The horrible process of How-To Permanently Delete Your Facebook Account

Image via CrunchBasehttp://www.groovypost.com/howto/security/permanently-delete-your-facebook-profile-account
Over the last 12 months, Facebook has seen its share of controversy in regard to account privacy and its terms of service.  It’s hard to say what sparked all the excitement: Rapid growth of the service (#3 on the internet overall)? Parents growing awareness of the site and how their kids were using it?  The Media?  Or perhaps they deserved it based on their unethical business practices, privacy policy and terms of service?
Whatever the reasons, it’s obvious some no longer trust the internet giant as I seem to keep hearing the same question over and over again:
“Is it possible to delete my facebook account?”
and
“I managed to deactivate it so it’s deleted right?”.
You would think the answer would be fairly straightforward however I have to admit, it took quite a bit of digging to come up with the answers surrounding account / profile deactivation and full blown account removal from the service.  After doing the research and walking through the deceptive complex process, it was very apparent that Facebook has done their very best to prevent its customers from leaving their service thus limiting the amount of customer data being scrubbed from their service.
 

Personally, I really feel Facebook has definitely crossed the border of unethical behavior on this.  After all, they don’t “actually” provide an interface to delete your account and end your agreement with them regarding the use of your personal data per section 2.1 in their terms of service.
Here, let me show you.  First I’ll explain Facebook Account Deactivation since this is the only option offered in their User Interface.

Deactivating Your Facebook Account, Is it the same as Account Deletion?

Users can deactivate their Facebook account from the user interface without too much trouble however Facebook will ask you to confirm your decision (more on this) by displaying one of your friends and telling you “Your Friend will miss you”.  In my example for instance, I’m pretty sure it took at least a few days for “P-Diddy” to get over losing me as a FaceBook friend. 
Be sure to see the rest of this hideous process at the link below.
http://www.groovypost.com/howto/security/permanently-delete-your-facebook-profile-account
more here.
https://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=16929680703

I REPEAT: Your profile isn't deleted right away! You must NOT log in to, or interact in any other way with Facebook for at least two weeks, as it will cancel the deletion request. That includes NOT logging in to Facebook using any client (like the iPhone app or IM:s like Pidgin), NOT clicking embedded Like-buttons on other websites, NOT logging in to other services using Facebook Connect (like Digg) etc etc.

Hey, while your're at it, delete all your browsing/forms history and cookies as well, to minimize the risk of accidentally using your account! 

Related articles

• How to Delete Your Facebook Account [Emailable Tech Support] (lifehacker.com)
• How to Permanently Delete Your Facebook Account (lockergnome.com)
• How to deactivate your Facebook account (guardian.co.uk)
• Facebook: the virtual Hotel California | Edgar Whitley (guardian.co.uk)
• Deactivating Facebook (strategicallycommunicating.wordpress.com)
• How to delete your Facebook account (rovemonteux.net)
• Deleting a Facebook Account (allthingsd.com)
• #ff Privacy For Dummies (dave-lucas.blogspot.com)
• De-Networking (beyondthepopcorn.wordpress.com)
• AccountKiller Details How to Delete Your Account from Nearly Any Web Site (kozar.wordpress.com)
• Facebook for BlackBerry Smartphones v2.0 (Beta 3): Wi-Fi Support and More (blogs.blackberry.com)

Facebook, Walmart Becoming “666 Digital Beast” of the 21st Century

Image via Wikipediahttp://altnewsreport.wordpress.com/2011/06/11/facebook-666-beast
Watch http://www.youtube.com/user/peltecs?blend=1&ob=5#p/u/0/3V38WT2YVlg
This is the final red flag alert for the approach of  overt social  fascism. There is nothing covert about what the TV reporter in the video clip above is describing. Do you see where all this is going? Do the math.  With facial recognition software in place on Facebook, whenever the FED is monitoring your conversation, they know who you are, by face, and they will intervene and “correct” your conversation if they feel you are crossing some line they have established. You are not only being watched and listened to which is unauthorized personal surveillance, but they will now tell you what you should or should not be saying, that is to say, they will “weigh in” and “correct the conversation.”
Outrage is not a word that even comes close to how I feel about this newscast. The sheer hubris and audacity evident in the statement staggers me.
Since when does anyone in Canada or America need to be “corrected” by some anonymous government official when they are in an online conversation?  Being surreptitiously monitored by the government is awful enough. The very premise of what this reporter is suggesting throws every constitutional right to privacy and free speech out the window. If these kinds of public mass PSY OPs, disguised as TV news broadcasts, are already airing in Canada, then how soon will PSY OP TV broadcasts like this one air in the US? Is the mass TV network PSY OP already creeping into America’s living rooms which will suggest, in oh so blithe and cheerful conversational terms, that it’s now “OK” not only for the FED to listen in and ID you by photo while you chat with friends online on Facebook, but to actually intervene in the conversation and “correct” it when they deem appropriate?
Read also: 666 Marriage From Hell: Facebook and RFID

I also quickly discovered that Christians and Christianity are not the “favored” identities to the computerized Facebook protocols. One evening I had another spooky and inexplicable experience. I wanted to place certain keywords in my profile so that other Christians could find me a little bit easier. [ My entire reason and motive for joining Facebook had been to not only investigate just how secretly rotten this portal is, but to examine how it worked and report on it, which I am doing now. ]
So I was trying to enter the keyword phrases like:” Jesus follower“, “Jesus of Nazareth”, “Lord Jesus Christ” “Christian Conservative” “Tea Party Patriot” and so forth into my profile. Every time I entered these phrases they vanished. They just disappeared. I entered and re-entered these keyword phrases 6 times over before I realized that the pre-coded protocols of Facebook WAS NOT going to allow me to place those phrases into my profile, yet there was a persistent ongoing effort to get me to put into the profile instead:

 

 

Related articles

• Facebook's facial-recognition software prompts privacy concerns (news.consumerreports.org)
• How To Stop Facebook's Facial Recognition Software from Automatically Tagging You in Photos (businessinsider.com)
• Privacy Regulators See Red Over Facebook Facial Recognition (martingysler.com)
• Facebook growth slows for second straight month (venturebeat.com)
• Facebook Facial Recognition : on by default - and other considerations! (nwapchelp.wordpress.com)
• Facebook Is Becoming The "666 Digital Beast" of the 21st Century (altnewsreport.wordpress.com)
• European regulators investigating Facebook facial recognition over privacy concerns (venturebeat.com)
• Weekly newsletter (bigbrotherwatch.org.uk)
• Privacy Regulators See Red Over Facebook Facial Recognition (searchenginewatch.com)
• Facebook, Photo Recognition & Privacy (globalneighbourhoods.net)
• Doing Multilingual Keyword Research that Works (clickfire.com)
• Mario Teguh Is Third Most Engaging On Facebook (allfacebook.com)
• Facebook Can Block You For "Liking" Too Many Things (businessinsider.com)
• Philippians 1.10: To Live is Christ (cornerstonefellowship.wordpress.com)
• Another fake "Facebook profile views" application - how many girls and boys have viewed your wall (commtouch.com)
• The other side of Grace ... (thepauls.wordpress.com)

SPECIAL REPORT: Indiana Citizens Take Back 4th Amendment

Image via Wikipediahttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhUhrlcSlQg&feature=player_embedded#at=136

http://RTR.org | After the unconstitutional Indiana Supreme Court ruling removing the protections of the 4th Amendment, the people of Indiana spontaneously organized in a trans-partisan alliance uniting for the Constitution at their state capitol. Gary Franchi was on the scene to report. Become a member of the social network of the revolution, login with your Facebook or Twitter account at http://RTR.org/signup

Indiana Supreme Court: Resisting an Unlawful Entry Into Your Home is… Unlawful

http://michellemalkin.com/2011/05/14/indiana-supreme-court/
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. — 4th Amendment to the US Constitution
The Indiana Supreme Court has ruled that the 4th Amendment needs a disclaimer when it comes to officers of the law acting unlawfully (at which point, by definition, wouldn’t they cease to be “officers of the law”?).
Bruce McQuain has the details:

That’s what the Indiana Supreme Court decided in what would be a laughable finding if it wasn’t so serious:

Overturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes.

The author of the story reporting this is right – somehow the ISC managed, in one fell swoop, to overturn almost 900 years of precedent, going back to the Magna Carta.

In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer’s entry.

Or said another way, your home is no longer your castle.

From the ruling (PDF):

Related articles

• Indiana Rallies for the 4th Amendment (fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com)
• Live: Indiana's Fourth Amendment problems and protests (thetechherald.com)
• Live: Indiana's Fourth Amendment problems and protests (FINAL) (thetechherald.com)
• Live: Indiana's Fourth Amendment problems and protests (Update 2) (thetechherald.com)
• Indiana Supreme Court: Resisting an Unlawful Entry Into Your Home is... Unlawful (michellemalkin.com)
• "Indiana Sheriff: House to House Random Searches Now Possible" and related posts (dprogram.net)
• Assaulting the 4th Amendment (radocracy.com)
• GOOD NEWS: Indiana Attorney General seeks reconsideration of Fourth Amendment ruling. I'm not sure... (pajamasmedia.com)
• Indiana Becomes Police State: Supreme Court Overrules 4th Amendment (fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com)
• Indiana Sheriff: House to House Random Searches Now Possible (mountainrepublic.net)
• Indiana Supreme Court Shit-cans Fourth Amendment (sfcmac.wordpress.com)
• Indiana Supreme Court: You Have No Right to Resist Unlawful Police Entry (disinfo.com)
• "Indiana Supreme Court: No Resisting Police Entering Your House; Oh, & They Can Enter Without Knocking First Too" and related posts (hoosierpundit.blogspot.com)
• Indiana Supreme Court Eviscerates U.S. Constitution (chicagonow.com)

Facebook founder and CEO responds to complaints, introduces new settings

Image via Wikipedia

I personally don't like to use facebook much. Though I do have a couple of accounts for different things I do on the net.
For the most part. I think people should know this. If your one of those that have privacy issues on the net. There is a simple fix to all that. Anything you do NOT want seen by everyone in the world. DO NOT Upload it to the internet.
Trust me, this will fix all of your problems.
If it's online anywhere. Be sure to know that anyone with any knowlegde will be able to see everything you have uploaded.
Same goes for your computer, Cell phones, anything that hooks up to wi-fi or Gps.
It really goes down to common sense.
Facebook is meant to share information. Even though many claim security this and that. It's all good to have. But any good hacker can still get in if they really wanted too.
Facebook response and I give them credit for do this.
Check it out.

clipped from www.msnbc.msn.com Facebook has been growing quickly. It has become a community of more than 400 million people in just a few years. It's a challenge to keep that many people satisfied over time, so we move quickly to serve that community with new ways to connect with the social Web and each other. Sometimes we move too fast — and after listening to recent concerns, we're responding. The biggest message we have heard recently is that people want easier control over their information. Simply put, many of you thought our controls were too complex. Our intention was to give you lots of granular controls; but that may not have been what many of you wanted. We just missed the mark. Many people choose to make some of their information visible to everyone so people they know can find them on Facebook. We already offer controls to limit the visibility of that information and we intend to make them even stronger In the coming weeks, we will add privacy controls that are much simpler to use

Related articles by Zemanta

• Facebook CEO Addresses Privacy Concerns (sfgate.com)
• Facebook admits privacy change 'missed the mark' (v3.co.uk)
• Facebook CEO addresses privacy concerns (macworld.com)
• Mark Zuckerberg On Facebook's Privacy Controls: "We Just Missed The Mark" (techcrunch.com)
• Zuckerberg promises simpler privacy settings (vator.tv)
• Facebook founder admits they dropped the ball on privacy (ghacks.net)
• Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg Admits Gaffes (abcnews.go.com)
• Facebook CEO Admits They "Missed the Mark" On Privacy [Facebook] (gizmodo.com)
• Facebook CEO admits mistakes, adresses privacy concerns (infoworld.com)
• Facebook's Zuckerberg Responds To Mounting Pressure Over Privacy Issues (searchenginewatch.com)

CNN President "Really Afraid Of" Social Networks

clipped from www.webpronews.com Over the years, there have been more than a few arguments about whether online news sites are killing newspapers.  Now, due to some almost startling comments made by the president of CNN, it looks like the next round of old media-new media disputes might concern social networks and cable news organizations. The competition I'm really afraid of are social networking sites.  That's an alternative that threatens to pull people away from us." Klein then explained, "The people you're friends with on Facebook or the people you follow on Twitter are trusted sources of information. . . .  Well, we want to be the most trusted name in news.  We don't want the 1,000 people you follow in Twitter to be the most trusted sources for you. . . .  So I'm far more worried about the 500 million people on Facebook than I am about two million people watching Fox." It implies - at the very least - that CNN anchors are going to spend a whole lot more time referencing Facebook and Twitter from now on

Related articles by Zemanta

• CNN's Klein says he fears social networks (lostremote.com)
• Survey: More get news online than from print, radio (cnn.com)
• Announcing New Social Media Seminars for April in Indianapolis (kylelacy.com)
• The future of Facebook (guardian.co.uk)
• Twitter users not so social after all (downes.ca)

Hologram Preachers Slated to Appear in Churches

Revelation 13:13 He performs great signs, so that he even makes fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men. 14 And he deceives those[e] who dwell on the earth by those signs which he was granted to do in the sight of the beast, telling those who dwell on the earth to make an image to the beast who was wounded by the sword and lived. 15 He was granted power to give breath to the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak and cause as many as would not worship the image of the beast to be killed. 16 He causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads, 17 and that no one may buy or sell except one who has the mark or[f] the name of the beast, or the number of his name.

clipped from www.christianpost.com Holographic preachers are stirring another technology-gone-too-far debate among Christians. While the dust over beaming preachers on a video screen on multi-site campuses has somewhat settled, the new 3D tool is raising more questions and concerns among some believers. "Since so many of us in the west are convinced that entertaining pew fodder is critical to advancing 'the gospel' and that only a very few have the necessary gifts to preachertain – this will become the 'perfect' solution," Bill Kinnon, author of A Networked Conspiracy, Social Networks, The Church & the Power of Collective Intelligence, wrote in a recent blog post. What has Kinnon and many other Christians talking is the holographic technology that music artist Madonna famously used at the Grammy Awards in 2006 and that one company wants to promote in churches.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Keynote on Web 2.0 in the enterprise at IBM Collective Intelligence (rossdawsonblog.com)
• Grappling with the Beast (cbc.ca)