Facebook privacy settings are about to change again
washingtonpost.com
washingtonpost.com
Also I love the off screen cellphone picture of the new drop down menu. It really adds to context to the writers commitment to getting a good story.
1. Make the minimal change necessary;
2. Use language that's already there.
By "already there" I mean not adding words of one's own choosing, but drawing on the existing titles and headings or, if need be, the first sentence of the article.
Granular control is used by what % of people? Experience tells me to watch for a bait and switch from Facebook, if not this update, the next one.
> Facebook is testing a pop-up notification that asks users who haven't reviewed their settings in a while whether they'd like their posts to be shared publicly by default, to their friends by default or another more specific setting.
I feel this is an attempt to get those of us only sharing with friends to reconsider sharing publicly.
Source: http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2014/03/25/facebook_...
[1]: http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2014/03/25/facebook_...
You can set the privacy for anything you post to 'only me' (which is about as private as it gets, in a way), though I suspect that's not what you have in mind.
Not friends of friends for some stuff etc. FB allows you to search for people etc. Realistically, I should just start using something like Path.
> The graphic comes along with an icon of a little dinosaur. Asked whether Facebook was implying that privacy was an artifact of the past, ...
It was just a cute, irreverent dinosaur icon! Must the press always come up with misleading angles for everything?
You've just described the typical use-case for what most people use FB for. I don't think FB was ever about sharing with a million people, just whoever you friended.
LiveJournal (RIP) is what trained me in all this behavior.
I have my FB set to "friends only", so I can make posts which can't be linked from Google results or elsewhere. Generally, anything which is either less-general-interest or more-sensitive than twitter, but which I want to post in general, vs. to a specific crowd. (Even more public/reputational than twitter would be HN submissions; HN comments generally are on-topic, and more on par with Twitter for sensitivity, although down in a conversation not as generally relevant.)
I also have a few "secret fb groups" where we discuss various things.
None of this really requires extreme privacy; it's just "please don't quote this in public yet" or "this might be too boring for the public."
Since I've curated my friends well, I tend to see pretty interesting debates about: 1) guns (which is fun because especially the UK friends are anti-guns, and others are in the industry, and it remains civil)
2) crypto, security, and hardware stuff (including my own startup)
3) political issues (generally "good governance" which tends toward non-partisan, but also generally libertarian stuff)
4) major world events (e.g. I have friends from Ukraine, and when Afghanistan stories come up, I have friends I worked with in Afghanistan, and some who are in Afghanistan now)
FB Messenger isn't secure/is archived by FB for unknown future use, but is remarkably convenient. If nothing else, it is better for "presence" than any of the encrypted chat stuff I use for content, so either non-sensitive discussions there, or "can we talk on OTR/irc/etc.?"
It's also still my favorite photo sharing site for photos restricted to friends. My workflow involves Lightroom and then publishing to Flickr (public), FB (friends), 500px (pro). (although my real workflow is "archive to a drive and sit on them until I have time to edit...I have about a year backlog right now).
I don't use Dropbox or WhatsApp.
Just add the people you actually talk to on Facebook. Your friends and family, guys from your gym. Create a group with your Chess Club in it so you can discuss chess openings.
I don't think any one apart from my friends can see what I post on Facebook, not sure you can even share your page with millions of people unless millions of people follow you.
WhatsApp has no penetration in any social group I've ever been part of. I'll be disappointed if it does displace Facebook, because I so much prefer being able to transition a conversation to my laptop.
* Public
* Friends
Below there is also some tiny blurry text that may stand for "advanced".The hiding old profile picture might be a good thing, based on how often former paramour are featured there.