Paul O'Flaherty

Baby Megatron Will Have Revenge

I wonder if Megatron will smile about this?

It’s good to see that the idiots are out in full force. If you haven’t heard about it, the online world is buzzing about “Baby Megatron” or at least the baby who may be called Megatron now that more than 1,000,000 (1 million) people have joined the Facebook fan page called:

Google Hasn’t Built A Twitter Killer: Goolge Buzz

FYI: I started writing this before the Google announcement today and am writing it as I watch it live and as a product GBuzz looks great.

Google doesn’t want to build, nor is it trying to build a “twitter killer”. What Google wants is your information in order to better target advertising.

Every time you send an email, update your status, chat on Goggle Talk, share an item on Google Reader, post a video to YouTube or a picture to Picasa, Google gets a little bit more information about you that it can use to better tune the advertising you see in the hope that you will click on one of those ads.

Information like your status updates disappear as soon as they are used but by offering timelines where you can see the status updates of your friends Google  can keep you on in their service a little longer and in front of their advertising a little longer.

By associating Facebook and Twitter id’s with your Gmail contacts Google learns a little more about both you and your contacts. They have already announced that you will be able to import RSS streams from other services, connect with twitter, and there was a hint of facebook connect. It was driven home that the platform will be made as open as possible and noted that if you tweet and it gets imported into GBuzz then it could end up on somebody elses recommended list.

GBuzz is shaping up to be a wonderful looking social experience, but it boils down to being a content gathering service. It will allow you to pump information into Google from all your other services, consume information there and ultimately spend more time in from of Google advertisements while providing it with the information necessary to fine tune those advertisements to you and your friends.

At the end of the day it all boils do to gathering more information about you in order to target advertising. They don’t need to build a Twitter killer. Twitter and Facebook already do a great job creating the information that Google wants.

What they have built however, is a marvelous looking social experience for those people who already use Gmail and Googles mobile services and given them the means to pour information about themselves and others into Googles servers.

Privacy Isn’t Binary. It Isn’t Yes Or No

Tell or Don't!

You’ve got  real life friends so you know that privacy is never a simple “yes or no”, “tell or don’t tell” matter.

There are things that you tell your spouse or best friend that you wouldn’t tell anybody else. There are things you would say to some friends and not to others. When you are out a party there may be pictures that you would let your friends and your brothers see, but would result in a serious ear bashing from your mother.

I’ve always been a strong proponent that our online activity is an extension of our offline activity. That online relationships mirror the dynamic and complex relationships that exist in our offline lives.

Believing that, I find it counter-intuitive to have social networks like Facebook push us further and further into a binary way of thinking about privacy. Essentially boiling privacy down to a “post it or don’t” issue. Forcing us to treat all of our online “friends” as equals.

As much as we may not like to admit it in front of our friends, we know that even our offline, real life, friends are not equal in our eyes. That is why the terms “best friend” and acquaintance exists.

Instant messaging clients, with the exception of ICQ (or at least it used to be when I actually used it), do the same thing. We are either online or off. Visible or invisible. Not a case of  visible to some and not to others. We’ve all put our phone on silent from time to time to “ignore” that call from a friend or family member. Or simply turned it off. While we might not want one person to know we are online, or available to talk, we might and sometimes do desperately need other people to know we are available to talk and that we want to talk. Skype are you listening?

With social networks, instant messaging and almost every other form of online communication pushing us into a binary way of thinking about privacy, we have to ask ourselves if that is what we really want? Would we stand for it, or be able even to successfully get through our lives if privacy in real life was dual choice only?

Tell everyone, or tell no one?

Shouldn’t we be pushing for finer grained control and groups rather than simply eradicating privacy? Or do we want  everyone to be burdened with a lot more secrets and worries that they would never be able to get off their chest and for confidentiality to cease to exist?

Facebooks Privacy Changes Help To Criminalize Us All

A right to think?

You might not think it was possible to be arrested for a joke you made on Twitter, but that is exactly what happened to Paul Chambers.

He was due to fly to Ireland on January 15th but after the extreme bad weather on January sixth which resulted in the closing of the airport he was to fly from, he jokingly posted the following:

You’ve got a week and a bit to get your shit together, otherwise I’m blowing the airport sky high!!

We’ve all done it. We’ve all said and though things similar to this, but for Paul Chambers it resulted in being arrested by police to whom he had to explain what Twitter was because “they’d never heard of it”. It resulted in having to pay to be bailed out, being suspended by his employer, having his laptop, iPhone and home computer taken away and he is still waiting to find out whether or not he will charged with conspiring to create a bomb hoax.

It’s overkill, it’s ridiculous, it displays a complete misunderstanding of the law (by the police no less) and it is about to become the “norm” in our society.

Everyday we make statements such as the one Paul Chambers made. While watching a match on TV – “I’ll kill him if he doesn’t score”. Parents – I’m sure you’ve said “I’ll kill (enter child’s name here) if he’s late home” and other such things.

We do it on blogs,  on social networks and we do it in our day to day conversations. If you need convincing just do a search on twitter for “I’ll kill” or “I’ll blow up” and watch the comments scroll by.

What people and police don’t understand is that expressing the desire to do something does not mean that we *will* do something.

I have a desire to throttle Hugh Grant. I can’t stand they guy. I’ve expressed that desire verbally and in writing a number of times. However, expressing the desire to do something does not mean that I would, have or will. I have (apparently) the ability for rational thought, for self control and to know the difference between right and wrong.

Just because I don’t have much money and say that I would love to “rob a bank”, it does not mean that I will do it or ever had any real intention of doing it. I know it’s wrong and desire aside, I will be driven by my own moral compass. Or to put it another way I know it’s wrong so I won’t do it!

As I said, these types of arrest are about to become the norm rather than the exception.

As governments and law enforcement agencies continue their futile attempts to crack down on terrorism (lets be honest, if you want to do it they can’t really stop you until it is too late) they continue to disregard the difference between “thinking about doing something” and actually “doing something”.

While arrests like these are becoming more common place, we continue to be ourselves, to use social networks and forums, expecting to have the right to think what we want. At the same time companies like Facebook continue to make our previously private data open in the name of data-mining, page views and advertising revenue, providing law enforcement agencies, which are supposed to be protect us, with the means to criminalize use because we choose to think and express ourselves.

To quote civil libertarian Tessa Mayes, an expert on privacy law and free speech issues:

Making jokes about terrorism is considered a thought crime, mistakenly seen as a real act of harm or intention to commit harm.

The police’s actions seem laughable and suggest desperation in their efforts to combat terrorism, yet they have serious repercussions for all of us. In a democracy, our right to say what we please to each other should be non-negotiable, even on Twitter.

The Social Media Guru (Video)

Trust me!

Social media experts, gurus and witchdoctors! You can’t turn a corner on the internet without running into 10 of them. Each and every one of them pimping their own regurgitated brand of “unique” insight that will do everything from save your business to turn you into a superstar with all of the perks and track marks as proof!

They’re like pigeons around old people at the park -- annoying, everywhere and covering the place in shit.

Have you ever wondered what it is most of these so called “social media experts” actually do for companies? This video tells all…

Hat tip to “New Pair Of Goggles“

If The Death Star Had Facebook

I came across this while scheduling posts for Daily Shite and it just cracked me up. I don’t know who originally did the image, but if you know please drop me a note in the comments so I can give proper credit.

Facebook Ads And Suggestions That Aren’t

Our friend Heather (@Wigenout) pointed us to an image on Facebook yesterday for submission to Daily Shite and while we were checking it out I noticed the advert that you can see on the right hand side there.

I have very little problem with Facebook or any network suggesting people to me that I may know (except when I’ve already removed them or blocked them) but these new user created adverts cross a line with me.

These ads attempt trick the user in to adding the person in the advert to their user list by suggesting that the recommendation is coming for Facebook. That is not only untrue, simply sneaky and underhanded, but also expressly forbidden by Facebooks Advertising Guidelines.

From section 3 of Facebooks Advertising Guidlines (emphasis added by me):

Facebook references

1. The following conditions apply to all adverts that have a Facebook Page, application, event, group or Connect site as its destination, except as otherwise specifically permitted to those subject to the Branding and promotion policy section of the Platform Guidelines:
   1. Adverts may make limited references to “Facebook” in its title, body or image for the purposes of clarifying the destination of the advert;
   2. Adverts cannot imply any endorsement of the product, service or ad destination by Facebook.
2. All other adverts, destination adverts and landing pages must adhere to the following restrictions:
   1. Adverts cannot mention or refer to Facebook, its site or its brand in any manner, including in the title, body, image or destination URLs;
   2. Adverts cannot use Facebook logos, trademarks or site terminology (including but not limited to Facebook, The Facebook, FacebookHigh, FBook, FB, Poke, Wall and other company graphics, logos, designs or icons);
   3. Facebook site features cannot be emulated.

I’ve been seeing this style of advert on Facebook for a number of weeks now and am wondering how long before the crack down begins or will they just continue to ignore them in favour of the advertising coin?

The Ages Of Social Media

It’s a true sign of the changing face of social media when my 13 year old sister messages me on Facebook to get me to tell my Grandmother to accept her friend request (because my little sis is impatient that way, as most kids are with a new toy).

Social media is no longer the domain of the geeks & nerds. It’s truly become universal.

Facebook is pimping you (and how to stop it).

Did you know that Facebook is using your profile image to pimp dating services and other adverts to your friends? Neither did I! At least not until Cheryl Smith wrote about what happened to her and her husband.

Or else your husband may just see a Facebook ad with your picture in it advertising hot singles in your area. I’m not joking. Not too long ago, my husband Peter had this ad appear on his Facebook page. Good thing we both have a sense of humor!

My first instinct was WTF? Which was then followed by a sense of indignation! I’m in a relationship myself! Have Sara’s mates seen me advertised as a “hot single”?

Thankfully Cheryl also posted how to turn off this “feature” on Facebook:

(Hint: You may need to do this in a browser other than Firefox as the settings don’t always appear for some strange reason.)

1. Settings
2. Privacy
3. News Feed and Wall
4. Click on “Facebook Ads”
5. In the “Appearance in Facebook Ads” box, click “no one” (unless, of course, you actually want to tell your spouse to check out hot singles)

It was while I was “opting out” of this wonderful opportunity to be pimped to my friends that I read this:

Facebook occasionally pairs advertisements with relevant social actions from a user’s friends to create Facebook Ads. Facebook Ads make advertisements more interesting and more tailored to you and your friends. These respect all privacy rules. You may opt out of appearing in your friends’ Facebook Ads below.

I added the bold highlighting of “These respect all privacy rules.”

Those words, “These respect all privacy rules” stood out like a sore thumb amidst that short paragraph of text.

Why was it there? It’s out of place considering you already agreed to Facebook’s terms of service.

Then it struck me! It’s there because they knew that people would be annoyed, upset, and indignant as hell when they found it.

They knew that using your face to pimp out advertising and dating services would rub people up the wrong way.

It’s their was of saying “We know what we’re doing is wrong, but it’s not against the rules, so piss off and don’t bother complaining to anybody!”.

I know I’m not the only one who, while I can see the vaguely funny side of it, am frankly shocked that Facebook would be stupid enough to do this. I’ve used the method above to turn off this “feature”, to “opt out”!

But opting out is not enough. I should never have been “opted in” in the first place.

The long rambling (subject to change with minimal notice and no dialogue) terms of service, full of legalese, do nothing to protect the end user from this kind of behaviour.

It needs to made clear to users in plain, simple, readable terms that don’t require the services of a lawyer exactly what they are getting themselves into when they sign up!

Would you honestly have signed up for Facebook if you knew they would use your image in this way?

The only vanity URL that matters is yours!

Forget Facebook, forget MySpace, forget Twitter. 

When it comes to branding yourself, when it comes to being found online, when it comes to making your mark on the internet the only URL that really matters is your own URL.

By that I mean the one that is your domain, your website or blog, your corner of the web.

Not your name on somebody else’s piece of the web, but your own place. Yours!

A sense of identity is important to all of us and the minds behind companies like Facebook know this.

They offer personalized URLs as a means to provide us with this sense of identity, with this sense of ownership, but they neglect to tell you that the sense of identity will be fleeting and that the sense of ownership is, at best, an illusion.

Companies come and go! How many social networks have risen and fallen in the past few years?

The crowd is fickle and when they move on to the next big thing, as they inevitably do, the networks die off, taking with them your content, your identity and everything you thought you owned.

As Anil Dash said in his post a few days ago, “Exclusive, the future of Facebook Usernames”:

A first wave of "It’s alive! Go get your name!" posts go up on various technology blogs, noting that the service is running a little bit slow. None of these posts mention that you can also register a real domain name that you can own, instead of just having another URL on Facebook.

If you really want to carve out your place on the web you have to secure your own domain and preferably your real name (not some made up name that you may not want, or may not fit 5 or 10 years down the road).

With your own domain you can have your own space on the web, where you are in control and you own everything. Nobody can take it away, nobody can change the rules, it’s your identity and your place.

Once you have that, run off and get your Facebook vanity URL (and again, choose one that identifies you and will still be valid in 5 years time – remember you are your brand) and use it to drive traffic to your domain and while you’re at it, aggregate your content from social networks into your domain so that you have it forever and always.

Make your mark. Claim your own territory on the web! Make it so that when your name is typed in on a search engine, it’s not some social network that comes up first, but you.

Your name, your domain, your identity. You!

Once you’ve secured “you” then it’s time to make friends!

Facebook thinks I’ve got boobs

Forget all the uproar about the Facebook redesign. It’s just not that important!

What I want to know is this: How is the platform which was able to magically deduce that I speak German now unable to tell what gender I am?

Why, oh great flying spaghetti monster is Facebook pushing an application at me asking “Which type of woman are you?”

Let me say this once and for all – “They’re pecs! Not frickin tits!”