greggyour: RT @dotRights: #danahboyd calls it dismantling contextual integrity = privacy violation.
mblafkin: #DanahBoyd basically saying: not worried about #privacy vs. sharing, but we ARE worried about the Worlds Colliding problem
hastac: RT @MobileBehavior: Just because people put things in public places, doesn’t mean they want them to be aggregated
namtrok: Personal (relationship based) vs Articulated vs Behavioral networks. (like location svcs) #danahboyd crossing those lines can cause issues
StaceyMonk: RT @rachelannyes: “People make information available in part to make themselves vulnerable.” That builds relationships
greggyour: RT @mr_lbs: Personal (relationship based) vs Articulated vs Behavioral networks. (like location svcs)
JosephDickerson: RT @McClennan: It’s the technologists that say privacy is dead. Many consumers still share but crave obscurity
blakecannon: RT @hastac: “Early adopters are consistently surprised at how a community changes when it becomes mainstream
CauseGlobal: RT @amandafrench: Danah Boyd has been asking nontechie users what their privacy settings are: not one has actually got it right
dotRights: #danahboyd technologists use argument that privacy is dead in order to justify their desire to make more info public
elysa: RT @drkkolmes: Last Dec, 65% Facebook users made their info public when they selected new privacy changes
dgebler: Teens want to be seen online by peers, but they don’t want to be seen by people who have power over them… namely parent
rachelannyes: “Making something that is public more public is a violation of privacy.”
smc90: interesting: teen demographic more conscious of what they gain in public, adults more conscious of what they lose
greggyour: RT @mbjorn: RT @pgillin: FB is about communicating with the ppl you already know. Twitter has become a place people find an audience
ayatlin: RT @simonmainwaring: #SXSW #danahboyd In life, private by default, public by effort is normal. In social media its the opposite.
johnmjones: Reaction to trending topics during BET awards show how “not everyone is welcome in public spaces
dotRights: #danahboyd talks about those who CANNOT embrace a public-by-default world w/o fear (political, religious, racial minorities)
Beckland: #danahboyd has influence, therefore has control of her #sm presence. Marginalized people have the opposite response to #sm #sxsw #sxswi
joncamfield: RT @hastac: danah: “How public is your kids teacher allowed to be online?” Can s/he date, be perself, etc.
dotRights: public-by-default is not the great democratizer we would like it to be.
smc90: Technologies like Chatroulette blur boundaries between privacy & publicity - expect more such mashups
Beckland: #danahboyd “there is no algorithm to parse private vs public, and changes with each person and over time”
greggyour: RT @PARCinc: Technologists: when designing social systems, you’re moving from code to living systems. Must listen to users when changing
MediaFunders: RT @lizwinks: If you are talking to your kids about privacy DO NOT start w/ “back in my day”. Ask questions
customersmarket: Oxymoronic but true - bloggers and celebs put a lot of info out there to actually maintain more privacy. I know I do that!
hesnow: The paradoxical wisdom of Angela Jolie: the more she puts out in public, the more she can maintain privacy
- V. A. To me death seems to be an evil.
- M. What, to those who are already dead? or to those who must die?
- A. To both.
- M. It is a misery, then, because an evil?
- A. Certainly.
- M. Then those who have already died, and those who have still got to die, are both miserable?
- A. So it appears to me.
- M. Then all are miserable?
- A. Every one.