[HacktionLab] We need to talk about Facebook

UuOoBb borzoj at aktivix.org
Thu Nov 29 23:53:44 UTC 2012


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi,

There is a lot of concern about people giving up their privacy
voluntarily. What about the situations where people are forced to give
up privacy?

The government has just started rolling out a new service calle d
Universal Jobmatch, with the intent of forcing everyone claiming JSA,
which is around 1.5 million people. The service is run by monster.com.
Read the privacy policy here and weep:
https://jobsearch.direct.gov.uk/Privacy/Default.aspx

Best bits:

"We try to limit access to our searchable CV database only to those
employers who have been given permission, but cannot guarantee that
people or organisations without permission will not gain access to
this database"

"We have put in place technical and organisational systems designed to
secure your personal information from accidental loss and from people
or organisations that do not have permission to access, use,
alteration or disclosure. However, the Internet is an open system and
We cannot guarantee that people or organisations that do not have
permission will not be able to defeat those systems or use your
personal information for improper purposes."

On top of this, on signing up to this people are actually requested by
their Job centre advisor to give access to their account.

There are similar concerns regarding the Universal Credit which, even
if it's late by few years, is meant to replace all currently existing
benefits. Most people did or will at some point claim some form of
support, even those lucky enough to be working if they want to and on
good enough salary not to require housing benefit or tax credits do
fall ill sometimes or have children. The kind of data gathering
operation that the government wants to run is pretty scary:

http://johnnyvoid.wordpress.com/2012/03/24/big-brother-is-back-id-cards-were-nothing-compared-to-this-governments-snooping-plans/

How do we prevent this?

Solid,
M

On 28/11/12 04:57, Dave Hollis wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I think there is no simple answer, not even a set of simple
> answers.
> 
> In my experience it is a question of showing what are the concrete 
> negative benefits that could come out of using FB (or whatever) in
> the particular field I am involved in: self-organisation in the
> workplace.
> 
> There are particularly good examples of how dangerous it is to 
> organise on, say, FB, and relatively easy then to extrapolate.
> 
> Our recent experience in the case of steel works that is to be
> closed is that there is a fair bit of resentment among the
> workforce to having to join facebook in order to participate in the
> platform run by the works council and the union in the factory. We
> have profited from that and tried to strengthen this sentiment by
> explaining that users of FB are the commodities. Also the aspects
> of data protection and being traceable are other obvious negative
> points when talking about FB.
> 
> Be that all as that may, these are just attempts and ideas. We are 
> just scratching the surface here.  We'd be more that happy to have
> and develop others. Just stumbling in the dark and thankful for any
> rays of light.
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> Dave
> 
> 
> 
> On 28.11.2012 00:33, Gzikskud wrote:
>> Hello
> 
>> trying to drag it back on topic, to me the problem is in two 
>> parts;
> 
>> 1. we need to find a way to the message to the kids, the 12 year 
>> old's to think about the platform they use, and why they should 
>> consider their privacy. This will be a long campaign and one
>> that we have to plan for.
> 
>> 2. A platform that works for them, that offers them something
>> that FB does not, I don't have an answer on what that would be?
> 
> 
>> My view is the vast majority of FB users will continue to use it 
>> along with other platforms, so we almost have to say we have
>> lost this generation and concentrate on the next... lets start
>> with local community based websites target schools/colleges that
>> they can be involved in the running of their own communities
>> online.
> 
>> Gzik
> 
> 
>> On 27/11/2012 22:35, penguin wrote:
>>> Hi
>>> 
>>> I feel this has gone quite a way from "We need to talk about 
>>> Facebook" - if people want to carry on this thread, any chance
>>> of changing the subject line.
>>> 
>>> Cheers
>>> 
>>> G
>>> 
>>> On 27/11/12 22:32, mp wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On 27/11/12 23:06, Garcon du Monde wrote:
>>>>> personally, i have better things to worry about: global 
>>>>> capitalism
>>> 
>>>> which is what funds "peer-reviewed" science.
>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________ HacktionLab 
>>>> mailing list HacktionLab at lists.aktivix.org 
>>>> https://lists.aktivix.org/mailman/listinfo/hacktionlab
>>> 
>>> 
> 
>> _______________________________________________ HacktionLab
>> mailing list HacktionLab at lists.aktivix.org 
>> https://lists.aktivix.org/mailman/listinfo/hacktionlab
> 
> 
>> _______________________________________________ HacktionLab
>> mailing list HacktionLab at lists.aktivix.org 
>> https://lists.aktivix.org/mailman/listinfo/hacktionlab
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________ HacktionLab mailing
> list HacktionLab at lists.aktivix.org 
> https://lists.aktivix.org/mailman/listinfo/hacktionlab
> 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQt/WEAAoJEBitWRlUeZlietIIAJ6glKFKHlWHHD6qD8aZLKb6
scBmQstdhk7BTIqb/fXTusayqThO80VTNGg/PQCW8Zx1U70jpV+E4RmyUNSfylVP
vpyNNNOKOdcQFfZOc882SaUmPWEzTl98vHRHk0OFcDXVoPUi/HoBjgCrWGl3HWH+
4QqRoJgqxQBWY9/kBBQFGf0tlqg1lf5M9ngMlw5RExenRmk1cwOeoJ+5V/fW7vRG
02bAqBZnzxsqgEyLmMRkPwbwnMqU2tsVV3FpCRhxaf7NOf0tP6+/AKS2olgE8Oqj
yzAcJWkZn2HEOP7SurLMkxqaAH4pct5Ct1SOxoZ/lT9XJNmLDnysXuN+SGEBr9Y=
=xsOm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



More information about the HacktionLab mailing list