

Matt Cutts from Google deactivates his Facebook account - keltex
http://twitter.com/mattcutts/status/12677133480

======
pedalpete
Assuming that a large number of people are deactivating their FB accounts due
to the recent privacy 'issues', is this really accomplishing the goal they are
attempting.

As Matt points out, you can always revive your FB account later, which means
FB is keeping all of your information. I assume this also means that FB is
continuing to share the information they already have on you.

Therefore, aren't you better off just turning off the sharing features and not
using the 'like' button or other FB tools on the web.

You can still get the benefits of having FB and take privacy into your own
hands.

~~~
bigiain
You need to ensure you're also not returning cookies to facebook's domain. The
iframes that other sites use for their "like" buttons allow facebook to link
your facebook identity with your browsing of those external-to-facebook sites
(and I assume they've done some deals with Yelp, docs.com, and Pandora which
leaks your personal details to them in return).

If I find some spare time I'm going to set facebook.com to resolve to
127.0.0.1 and run a logging proxy which knows facebooks real ip address, to
let me see (and control) what my browser(s) send to facebook (I'm thinking all
instances of my facebook user id will get replaced with a random number, or
perhaps with "4" to screw with Zuck's demographics...)

~~~
pedalpete
it would be really interesting to hear what you find. Maybe a grease monkey
script could block the facebook cookie gathering on non-fb sites.

------
jmount
What privacy leak is Facebook implementing that GMail Buzz is not also
attempting?

~~~
ableal
The guys at TheRegister went a bit into that:
[http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/04/23/google_on_facebook_o...](http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/04/23/google_on_facebook_open_graph/)

(Not much, but had some info. Submitted here last week:
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1294542> )

