Maybe the poster knows something we don't. maybe the person who made the decision in the Kansas Department for Children and Families is a lesbian.

Holy shit this guy could make a giant mech battle at a strip club sound like doing your taxes.

No you didn't.

That's a great story, but it's complete and utter bullshit.
Most people would not just flea from some indie developer because an image in their game was suddenly not working. The communities of indie developers are in fact quite understanding.

As far as revenue goes, if you lost hundreds of dollars in revenue from a quarter of your users fleeing overnight. it would mean that you were in fact regularly making a serious chunk of change moving you out of indie status, to the point where you should be showing a lot more competence or be able to afford someone who has some.

Troubleshooting 101 is to run the app with all add-ons turned off in the browser. It shouldn't have taken you more than 30 minutes to find the problem.

You may have had an issue, but this story is sensationalized garbage, all from an AC no less..

I'm not shocked at all that this came from Timothy, I can only guess he must have been on the phone with kdawson at the time he posted it.

So do they want privacy or not?
On one hand they're claiming to serve up images by proxy to protect users privacy, on the other hand, they're using Google+ and youtube to force users to display their real name.

We had the issue where Google started forcibly customizing google services for you based on you signing up for Google+. When I signed up a couple years ago, it broke my news archive search, because it would only search news sites in Korea, and in Korean despite having everything in English and my account being created in Canada (I happen to be in Korea). While several months later that was actually fixed, they also went ahead and first removed the insanely useful timeline from the archive, and then just recently killed off the archive entirely, because who could ever want to read news more than 30 days old.

Butchering services, heavy handed user manipulation, my patience with google is quickly wearing thin.

"Who says Wikipedians don't have a sense of humor? "
No one, except some lame submitter trying to make a hook for an article by linking to some wikipedia page that's been around forever.

and the first thing you would need to do is not make assumptions. The MR doesn't stand for mister.

Wow.. you're such an interesting edgy hipster. What do I have to do to get you to father my children?

Maybe then they'd come up sooner than 5 days later than everywhere else..

a little more strict? That's like saying hitler had a slight preference for blue eyes...

Kdawson has thankfully been gone for awhile now, unfortunately timothy picked up right where he left-off. I'm half convinced they are the same person.

Never seen them index generic tags. People can write all kinds of random shit in tags, unless they were linked to accounts, there is no reason for them to even be indexed.

yes, they can follow your profile to friends profiles and check any public photos they have, but again that requires someone have a facebook account in the first place. This was a discussion about people without facebook accounts, and if someone just typed a non-account name as a tag on a photo. Those don't show up in searches, so doing so does in no way lead back to you.

The OP was claiming that it was basically a requirement that you signed up for facebook so that you could manage photos tagged of you since people could tag you in photos even if you didn't have an account. I was pointing out that if you don't have an account making generic tags like that would in no way lead back to you. Those names aren't searchable and since you don't have a facebook account the HR person is extremely unlikely to know that that person is your friend and check their account on the whim that some random person might have pictures of you. If they did, they'd take a hundred years to hire someone by the time they had the whole department trolling through every single facebook account ever on the chance someone somewhere might have a picture of you.

Holy fucking reading comprehension batman.
Here is the original post:

It is entirely possible to tag someone's name into a photo that does not have a Facebook account

He was talking about people tagging people who don't have facebook accounts.
So the answer to your question is: You

But if you tag someone in a photo who doesn't have a profile, it won't matter. It doesn't link to anything.

It's a shame you're on a tech site but so ignorant of the technology that you're speaking out against. The way HR sees photos of your on facebook is because they find your profile and you have privacy set to public, and photos of you that friends tagged, which you approved are also sitting there publicly on your wall.

They don't find them via your friends profiles. They find them because of the connection to your profile.
So if you aren't on facebook, there is no profile for them to connect to, and they won't be showing up in any searches.