Why I don't use Facebook

When I let people know why I don't use Facebook they start to see things differently.

My initial reasons were simple. I wanted to create Facebook groups and share my information with customers. For example I've created the Australian English spellcheck dictionary now used by Google, Firefox and most other major open source projects. For those few that actually contributed back (most including the projects take and give nothing back) I wanted to use Facebook to keep these people informed.

I then found with Facebook it appeared that everything I wrote becomes the property of Facebook. Now I do the hard work and Facebook gets the rights to my work, I didn't think that's a good business decision so I closed down my use of Facebook in that way.

Over time more things happened. I began to see the Americans seem to have different ethics to us in Australia. Very young people were building massive worldwide companies and didn't in my mind have the years of experience that helps us to determine higher standards of ethics. If I were to set up a service, your information, your privacy is yours until you decide to share it. These new breed take the approach of "it's fair game".

For example my daughter said "dad do you mind not being my Facebook friend". I trust her and I respect her privacy.

However when she turned 18 Facebook flipped her information from private to totally public. She had no knowledge and I could see all her information as could the world. I then suggested she check her settings. I could still see some of her information but not most. Until I checked my other daughter's Facebook information and there was her information again, as my daughters were both Facebook friends. I again suggested she check her privacy settings.

Now with that fixed I then used Google and searched for my daughter's name. There she was and photos of eight of her friends. Press reload on the browser and I could get her next eight friends. In effect I could quickly obtain a list of quite a lot of her friends in a matter of minutes.

Now if my daughter wants to put her photo onto the internet that's her choice. But I don't think it is right that Facebook makes her friends photos available on the internet via her. Have her friends given her permission to display their photos. No. It is just assumed to be OK because of the underlying ethics built into Facebook.

Most people don't think making your information public on the internet matters. The usual argument is I'm not doing anything wrong so I have no concern from the authorities. However they seem to forget whilst big brother is watching, so too are the less reputable elements in our society.

After September 11 I read that 3% of people trying to board a plane would not be allowed to get onto an aeroplane due to security reasons and up to a total of 10% would be stopped. I also heard once that when the banks released bankcard in Australia and sent cards to everyone, there was a 3% risk which was acceptable. I went to a seminar with St George about businesses using credit cards and it was stated that business should budget for 3% loss through fraud.

So 3% is a good figure to use as a starting point. That means in any situation we can expect 3% of a group of people to be less reputable. Years ago I read there were 10,000 police in Victoria. That means 3% is 300. Whether we like it or not the less reputable live with us daily side-by-side.

An easy example of this is pirated DVDs. I was over in Thailand listening to conversations about DVDs (they are about $3 each for recent movies, but the quality I found was terrible) is it appeared almost everyone knew someone who could get them pirated DVDs from their work. That means you probably know someone who works in your company, or government organisation that is less reputable. How safe then is your information. So internally in every organisation there is a risk.

With Facebook I read of one person scraping (using programs to collect information) and building a massive database from the Facebook contacts. When they went to sell this information they were promptly stopped. Just think about it. Five hundred million people and who they are all connected to is an enormous resource. However the less reputable amongst us won't go public, they'll just trade the information and use it to their advantage.

The problem is we are now in a world where our information is being concentrated into the hands of a few. There is high internal risk when that happens and remember many of the largest companies outsource parts of their business to countries where the average person earns less than a few dollars a day, so a few thousand becomes very attractive. We all remember what happened to Google in China recently and if the biggest can't protect their systems then there is little hope for governments and businesses with less technical skill. Then we have the external risk where people can easily collect the information you make avaiable.

In the good old days there was less risk, although it was still there. With email from a local telephone company my sign up information with personal details is largely kept in their systems. Only the information I send has increased risk because of the nature of the internet. That means our private information was dispersed amongst many organisations. There are so many islands of information it wouldn't be worth the time for people to try to harvest this information. But with Facebook there are 500 million users. The meaning of six degrees of separation where all of us are supposedly connected to everyone else in this world (it was actually 12 degrees but Hollywood created the 6 degrees myth) is now much less.

I wanted to provide a real example which Australians can related to show what I mean.

Julia Gillard won't be running how own Facebook site so she will have a team of advisors guiding and protecting her. We don't have that luxury.

On the other hand her step daughter (Staci Child) just got into the press. A search of "Staci Child" and "Facebook" returns her Facebook page and eight of her friends. In theory if you wanted to get to know the Prime Minister of Australia you now have information on people who are only a few degrees of separation away. Whilst I use the example of our Prime Minister, the same applies to all the leaders of the world.

I have no doubt the government is collecting information on us, with the Federal Police reportedly pushing to have everyone's movements on the internet tracked, and whilst I don't think that is right, it won't be stopped. However that is a lower risk than the less reputable who could have access to the same information. That to me is a concern.

So next time you walk out the front door with your iPhone turned on just keep in mind it may be possible for someone, somewhere, to know, the date and time you leave your home, the direction you face, the door your took and then where you went during the day.

Take the time to learn about the technology you are using and realise there is a potential for increased exposure. There is no need to be paranoid because the 3% has always existed and always will. A small amount of care and caution will reduce grief, but in the end there will always be some. That is part of life.

I hope this article helps people to perhaps gain a little more understanding of what is happening. Just keep in mind if in the modern technological world when you get something for free, others have to make their money somehow, and the only thing they have is your information and what you do. And of course, it is entirely our own fault if something happens. It is our choice to use the services that are now available.

Kelvin Eldridge