Whoa. That was weird.

[hudebnik]

So I follow a link in somebody's LJ post to a Washington Post blog entry. And over on the right side of the page is a panel labeled "Your Friends' Activity", listing Washington Post pages that have been liked, linked to, etc. by a bunch of people I know. How does the Washington Post know this? And which of my various social-network identities is it using to figure out whom I "know"? I mouse-over some of the entries, and they show Facebook URL's. Wait: I don't even have a Facebook account (that I know of)! Oh, I bet shalmestere didn't log out of her Facebook account the last time she used this computer. Still, a bit scary. I guess this is the "frictionless sharing" thing they were talking about.

Comments

[metahacker.livejournal.com]

http://sharemenot.cs.washington.edu/ is a good extension to use there.

[hrj.livejournal.com]

The annoying thing is that she may well have logged out of her Facebook account. Evidently Facebook sets cookies that track what you're doing whether you're logged in or not. Various people I know keep a separate web browser just for Facebook in order to quarantine the infection.

[ilaine-dcmrn.livejournal.com]

That works for regular cookies, but not flash cookies which cross browsers. I don't know that FB uses those, but many many sites do.

[hlinspjalda.livejournal.com]

This ramping up of FB ubiquity is part of what led me to opt out of FB entirely -- and then set my browser to deny all its cookies.

[unclrashid.livejournal.com]

I think I found a way to stop that nonsense, but of course I don't remember how. I think it was a button I clicked on Yahoo News. In any case, I still see what friends have viewed, but it stopped FB from showing what I have viewed.

[goldsquare.livejournal.com]

Facebook teh Ebil.

[goldsquare.livejournal.com]

I understand.

What I found is that the people who really care, keep in touch. The ones who only cared enough to spend 30 seconds on Facebook, were different.

[goldsquare.livejournal.com]

I believe it is a sword that cuts both ways, yes.

[goldsquare.livejournal.com]

Well, I was thinking mostly of me, when I wrote that.

For some folks, I've been an excellent correspondent and keep in touch. With others, not as much. Rarely with intention, but mostly a death of a thousand "not now" cuts.

I imagine that if it were not for "electronic means", you and I would be out of touch as well. Not for any particular negative reason - just because my life is not fully under my control.

Heck, my college room mate, or my best friend in college and I no longer keep in touch.

The ability to keep in touch with others is a true feature of Facebook. But, I'm not willing to give them what they ask for to do it. When I look at what I, personally, seem to value, I think it is too easy for ME to overvalue those friendships in comparison to what Facebook would rip from me.

[freetrav.livejournal.com]

May I hand a link to this entire entry-plus-comments around? There are people who keep urging me to join FaceBook in connection with the e-zine I edit, and I keep hearing about stuff like this, which only stiffens my resolve NOT to.

[hudebnik.livejournal.com]

Sure, it's public.

[ilaine-dcmrn.livejournal.com]

Even if she is logged out, there are locally stored objects that can keep information around.
I'm using noscript and betterprivacy with firefox and am much happier for it.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/11/08/how_to_stay_anonymous_part_ii/