PeteMorris Posted February 1, 2016 Share Posted February 1, 2016 What's with this "Motherhood challenge?" am I right in thinking that mothers just have to post a few pictures of themselves with their kids in order to complete the "challenge" ? Call me cynical, but to me it just seems it 'could' be an incentive for women to post pictures of 'kids'...Started by someone a bit...Shall we say... less than 'friendly'...With all the implications that engenders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bethanywalke Posted February 1, 2016 Share Posted February 1, 2016 Between that and the "we all know a person called..." posts that seem to be shared lately, I might just deactivate... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 Call me cynical, but to me it just seems it 'could' be an incentive for women to post pictures of 'kids'...Started by someone a bit...Shall we say... less than 'friendly'...With all the implications that engenders. Take your paranoia hat off. Firstly, as discussed in detail, when used appropriately only friends can see pictures that you post. Secondly, I've seen a few of these being posted, guess what, they're fully clothed children with their mums, like you can see in the street by looking outside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteMorris Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 Take your paranoia hat off. Firstly, as discussed in detail, when used appropriately only friends can see pictures that you post. Secondly, I've seen a few of these being posted, guess what, they're fully clothed children with their mums, like you can see in the street by looking outside. Well it might be news to you, but there's probably a billion people out there that 'don't' use FB 'appropriately' as you refer to it. Their profile and photo's are available to every Tom, Dick and Harry. Why do you think such nonsense 'please share' type posts are circulated?..I suggest you do some research. It's a jungle out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted February 2, 2016 Author Share Posted February 2, 2016 Take your paranoia hat off. Firstly, as discussed in detail, when used appropriately only friends can see pictures that you post. Secondly, I've seen a few of these being posted, guess what, they're fully clothed children with their mums, like you can see in the street by looking outside. While it most likely has fairly innocent origins (I'm sure there's plenty of other preferred methods for paedophiles to get their kicks), there is this, which some may find overreactive but others may agree with... Link to article about data mining and profile building of infants Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 (edited) Well it might be news to you, but there's probably a billion people out there that 'don't' use FB 'appropriately' as you refer to it. Their profile and photo's are available to every Tom, Dick and Harry. Why do you think such nonsense 'please share' type posts are circulated?..I suggest you do some research. It's a jungle out there. They're circulated because someone thought it was a good idea to start it and their friends passed it on. Seriously Pete, how would a paedophile benefit in some way from this? What you suggested is a conspiracy theory, and one that doesn't make any real sense. ---------- Post added 02-02-2016 at 10:10 ---------- While it most likely has fairly innocent origins (I'm sure there's plenty of other preferred methods for paedophiles to get their kicks), there is this, which some may find overreactive but others may agree with... Link to article about data mining and profile building of infants The article makes some good points, but there's definitely a hint of paranoia there as well. On the day of her birth, our daughter already had accounts at Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and even Github. And to this day, we’ve never posted any content. Err, why? The idea that facial recognition is running on a figure in a picture who ISN'T linked to an account, and that it will somehow still be able to identify her as she ages is just silly. Yes the algorithms will run. And they'll find no suggestion to make. Perhaps they'll even store a high % match of her face being the same one between a whole bunch of different photos... But so what? Edited February 2, 2016 by Cyclone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted February 2, 2016 Author Share Posted February 2, 2016 The article makes some good points, but there's definitely a hint of paranoia there as well. Err, why? The idea that facial recognition is running on a figure in a picture who ISN'T linked to an account, and that it will somehow still be able to identify her as she ages is just silly. Yes the algorithms will run. And they'll find no suggestion to make. Perhaps they'll even store a high % match of her face being the same one between a whole bunch of different photos... But so what? I was lost with that as well, the opening of a bunch of social media accounts from birth, to be left dormant until the kid comes of age Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteMorris Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 They're circulated because someone thought it was a good idea to start it and their friends passed it on. Seriously Pete, how would a paedophile benefit in some way from this? What you suggested is a conspiracy theory, and one that doesn't make any real sense. I'd like to think that the world is a nice cozy place, where beautiful innocent people abound, but plainly it's not. Have a gander at this article. Just one in a long list of articles on the subject. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/australasia/paedophile-websites-steal-half-their-photos-from-social-media-sites-like-facebook-a6673191.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 He told the Sydney Morning Herald that while the images themselves were not exploitative And it goes on to say that people should use appropriate privacy settings. ---------- Post added 02-02-2016 at 10:39 ---------- I was lost with that as well, the opening of a bunch of social media accounts from birth, to be left dormant until the kid comes of age They seemed worried that they'd be taken or something... I don't quite get it though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteMorris Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 And it goes on to say that people should use appropriate privacy settings. ---------- Post added 02-02-2016 at 10:39 ---------- They seemed worried that they'd be taken or something... I don't quite get it though. Of course it does. But the inescapable truth is that billions of people don't. That's my point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now