Hacker News Reader

Comment by rhizome | Hacker News Reader

Her stated intent contradicts your interpretation. She posted not thinking it could propagate and she only figured it out after the fact.

View on HN

She posted it as "friends only" and tagged her family members. The person who tweeted it saw it and assumed that it was showing up because she is a subscriber of Randi's public posts, though in reality it wasn't public and she saw it through a friend connection with one of Randi's sisters. She tweeted the image based on that assumption. Randi saw it, was surprised, and then discovered how it happened (because Randi knows how privacy controls work quite well). They communicated on Twitter and realized the misunderstanding. The end.

Randi didn't seem to know that "friends only" meant that Callie-- and presumably other friends of those who were tagged-- could see it.

Her 12:36am tweet indicates as such: http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/enhanced/webdr03/2012/12/26/...

No, she (understandably) didn't know Callie was friends with her sister.

Now she knows that she has to check, despite the text of the feature, thanks to the FB security model.

I think we can all expect an FB permissions update in 1Q13 that touches on this experience of hers.

I know the timeline. She posted under "friends only" thinking that it meant "friends only" rather than "friends, and friends of everybody tagged." Is this unclear?

I'm not sure how you know what she thought or how she interprets the privacy rules. If someone posts something as friends only and someone jacks the link to the image and posts it on twitter, publicly, it doesn't mean the poster doesn't know the privacy rules of Facebook. It means someone who could see the photo took it and made it public. In this case it's the poster who didn't realize it wasn't already public (again, understandably, though in error).

It means someone who could see the photo took it and made it public.

Ah, now I see why you continue your line of insistence here: the problem is that the person who publicized the photo wasn't supposed to be able to see it. The poster didn't know it would be seen by more people than just her friends.

Disagree. The problem is someone who wasn't supposed to share the photo shared it. Allowing friends of friends to see tagged photos is one of the points of tagging. My friends don't want to see my pictures of you, they want to see your pictures of me. In either case, reposting it to twitter should be taboo (and copyright infringement!).

Allowing friends of friends to see tagged photos is one of the points of tagging

Says who?

My friends don't want to see my pictures of you, they want to see your pictures of me.

You already said that.

I thought you missed it. That's what I use tagging for. Am I doing it wrong?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com