Log in

No account? Create an account

Facebook - John C. Kirk — LiveJournal

Jun. 20th, 2007

12:15 am - Facebook

Previous Entry Share Next Entry


[User Picture]
Date:June 20th, 2007 11:01 am (UTC)
I've now added my current employment status, and it's shown me a few other people who work at the same company, but it didn't ask for my work address when I set that up.

The "add friend" logic is a bit annoying, partly because it meant that I had to skip the recommended steps during registration and so I'm now stuck with a "tut tut" message in my profile, even though I've added friends a different way. If they only want you to search by name, I think it would still be worth adding that option to the "find friends" page explicitly; I assumed that the "Search" option was more general.

The photo thing reminds me of the way that "friend" access works in object oriented programming languages. There's a quote I heard a while back: "In C++, only your friends can see your private parts." I.e. one class can say "these methods are public, and these ones are private unless you're on the list of friends that I define". In VB, it's a bit different - methods can be Public (available to everyone), Friend (available to all other modules in the same project/component), or Private (only available to instances of this class). They're both valid concepts, but it's a bit confusing to use the same word for two different things when you hop between languages.

In this case, they seem to have a transitive trust model in mind, e.g. I can only see photos of you if you've listed me as a friend, and therefore you're (implicitly) vouching for me to the person who took those photos of you, allowing me to also see other people in those pictures. As you say, it's no worse than photos on a public website, but it's a bit different to putting photos in a friends-only LJ post (where the URLs of the image files are protected, rather than the images themselves).

By the way, my comment about out of date metadata was inspired by some of your photos; being a bit vague, if I look at photos of you from a wedding and a pie-off, there are people who are tagged in an "unlinked" way. (Don't change it on my account, it's just something to be aware of.)

I can see the benefit of being on Facebook if people are organising things that way; it's the equivalent of having an LJ account so that you can view "friends only" posts. However, I'm not quite clear on how it actually works. Do you just change your status temporarily ("Party this weekend!") so that people will see it in their news feed? Do you write it on people's walls? Or is there some other feature that I haven't come across yet, e.g. via group membership?
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]
Date:June 20th, 2007 01:18 pm (UTC)
The trust model is confusing, yes. It's not completely transitive - I can't see all photos of your friends, only photos that have you in. If you want an LJ analogy, it would be like me posting my photos friends-only, then you taking the ones that were of you and posting them in your journal, also friends-only. Which is precisely the sort of thing that's likely to happen if you get too restrictive in your security model. The facebook way is certainly confusing, but I think it's quite hard to think of a way of doing it that would satisfy more people.

And yes - parties are usually organised using the facebook event mechanism. Group membership helps with this, because you can invite all members of a group in bulk.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)