From the article, it seems as if this new move is only useful to data miners, not Facebook users. So they're basically screwing with us (I use, albeit sparingly, Facebook).

Facebook's done similar things to user's data before, and we've have had some success in protesting those changes. But I'm getting fed up. I don't want to have to worry about every single time Facebook has some sort of an update, that my personal data is going to be distributed publicly. I've had to change my privacy settings before, where stuff that I previously had private was suddenly public. Now it seems I have no option but to delete part of my profile in order to keep my stuff private.

What I wonder is how long Facebook thinks they'll get away with this until everyone is fed up and leaves?

Oops, this tells me that I should not try to post responses on /. when I'm at work and don't have much time to craft my responses :)

I certainly am not on the "just punish" side, and I much prefer criminals, juveniles or older ones, to have all possible resources to make something better of their lives.

My point was (well, was supposed to be) if you and Joe commit a crime, you shouldn't have to endure a heavier punishment for it than Joe just because some computer program has calculated that you are at a higher risk to re-offend than Joe.

If the program doesn't do that, only opens up different resources for the juveniles/offenders to help them, then yeah, I'm all for it. It just sounded like "justice" was going to be meted out according to some probability analysis and that creeped me out.

In my opinion, that's even worse. Even if person A has a higher risk of re-offending than person B, I thought the idea of justice was to give everyone the same treatment.

True, but if you are looking for a job, then this may be the thing that stops you from getting an interview. And in Japan, the competition is steep, I hear.

Well, the derogatory tone in the article is par for the course for this particular rag. I think there is some kind of a rule that the Daily Star, the Daily Mail and a few others have to publish at least one perpetual arousal symptom story per month (the sufferer is always young, female and unattached). Then there is the story about the adulterer, from the mistress' point of view but trashing her nevertheless, the fat lady trying every diet possible story... etc. These stories are all pretty sordid, sad and derogatory toward women. I hate them, but they have a very distinct, disturbing pull...

And finally, since I'm on a rant, TFA isn't even an article, it's a friggin' blurb advertising an article in a magazine!

Seriously.

Ok. This freaks me out. It's a screensaver on my wall that tracks my movements via a fashion disaster.

I'll pass, thanks.

Wait. Why would an atheist, on or off campus, want to embrace any sort of a religion? I thought the whole point of being an atheist was to be rid of all that shit.

Yeah, see, telling a non-sports-loving, non-American nerd (me) that Lebron James is the basketball equivalent of Peyton Manning doesn't help, because then my next question inevitably is: Who the hell is Peyton Manning?

I suppose neither one of these guys has managed to have dozen mistresses at once, because I sure do know who Tiger Woods is.

Well, I don't see anything in the article as being particularly discrediting to Julian Assange. It appears that he has a secret past involving nomadic life and computer hacking. I don't know about the rest of you, but considering his current career pretty much consists of being constantly on the move and publish classified documents online I find that amazingly non-shocking.

Not that the CIA might not be involved in this, they might, what do I know? But if they are, they are either taking the long, long, infinity-can-be-seen-on-a-good-day-long view or are just really inept.