[Chester LUG] Chester Digest, Vol 345, Issue 1

Tue Apr 21 12:57:03 UTC 2015

That's a really good point! Maybe they could offer a feed that only shows
their 'friends' looking rough instead of the highly posed selfies!

On 21 April 2015 at 13:12, animation animation <animation1138 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I have seen an article online linking heavy Facebook use to depression.
> Facebook envy. People exaggerating how good their lives our makes onlookers
> depressed about their own life.
> Perhaps mildly bad news on fb will cheer people up.
>  On 21 Apr 2015 13:00, <chester-request at mailman.lug.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> Send Chester mailing list submissions to
>>         chester at mailman.lug.org.uk
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>         https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/chester
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>         chester-request at mailman.lug.org.uk
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>         chester-owner at mailman.lug.org.uk
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of Chester digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>>    1. facebook (Robin Hemuss)
>>    2. Re: facebook (Les Pritchard)
>>    3. Re: facebook (David Holden)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 15:48:58 +0100
>> From: Robin Hemuss <robin592 at yahoo.co.uk>
>> To: chester at mailman.lug.org.uk
>> Subject: [Chester LUG] facebook
>> Message-ID: <201504201548.58707.robin592 at yahoo.co.uk>
>> Content-Type: text/plain;  charset="us-ascii"
>>
>> Hello people,
>>
>> I don't know if this is old news for everyone else. The article's a few
>> months
>> old, but still interesting I think.
>>
>>
>> http://www.nature.com/news/misjudgements-will-drive-social-trials-underground-1.15553?WT.mc_id=TWT_NatureNews
>>
>> It seems that facebook spent some time feeding people disproportionately
>> good/bad news in their updates, and monitored if they behaved happy/sad
>> as a
>> result. Apparently this is ethical because it's pretty much what they
>> normally do anyway, and also it's not that much different from regular
>> advertising. Sounds a bit iffy to me though.
>>
>> I just wondered what the general opinion over this kind of stuff is. How
>> can
>> you keep your facebook activity secret from facebook?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Robin
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 20:53:06 +0100
>> From: Les Pritchard <les.pritchard at gmail.com>
>> To: chester <chester at mailman.lug.org.uk>
>> Subject: Re: [Chester LUG] facebook
>> Message-ID:
>>         <CAC_G_sDZ5-kLh=
>> BpF_1js_3VUr5pZUXsFfa9rrA2MCV2xXVGQg at mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> Yes, it was an interesting 'experiment' but the ethical side is really
>> questionable. I'm sure their view is that it is their network and you
>> agree
>> to this stuff in the T & C. Facebook certainly does decide what you see,
>> but you are able to change that if you 'train' your account. In terms of
>> stopping Facebook from watching you, well on Facebook you're obviously
>> screwed! To avoid tracking on other sites you'd need to remove all the
>> cookies so the like buttons couldn't track your visits. You could run you
>> browser in the private mode and restart it after using Facebook, which
>> would reduce the tracking ability. Alternatively, use one browser to
>> access
>> Facebook and then another for every other site. This would mean Facebook
>> could only see what they already know.
>>
>> There are plenty of other steps you can take, but those are the simple
>> ones
>> that spring to mind.
>>
>> On 20 April 2015 at 15:48, Robin Hemuss <robin592 at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> > Hello people,
>> >
>> > I don't know if this is old news for everyone else. The article's a few
>> > months
>> > old, but still interesting I think.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> http://www.nature.com/news/misjudgements-will-drive-social-trials-underground-1.15553?WT.mc_id=TWT_NatureNews
>> >
>> > It seems that facebook spent some time feeding people disproportionately
>> > good/bad news in their updates, and monitored if they behaved happy/sad
>> as
>> > a
>> > result. Apparently this is ethical because it's pretty much what they
>> > normally do anyway, and also it's not that much different from regular
>> > advertising. Sounds a bit iffy to me though.
>> >
>> > I just wondered what the general opinion over this kind of stuff is. How
>> > can
>> > you keep your facebook activity secret from facebook?
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> > Robin
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Chester mailing list
>> > Chester at mailman.lug.org.uk
>> > https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/chester
>> >
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <
>> http://mailman.lug.org.uk/pipermail/chester/attachments/20150420/6d669d3b/attachment-0001.html
>> >
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 3
>> Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2015 11:25:35 +0100
>> From: David Holden <dh at iucr.org>
>> To: chester at mailman.lug.org.uk
>> Subject: Re: [Chester LUG] facebook
>> Message-ID: <5536259F.10403 at iucr.org>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>>
>> It's a disgraceful exercise IMO. I wonder how many of those experimented
>> on were suffering from depression? A "tap tap tap" in the wrong
>> direction could lead to devastating consequences if so.
>>
>> But then it's par for the course with unthinking globocorps like
>> FaceBook and Google.
>>
>> I'm pretty sure I read that Google's identity "merging" around Google+
>> lead to people being outed when they were not ready or wanting to be.
>>
>> We're witnessing a step change reduction in privacy made all the more
>> troubling by the internet's pretty permanent memory and governments need
>> to surveil.
>>
>> Ultimately I suspect we're all going to have to become both a lot more
>> forgiving of other peoples private peccadilloes or a lot more shameless
>> ourselves.
>>
>>    Dave.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 20/04/15 15:48, Robin Hemuss wrote:
>> > Hello people,
>> >
>> > I don't know if this is old news for everyone else. The article's a few
>> months
>> > old, but still interesting I think.
>> >
>> >
>> http://www.nature.com/news/misjudgements-will-drive-social-trials-underground-1.15553?WT.mc_id=TWT_NatureNews
>> >
>> > It seems that facebook spent some time feeding people disproportionately
>> > good/bad news in their updates, and monitored if they behaved happy/sad
>> as a
>> > result. Apparently this is ethical because it's pretty much what they
>> > normally do anyway, and also it's not that much different from regular
>> > advertising. Sounds a bit iffy to me though.
>> >
>> > I just wondered what the general opinion over this kind of stuff is.
>> How can
>> > you keep your facebook activity secret from facebook?
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> > Robin
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Chester mailing list
>> > Chester at mailman.lug.org.uk
>> > https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/chester
>> >
>>
>> --
>> Dr David Holden. (dh at iucr.org)
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Chester mailing list
>> Chester at mailman.lug.org.uk
>> https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/chester
>>
>>
>> End of Chester Digest, Vol 345, Issue 1
>> ***************************************
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Chester mailing list
> Chester at mailman.lug.org.uk
> https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/chester
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.lug.org.uk/pipermail/chester/attachments/20150421/f8e95b94/attachment.html>