>Where do we draw the line between my right to control my data, and the right of other people to exchange information about me?
When you make your data public, you no longer have a right to control it. The alternative is that by making your data public, you impose a burden of secrecy on those who hear you talking.
It's mildly creepy that facebook knows so much about you, but it's not a particularly new phenomenon. ("You must be Danny, Jo talks about you all the time! Tell me, did you really...") Facebook just hears more gossip than any one person did in the past.
"I don’t think that Facebook as a company is doing anything unusual or exceptionally bad."
Yet he offers an example in the article of Facebook prompting for the user's email account password, which, in my book, is insidiously evil. Sending sensitive emails to someone may not be wise, but it's hardly an example of making your data public. Facebook claims to be harvesting email addresses (which is bad enough), but the potential for abuse is enormous, considering that the company is dedicated to monetizing the private details of people's lives. Facebook shouldn't even ask for passwords, and this is one of the main reasons it's banned in our household.
Any service that uses any sort of contact importer will need your password if you would like to get any use out of said importer.
How can anyone read your GMail contacts without your logging into your account?
If the utility of this tool is lost on you even though this password is clearly not stored anywhere, you can manually go out and find on-Facebook friends yourself.
Here's one way. Its a bit more inconvenient, but I think its worth the inconvenience.
1) GMail has an export to csv feature. Export your contacts.
2) Facebook creates a "import contacts" feature. Import the list.
Done.
I can't think of any right now, but you may be able to come up with a feature that absolutely needs you to put in your email password. However, I suspect that by adding a little inconvenience, one can find a way around it.
Are you seriously suggesting that visitors should supply email account passwords to any site that asks for them? How is Facebook different from any other phishing site?
Facebook just hears more gossip than any one person did in the past.
At some point, a large enough quantitative difference becomes a qualitative difference. Facebook has definitely crossed that boundary. This does, in itself, make facebook bad, but its not just the equivalent of an absurdly gossipy person.
When you make your data public, you no longer have a right to control it.
Fair enough, but the problem is the rate at which your information becomes very public that is causing problems. In the past, if you sent someone a letter with a return address, they could make photocopies if it and send it to everyone they wanted to, but that would take a lot of time and effort. The fact that its almost automatic now will catch a lot of people by surprise. People need to understand how quickly information about them can spread so they can make informed decisions in their life.
When you make your data public, you no longer have a right to control it. The alternative is that by making your data public, you impose a burden of secrecy on those who hear you talking.
It's mildly creepy that facebook knows so much about you, but it's not a particularly new phenomenon. ("You must be Danny, Jo talks about you all the time! Tell me, did you really...") Facebook just hears more gossip than any one person did in the past.