connected to the internet.
With that in mind, NOW look and see what kind of information is transmitted when you click various sharing features without signing into any service. That would mimic the situation for those who do not use services like Facebook, and do not want any data transmitted to them. Maybe it's clean and maybe it's not, but all the ignorant comments at this point saying "just don't use it!" are just that: ignorant.
Social is *everywhere* and the industry at large wants a) more of it and b) tighter product integration with it. You can leave Apple, but everywhere else you turn, you'll be bumping up against either Facebook or Twitter or Google's social service du jour.
Thank you for recognizing that it's "the industry" that wants more of this and tighter integration. It's not necessarily consumers (although some certainly do). Consumers want easy ways to communicate with their friends, family, coworkers, etc. It's unimportant to most people how or through what service that happens. Tying everything together is dangerous, both technically (see the Mat Honan situation for an extreme example) and from an ownership-of-data standpoint.
Originally Posted by Quadra 610
Your complaints are noted, but your attitude is that of a hopeless tech luddite. Accept the inevitable, and learn to find something about it to enjoy. If not, your stubbornness will result in your marginalization. Eventually there will be no escape. It's ALL ABOUT consumption. Always was. But there are also new avenues of creation that are accessible to everyone. The average consumer has never in the history of modern tech been more empowered with great tools for self-expression.
However, this sounds like something written by a damn Facebook employee. I can't speak for the person you were replying to, but I am, in most ways, the opposite of a luddite. I understand technology better than almost anyone, having been involved for decades, and have deep knowledge of the social aspects as well as the technology underneath the hood. I will stand up to almost anyone, anywhere as far as technical understanding. I am also a proponent of the use of (most) technological advancement.
But social fucking media is a different beast. There are many ways to communicate, both electronically and otherwise, but no one should be forced or goaded into using tools like Facebook, which is managed by a group of morally corrupt individuals who OWN ALL DATA POSTED TO THEIR SERVICES. They have proven themselves to be untrustworthy at almost every turn, from the unscrupulous opening of privacy settings without users' permission to the disaster around their IPO. They have no interest in serving their users (note I did not say customers, because we all know their users are their product), they are in business to serve their own selfish needs, which revolve around collecting and selling (indirectly) incredibly detailed personal profiles of their users. That is vile and reprehensible.
Ah, but that's a different level of sharing. I would advise against combining the two, as that would be confusing. That 'sharing' is intra-network, computer-level sharing. Social network 'sharing' is internetwork, content-level sharing.
OK, ok...
Anyway, its their job (Apple) to find the best way to make these "buttons" less intrusive.
Except you see the buttons whether you use it or not. Could you think before rehashing this incorrect argument? I'm fine with sociopath networking in my OS as long as it doesn't bloat unnecessarily and I don't have to see or use it to use the OS. My only problem is that I have to see these idiotic buttons whether I use the services or not.
I don't want to see the buttons, but I also don't want the bloat of extra code on my machines, nor the waste of extra CPU cycles. If I was sure the former was extremely minimal and the latter wasn't happening at all, then as long as there's no information being sent out from the machines, I can live with the buttons/images for social crap living in one and only one place: System Preferences, where I can leave it completely disabled. I don't know that this is true, however.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GadgetCanada
I like Facebook because it lets me talk to my nephews who live far away simply because they don't talk on the phone. But we laugh and joke all the time on Facebook so it keeps us connected. It's not the same as talking on the phone or talking face to face but I won't say it's any less valuable. I just think the other poster who is a 20 year Apple user saying he will abandon Apple because of one item in a pull down menu is a bit excessive. Nice tie btw
Want to communicate with people? Fercrissakes, how about email? Or in public-broadcast mode, how about a blog? Mailing lists? Web sites? SMS? There are a host of ways to communicate with people beyond a telephone that don't involve morally bankrupt companies. Sorry, I'm mostly irked at others and you were in the path of fire. ;-)
People are under the illusion that their posts on facebook are private to their friends and family, but they are not private, they belong to The Facebook Corporation, which will use them in whatever way they see fit for as long as they see fit. As soon as it will benefit themselves to use them differently you can be damn sure they will. See above.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vanilla Gorilla
Two quick replies to the original rant:
1. If you don't like social media, don't use them. We all ignore features of a massively complex modern OS.
2. Social media are media, likes books or movies or anything else. The content is made by people, and so a lot is inane and some is really good. This will sound obnoxious but needs to be said -- if you find social media mind-numingly stupid, it means you have stupid friends or make bad choices about whom to follow.
I am a college professor in my 40s and many of my colleagues, locally and around the world, use Facebook. We show pictures of our kids and dogs, true, but we also talk about the books we're writing and reading, about politics and art and history and science and religion. I learn a lot from a lot of smart people. I find Twitter even more intellectually rewarding because I can follow a great range of people and organizations.
#2 is a good point, but #1 is grossly misunderstood. If crap like Facebook gets integrated into the devices we use, it becomes very difficult to even KNOW if you're using them or not. You may not explicitly be posting, but various information may (or may not) be sent out without your explicit consent. Some of this is happening right now and people are mostly clueless.
Beyond that, the trends are such that one can imagine being locked out of opportunities by not being connected to specific online social media. LinkedIn is one example. Should we, as a society, really be required to post our personal CVs/profiles online where any of 7 billion people can see them? WTF is the world coming to?
A tragic dumbing down of a once superb OS. FB is a toxic entity that has done more to create a generation of callous dystopian voyeuristic narcissistic shallow low IQ individuals than any other invention in recent history outside of American daytime TV or anything on Sky (UK) that isn't the sports, History or Discover channel. FB has few positive attributes and Apple who are supposed to develop engines of creation that inspire people to create have lost their way. No wonder the Mac Pro's have not been updated in years and the iPad doesn't have a proper high resolution stylus. I for one, whilst finding Apple hardware such as the MBA, Mac Mini and iPod Touch superb, will question my continued loyalty to the platform if they do not reconsider their current immature mind numbing consumption based path. I already boycott all services and publications that require an FB login to gain access and will have no hesitation to drop Apple in full after over 20 years of loyalty if this behaviour does not stop. I hope others comprehend what I am getting at here and will back me up. I estimate 5% will 'Like', the rest will 'Hate'.
It isn't inevitable to use it. In fact, I almost forgot about the Twitter integration in Mountain Lion because the system didn't show me that, didn't give me any advice to use it. Just when I was exploring the System Preferences I found it and remember it.
I'm not a big fan of Facebook, I just use it to have some fun and share some jokes. I'm 99% sure I'll again deactivate my account one of these days (that time forever), but I don't see why so much complain and why bashing Apple and the OS for such integration. Maybe you don't like it, maybe I don't like it, but Facebook is a reality and the youngs are all using it, so Apple gains a couple of points into the future generation with this integration, and that matters.
A tragic dumbing down of a once superb OS. FB is a toxic entity that has done more to create a generation of callous dystopian voyeuristic narcissistic shallow low IQ individuals than any other invention in recent history outside of American daytime TV or anything on Sky (UK) that isn't the sports, History or Discover channel. FB has few positive attributes and Apple who are supposed to develop engines of creation that inspire people to create have lost their way. No wonder the Mac Pro's have not been updated in years and the iPad doesn't have a proper high resolution stylus. I for one, whilst finding Apple hardware such as the MBA, Mac Mini and iPod Touch superb, will question my continued loyalty to the platform if they do not reconsider their current immature mind numbing consumption based path. I already boycott all services and publications that require an FB login to gain access and will have no hesitation to drop Apple in full after over 20 years of loyalty if this behaviour does not stop. I hope others comprehend what I am getting at here and will back me up. I estimate 5% will 'Like', the rest will 'Hate'.
I am going to 100% AGREE with this.
Integrating facebook into safari was, in my opinion, a bad move.
Definitely not an intelligent one.
Facebook is a time waster and an addiction, and, as OfLife stated, a haven of the most narcissistic oxygen thieves within humanity. It is definitely a factor in the downfall of social interaction in the modern world, killing empathy and any sense of community.
Facebook is a time waster and an addiction, and, as OfLife stated, a haven of the most narcissistic oxygen thieves within humanity. It is definitely a factor in the downfall of social interaction in the modern world, killing empathy and any sense of community.
I don't think that Facebook is that harmful, though the potential is certainly there, and I'm sure that there are some people who are "addicted", or otherwise psychologically affected by its use. My biggest concern (as I stated earlier) is that Facebook is not a product that we, as consumers use. We are not "users". We are the product that Facebook sells to whomever wants to know about us. It's a huge datamine whose whole business strategy is built around cajoling as many people as possible to reveal as much about themselves as possible. That's why Facebook is so dubious in their treatment of people's privacy. Privacy is the antithesis of Facebook's strategy.
There's nothing inherently wrong with using Facebook, but I think a lot of "users" are not very wise about how they use it. My approach is to assume that nothing on the internet is sacred and nothing is private, despite assurances and "privacy policies" that promise otherwise. I use Facebook to keep in touch with a few friends, and to follow authors I like. But I don't talk about personal things there, and tone down my political/activisty talk there as well. When I want to get into more serious discussions about things, I go to Diaspora*. Half of the users there are crazy paranoid, and have of those are conspiracy theorists, so privacy is a pretty big deal there. And people tend to be smarter in general.
I have a question, Why do websites LOVE to use multiple pages, instead of just putting the entire article on the same page?
Yeah, I already know about above the fold vs below, but honestly, it's a pain in the ass.
Advertising. The more clicks, the more refreshes, the more ads seen. It only ever fluffs my nutters when they'll do something as shoddy as a single sentence on the pre-page click, you know?
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabbit_Coach
These "buttons" or better options appear only if you want to make your content available. They are not just sitting there. So if I normally use my Mac I don't even see them. Once I push the publish button or select the equivalent menu, these options become visible.
So all the heated talk about how bad social network integration is, is completely BS. Unless you actively sign in in all these networks, there is absolutely nothing to worry about.
That's not true. The share option is always there whether you have an account or not. If you select the option, animated dialog pops up asking you to sign in or create an account.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mario
That's not true. The share option is always there whether you have an account or not. If you select the option, animated dialog pops up asking you to sign in or create an account.
It's exactly as I say! Only in my german regionalized OS it's called "bereitstellen"-button , what translates as "publish"-button. which is the button you call the "share option".
So I hope to have settled this small misunderstanding without having introduced a lot more confusion???
;-)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Except you see the buttons whether you use it or not. Could you think before rehashing this incorrect argument? I'm fine with sociopath networking in my OS as long as it doesn't bloat unnecessarily and I don't have to see or use it to use the OS. My only problem is that I have to see these idiotic buttons whether I use the services or not.
I don't see empty inboxes for qq.com, 123.com, Yahoo!, and Gmail in Mail… since I don't have accounts with them. I shouldn't see Twitter, Flickr, or Facebook buttons or options anywhere in either of my OS' unless I use those services.
Yes!
I love MacBookAir also because there are no stickers on it (all windows laptops look just dirty because of those stickers).
Now, why would they put a Facebook sticker in OS X?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mario
That's not true. The share option is always there whether you have an account or not. If you select the option, animated dialog pops up asking you to sign in or create an account.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabbit_Coach
It's exactly as I say! Only in my german regionalized OS it's called "bereitstellen"-button , what translates as "publish"-button. which is the button you call the "share option".
So I hope to have settled this small misunderstanding without having introduced a lot more confusion???
;-)
Dude, I don't care how you call this button.
It is always there. Even if you have ont signed in yet. That is why I (and other people) don't like it - the presence of useless buttons.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doorman.
Dude, I don't care how you call this button.
It is always there. Even if you have ont signed in yet. That is why I (and other people) don't like it - the presence of useless buttons.
Here is a hint to Apple: do a special preference panel for the social network accounts. Then, activate the share/social button (or whatever you call it) only if you have an activated account, otherwise don't show any share button at all.
Originally Posted by mac512
Here is a hint to Apple: do a special preference panel for the social network accounts. Then, activate the share/social button (or whatever you call it) only if you have an activated account, otherwise don't show any share button at all.
There's no need for that. They just need to do it the same way they handle EVERY other account currently. The last thing we need is MORE special treatment to this crap.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oflife
A tragic dumbing down of a once superb OS. FB is a toxic entity that has done more to create a generation of callous dystopian voyeuristic narcissistic shallow low IQ individuals than any other invention in recent history outside of American daytime TV or anything on Sky (UK) that isn't the sports, History or Discover channel. FB has few positive attributes and Apple who are supposed to develop engines of creation that inspire people to create have lost their way. No wonder the Mac Pro's have not been updated in years and the iPad doesn't have a proper high resolution stylus. I for one, whilst finding Apple hardware such as the MBA, Mac Mini and iPod Touch superb, will question my continued loyalty to the platform if they do not reconsider their current immature mind numbing consumption based path. I already boycott all services and publications that require an FB login to gain access and will have no hesitation to drop Apple in full after over 20 years of loyalty if this behaviour does not stop. I hope others comprehend what I am getting at here and will back me up. I estimate 5% will 'Like', the rest will 'Hate'.
Facebook is a virus, that sadly, has now "infected" the Apple-verse. Now, I'm not saying that lightly. There are hardly any websites left that you can go to, that Facebook doesn't know you've been there, and is gathering data about you--without your consent. I totally get the appeal of Facebook. It lets people connect with friends and post vacation pictures and whatnot. But that's just a way to get people to voluntarily give them personal information that they can use however they want. There's some very unsettling stuff beneath the surface, mainly around the area of privacy. It's no secret (pun sort of intended) that Facebook has played fast and loose with people's privacy. And it's not simply an issue of "if you're not doing anything wrong, you've got nothing to worry about." or, "don't put private stuff in your Facebook account!" It's about what information about you is being gathered, by whom, and for what purpose. There are all sorts of nefarious ways this information about you could be used, without your knowledge or consent.
And so, with Apple's claim of deep Facebook integration, what exactly does that mean? How deep does that integration go? Okay, you can easily share stuff that you want to share; that's well and good. But what about the stuff you don't want to share? Should I just take their word for it that Facebook doesn't have access to my personal documents, photos, etc.? Now, if Facebook had a demonstrated history of respecting people's privacy, but the opposite is true, which is that there are serious privacy issues going on here. It used to be just confined to the internet. Now it's extending to our personal computers. That is deeply troubling.
At least we are seeing integration in OS's these days.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
There's no need for that. They just need to do it the same way they handle EVERY other account currently. The last thing we need is MORE special treatment to this crap.
Well... I agree, what can I say? You said everything :-)
Actually, I just remember that there exists already a preference pane "Sharing", it could be also used for that (or anyone else, I don't really care). I also dislike these social-stuffs but there are people who like. Just suggest Apple to make this bug feature the less intrusive as possible.
Originally Posted by mac512
Actually, I just remember that there exists already a preference pane "Sharing", it could be also used for that (or anyone else, I don't really care).
Ah, but that's a different level of sharing. I would advise against combining the two, as that would be confusing. That 'sharing' is intra-network, computer-level sharing. Social network 'sharing' is internetwork, content-level sharing.
Originally Posted by GadgetCanada
How to ignore it......hmmmmmmm...........................I'VE GOT IT!!!! Don't use it. Brilliant!
Do you (or anyone else here) know for a fact that if you don't set up an account that absolutely no information will ever be transferred from your computer to Facebook or any other "integrated" service? Didn't think so. You'd be surprised at how much is already sent out as it is.
Here's a request for anyone with this latest 10.8 release: try running Little Snitch for a while and see what kind of requests go out when you use various features, especially those related to sharing. In other words, try using the OS for a while without sharing anything, then try bringing up a sharing sheet, etc. See what kind of information goes out.
Before starting the test, be sure to disable or delete (NOT change to disallow - you won't see anything!) all the non-required rules that send information to Apple as well, even if you get warnings. You can always run the "Restore Factory Rules" when you're done with this test. You'll see LOTS of requests to send information about your system configuration and such to Apple. It's a good educational experience to see how much information is being sent out across the internet about your computer. Given that for most people, your computer is immediately connected to you as an individual, at least with Apple if you purchased new, that's also sending them information about you personally -- how and when and where you use your computer, in addition to what apps you have installed, etc. Lots of this seems innocuous (depending on what information gets sent across the wire), but even the default connections to NTP servers give Apple a constant heartbeat of virtually every Mac connected to the internet.
With that in mind, NOW look and see what kind of information is transmitted when you click various sharing features without signing into any service. That would mimic the situation for those who do not use services like Facebook, and do not want any data transmitted to them. Maybe it's clean and maybe it's not, but all the ignorant comments at this point saying "just don't use it!" are just that: ignorant.
Originally Posted by Quadra 610
Social is *everywhere* and the industry at large wants a) more of it and b) tighter product integration with it. You can leave Apple, but everywhere else you turn, you'll be bumping up against either Facebook or Twitter or Google's social service du jour.
Thank you for recognizing that it's "the industry" that wants more of this and tighter integration. It's not necessarily consumers (although some certainly do). Consumers want easy ways to communicate with their friends, family, coworkers, etc. It's unimportant to most people how or through what service that happens. Tying everything together is dangerous, both technically (see the Mat Honan situation for an extreme example) and from an ownership-of-data standpoint.
Originally Posted by Quadra 610
Your complaints are noted, but your attitude is that of a hopeless tech luddite. Accept the inevitable, and learn to find something about it to enjoy. If not, your stubbornness will result in your marginalization. Eventually there will be no escape. It's ALL ABOUT consumption. Always was. But there are also new avenues of creation that are accessible to everyone. The average consumer has never in the history of modern tech been more empowered with great tools for self-expression.
However, this sounds like something written by a damn Facebook employee. I can't speak for the person you were replying to, but I am, in most ways, the opposite of a luddite. I understand technology better than almost anyone, having been involved for decades, and have deep knowledge of the social aspects as well as the technology underneath the hood. I will stand up to almost anyone, anywhere as far as technical understanding. I am also a proponent of the use of (most) technological advancement.
But social fucking media is a different beast. There are many ways to communicate, both electronically and otherwise, but no one should be forced or goaded into using tools like Facebook, which is managed by a group of morally corrupt individuals who OWN ALL DATA POSTED TO THEIR SERVICES. They have proven themselves to be untrustworthy at almost every turn, from the unscrupulous opening of privacy settings without users' permission to the disaster around their IPO. They have no interest in serving their users (note I did not say customers, because we all know their users are their product), they are in business to serve their own selfish needs, which revolve around collecting and selling (indirectly) incredibly detailed personal profiles of their users. That is vile and reprehensible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Ah, but that's a different level of sharing. I would advise against combining the two, as that would be confusing. That 'sharing' is intra-network, computer-level sharing. Social network 'sharing' is internetwork, content-level sharing.
OK, ok...
Anyway, its their job (Apple) to find the best way to make these "buttons" less intrusive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Except you see the buttons whether you use it or not. Could you think before rehashing this incorrect argument? I'm fine with sociopath networking in my OS as long as it doesn't bloat unnecessarily and I don't have to see or use it to use the OS. My only problem is that I have to see these idiotic buttons whether I use the services or not.
I don't want to see the buttons, but I also don't want the bloat of extra code on my machines, nor the waste of extra CPU cycles. If I was sure the former was extremely minimal and the latter wasn't happening at all, then as long as there's no information being sent out from the machines, I can live with the buttons/images for social crap living in one and only one place: System Preferences, where I can leave it completely disabled. I don't know that this is true, however.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GadgetCanada
I like Facebook because it lets me talk to my nephews who live far away simply because they don't talk on the phone. But we laugh and joke all the time on Facebook so it keeps us connected. It's not the same as talking on the phone or talking face to face but I won't say it's any less valuable. I just think the other poster who is a 20 year Apple user saying he will abandon Apple because of one item in a pull down menu is a bit excessive. Nice tie btw
Want to communicate with people? Fercrissakes, how about email? Or in public-broadcast mode, how about a blog? Mailing lists? Web sites? SMS? There are a host of ways to communicate with people beyond a telephone that don't involve morally bankrupt companies. Sorry, I'm mostly irked at others and you were in the path of fire. ;-)
People are under the illusion that their posts on facebook are private to their friends and family, but they are not private, they belong to The Facebook Corporation, which will use them in whatever way they see fit for as long as they see fit. As soon as it will benefit themselves to use them differently you can be damn sure they will. See above.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vanilla Gorilla
Two quick replies to the original rant:
1. If you don't like social media, don't use them. We all ignore features of a massively complex modern OS.
2. Social media are media, likes books or movies or anything else. The content is made by people, and so a lot is inane and some is really good. This will sound obnoxious but needs to be said -- if you find social media mind-numingly stupid, it means you have stupid friends or make bad choices about whom to follow.
I am a college professor in my 40s and many of my colleagues, locally and around the world, use Facebook. We show pictures of our kids and dogs, true, but we also talk about the books we're writing and reading, about politics and art and history and science and religion. I learn a lot from a lot of smart people. I find Twitter even more intellectually rewarding because I can follow a great range of people and organizations.
#2 is a good point, but #1 is grossly misunderstood. If crap like Facebook gets integrated into the devices we use, it becomes very difficult to even KNOW if you're using them or not. You may not explicitly be posting, but various information may (or may not) be sent out without your explicit consent. Some of this is happening right now and people are mostly clueless.
Beyond that, the trends are such that one can imagine being locked out of opportunities by not being connected to specific online social media. LinkedIn is one example. Should we, as a society, really be required to post our personal CVs/profiles online where any of 7 billion people can see them? WTF is the world coming to?
It isn't inevitable to use it. In fact, I almost forgot about the Twitter integration in Mountain Lion because the system didn't show me that, didn't give me any advice to use it. Just when I was exploring the System Preferences I found it and remember it.
I'm not a big fan of Facebook, I just use it to have some fun and share some jokes. I'm 99% sure I'll again deactivate my account one of these days (that time forever), but I don't see why so much complain and why bashing Apple and the OS for such integration. Maybe you don't like it, maybe I don't like it, but Facebook is a reality and the youngs are all using it, so Apple gains a couple of points into the future generation with this integration, and that matters.
*deleted by poster*.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oflife
A tragic dumbing down of a once superb OS. FB is a toxic entity that has done more to create a generation of callous dystopian voyeuristic narcissistic shallow low IQ individuals than any other invention in recent history outside of American daytime TV or anything on Sky (UK) that isn't the sports, History or Discover channel. FB has few positive attributes and Apple who are supposed to develop engines of creation that inspire people to create have lost their way. No wonder the Mac Pro's have not been updated in years and the iPad doesn't have a proper high resolution stylus. I for one, whilst finding Apple hardware such as the MBA, Mac Mini and iPod Touch superb, will question my continued loyalty to the platform if they do not reconsider their current immature mind numbing consumption based path. I already boycott all services and publications that require an FB login to gain access and will have no hesitation to drop Apple in full after over 20 years of loyalty if this behaviour does not stop. I hope others comprehend what I am getting at here and will back me up. I estimate 5% will 'Like', the rest will 'Hate'.
I am going to 100% AGREE with this.
Integrating facebook into safari was, in my opinion, a bad move.
Definitely not an intelligent one.
Facebook is a time waster and an addiction, and, as OfLife stated, a haven of the most narcissistic oxygen thieves within humanity. It is definitely a factor in the downfall of social interaction in the modern world, killing empathy and any sense of community.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harleigh Quinn
Facebook is a time waster and an addiction, and, as OfLife stated, a haven of the most narcissistic oxygen thieves within humanity. It is definitely a factor in the downfall of social interaction in the modern world, killing empathy and any sense of community.
I don't think that Facebook is that harmful, though the potential is certainly there, and I'm sure that there are some people who are "addicted", or otherwise psychologically affected by its use. My biggest concern (as I stated earlier) is that Facebook is not a product that we, as consumers use. We are not "users". We are the product that Facebook sells to whomever wants to know about us. It's a huge datamine whose whole business strategy is built around cajoling as many people as possible to reveal as much about themselves as possible. That's why Facebook is so dubious in their treatment of people's privacy. Privacy is the antithesis of Facebook's strategy.
There's nothing inherently wrong with using Facebook, but I think a lot of "users" are not very wise about how they use it. My approach is to assume that nothing on the internet is sacred and nothing is private, despite assurances and "privacy policies" that promise otherwise. I use Facebook to keep in touch with a few friends, and to follow authors I like. But I don't talk about personal things there, and tone down my political/activisty talk there as well. When I want to get into more serious discussions about things, I go to Diaspora*. Half of the users there are crazy paranoid, and have of those are conspiracy theorists, so privacy is a pretty big deal there. And people tend to be smarter in general.
I have a question, Why do websites LOVE to use multiple pages, instead of just putting the entire article on the same page?
Yeah, I already know about above the fold vs below, but honestly, it's a pain in the ass.
Originally Posted by marcusj0015
I have a question, Why do websites LOVE to use multiple pages, instead of just putting the entire article on the same page?
Yeah, I already know about above the fold vs below, but honestly, it's a pain in the ass.
Advertising. The more clicks, the more refreshes, the more ads seen. It only ever fluffs my nutters when they'll do something as shoddy as a single sentence on the pre-page click, you know?