Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Google Facebook Privacy Social Networks Technology

Zuckerberg Quits Google+ Over Privacy Concerns 284

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the so-much-irony dept.
ianpm writes "Mark Zuckerberg has decided to leave Google's new social network because he 'doesn't want to be tracked.' In other news, the Internet's irony meter has just exploded. Robert Scoble is now the most followed person on Google+ according to The Inquirer." Most of the article is about the rankings of various G+ users with big followings. I currently have a measly 400 or so. Guess I'll never be as cool as MySpace's Tom.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Zuckerberg Quits Google+ Over Privacy Concerns

Comments Filter:
  • by Frankie70 (803801) on Wednesday July 13, 2011 @08:58AM (#36747996)

    A wise man once said this [readwriteweb.com].

    Facebook's Zuckerberg Says The Age of Privacy is Over

  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 13, 2011 @08:58AM (#36747998)

    Well, the first is just Google data mining your info to provide better ads. Since this information is only being used by Google, its still private, in the sense that its not publicly available (note that the same will be true of EVERY social networking site by definition: whoever you give information to will have that info. No way to stop that. Google is just being honest and telling you that that info will be used BY THEMy them to provide targeted ads. NOT shared with third parties: only the ads they target you with are.) The third is, as you say, toggle-able, and as for the second, anyone I want to see my picture already knows where I live. So, yeah, not much going on there. As for being indexed by google: facebook indexes everyone too. Its an absolute requirement for social networking. Without being able to search for your friends, no one would ever be able to find them.

    Facebook, on the other hand, has privacy controls deeply buried, which often reset themselves, and up to very recently at least (don't use Facebook apps anymore) didn't work properly with Facebook apps. I'll go with G+, TYVM.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 13, 2011 @09:12AM (#36748196)
    Yeah, except FB routinely changes the way things are made private/public, and defaults those settings to 'Wide Open'. They then notify you up to 48 hours later, giving the search crawlers plenty of time to index your stuff.

    I rather prefer Google's method. It seems more honest.

    Also, anyone who didn't foresee Zuck doing this wasn't paying attention.

    1. Sign up for competing service.
    2. Give it an "honest try"
    3. Quit over perceived "problems" that your site doesn't have, or resolved previously.
    4. Profit!
  • by Serious Callers Only (1022605) on Wednesday July 13, 2011 @09:16AM (#36748252)

    At least with Facebook I have control over what my information is made public.

    Do you really believe this? You think the company which came up with Beacon and introduced it as on by default has any interest in giving you control over your information? Much as I don't hate Zuckerberg, he and facebook are playing you for a sucker.

    You CAN change what information is public and what you want to give out.

    If you trust Facebook to live up to their promises in this regard (which are pretty flimsy to start with) I have a bridge to sell you. I leave you with a verified quote from Zuckerberg about his users:

    "They trust me — dumb fucks,"

  • by tripleevenfall (1990004) on Wednesday July 13, 2011 @09:21AM (#36748308)

    This was obviously a stunt from the get-go. Zuckerberg joined only with the intention of quitting in mock disgust later, in a stunt to protect his media empire, which is all based around collecting and selling personal information.

  • by Lunix Nutcase (1092239) on Wednesday July 13, 2011 @09:34AM (#36748448)

    So...it has the same privacy violations as facebook...not seeing your point.

    That's the entire point. It has the same privacy violations by default as Facebook thus negating the whole thing about how Google+ is so much greater about privacy than Facebook.

  • by Kamiza Ikioi (893310) on Wednesday July 13, 2011 @09:49AM (#36748608) Homepage

    On Facebook, Mark sees other people's info, and they can't see his.

    On Google+, he set his profile public, and they can all see him, and he can't see all the stuff they set private like he can on Facebook.

    See? Privacy... Concern...

    Unless Mark can be private while at the same time looking into everyone else's dirty little secrets (I wonder exactly how many private nude pictures he's check out late nights at FB...), then it's a concern for him, a... privacy... concern...

    Besides, this is a publicity stunt. He is trying to throw privacy concerns Google's way to make them look just as bad as him. Of course, it could be the biggest FAIL of the year. It'd be like McDonald's calling out Wendy's on obesity concerns.

...there can be no public or private virtue unless the foundation of action is the practice of truth. - George Jacob Holyoake

Working...