However, order robaxin from canada scheduling regular appointments with a healthcare professional and following a order advair cheap online personalized treatment plan can help control the condition. Opt-out physicians buy cheap dexamethasone online must complete additional paperwork, and a person they treat will discount viagra no rx only pay the cost over the Medicare-approved amount, known as discount cialis without prescription an excess charge. Osteogenesis imperfecta is a rare condition that generic prozac doctors refer to as brittle bone disease as it causes order artane no prescription required fragile bones. People place nonwearable devices on the floor and generic kenalog activate them by pressing a button or using voice commands buy cafergot online to call for help. Health Maintenance Organization Point-of-Service (HMO-POS) plans purchase triamterene online are also available, but these are less common. Currently, it cialis overnight shipping appears additional research needs completion before doctors make a definite buy free lipitor prescription change in their recommendations for treatment. A deficiency in factor cream buy online VIII may also relate to hemophilia A, which is another type.

A year and a half ago, I wrote an opinion piece entitled How Facebook Spells the End of Privacy. Now Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg says he’s sorry he ever built those privacy options into Facebook in the first place. Explaining the company’s decision in September to make all kinds of information public that users used to have the option to keep private—their friends list and the list of pages they subscribe to in particular — Zuckerberg explained,,

A lot of companies would be trapped by the conventions and their legacies of what they’ve built, doing a privacy change – doing a privacy change for 350 million users is not the kind of thing that a lot of companies would do. But we viewed that as a really important thing, to always keep a beginner’s mind and what would we do if we were starting the company now and we decided that these would be the social norms now and we just went for it.

Zuckerberg says that people are more comfortable sharing and being open than they used to be, and Facebook is just catching up with where society has already gone. Of course this is nonsensical reasoning, unworthy of someone who took a course in computational theory from me (yes, he did). The claim that a lot more people today do X than not-X is no reason to make everyone do X. As Marshall Kirkpatrick observes in the story linked to above, money is a more likely explanation. Having made Facebook nearly ubiquitous, Zuckerberg now sees more money in encouraging (or requiring) people to give up more information about themselves.

There are reasons of personal safety for people to maintain some privacy. There are reasons people want to keep multiple identities (personal and professional, for example) isolated from each other. And there is the big argument, which I put forward in Chapter 2, that privacy is socially progressive—not in the political sense, just in the obvious way, it is easier to think differently, and act differently, if you do so with trusted friends than in the full view of the entire world. I wonder if Zuckerberg would say the same thing about people being more open about everything if he spent a few months in China or in Iran.

This entry was posted on Sunday, January 10th, 2010 at 6:06 pm and is filed under Privacy, The Internet and the Web. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.