Oil and Water

 
It really seems like it should work, doesn't it? You'd think that movies like Harry Potter and Iron Man should make great games, right? There's plenty of room for action, creative game mechanics, even RPG elements... It's almost like the idea is gift wrapped for the developer.
Regardless, time and time again, taking a movie and making it into a video game instead becomes an exercise in futility.
Take Harry Potter, for instance. A quick look at Metacritic tells most of the story. The movie Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 has received an aggregate score of 87, an impressive showing. The game of the same name? 47. That's not even in the ballpark.
Iron Man was also recognized as a decent movie by most standards. But the video game? It fared even worse than the Harry Potter game, earning an aggregate score of 45.

What's the problem? Why are these entertaining movies that are already littered with action ending up as such horrendous video games?
Unfortunately, the vast majority of games that are based on movies are created with the sole purpose of promoting the movie. They're glorified advertisements. Big-name publishers like Sega and Electronic Arts aren't above attaching their names to them because they're guaranteed money-makers.
Still, would it kill you guys to take one of these titles seriously? Just once?
Well, it did happen at least once. One very rare exception to this rule is - believe it or not - The Chronicles of Riddick. The movie was universally received as lousy, turning up a Metacritic score of 38. But the video game adaptation titled The Chronicles of Riddick: Escape from Butcher Bay received an excellent aggregate score of 90! It is widely considered a lost gem of a video game that simply not enough people played due to the fact that it was based on a failure of a movie.
But that's an extremely unusual case. And the problem is arguably worsened when the roles are switched.
Has anyone seen the Doom movie? Max Payne? Alone in the Dark?
These are all great games, considered some of the best ever in their respective genres. The movies are the polar opposites.
And it's for the same reason that game adaptations of movies are never good. They're cash-ins. The directors of these movies aren't fans of their associated games, made painfully evident by the fact that the movies have almost nothing in common with the games other than than their titles.
Even a movie like Resident Evil, considered one of the less-painful of game-to-movie adaptations, is hardly an adaptation at all. It's just a film with occasional references to the game peppered throughout.
So excuse me if I'm less than excited to hear stories of movies based on great games like Uncharted and Mass Effect being in development.
As far as movies go, Uncharted has been done before. Nathan Drake is a compelling protagonist and a great video game character, but he is this gaming generation's Indiana Jones. Make it a 2-hour movie and the similarities will be exposed in all the wrong ways.
And a Mass Effect movie? The epic and compelling story of the video game took a good 30 to 40 hours of gameplay to be fully uncovered and fleshed-out. To say that I'm skeptical that a couple hours is all a movie would need to accomplish a similar feat would be a vast understatement.
I hate to sound cynical, but all we should expect here are two more cash-ins of big-time game franchises. If these movies actually see the light of day, do yourself a favor: save your ticket money and put it towards the next game in the series.
But for now, it looks like we're doomed to have our cherished games and movies bastardized by cross-pollination. I think we can expect these medium-swaps to eventually turn out products of actual quality as a result of the growing acceptance of gaming as a respectable form of entertainment. But being honest, we are still quite far from that scenario.

Read more »

Posted in: movie

The First Avenger

  When a superhero origin story movie is made it is inevitable that someone will be disappointed. Character introductions, lengthy exposition, and transformation scenes are all keys to getting the uninitiated up to speed, but can be merely a rehash for the target fanboy audience. Admittedly I went into Captain America: The First Avenger as a relative novice to the character’s history and status as one of Marvel Comic’s oldest heroic icons. The Captain has not exactly maintained a commercial presence outside of the realm of comic books like Batman, Spider-Man, or Superman (seriously how many people on the street would know his real name?). As a prelude to next year’s massive The Avengers, Captain America succeeds in introducing many of us to one of that film’s key heroes and does so with retro charm, efficient action sequences, and enough heart to care about the scenes in between all of the explosions.
Brooklyn pipsqueak Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) is our hero – a diminutive scrapper determined to join the U.S. armed forces as World War II rages. On the home front, Steve is designated 4-F (not fit to serve) but continues to prove his masochistic mettle in fights with guys twice his size. His best friend is called up and the two celebrate by checking out the Stark Industries Modern Marvels pavilion at the World’s Fair (lots of in-jokes for the “true believers” here). Howard Stark (Dominic Cooper) is aligned with Dr. Abraham Erskine (Stanley Tucci doing his best Dr. Strangelove) in a secret government experiment to perfect cell regeneration in the human body and beat Hitler in the “Supermen” race. Rogers’ foolhardy bravery in trying to sneak into the army impresses the scientists and he is subsequently strapped into a human-size blender. But before that it’s off to basic training.
Here’s where the movie lags in its crucial early stages. The training scenes are played for laughs – especially the gruff deadpan humor of Tommy Lee Jones as Col. Chester Phillips (a Men in Black-style role he could play in his sleep) and the flirtations between Rogers and his comely British superior Peggy Carter (buxom caricature Hayley Atwell). The corny stuff and all-American hokum is in keeping with comic book tradition, but for an audience primed for action it may prove wearying – a patriotic musical sequence in the George M. Cohan tradition is the most egregious example and might remind some of Peter Parker’s indulgent disco moves in Spider-Man 3.

Read more »

Posted in: movie

Hulu Could Lead Apple, Google, or Yahoo to Dominance

Each tech giant has their case for obtaining Hulu in leading its company toward dominance on the web.  Apple seeks interest in possibly jumpstarting their Apple TV services.  Google may have a similar case along with solidifying its social networking features on Google+.  For Yahoo, the former premiere search engine website seeks a comeback in both traffic and revenue with Hulu as their missing piece of the puzzle. 

Hulu shines as a highly attractive online property by proving its value with over 1 billion ad impressions a month, according to Comscore, and impressive offerings of video content.  The latest auction for Hulu has left many pondering on the potential combination of services that may birth from current bidders in Apple, Google, and Yahoo. 
Google+ has been rising in popularity with their innovative approaches to content sharing and video chat.  The addition of Hulu could concrete Google's spot as the top online video website as a new flood of content may do wonders for visitors and advertising revenue.  The search giant already owns YouTube, which rakes in nearly 150 million unique visitors a month, and will seek ways to integrate video watching within Google+.  The Hangout feature in Google+ may open the door to online video watching with multiple friends at once.  The platform makes watching video content and commenting on them through mobile devices easy and social.  Content from Hulu combined with Youtube's offerings can lure potential users to join Google's growing social network.  

Apple's case for a potential bid for Hulu comes in the form of Apple TV and content for their upcoming lineup of mobile devices.  Financially, Apple may hold the advantage in terms of having over $76 billion in cash on hand for a purchase.   If Apple were to follow its current business model of renting out shows rather than making revenue on ads, then the Hulu acquisition can potentially transform into another Netflix service.  Apple would then hold great advantages in terms of reach, marketing, and content distribution through iTunes.  As GigaOm pointed out, the deal would definitely provide Apple with additional video content to offer through iTunes and increasing the company's content value. 
In terms of distribution, Hulu's high definition, HD, quality content can be a valuable asset as Apple's new platform of HD capable iPhones and iPads plan to hit the market possibly later this year.  The iPhone 5 and iPad 3 are rumored to have HD display screens that can play 720p and 1080p videos.  With Hulu already reaching out to media devices through it s Hulu Plus subscriptions, the millions of Apple mobile devices will only increase the content reach. 
Of all the players involved with the current bid, Yahoo may appear to be the front runner as it has much to lose without Hulu.  Yahoo would love to see more traffic and utilize its strength in media and content.  . 
In an interview with Adage, EVP of 'Americas' at Yahoo Ross Levinsohn spoke about Yahoo's desired future plan, "to be the premier digital media company. We're No. 1 or 2 in 19 categories. That's insane! That doesn't exist anywhere else in the world. You embrace that. You support that. We're focused on premium content. Some of its original, some of it's curated, some of it's aggregated. And we're focused on premium advertising," said Levinsohn.

The Hulu acquisition would bolster the media aspect in Yahoo's offerings as well as increasing their online advertisement revenue.  Without Hulu, Yahoo may have less footing in their continuous role in playing catch-up with premiere rivals in YouTube or Apple. 
Recent news ruled Microsoft out of the bidding for Hulu saying that the company would not continue with future offers in the second round.  With Microsoft out, the remaining three big players will duke it out for ownership of a highly prized online commodity.  According to reports, Yahoo would be willing to pay $2 billion in a deal that includes an exclusive package for TV shows and movies.  Based on that, the LA Times suggested that Yahoo may be in the lead spot among other bidders.

Read more »

Posted in: internet

Google recognition firm, despite privacy concerns

Even after publicly declaring on several occasions that it had no interest in facial recognition, Google has gone out and bought itself a –yes – facial recognition software company by the name of PittPatt.
Pittsburgh based PittPatt, which emerged from Carnegie Mellon University’s Robotics Institute, has all the algorithms needed to identify your little punum, and is even able to track the motion of faces on video.
“At Google, computer vision technology is already at the core of many existing products (such as Image Search, YouTube, Picasa, and Goggles), so it’s a natural fit to join Google and bring the benefits of our research and technology to a wider audience,” said a notice on the PittPatt site.

We will continue to tap the potential of computer vision in applications that range from simple photo organization to complex video and mobile applications,” the statement went on.
Google said it thought PittPatt’s “research and technology can benefit our users in many ways,” though whether those ways invade people’s privacy or not remains to be seen.
It certainly is an about face for the firm whose Chairman, Eric Schmidt, said back in May his firm would be “unlikely to employ facial recognition programs,” owing to privacy concerns.
Google wouldn’t be the first to integrate facial recognition into mobile apps, however. Qualcomm funded Viewdle has been tinkering with facial recognition for quite some time. Which company ultimately gets the most face time, remains to be seen.

Read more »

Posted in: internet

Slowing Down to Savor the Data

DATA beats opinion” has long been a mantra at Google, where evidence-based research tends to rule. But now the company is showing its softer side with Think Quarterly, a business-to-business publication whose first United States issue is to make its debut online this week.
 


Although Google investors remain wary of the spending and long-term intentions of the company’s taciturn new chief executive, and co-founder, Larry Page, Google reassured them in July with financial results that beat Wall Street analysts’ expectations.
Google reported second-quarter net income, excluding the cost of stock options, of $8.74 a share, up from $6.45 a year ago. Net revenue, which excludes payments to advertising partners, was $6.92 billion, up 36 percent from $5.09 billion. Analysts had expected net income of $7.86 a share and net revenue of $6.5 billion.
Google’s stock price, which has fallen 9 percent in 2011 as investors react to uncertainty about Mr. Page, ballooning expenses, challenges from Facebook and stepped-up scrutiny from federal regulators, climbed 12 percent in after-hours trading.
Recent Developments
In June 2011, Google took its biggest leap yet onto Facebook’s turf, introducing a social networking service called the Google+ project— which happens to look very much like Facebook. The service, which was initially available only to a select group of Google users who will soon be able to invite others, will let people share and discuss status updates, photos and links.
But the Google+ project would be different from Facebook in one significant way, which Google hoped would be enough to convince people to use yet another social networking service. It was designed for sharing with small groups — like colleagues, college roommates or hiking friends — instead of with all of a user’s friends or the entire Web. It also offered group text messaging and video chat.
At stake was Google’s status as the most popular entry point to the Web. When people post on Facebook, mostly off-limits to search engines, Google loses valuable information that could benefit its Web search, advertising and other products.
Google has committed $200 million to find the next Google, playing venture capitalist in the hottest market for technology start-up companies in over a decade. Other pedigreed tech companies are doing the same.
To some, it seemed a telltale sign of an overheated industry, symptomatic of a late and ill-advised rush to invest during good times. But Google said it has a weapon to guide it in picking investments — a Google-y secret sauce, which means using data-driven algorithms to analyze the would-be next big thing.
Google Ventures said it has invested as much money in the first half of 2011 as in all of 2010, and Mr. Page, who became chief executive in spring 2011, has promised to keep the coffers wide open.
Background
Founded in 1998, Google runs the world's most popular Internet search engine. It's a position that has earned Google huge profits and given it outsize influence over the online world.
But Google's ambition far exceeds the confines of Internet search and advertising. The company sees its mission as the organization of the world's information, making it universally accessible and useful.
Its unbounded ambition, as well as what many critics say is a cavalier approach to copyrights, has put Google at odds with a growing list of companies in industries ranging from Hollywood to book publishing and from telecommunications to e-commerce. And the company's appetite for collecting vast amounts of data about its users and their online habits has prompted increasing fears that Google could become a threat to consumer privacy.

Read More...

Company Information

Google Inc. (Google) is focused on improving the ways people connect with information. The Company generates revenue primarily by delivering online advertising. The Company focuses on areas, such as search, advertising, operating systems and platforms, and enterprise. The Company maintains an index of Websites and other online content, and make it available through its search engine to anyone with an Internet connection. Businesses use its AdWords program to promote their products and services with targeted advertising. The Google Network use its AdSense program to deliver relevant ads that generate revenue and enhance the user experience. In February 2010, the Company acquired Aardvark and On2 Technologies, Inc. In May 2010, The Company acquired of AdMob, Inc. (AdMob). In August 2010, the Company acquired Slide, Inc. (Slide). In December 2010, the Company acquired Widevine Technologies, Inc. (Widevine). In April 2011, the Company acquired PushLife.

Read more »

Posted in: internet

"Google" Places drops outside customer reviews

Google Inc (GOOG.O) has removed excerpts of customer reviews from sites such as Yelp and TripAdvisor from Google Places, its own competing online service aimed at helping consumers search for local businesses.
The move, announced in Google's official blog on Thursday, follows the disclosure of a U.S. antitrust investigation last month.
The federal probe concerns whether Google, which dominates U.S. and global markets for search engine advertising, abuses its market power by favoring its own services over those of rivals in online searches and through other practices.
The blog post made no mention of the investigation.
"Based on careful thought about the future direction of Place pages, and feedback we've heard over the past few months, review snippets from other web sources have now been removed from Place pages," Avni Shah, Google's director of product management, said in the blog post.
Google said it added a function for Google users to write their own reviews at the top of its Place web pages.
It said the search pages' rating and review counts would only include reviews written by Google users, although the company would continue to list links to other review sites.
Google's "Places" offerings of local ratings and reviews, originally called Hotpot, were introduced last fall.

Read more »

Posted in: internet

Judge throws out Oracle's $6.1b suit against Google

San Francisco: Oracle Corp's $6.1-billion (Dh22.38 billion) damage estimate in its patent infringement lawsuit against Google Inc over the use of Java technology in the Android operating system was thrown out by a federal judge.
US District Judge William Alsup in San Francisco ruled on Friday that a new damage estimate should start as low as $100 million, a figure Google was offered, and rejected, in 2006 to license Java from Sun Microsystems Inc, before Sun was acquired by Oracle, according to a court filing. The $6.1 billion estimate assumed that all of the seven patents Oracle is suing over were used in Android and the company didn't present sufficient facts to support that, Alsup said.
"The court is strongly of the view that the hypothetical negotiation should take that $100 million offer as the starting point," Alsup said in his written ruling.
Oracle, the largest maker of database software, sued the internet search-engine company last year, claiming Google didn't obtain a licence for the patents infringed by Android. Besides seeking damages, Oracle wants the court to order destruction of all products that violate its copyrights.
Substantial possibility
A trial is scheduled for October 31. Deborah Hellinger, an Oracle spokeswoman, and Aaron Zamost, a Google spokesman, declined to comment on the ruling. Alsup said that if a jury determines that Oracle's patents were infringed, there is "a substantial possibility" Google will be ordered to permanently stop selling any infringing products. A new damage estimate should address assumptions that an injunction may be granted and can be based on a portion of Google's advertising revenue garnered from Android devices, he said.
The $100-million "starting point" can be adjusted upward to assume that all parts of the patents that Oracle cited in its complaint are valid and infringed, Alsup ruled.
Oracle's new damage report is due 35 days before an October 17 pretrial conference, Alsup said.
Google, based in Mountain View, California, denies infringing and asked Alsup at a July 21 hearing to throw out Redwood City, California-based Oracle's damage estimate.
The case Oracle America Inc v Google Inc, is being heard at US District Court, Northern District of California (San Francisco).

Read more »

Posted in: internet

Prem luxury tax and Hope Solo to MLS, Tim Howard talks Everton

   

After getting a bit of rest following the U.S.'s loss to Mexico in the Gold Cup final, Tim Howard has joined Everton's preseason tour of the states. Though he did so too late to play against the Philadelphia Union on Wednesday night, he did submit himself to a series of interviews earlier that day and one of them was with me. Here's how it went...
I know you're coming off a break, but did you watch any of the Women's World Cup?
Howard: [laughs] I was like everybody else -- captivated and mesmerized and inspired. They did pretty awesome.
ESPN was talking about the hypothetical of Hope Solo joining MLS. What do you think of that?
Howard: There's certainly not a precedent for it, but, you know, if anyone could do it she probably could. She's a top quality goalkeeper. But I think they have their own and she's doing well over there so, um -- listen, it's not outside the realm of possibility, that's for sure.
Your Allstate ads have been funny (see the newest one here). What's the most random thought you've had while actually playing?
Howard: I can't even begin to tell you some of the outrageous thoughts I have on the field to try and keep myself focused in many different ways. But when you're standing back there for 90 minutes as a goalkeeper, the craziest things go through your head [laughs]. And so some of the AllState commercials aren't terribly far fetched, unfortunately [laughs].
You've been to two cup finals in three years with the U.S. team, but they haven't really gone the way that you would want. What's your evaluation of the team right now?
Howard: Unfortunately when you get to the final you're not always guaranteed to win. You work so hard to get there then -- one goal, one day, one call and it's all finished, you know, and you have to start the hard work over again. That part's never easy, but I think we're doing a really good job. I think at this stage with this group of players and this coaching staff we're playing the best soccer we've played in five years. I think our passing, our movement, our ability to go forward and create chances has been better than it ever has. So I think we're going in the right direction.
What's been the weirdest experience with Premier League supporters that you've had?
Howard: I think for me the weirdest experience is just being when we travel to London on the train and seeing certain supporters sort of walk through our train carriage. We have our own, of course, but sometimes they wander into the wrong one and you just get random conversations with fans before or after the game.
Any in particular that stand out?
Howard: I usually have my headphones on so... [laughs]. I barely look up off my book.
If you had supreme power, what's the first thing you would do to improve the Premier League?
Howard: Probably create a luxury tax. Not that that solves every problem and I'm sure there's others that you can think of, but I think that would help a little bit anyway.
Kinda like baseball then?
Howard: Essentially, yeah. Exactly.
I don't know if you've seen it, but there's a website called EvertonTime.com and it has a running clock that shows that it's been almost two years since Everton bought a player (not including loans, youth players or free transfers).
Howard: No way...
As a player is that frustrating or is that not really something you pay attention to?
Howard: It's something we definitely pay attention to. Of course it's frustrating. I think people at Everton are trying to do the right things -- we all are. Unfortunately, it's not always as easy as that and I know they're trying their best to bring players in and for us as players our job is to keep our head down and try to win games. You know, we don't really have any say over those types of transactions. That's going to be what the manager does and the chairman does. It's always nice to see a fresh face come in and boost the morale of the club. It makes you feel like you're going in the right direction. And I have no doubts that we'll bring a few players in this summer. Our manager's proven in the past that he's shrewd in the transfer market and can work with a small budget. So, again, we're not overly concerned. I understand from a fan's perspective they have that counting clock, but we just have to kind of get on with it and hopefully we've shown that even teams spending £100 million more than us we've shown that we can push them aside and win games.
What's your goal for the new season?
Howard: I think the team goal is certainly always to solidify ourselves in one of the European places and I think we were on the verge of that last year, but we just got there too late. I think if we can, you know, around Christmas time get ourselves into the top six, top seven, then we have a long stretch of season to kind of really kick ourselves up the table and possibly get into the coveted Champions League spot or pull away from some of the other teams behind us, but we need to get to that position earlier in the year.
Any predictions as to who will win the league?
Howard: Uh...tough to say. You know, Manchester United are very formidable. I know they have a few key areas that they needed to replace and only time will tell whether that works or not, but I would never count them out [laughs].
Finally, we had some fun with what you said after the Gold Cup final. Any disgraces that have been grinding your gears lately?
Howard: [forced laugh] No, I mean, listen, that was said at a very emotional time after the game and I've clarified my statements obviously and so at this point it is what it is.
[awkward pause]
Yeah...well, that I appreciate the time, Tim, and good luck this season. Howard: Thank you, I appreciate it.
So there you have it. Tim Howard can see Hope Solo playing in MLS one day, he thinks unspeakable things to stay focused during matches, he believes the U.S. is playing the best it has in the last five years, he does his best to ignore chatty strangers on trains. He wants a luxury tax on the Premier League's big spenders, he's frustrated by Everton's lack of purchases, he thinks Man United will win the league and he doesn't want to talk about f***ing disgraces anymore. I'm taking that as him ceding disgrace supremacy back to Didier Drogba.
 

Read more »

Could Hope Solo play in the MLS?

This was a week of Steve Williams feeling betrayed (Elin: ‘Welcome to the club’). A week of sheer, frilly Dennis Rodman undergarments. But most of all it was a week when Hope Solo and the U.S. soccer team did an odd victory lap. Odd, because they didn’t win the Women’s World Cup — only come in second to Japan. But that didn’t prevent America from embracing them. Especially adored is Hope Solo, America’s Goalie. And here Slate asks the musical question, could Solo make it in the MLS?

   


he short answer is no—Hope Solo won’t be moving to MLS. The even shorter answer might be dead silence, since I couldn’t get anyone connected to Major League Soccer or U.S. Soccer to broach the subject, likely due to fear that they’d sound patronizing or chauvinistic.
One person who would talk on the record is Tony DiCicco, who coached the World Cup-winning 1999 U.S. women’s national team. DiCicco knows better than anyone how talented women soccer players can be, but he’s still realistic about the imposing physical differences between women and men. “How do you think Diana Taurasi would do if she was in the NBA?” he says, deflating David Stern’s assertion that a woman will soon play at pro basketball’s highest level. “Over one or two games, Hope could be great,” he continues. “But in the long run, the bigger, stronger players would win out.”
Slate goes on to say that the best shot for Solo to keep playing is with the creation of a women’s pro league. That would be cool — if just to be able to watch the game without all the flopping. But if I know this country, and I think I do, we’ll see a Lingerie Soccer League before we see a women’s MLS. Or we could just go all-in like in Croatia, and start signing Playboy models.

The fun and frivolity continues this weekend with Ben Chew, who will be doing posts from poolside while sipping tropical drinks. On Monday or Tuesday, Ryan Vogelsong stops by to talk with us about baseball and stuff. So you’ve got that going for you. Gunga-lagunga.

Read more »

Hope Solo's delivers a kick that dunks George Lopez

When Hope Solo's soccer career is over she shouldn't have any trouble finding carnival work.
The goalie of the U.S. women's World Cup team appeared on Lopez Tonight last night and answered George Lopez's challenge to drop him into a dunking pool. Here's the video, showing that Hope needs a couple of tries before hilarity ensues.

Read more »

Facebook's Privacy Changes

Facebook on Wednesday overhauled its privacy controls, in the hopes of making them simpler to use. The company focused on three major changes for Facebook users:"a single control for your content, more powerful controls for your basic information, and an easy control to turn off all applications," according to a blog post by Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg. The new changes should be rolled out to your Facebook account over the next few days.
So, how do Facebook's new privacy controls stack up against recent criticisms about how Facebook handles your personal information? Perhaps the easiest way to measure this is to take a look at PCWorld's recent article, "A Bill of Rights for Facebook Users," and see how Facebook's new settings compare to this ideal.
While I haven't had a chance to use the new controls myself yet, here's my comparison based on Facebook's announcement.
Proposed Right: Facebook must explain both the benefit to me and the benefit to Facebook when introducing services or features that may expose more of my data.
Grade: C The new changes don't do anything to give users more information about the various benefits to Facebook and its users when introducing new services. While I'm not so sure Facebook needs to detail what it gets out of a business deal with sites like Yelp and Pandora, the social network could do a better job of communicating user benefits.
Proposed Right: Tell me what I'm broadcasting to the world.
Grade: B- Facebook allows you to set the privacy level for each piece of content you post on Facebook through the News Feed--including links, status updates, events, videos, and photos. For almost everything else, like your pages, interests, and Web sites, you have to wade through Facebook's privacy settings.
Proposed Right: Let me opt-in, and not have to not opt out, of new features.
Grade: B++ Facebook appears to have learned its lesson from the privacy backlash over Instant Personalization and Facebook Beacon before that. But the real test will come when Facebook unveils its next new feature. Let's see if Facebook can resist the temptation to meddle with your privacy controls next time.
Proposed Right: Make Privacy Settings Simple.
Grade: B Facebook's new privacy controls look a lot better than before, but there are still a lot of Web pages you have to wade through to fully control your privacy. Current Facebook settings require you to go through six pages and their respective sub-pages to get all your settings, while the new controls require you to go through four pages: Basic Directory Information, Sharing on Facebook, Applications and Websites, and Block Lists.
But there's no telling how many sub-settings are underneath these four new simplified sections. I haven't been able to get a close look at these settings yet, but I have to wonder just how effective these new controls will be. Also, there are some privacy controls that aren't filed under your Privacy settings, but instead are stashed in your Account Settings and your Profile page. That gets really confusing.
The new privacy controls may be easier to understand than before, but as Search Engine Land's Danny Sullivan notes, "The complexity [of Facebook's new privacy controls] may still leave users feeling there are too many controls to be in control."
Proposed Right: Let me control whether or not someone can tag me in a photo on Facebook.
Grade: F This is not a part of Facebook's new controls. Sure, some people couldn't be bothered to approve a photo tag for every photo they're in, but I bet a lot of people would like this level of control. Besides, why should any of my Facebook friends be able to link to my Facebook profile through a photo tag, and then share that photo with the world? I may not be able to stop that photo from going online, but shouldn't I be able to choose whether or not I want Facebook to directly associate that photo with me?
This would be an excellent control for Facebook to implement, and would go a long way to regaining user trust. Just make sure it's an optional setting, and don't force it on users who can't be bothered.
Proposed Right: Tell me what data I'm sharing with apps.
Grade: F When you sign up to use an application like Farmville, you only get a vague statement telling you the app will be able access your personal data. Instead, Facebook should require each application to present you with a checklist of your personal information. Then you can decide which parts of your profile the application can see.
Proposed Right: Don't let search engines index my content without my permission
Grade: B++ Facebook has allowed you to opt-out of third-party search indexing ever since Facebook opened up your data to Bing, Google, and Yahoo. But new Facebook users are presented with a weird setting where the box that allows third-party search engines to index their profile is automatically checked off. But even though the box is checked, the feature is not turned on until you click "Allow" and then "Confirm." So why is that check box there in the first place if it's essentially meaningless? That's a very confusing way to do things.
Proposed Right: Facebook must notify me when bugs or mishaps come up, and give me advance notice before making changes to Facebook's data management policies.
Grade: B- Facebook has had a few technical mishaps recently such as the recent exposure of user chat sessions, a bug that allowed Facebook data scraping at Yelp, and the automatic app installation bug. Facebook wasn't upfront about any of these issues, but they should have been. On the other hand, the company does have an open governance policy for changes to its Terms of Use, and the company recently posted notices about its privacy changes on its blog. Nevertheless, Facebook could still do a better job of alerting users to potential new changes, especially the recent privacy revisions which went largely unnoticed until the recent privacy flap started.
Proposed Right: Accept responsibility when things go wrong.
Grade: A Even though Facebook didn't own up as well as it should have to recent bugs, the company recently admitted it had made mistakes with user privacy and moved to alleviate those concerns.
Proposed Right: Give me the right to quit and leave nothing behind.
Grade: B This is a tough issue, because you can never really know for sure whether any online service completely eliminates all your data from its servers once you leave. It all comes down to whether or not you believe the company when it says your data is being purged.
Facebook also has a very difficult process for deleting your account that takes 14 days to complete. Plus how ever long it takes to remove all your information from its backup servers. A good step in the right direction would be for Facebook to plainly state on its Facebook account deletion page how long it takes for your data to be removed from its servers once you delete your account.
Facebook's latest privacy overhaul is a step in the right direction, but the company still has a long way to go if it wants to make issues surrounding privacy and privacy control easier to understand.

Read more »

Posted in: internet