CREEPY SOCIAL MEDIA

@CalamityJane,

CalamityJane wrote:

Well, you can disagree, it doesn't make it right though.
Since I do have a daughter, I do whatever is necessary to protect her - on a grand scale,
I'd have hoped facebook is on the same page. Not so!

How will it be in THE FUTURE, if your daughter decides to PROTECT
her mother by making u do things that u do not want,
or by stopping u from doing things that U wanna do????

David

0 Replies

@CalamityJane,

CalamityJane wrote:

Well, you can disagree, it doesn't make it right though.

I agree with this, so much so that I kinda think it goes without saying...

Quote:

Since I do have a daughter, I do whatever is necessary to protect her - on a grand scale, I'd have hoped facebook is on the same page. Not so!

I think different parents may wish for different approaches and the scenario I favor is to put the parents in control to manage it the way they'd like though, and not a single way site-wide.

If you don't mind me asking, would you be happy if you could make it so that your kids could not get/be in friend recommendations while letting others decide if their kids should or do you prefer a blanket prohibition for all minors (even if some parents don't agree with it)?

1 Reply

@Robert Gentel,

Actually, I note the schools are taking up a lot of the slack...hence the two packages I squirreled away earlier on.

I don't know how effective they can be.....but they look well designed if a bit dull...in that the kids are given chances to make different choices and see what happens....except given kids' curiosity I guess it could make them more interested about what the fuss is about.

I agree it's impossible for sites to know who the hell someone is and how old they are.

I'll comment more later.

0 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

Robert Gentel wrote:

If you don't mind me asking, would you be happy if you could make it so that your kids could not get/be in friend recommendations while letting others decide if their kids should or do you prefer a blanket prohibition for all minors (even if some parents don't agree with it)?

Robert, I actually have taken steps that I think are safe(r): when we registered my daughter at facebook, I set her up with an email just for
facebook and I put her privacy settings in a manner that she cannot be
searched and that she can't be messaged to by anyone other than her friends. It certainly isn't fool proof, but it helps.

I am not for a blanket prohibition, however, if parents choose to shield their children and their pictures, there should be an app or option to do so. Heck we're having an app for everything else already, it should be fairly easy to
protect the most vulnerable ones on the internet.

0 Replies

@jespah,

jespah wrote:

High Seas wrote:

jespah wrote:

....... there are also open groups devoted to cycling, and frankly you could say you loved cycling or attended Barnard College and no one would check either) or provide the email address that they used to sign up for LinkedIn.

Frankly, it's not much of a solution, and it cramps the style of those of us who are trying to network and move outside of our personal inner circle -- which is precisely what networking is all about....

I question that; if someone falsely claims a degree from Barnard - or anyplace - maybe nobody will check today; but the claim will remain on the servers forever, and on the day someone does check for whatever reason the original poster will be outed as a liar and a fraud. People have had to resign for less.

True, but these are LinkedIn groups, and people can come and go as they please. No history is made available so, in theory, someone could claim they went to Barnard today, get some connections, then quit the group tomorrow (that info in buried in the database and isn't shown on screen -- how many people would even suspect something like that?). Few would check or care -- and even fewer would care if it was a cycling group or the like, yet people are still getting their networking done under what are, essentially, false pretenses. ......

Few "check or care", but once on the server, always on the server, and a deep web search will bring it to light - look up all those "background" checkers:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/21/technology/social-media-history-becomes-a-new-job-hurdle.html?_r=1&pagewanted=2

1 Reply

@High Seas,

But would you check whether someone falsely claimed to enjoy horseback riding in order to get a connection? The college thing I can see -- but isn't this another lie? Then again, even before social media, plenty of people claimed to love golf in order to get an in with their bosses. It is a game that's played.

1 Reply

@jespah,

LOL - suddenly you reminded me of my mom; a friend of mine had invited me (and, when I said my mother was visiting, her as well) to a Superbowl game. The friend had one of those air-conditioned boxes high up in the stadium, amply equipped with instant-replay screens, hostesses walking around with trays with glasses of champagne, assorted food, etc, and very comfortable armchairs. My mom, when I introduced the other people to her, assured everybody she was a devoted football fan. At one point one team scored; she turned to me and asked what the score was, I told her 1:0, and she said "At this rate they'll never get to 9". When my friend, sitting next to her, politely asked her why she thought the score might get to 9, my mom said, before I could stop her, "I spend a lot of time in casinos playing baccarat!" And yes, I see the distinction you're making between social exaggeration and legal misrepresentation Smile

0 Replies

Further update: While i was "working" in one of the games, the little girl referred to in the opening post came online to chat (i think she may be a little bored and lonely at he moment). At one point she said: "I'm only little." I told her i was a 60 year old man, and that i'd probably not be much interested in playing "It Girl" with her. She then suggested maybe her dad. I told it was OK to tell her dad or mom anything we talked about, but i suggested that maybe her dad isn't interested in playing "It Girl" either. I get the impression that this child is no more than eight years old, if even that old. To her, me being 60 is probably meaningless--i'm just an old guy, like her dad (who is probably not much more than 30). I'm very glad that there is evidence that her mom has taken charge (or rather, increased her vigilence and control) of that account.

At one point, she wanted to know my real name, so i told her (she's using her real name on the account). I told her i'd rather she didn't tell anyone, and then thought: "Whoa, back up." Then i told her again that it's always OK to tell her dad and her mom about any chat she has with anyone. However, it gave me a chill, because she is so obviously outgoing and trusting, and it would have been simplicity itself to have made myself out to be what i am not, and to have exploited her trust. She's very lucky that her mom is closely involved in this.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

Further update: While i was "working" in one of the games, the little girl referred to in the opening post came online to chat (i think she may be a little bored and lonely at he moment). At one point she said: "I'm only little." I told her i was a 60 year old man, and that i'd probably not be much interested in playing "It Girl" with her. She then suggested maybe her dad. I told it was OK to tell her dad or mom anything we talked about, but i suggested that maybe her dad isn't interested in playing "It Girl" either. I get the impression that this child is no more than eight years old, if even that old. To her, me being 60 is probably meaningless--i'm just an old guy, like her dad (who is probably not much more than 30). I'm very glad that there is evidence that her mom has taken charge (or rather, increased her vigilence and control) of that account.

At one point, she wanted to know my real name, so i told her (she's using her real name on the account). I told her i'd rather she didn't tell anyone, and then thought: "Whoa, back up." Then i told her again that it's always OK to tell her dad and her mom about any chat she has with anyone. However, it gave me a chill, because she is so obviously outgoing and trusting, and it would have been simplicity itself to have made myself out to be what i am not, and to have exploited her trust. She's very lucky that her mom is closely involved in this.

In your childhood, did u enjoy conversing with the elderly??
I certainly did. Thay were invariably kind, considerate, polite
and never any fighting, which was better than my peers of age in NY
from whom, occasionally, it became necessary to defend myself.

One wonders if u were equally as charming, patient n debonair
as u have been with the rest of us in this forum.

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

DAve, maybe Set comes off not to our liking at all times , but he never has come off as sounding "Creepy". You, on tne other hand, have given several instances, self admittedly, where youve sounded creepy to be around. I like your studied naivete (Im sure its a put on). I enjoy your insights, especially in Constitutional law BUT. I gotta admit that my mental picture of you is less than wholesomeness personified.

1 Reply

When I opened a myspace account, I was treated to a constant stream of attractive girls asking to be friends. In every instance, they noted their age was 15. I concluded they were agents looking to set up old guys for taking the bait.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Well, I 'll stand by whatever I 've said until anyone convinces me
that I 'm in error. Tho I endeavor to be polite, I don 't posture
to make a good impression on anyone; that 's not necessary.

David

2 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

I dont wanna be a"holier than thou" cause Im not. I just harken back to the stories youve told about bestowing money on people and giving ver attractive waitresses more financial honoraria than those less "endowed".
I found much of that kinda skeevy.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Some of the members here don't even try to be polite. (Just so I'm not misunderstood, I'm not implying any criticism of farmerman or setanta.)

0 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

I dont wanna be a"holier than thou" cause Im not. I just harken back to the stories youve told about bestowing money on people and giving ver attractive waitresses more financial honoraria than those less "endowed".
I found much of that kinda skeevy.

I advocate greed, but not stinginess. The latter takes too much fun out of life. Stinginess is not worth it.
I attribute our respective opinions to differences of philosophy and probably of more basic psychology.

In addition to my support of libertarianism and of Individualism,
I believe in hedonism, whose great GOOD is the creation of joy
and whose bad is the creation of misery (as a general rule, with exceptions).

I like to look at beauty, in many forms, including good looking chicks.
I like to contribute to their happiness. I have done so.

I don 't like to see ugliness; I deflect my attention from it.

From my own out-of-body experiences and those of other
people of my acquaintance and from my reading the body
of literature from people who have had near death experiences,
I believe that when a man's human body ceases to function,
and deciduates, in the ordinary course of events,
one has a life review experience during which he feels both
the joy and the discomfort that he has caused; boomerang.

In the meantime, there is some degree of empathy.
Sometimes its fun.

David

0 Replies

As usual, David, you miss the point because you're so absorbed in the alleged excellence of your point of view. I tried to be polite to the child, and i tried to make her understand that her mother and father should be involved in her participation at Facebook. The point, which seems to have eluded you entirely, is that a man my age who is predatory, who wants to take advantage of the situation for his own perverse gratification could very easily exploit a naïve and trusting child such as her.

Not every post here can reasonably be considered an opportunity for you to peddle your bullshit stories about your childhood and the putative "wisdom" of your ideology. You may not be aware of it, but trying to turn every subject into a disply of the excellence of your own views and philosophy--trying to make every post about you--is the behavior of a troll.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

As usual, David, you miss the point because you're so absorbed in the alleged excellence of your point of view.
I tried to be polite to the child,

In the last sentence of my post,
I was having a little fun with u, Setanta.
(Note, incidentally, that I have not "alleged"
that my point of vu is excellent
[altho that is my tacit belief]. )

If u feel like it, u might address the earlier part thereof.
If u don't feel like it, then please forget about it.

Setanta wrote:

and i tried to make her understand that her mother and father
should be involved in her participation at Facebook. The point,
which seems to have eluded you entirely, is that a man my age
who is predatory, who wants to take advantage of the situation
for his own perverse gratification could very easily exploit
a naïve and trusting child such as her.

I HOPE that she is not "trusting" but I have no way of knowing whether she is.
In that circumstance, I 'd have pointed out the dangers
of going around promiscuously trusting people. In point of fact,
I have done so, e.g., when having picked up juvenile hitchhikers,
I have pointed out that this practice has been dangerous,
and has led to violent ends; she shoud not trust to the mental stability
of the next random stranger that picks her up.

U 'd have served her security interests well,
if u had mentioned that for her safety,
she shoud withhold any personal information
(e.g., street address) and to avoid meeting
anyone in the real world (at least not without a bodyguard).
Maybe u did.

Setanta wrote:

Not every post here can reasonably be considered an opportunity
for you to peddle your bullshit stories about your childhood
and the putative "wisdom" of your ideology.

It is my opinion
that the denizens of this forum post their respective points of vu here.
Those vu points have been based upon their life experiences,
to which thay might not always cite, in particular, but which
have been the competent producing causes of those opinions.
When I took the Dale Carnegie speakers' course, I was advised
that: "details bore; examples score." I have given both
details and examples. That is also something that lawyers
get into the habit of doing, from case citation in their writings.

Anyway, I will continue to do whatever I damn please
(at least until required to amend by our host).
I suspect that u will do likewise; correct me, if I am in error on this point.

Setanta wrote:

You may not be aware of it, but trying to turn every subject
into a disply of the excellence of your own views and philosophy--
trying to make every post about you--is the behavior of a troll.

I have been led to believe that trolls are defined by their insincerity in posting inflamatory comments
for the purpose of exciting emotional responses. I am innocent of that,
unless I 'm just kidding around, joking.

David

0 Replies

The thread is about social media, it's not about your inane ideas of personal freedom, which is what you've been trying to peddle here. It is the behavior of a troll to try to turn every subject into a pulpit for one's ideology or pet stalking horse--but that's about all you ever do. Posts don't have to be inflammatory to qualify as trollish. I've not yet seen you discuss social media here, other than to say that you don't use it. FM doesn't use social media, either. He posted to that effect, and then had nothing further to say on the subject. You, however, cannot resist continuing to post your phony claims about childhood experiences and your lucicrous and irresponsible doctrines for "personal freedom."

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

The thread is about social media, it's not about your inane ideas of personal freedom, which is what you've been trying to peddle here.

The concepts r inextricably intertwined, so far as I can see.
Do u wish to discuss social media with NO personal freedom????

Setanta wrote:

It is the behavior of a troll to try to turn every subject into a pulpit for one's ideology or pet stalking horse--but
that's about all you ever do. Posts don't have to be inflammatory to qualify as trollish.

I think that u r inventing a new definition for it.
I 'll be surprized if u can find a dictionary to support u.

Setanta wrote:

I've not yet seen you discuss social media here, other than to say that you don't use it.

That is not what I posted, tho I said that I 've not used it much.
I did comment on it.

Setanta wrote:

FM doesn't use social media, either. He posted to that effect, and then had nothing further to say on the subject. You, however, cannot resist continuing to post your phony claims about childhood experiences and your lucicrous and irresponsible doctrines for "personal freedom."

WHATAYAMEAN "phoney"???
What evidence have u on that point??
Were u watching me when I was a kid, that u know
what HAPPENED and did not happen???? Please explain.
What is the source of your factual authority??

or are u just blowing off malicious emotion, again, with absolutely NO BASIS in known fact ????

David

0 Replies

When you claim, as you have done at least twice now, that at the age of three or four, you were told by "the commie next door" (the term you used) about the Sullivan Act and ran home to your mother in tears at the implications of it, one doesn't need a crystal ball to know that you're making **** up. I have never believed your fantasy story about how you lost your virginity, either--another story you've peddled more than once, and another story, like the first mentioned here, for which the details change with the telling.

And you are successfully disrupting this discussion to make it about yourself and your idiotic ideas, rather than the topic, which is classic trolling. I won't be responding to any more of your self-absorbed and irrelevant posts because that would be feeding the troll.

2 Replies

CREEPY SOCIAL MEDIA

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know