Facebook default email address

[Ketlane]

Anyone else spotted this?

 

BBC News - Facebook's email switch prompts criticism by users

 

FB now displays an @facebook.com email address by default

[SteveT]

Easy enough to change to your preferred email addy though!

[X-13]

Easy enough to change to your preferred email addy though!

 

That's not the point.

 

The point is, that facebook has made a change without telling anyone [again] and is ignoring privacy settings.

 

If your e-mail is set as hidden, why do they think you want an alt e-mail shown?

 

 

Also, [username]@facbook.com emails have been available for a while. But, no-one cares so they're forcing it.

[AMLinington]

Yeah I saw this and after the initial spike of righteous indignation passed I realised there were a few benefits to this:

 

1) For those people who have not properly managed their security settings, the facebook.com email address being the 'default' means that their personal email address that they may use for such services as 'Online Banking' is hidden and therefore not harvestable by unscrupulous individuals.

 

2) Again with not harvesting emails - less SPAM. I would EXPECT facebook to be rigidly spam filtering mails sent to the @facebook.com domain otherwise user's inboxes would be full of adverts for meds, viagra and 'male enlargement - please your lady long time'. This would end very badly for facebook.

 

3) We ALL have friends on our facebook accounts that perhaps we knew at school, or perhaps they are a family member that you aren't particularly fond of but can't avoid friending by virtue of the shared DNA. Some of these friends have an annoying habit of fwd-ing all those glurge emails - so much so that I have a rule in place on my personal email account that says anything with 'fwd' in the subject bypasses the inbox and is immediately deleted. But using the facebook address, means my personal email account remains inviolate and I'm pretty sure you can set facebook to not allow this person to send you messages.

 

4) I have plenty of friends on facebook that I would rather not use my personal email account to contact me. I've got around this by creating a different profile I've called 'limited profile' in which they can see pics I've posted but not my wall, the can see my name and age but not my email, place of work etc. But equally there are people that I'd like to hear from, I'd just rather they contacted me via facebook tbh and this change means that facebook is the only way they CAN. I like this. I like controlling things from one place. If a friend has my personal email it is because I want them to. I like being able to have control over this again.

 

5) So-called friends can't use your personal email to sign you up for things that might result in you being targetted for identity fraud. This is a bit like point 1 with the online banking thing - keeping Facebook and your personal email account separate is a really good idea in my opinion. There is information on facebook pages that COULD be used to make educated and accurate guesses at the 'reset my password' security questions - Questions like 'What town was your first job in?' or 'Where was your first job?' - Facebook has a 'work history' section... If you can't see the personal email address you can't use that page to 'hack' an account you don't know about or cannot see.

 

So whilst I briefly considered reasserting my autonomy over my Facebook account, I paused long enough to consider that actually, I am happy to hide behind the @facebook.com address.

[X-13]

2) Again with not harvesting emails - less SPAM. I would EXPECT facebook to be rigidly spam filtering mails sent to the @facebook.com domain otherwise user's inboxes would be full of adverts for meds, viagra and 'male enlargement - please your lady long time'. This would end very badly for facebook.

 

 

Have you not seen the ads? [based on browsing history]

 

You can get some really questionable suggestions. Some in the same vein as the viagra emails.

 

If they can't stop them, why do you think they will stop the email versions.

[AMLinington]

Have you not seen the ads? [based on browsing history]

 

You can get some really questionable suggestions. Some in the same vein as the viagra emails.

 

If they can't stop them, why do you think they will stop the email versions.

 

I can't say I've ever seen an ad for enlarging the male member based on my browsing history... But then I'm not a man. I've seen plastic surgery ads and ads for boob jobs (neither of which I want or need) and plenty of adverts for Shoes (which I never have enough of). I do think there is a difference between what they CAN stop and what they WANT to stop. They don't WANT to stop ads from appearing on the page because they make money every time the ad appears and more when they get a click-thru. The email SPAM doesn't make Facebook money, so they will be invested in preventing 'freeloaders' from spamming facebook accounts with 'Love your lady long time' as it doesn't make them money.

[X-13]

as it doesn't make them money.

 

Yet.

 

They'll find a way.

[AMLinington]

Yet.

 

They'll find a way.

 

Indeed - by selling the list of @facebook.com addresses to 'selected marketing partners' so I imagine we need to go back through our 'preferences' and make sure there is not another ticky box that has appeared since the email change to say 'Please do not tick here if you want to be contacted by selected marketing partners' (in typically ambiguous and tongue-twisty syntax to confuse people into selecting the wrong option).

[X-13]

Indeed - by selling the list of @facebook.com addresses to 'selected marketing partners' so I imagine we need to go back through our 'preferences' and make sure there is not another ticky box that has appeared since the email change to say 'Please do not tick here if you want to be contacted by selected marketing partners' (in typically ambiguous and tongue-twisty syntax to confuse people into selecting the wrong option).

 

Quadruple negatives and legalese. Like a boss.

[rich_tech]

Their brute forcing of changes through to their userbase is very tiresome stuff, one of a few reasons I deleted a lot of the content off my account on there, dont know why I didnt fully deactivate it on there.

[X-13]

Their brute forcing of changes through to their userbase is very tiresome stuff, one of a few reasons I deleted a lot of the content off my account on there, dont know why I didnt fully deactivate it on there.

 

There's no point deactivating it, though.

 

Someone tried it, then the remade their account from scratch [as a test]... And all their data was still there.

 

 

They retrieved the data through Facebok's in-built data request hoojabob. [Yeah, that's the technical term.]

 

 

Also:

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]14444[/ATTACH]

 

 

Negrep for no reason, with no name... Y U So cereals?

 

It's a bit strange getting negrep for memeing... when the negreppar decides to meme in response.

[AMLinington]

There's no point deactivating it, though.

 

Someone tried it, then the remade their account from scratch [as a test]... And all their data was still there.

 

 

They retrieved the data through Facebok's in-built data request hoojabob. [Yeah, that's the technical term.]

 

 

Also:

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]14444[/ATTACH]

 

 

Negrep for no reason, with no name... Y U So cereals?

 

It's a bit strange getting negrep for memeing... when the negreppar decides to meme in response.

 

Yeah, once you've put data on Facebook it's there for eternity. IMO It's better to interact with it personally, that way you at least have ownership of the data rather than to leave it sitting in the nether in a Facebook server somewhere that you can't access or control in any way. Better the devil you know and all that. I once stupidly signed up to MySpace then deleted the account within 3 days after my inbox was spammed by people looking to 'love me long time' and 'horny fireman looking for love'... Luckily I never got around to putting anything significant on the page but still, I worry how much they might be retaining about me.

 

I also signed up to Twitter because I'd rather sign up for something myself, than for someone else to sign up pretending to be me (a la the whole Funnyjunk Lawyer debacle).

 

Re: Neg repping - why are people neg repping for meme references have I missed something? Thats not fair. As an aside, there should be an appeal button...

[CAM]

But if you deactivate the account then go back and re-activate it, you discover the data is still sitting on a random Facebook server in the nether. The only rule for keeping data private and safe on social networks is not to post it at all.

[X-13]

my inbox was spammed by people looking to 'love me long time' and 'horny fireman looking for love'...

 

Re: Neg repping - why are people neg repping for meme references have I missed something? Thats not fair. As an aside, there should be an appeal button...

 

I see you got my messages.

 

Eh, I get anon meme related negrep a lot. Not as much these days, but I'm used to it.

 

And you CAN flag it. But you have to post it in the "message the admins" forum. I've done that once. But only because someone went into ANOTHER thread to negrep twice for the same thing.

[januttall]

you can get the @facebook.com email address any way even if its not displayed go on there page friend or not and copy the last bit normaly there name or id number stick the @fbook on the end walla so even if they do hide them expect emails

[X-13]

you can get the @facebook.com email address any way even if its not displayed go on there page friend or not and copy the last bit normaly there name or id number stick the @fbook on the end walla so even if they do hide them expect emails

 

That requires human interaction and a bit of applied logic.

 

A simple e-mail harvesting bot wouldn't be able to do it*.

 

 

*Yes, I realise someone could code a bot in a way that it builds the @facebook.com email from the URL while scanning for another email host[?].

[pete]

A point that's been brought up in other places is the whole "wait, so I want people to use [email protected] and you've just changed the displayed email in a way that lets you intercept communications intended for me?".

[X-13]

a way that lets you intercept communications intended for me?".

 

TBH, it's more of the same from Facebook. First they store personal information, and ignore DPA so they don't delete it.

 

Then they scan through your search history to fine tune their targeted ads...

 

Now they're in ur base killin ur doods intercepting your emails for whatever reason.

 

 

No one website should have all that power.

Edited June 28, 2012 by X-13

[AMLinington]

TBH, it's more of the same from Facebook. First they store personal information, and ignore DPA so they don't delete it.

 

Then they scan through your search history to fine tune their targeted ads...

 

Now they're in ur base killin ur doods intercepting your emails for whatever reason.

 

 

No one website should have all that power.

 

That is a good point, and 'intercepting communications meant for me' is a valid and important observation, but it does not take into account context. The context of this is that [PERSON] has a Facebook page. This person has a bunch of 'friends'. One of these friends wants to send a communication to said person. They have a choice of options. As a facebook friend, they COULD post on the wall, but lets say it's 'personal', they COULD send a message. Both of these are intercepted and 'owned' by Facebook already. More than likely, the only way this friend has to contact the person in question is via facebook so why would they go to the additional hassle of going to facebook to find an email address, then send an email - a distant friend will more likely just send a facebook message as it's easier. If they were a 'close' friend they would have a mobile number or they would probably ALREADY have [PERSON]s personal email. If they are a close friend it is more likely that they will call or text. If they are not a close friend they will be more likely to send a quick facebook message. The only reason they might send a 'proper' email is if they want to add attachments, but how often will a 'distant' friend send attachments? We are generalising the function without considering the context or nature of the relationships between people on Facebook and the implications thereof.

 

As a facebook user, if I want to contact a person I don't have a phone number for I will Facebook message them. If I have a phone number I will text or call if it's 'personal'. As a Facebook user, this change will not affect me as I rarely email people from facebook.

[Earthling]

As a non-user (well, I have an account, but I haven't logged-on to it for months now), I wonder just how much people get from FB in terms of 'life-enrichment', if you will, in return for putting up with all this stuff.

 

I guess I'll never understand. I'm more of an Instant Messaging person. Which I know you can do on FB, but having to put up with the rest of the ...... facilities, shall we say......is just too much for me.

 

Just sayin'.

[AMLinington]

As a non-user (well, I have an account, but I haven't logged-on to it for months now), I wonder just how much people get from FB in terms of 'life-enrichment', if you will, in return for putting up with all this stuff.

 

I guess I'll never understand. I'm more of an Instant Messaging person. Which I know you can do on FB, but having to put up with the rest of the ...... facilities, shall we say......is just too much for me.

 

Just sayin'.

 

Thats a good question (hopefully it wasn't rhetorical). When we were at school, everyone knew everything about everyone. We all knew when and where the parties were, we all knew who was going out with who and who had a pregnancy scare. It was immersive and social. You didn't even necessarily need to speak to anyone, you just 'heard' things. To me, that's what facebook is like for disconnected adults. In this day and age of long commutes and little free time, we don't have as much time for socialising as we once did. We don't live and work near our friends so we rarely see them. Facebook is the 'grapevine', it's the same as the collective consciousness that we experienced at school. It's about being connected without actually having to connect.

 

That being said, having my news feed full of videos of schoolfriends' children playing in the park is a little tedious. But equally I know all sorts of stuff that no-one wants to actually ask. You hear your mate Bob has left his wife to shack up with Sheila, but you don't want to ask his wife if it's true as she's probably going through a lot of pain at the moment (as evidenced by her man-hating, violent, weepy or miserable status updates). You also don't want to appear to condone him by asking him about it (Bob has changed his relationship status to 'It's complicated'; 'Bob' is in a relationship with 'Sheila'). But you don't NEED to ask, because you already know. So before you send a Christmas card to Bob, Jane and the kids, and get a vitriolic rant back from Jane, you have Facebook there to keep you up to date. When a friend is looking a bit fat but you're not sure if she's fat or pregnant? Facebook is your friend - Status updates about her diet and gym routine will help you realise that she's just put a few pounds on. Status updates about buying a cot and redecorating the spare room gives you the confidence you need to say 'I heard about your happy news; congratulations'.

 

I wouldn't say 'Life enriching' per se, but certainly useful and informative. It's also slightly voyeuristic - watching a person's relationship fall apart on Facebook is the same as people rubbernecking at an accident. You know you shouldn't be seeing it but you can't help but want to.

Edited June 28, 2012 by AMLinington

[elsiegee40]

I have a very small circle of facebook friends... none of them are colleagues. Only 2 of them live in the same county as me.

 

Over 50% of them are family members, none of whom lives closer than 2 hours drive from me (One of them lives on Tenerife!) My best friend from school lives in California. A close friend from here has moved back to her native Brisbane.

 

For keeping up to date on day to day chit chat with people with whom I am close, but unable to see often if at all, Facebook is brilliant. My privacy settings are locked and I put as little 'data' as possible on there!

 

And no I won't use that handy 'log into this with facebook' feature that appears just about everywhere now. Facebook logging in is for facebook and nothing else!

[Earthling]

Thats a good question (hopefully it wasn't rhetorical). < S N I P >.

 

No, it wasn't rhetorical, I genuinely wondered whether if it's worth all the hassle, the loss of control over posted content, the possible redirection/interception of e-mail, the 'care' that has to be taken to abide by SN Policies. Just the fact of having to submit to a work-enforced SN Policy makes me want to rebel the way I used to before I got old and jaded. All without any, or minimal, user consultation or consent.Coupled with the almost diarrhetic posting of some of the 'friends' on my account, it all got too much for me. I didn't get enough from it to warrant the amount of aggro.

 

I got enough friends anyway, and they all want me to fix their puters too ( see other thread).