Ping Savageduck

On 2016-06-21 01:52:20 +0000, Bill W said:

On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 17:39:01 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

I dislike sites which insist on access via a Facebook log in, and there
are quite a number of those.

I finally created a fake page for just that purpose, just in case I
ever need it. It's simple. Just create a fake email address, and a
fake name, and leave everything set to private when you set up the
account. The only catch is the verification process. They want your
cell phone number, and they send a verification text. I think another
option might have been a voice mail, and if that's the case, and you
have VOIP, you might be able to set up a throwaway phone number.

More trouble than it is worth.

I set it up weeks ago, and haven't looked at it since. I believe
Zuckerberg is pure evil, which I think you agree with.

Maybe not evil, he is doing some good with his $$$$, perhaps conniving
weasel would be closer to the mark.
--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 6/20/2016 10:08 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2016-06-21 01:40:17 +0000, PeterN said:

On 6/20/2016 8:47 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2016-06-21 00:34:16 +0000, PeterN said:

FB has a lot of convenience.

Not for me.

Through FB I recently got in touch with a friend who had moved several
years ago, and we simply lost touch. We often keep in touch with a
large part of our family through FB.

There are other ways to do that.

Probably, but we all agreed to do it through FB. I suspect that you
are a nice guy, trying to be a curmudgeon, but don't know how.

I am not sure of your Usenet character analysis, but as a "nice guy" I
am vulnerable to a few things which will trigger my inner curmudgeon.
One of those things are friendly nudges towards the FB Charybdis.

My biggest complaint is the loss of privacy, so I am careful about
what I post.
Adverse comments have been made about my downgrading images.

So you have been posting images downgraded for FB in a photogroup where
they only invite adverse comments.

No. With some exceptions I usually post downgraded images, for reasons
we have discussed ad nauseum.

I am not quite that paranoid.

When you post an image on FB, you have given them a non-exclusive
right to use that image for any purpose they deem fit. One of my
friends, a fine art photographer, found some of her images being used
commercially.

All good reasons not to join the FB club.

Horses for courses.

I like to control the reins.

IIRC There are other sites who claim the right to use your images in
exchange for the free posting space. At least FB greases the umbrella.
(sometimes.)
Our older daughter's FB page was maintained for years. she used her dog
as a nym and the dog would regularly complain about the things her
mother was "forcing" her to do. It was cute and funny. One day FB just
terminated her page, because not using your own name is a violation of
their rules. (It's hard to get a dog to pay for purchases.) That take
down brought a sharp realization of FB's commercialism. Sort of took
all the fun away. I will not login to sites through FB and since then I
only use it for family connections.




At my suggestion she now places a copyright notice on every image she
posts to FB. Some people are really crazy. It seems that they post
every time they go to the bathroom. it is a neat way to wish someone a
happy birthday. We have saved a lot of money on birthday cards. End of
rant.




--
PeterN

On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 19:11:27 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2016-06-21 01:52:20 +0000, Bill W said:

On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 17:39:01 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

I dislike sites which insist on access via a Facebook log in, and there
are quite a number of those.

I finally created a fake page for just that purpose, just in case I
ever need it. It's simple. Just create a fake email address, and a
fake name, and leave everything set to private when you set up the
account. The only catch is the verification process. They want your
cell phone number, and they send a verification text. I think another
option might have been a voice mail, and if that's the case, and you
have VOIP, you might be able to set up a throwaway phone number.

More trouble than it is worth.

Yeah, I thought it was a pain, too, but the option is there if you
ever need it.

I set it up weeks ago, and haven't looked at it since. I believe
Zuckerberg is pure evil, which I think you agree with.

Maybe not evil, he is doing some good with his $$$$, perhaps conniving
weasel would be closer to the mark.

He's evil.

On 2016-06-21 02:29:41 +0000, PeterN said:

On 6/20/2016 10:08 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2016-06-21 01:40:17 +0000, PeterN said:

On 6/20/2016 8:47 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2016-06-21 00:34:16 +0000, PeterN said:

FB has a lot of convenience.

Not for me.

Through FB I recently got in touch with a friend who had moved several
years ago, and we simply lost touch. We often keep in touch with a
large part of our family through FB.

There are other ways to do that.

Probably, but we all agreed to do it through FB. I suspect that you
are a nice guy, trying to be a curmudgeon, but don't know how.

I am not sure of your Usenet character analysis, but as a "nice guy" I
am vulnerable to a few things which will trigger my inner curmudgeon.
One of those things are friendly nudges towards the FB Charybdis.

My biggest complaint is the loss of privacy, so I am careful about
what I post.
Adverse comments have been made about my downgrading images.

So you have been posting images downgraded for FB in a photogroup where
they only invite adverse comments.

No. With some exceptions I usually post downgraded images, for reasons
we have discussed ad nauseum.

I am not quite that paranoid.

When you post an image on FB, you have given them a non-exclusive
right to use that image for any purpose they deem fit. One of my
friends, a fine art photographer, found some of her images being used
commercially.

All good reasons not to join the FB club.

Horses for courses.

I like to control the reins.

IIRC There are other sites who claim the right to use your images in
exchange for the free posting space. At least FB greases the umbrella.
(sometimes.)
Our older daughter's FB page was maintained for years. she used her dog
as a nym and the dog would regularly complain about the things her
mother was "forcing" her to do. It was cute and funny. One day FB just
terminated her page, because not using your own name is a violation of
their rules. (It's hard to get a dog to pay for purchases.) That take
down brought a sharp realization of FB's commercialism. Sort of took
all the fun away. I will not login to sites through FB and since then I
only use it for family connections.

Quite frankly, even Google Photos (ex-Picasa) provides a better
experience for sharing images, folders of images, or URLs to images,
than FB. Then there are all the various ways of sharing or
collaborating we get with an Adobe CC subscription from LR, to Behance,
and Portfolio.
https://www.myportfolio.com/examples

At my suggestion she now places a copyright notice on every image she
posts to FB. Some people are really crazy. It seems that they post
every time they go to the bathroom. it is a neat way to wish someone a
happy birthday. We have saved a lot of money on birthday cards. End of
rant.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 17:39:01 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2016-06-21 00:08:34 +0000, Ken Hart said:

On 06/20/2016 10:15 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2016-06-20 11:04:17 +0000, PeterN said:
On 6/20/2016 5:52 AM, Noons wrote:
On 20/06/2016 6:49 @wiz, Eric Stevens wrote:
Never mind the quality - feel the width!

https://www.facebook.com/Avspecs/pho...type=3&theater

or

http://tinyurl.com/jy3t5y9

I

doubt if anyone will ever get a shot like this again: a freshly
rebuilt Spifire XIV, *two* Brough Superiors and, in the background, a
Britten http://tinyurl.com/gv8onzb



Dunno about the Broughs, but I'll match your Spit and raise it to a
MkXVII (follow the arrows to see the lot):

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...type=3&theater




That

Gruman Avenger got me completely surprised. It is HUGE!!!!

Yup! It is big, but I still don't use Facebook.

Obviously, your decision to not use facebook is your own, but I am
curious as to why not.

Several reasons, the first being, I don't need it, just as I don't need
or use Instagram, Twitter, or Readit. I have effective means of
communicating and sharing my images with various folks none of which
include any of the methods listed.
I dislike sites which insist on access via a Facebook log in, and there
are quite a number of those.
Finally I don't care to be part of the Zuckerberg parasitic business model.

I find facebook to be a convenient method to stay in touch with friends
and share photos.

If that works for you go ahead. Like Groucho Marx, I choose not to join
those particular clubs.

I don't post every cat photo, and political rumor that comes around.
And I ignore most of the ones that do get posted. I frequently click on
the "see less of this" button.

The concept of the crowded club makes me feel claustrophobic.

I am going on vacation in two days. I posted my schedule, and tagged
several friends. Each has messaged me and we've set up get-togethers.

Nice.

(BTW, you don't always have to have a facebook page to view someone
else's page, if they make it public. Usually, I make my photo albums
public.)

I know, and I actually saw the image when Eric first posted it. I had
no access to any other images, just a prompt to sign up. That I did not
do.

As for the second shot hosted by Photobucket, I was never able to view
that until Eric used another method to post a working link.

It was a dropbox to a screen print on my machine.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 21/06/2016 10:39 @wiz, Savageduck wrote:

Obviously, your decision to not use facebook is your own, but I am
curious as to why not.

Several reasons, the first being, I don't need it, just as I don't need
or use Instagram, Twitter, or Readit. I have effective means of
communicating and sharing my images with various folks none of which
include any of the methods listed.
I dislike sites which insist on access via a Facebook log in, and there
are quite a number of those.

Interesting. I gave up on a lot of photo sites, Flickr, Picasa and
google photos included. Mostly because they proved to be unreliable on
how they showed the photos and prone to abuse by dishonest marketeers.

With FB I got daily access to folks I haven't seen in over 40 years, and
for someone like me - born in one continent, grew up in another and
lived most of my life in a third one - easy contact with a lot of folks
around the world is important.

And in FB I can lock out access at will. The album above was made
public and I can access it while logged out from FB, quite easily - all
I have to click on is a bit that says "Not now" to get rid of the
"forced membership".

And when it comes to locking out abusive idiots or trolls, FB is without
par! Miles ahead of anything else.

I can control what folks can do with photos I publish, if they can share
them, what I get spammed with, etcetc. Lots of control. But I have
invested a lot of time in learning how to control the UI and the site's
security.

Finally I don't care to be part of the Zuckerberg parasitic business model.

Fair enough, that is certainly a valid reason!


The concept of the crowded club makes me feel claustrophobic.


I've found it can actually be graded. I have various access rights to
my photos. Some are public, others are private to my circle of friends,
others are blocked to certain groups of friends and visible to others.
What I like is the fine grained control over who can see what. Family
photos are reserved for those that belong to my group called "Family".
Work ones to "Work". And so on.

The only other place that vaguely approaches that is Photobucket, but
with much broader locks and less granularity control.



I know, and I actually saw the image when Eric first posted it. I had no
access to any other images, just a prompt to sign up. That I did not do.

Yes. And you should be able to see a public album even if you chose not
to sign up. Nothing wrong with that?



As for the second shot hosted by Photobucket, I was never able to view
that until Eric used another method to post a working link.


Interesting. I just click on the first photo of an album and copy and
paste the url in the browser. If I then click on that url, I get taken
to the album with arrows to traverse it, after the usual "Not now" if
I'm not logged in. Not much different from other sites that continue to
pester with ads to join them and all sorts of additional spam if we
continue to look while logged out.


Still, as you say: entirely subjective and far from me to try and
convince you otherwise. Just mentioning what worked for me.

On 20/06/2016 9:04 @wiz, PeterN wrote:



That Gruman Avenger got me completely surprised. It is HUGE!!!!


They are built like tanks, but for only one purpose. According to a
friend of mine, who flew one, the controls were heavy, the plane
certainly was not nimble, but it was reliable. I suspect the Duck would
have more accurate information.

I was completely taken by surprise! Hadn't the faintest clue how big
they are and how solid they look! Amazing pieces of machinery,
particularly taking into account when they were designed and built.

Oh, and apologies: it's Grumman, not Gruman!
Damn keyboard...

On 6/20/2016 10:11 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2016-06-21 01:52:20 +0000, Bill W said:

On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 17:39:01 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

I dislike sites which insist on access via a Facebook log in, and there
are quite a number of those.

I finally created a fake page for just that purpose, just in case I
ever need it. It's simple. Just create a fake email address, and a
fake name, and leave everything set to private when you set up the
account. The only catch is the verification process. They want your
cell phone number, and they send a verification text. I think another
option might have been a voice mail, and if that's the case, and you
have VOIP, you might be able to set up a throwaway phone number.

More trouble than it is worth.

I set it up weeks ago, and haven't looked at it since. I believe
Zuckerberg is pure evil, which I think you agree with.

Maybe not evil, he is doing some good with his $$$$, perhaps conniving
weasel would be closer to the mark.

thinking Robin Hood, Eh!

--
PeterN

Ken Hart wrote:
Obviously, your decision to not use facebook is your own, but I am
curious as to why not.


Hi,

I have to jump in and make a comment.

Facebook steals your data and sells them, and that is how they make tons
of money. Your privacy is thus gone with the wind.

I keep in touch with my friends and family, including photos, by
encrypted e-mail. It is not guaranteed private, but is a heck of a lot
better than with Facebook and its ilk.

Mort Linder

In article , Mort
wrote:


Facebook steals your data and sells them, and that is how they make tons
of money. Your privacy is thus gone with the wind.

facebook doesn't steal anything. what they get is willingly provided by
the user.

they also don't sell the data itself. they sell the use of the data.

it's a very important difference.