Facebook CEO: 'We've made mistakes' on privacy

by Laurie Segall, CNNMay 24, 2010: 9:40 AM ET

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, ending his silence about recent privacy controversies, has admitted to making some mistakes and promised to fix the problems.

I've been thinking about this a lot lately. The truth is, generally speaking, facebook, even with mistakes, is more secure than the internet as a whole. You can find out anything about me online if you dig. (and for me personally, you don't have to dig deep). This is a reality we have come to accept. Any of us who have blogs, comment on blogs, have a website or even use email seems to understand this reality and consider it an acceptable risk.

The internet is to us, as a public building or street is in the brick and mortar world. I accept certain risks to my privacy and person when I leave my house. When I'm at the market, someone could recognize me and stop and want to chat even if I don't like them and I'll have to try to wriggle out of it somehow. I could be assaulted, I could have an accident, etc. These are all acceptable risks to me since I'm not agoraphobic.

My house is something altogether different. I consider it a space of secure privacy and safety. The risks to my safety and privacy decrease (generally speaking, all things being equal) when I'm in my house (or that's how I feel, I have no idea if that's statistically true but I would imagine it is taking all outside risks into account) as long as I take appropriate household safety precautions. The only people who enter my home are those I invite in. The only people who see me at my most vulnerable are those who are allowed. There is a risk of forced entry but it's low.*

The internet is to the world outside my home as facebook is to the space inside my home. I think much of the anger directed toward facebook/Zuckerberg lately is a result of people feeling incredibly violated. It's like we gave our house keys to a friend and that friend admitted a burglar while we were away. Should we have trusted Zuckerberg & co. as we would a friend? Perhaps not. But most of us aren't conspiracy theorists or paranoid people. Most of us trust that something will work as it claims and that people will honor their commitments and responsibilities.

So I guess the question is this - will facebook continue to be the inside/secure space of our internet lives as our homes are in our brick and mortar lives or do we need to just lump facebook into the rest of the internet and abandon those perceptions?

*caveat - some people use facebook primarily or even exclusively for business networking and promotion - this changes the facebook dynamic and for them, I think it becomes much more like a public space...or maybe a good comparison would be a networking coffee event - slightly more "secure" than the public market but less so than a home.

England, you officially can no longer hold sophistication over our heads. WTF?!

I don't find any of this all that surprising and I think we should be very careful with our reactions. I can tell you that in spite of all the conversations we have about race and ethnicity and sexual orientation and gender identity...my girls until about the age of 6 or 7 would often say things just as shocking (they would also say things like "when I grow up I'm going to marry a boy and take care of him" in spite of my frequent feminist rants). They are white, in many ways "stereotypically" female, in a home with straight parents, most of the people around them are the same. I'm also not surprised about the response of the black kids. Of course I think the reaction to have more/better conversations about race are a good idea but I hope we don't go crazy about this...esp. in reaction to this study.

Like my Episcopal Priest friend said "Challenging & sobering"

Awesome. We sponsor a child through Save the Children and have nothing but good things to say about them.

The Supreme Court ruled Monday the federal government has the power to indefinitely keep some sex offenders behind bars after they have served their sentences, if officials determine those inmates may prove "sexually dangerous" in the future. "The federal government, as custodian of its prisoners, has the constitutional power to act in order to protect nearby (and other) communities from the danger such prisoners may pose," Justice Stephen Breyer wrote for the 7-2 majority.

ok, I loathe sex crimes as much as the next person and struggle with my own commitment to peace and opposition of the death penalty when it comes to certain sex crimes (esp. those against children) but I'm not sure I'm ok with this.

every feminist should be outraged by this.

Arizona Governor Takes Away State Domestic Partner Benefits
Says 'God Has Placed Me in This Powerful Position'

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer has eliminated state domestic partner benefits a year after they were implemented, the Arizona Daily Star reports:

"A bill signed by Gov. Jan Brewer redefined a 'dependent,' canceling the rule change made by Gov. Janet Napolitano that allowed domestic partners to receive benefits. Also eliminated are children of domestic partners, full-time students ages 23-24 and disabled adult dependents. The legislation is in legal review. About 800 state employees are affected, according to the state's administration department...

*shaking head