Filed under: facebook

How to master your Facebook Timeline

There are a number of ways you can personalize your Timeline so it highlights the posts, pictures and events you cherish most.

 

 

Facebook has rolled out its new Timeline feature to the masses.

This ultra-illustrative, chronological listing of posts, photos, shared links, check-ins, and more is a radically different arrangement than the Facebook profile you've been used to.

And now that your life can be exposed for everyone to see -- and scrutinize -- you may be interested in curating the new interface. Once you've activated Facebook Timeline (go here to do so), you've got seven days to tweak it to make sure it's just how you like before it goes live for everyone to see.

Below are five quick tips on how to personalize, privatize, and generally get the most out of Facebook's newest feature. It doesn't take long to master the new interface, and it's an important exercise for anyone interested in, well, reputation management.

1. Privacy 101: How to hide things

You probably already know that Facebook has controversial positions on privacy. So you may now find that some things included on your Timeline are best kept from curious eyes. This could be anything from an embarrassing status message you posted in simpler social media times, to a rant your ex left on your wall a few months ago.

To hide a Timeline element, click the pencil icon at the top of the offending post, then choose "Hide from Timeline." Easy.

And please note: Any privacy settings you've already set still apply to the Timeline interface. So the photos of you getting wild at last weekend's kegger are still safe from Mom.

If you prefer to keep your profile public, but don't want everyone to see what you posted back in high school, for example, you can also tweak your Timeline settings more generally. Click the arrow next to your Home button at the top of the screen to access your Privacy Settings. Scroll down to "Limit the Audience for Past Posts," then choose "Manage Past Post Visibility." Now click "Limit Old Posts" -- all

2. Tell your life story: How to add past events

Privacy, schmivacy! Perhaps, you want the whole world to know the day you were born, the first time you rode a bike, and that debate club award you got in high school. These events aren't listed on your Timeline, but they can be.

To add a status update, photo, place check-in, or life event to your Timeline, simply hover the mouse over the line in the center of the page until it turns into a plus sign, and reveals the option to add one of those four types of posts.

Now, Facebook can accurately reflect your entire life -- and not just the events that occurred after you first signed on.

3. Add some individuality: How to customize your Timeline

There are a number of ways you can personalize your Timeline so it highlights the posts, pictures and events you cherish most.

First, you can add a cover to your Timeline. Toward the top of your profile, above the buttons where it says "Update Info," you should see "Add a Cover." Once you click that, you can select an image from your photos, or opt to upload a new image. Once it loads, you can adjust the positioning of your cover image.

If you set a cover photo and then decide it's not as great as you first thought, just hover your mouse over the image, and a "Change Cover" option menu will pop up, letting you reposition the image or select a new one.

For photo albums you've created, you can change the primary photo that displays (you could do this before, but now the process is different). Simply click the pencil icon in the upper corner of the album post, and select "Change Primary Photo."

You can also choose to highlight a post -- expanding it from a small, half-page-size post to a wide-screen version — by selecting the star icon in the post's upper-right corner. Conversely, you can click the star on a maximized featured post to make it normal again.

4. Appearances matter: How to check out your Timeline from different angles

If you decide to make a number of posts and photos private or hidden from your Timeline, you can still get the full, complete view of your Facebook action history.

On your Timeline, click "Activity Log." There you'll find posts and information you need to review before it publishes to your profile, as well as a complete look at your interactions on Facebook. This is log completely private to you.

You can choose to filter what you see by clicking the "All" dropdown menu at the top. You can choose to see only your posts, posts by others, posts from specific Facebook apps ("Hmm, let's look at my past Farmville accomplishments"), photos and more.

Like before, you can also check how others view your profile. Next to "Activity Log" is a cog icon. Click that, and you can choose "View As..." and either enter a friend's name or click the "public" link to see how your profile looks to strangers.

5. Information overload: How to organize friends and filter updates

Now that your Timeline is all straightened out, you might as well do some house cleaning on what shows up in your Newsfeed.

When you add a friend or follow someone's public updates, Facebook automatically sets the level of posts you see to "Most Updates." You can change this by going to that profile, and clicking the "Subscribed" button. You can change it to "Only Important" updates or "All updates," and you can also filter what types of posts you're interested in seeing: things like life events, status updates, or photos.

And if you haven't done so already, you can organize friends into lists, a la the Google+ Circles feature. Facebook Lists rolled out in September.

Just go to the left-hand side of your Newsfeed page, click "More," and toward the bottom you'll see "Lists." You can add friends individually to lists like Close Friends, Family, or Co-workers. You can click "More" next to Lists to add other lists of your choosing — "Acquaintances," "Poker Club Members," you get the picture.

The average Facebook user has 130 friends, but I'd venture to say that most of you reading this have far more than that, so this will help streamline your Facebooking experience.

One last thing: If you're one of those people who's still into "poking" your friends, you can still do that. Go to your friend's profile, and the Poke option is listed under a gear cog dropdown menu next to "Message."

via wired

 

Hackers Leak Facebook Law Enforcement Guidelines

A group of hackers claiming to represent Anonymous’s Antisec movement hijacked two Gmail accounts belonging to a retired California Department of Justice cybercrimes investigator, now a private investigator, and on November 18 published 38,000 private emails and identifying contact information online.

Among the data published by the hackers in a torrent file were two versions of what appears to be Facebook’s guidelines for law enforcement agencies, according to Public Intelligence, a collaborative research website dedicated to the freedom of information.

Specifically, the documents posted by the hackers and made available on the Public Intelligence website are two different versions of instructions on how agencies should submit subpoenas and requests for user data from the world’s largest social network, one of them dated 2010 and the other, shorter document dated November 2006.

Sources close to Facebook told TPM that the newly revealed guideline documents are “outdated,” and that an updated set of law enforcement guidelines is scheduled be made publicly available to all users on Facebook’s Help Center late Wednesday.

The 2006 document notes that Facebook will not provide any user data without “a valid subpoena or warrant,” while the 2010 document states that the social network requires “a valid subpoena or a legal document with equivalent authority issued through your local court system.”

Federal warrant rulings permitting law enforcement agencies to obtain Facebook data have surged in recent years, Reuters reported, with federal judges granting over 24 warrants since 2008.

The newly revealed 2010 document expressly discourages law enforcement officers from creating phony accounts, even for undercover investigations: “We encourage you to report false accounts to Facebook, and discourage any use of false accounts by law enforcement,” the document states.

Both the 2010 and 2006 documents explain how agencies need to first locate a Facebook user’s or group’s unique ID number, which is easily seen in the URL after the letters “id” or “gid.”

The documents state that a law enforcement agency must submit this information to Facebook in order to retrieve information about the account in question. According to the documents, Facebook can then provide agencies with “basic subscription information (BSI)” which includes a user’s email address, mobile phone number (if provided by the user in their Facebook account), the date and time their account was created, and the most recent login times.

The 2006 document states that Facebook can provide a user’s “Neoprint,” which is described as an “expanded view” of a profile, including “all wall postings and messages to and from the user that have not been deleted by the user.” Facebook can, according to the document, also provide “a compilation” of all of a user’s photos and all of a user’s contact information that’s been uploaded, even if it doesn’t appear in their publicly viewable profile.

As far as Facebook Groups, the social network can provide a list of all users in the group, contact information and the current status of the group page, the 2006 document states.

Importantly, though, Facebook points out in the 2006 document that it cannot provide any user data that has already been deleted by the user before the time of the request. That’s seemingly at odds with the deleted data that Facebook turned over to an Austrian user upon request, who later filed a list of complaints with the Irish Data Commissioner, which is now auditing the social network. The 2010 document contains no mention of deleted data.

In addition, Facebook can reportedly provide law enforcement agencies with a user’s Internet Protocol (IP) logs, including the user’s unique IP address, the Facebook usernames associated with that IP address, and the most recent times that IP address viewed Facebook. The 2006 document states that Facebook “generally” retains IP logs for the past 30 days.

Finally, the documents state that the “Facebook Security Team,” may respond to “special requests” for information not contained in the above provisions, as well as provide “emergency disclosures.”

The 2010 document contains a notice that Facebook will immediately disable all user accounts that have been accused of illegal activity, although law enforcement agencies can stop the network from doing this in their request, at least temporarily, by writing “DO NOT DISABLE UNTIL [DATE],” and filling out a corresponding date. This provision is to allow agencies the freedom to continue pursuing an investigation that would otherwise be hindered by shuttering the Facebook account(s).

As Public Intelligence notes, these are actually just the fifth and sixth versions of documents purporting to be the “Facebook Law Enforcement Guidelines” going back to 2007.

Facebook declined to confirm authenticity of any of the prior versions of the documents to Reuters, but the documents contain valid Facebook email and mailing addresses, and the 2010 document contains a Facebook copyright notice.

In addition, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, an advocacy group dedicated to protecting users’ digital rights, obtained several copies of the Facebook guidelines from the Justice Department. The EFF commended Facebook for taking a zero-tolerance approach to enforcing its “no fake accounts” policy, even against law enforcement.

That said, the EFF has also pointed out how a November 10 court ruling ordering Twitter to hand over user information to the Justice Department without a warrant or subpoena could also apply to Facebook.

And the Obama Administration was this year supposed to submit to lawmakers a bill that would allow federal law enforcement agencies the ability to use “back doors” to observe all online communications under wiretap orders, even encrypted communications, according to a New York Times report in October 2010. That legislation has yet to be introduced.

Can Facebook become the Web?

via:cnn money

What began a few years back as a fringe festival for hackers — Facebook's f8 -- has turned into the de facto ground zero for anyone interested in helping build the infrastructure of tomorrow's internet.

Mark Zuckerberg took the stage today at f8, Facebook's sort-of-annual developers' conference, to the screaming affirmation of thousands of laptop-toting fanboys (and also a few women) and a live-streaming audience that surpassed 100,000. What began a few years back as a fringe festival for legit hackers has become ground zero for anyone interested in helping build the infrastructure of tomorrow's Internet.

What's changed? A year and a half after the last f8, where the "like" button debuted, Facebook has increased its users 40% to 750 million and eMarketer estimates it will double revenues to an estimated $4.27 billion. Zuckerberg has become the Robert Moses of his generation, building out not just an operating system for the web or a way to organize it -- but the web itself.

As expected, Zuckerberg unleashed a dizzying number of announcements: He introduced a redesigned profile called Timeline; a new way to bring applications into the Facebook experience; and, an evolved version of the "social graph" -- the web of personal relationships that users map out by connecting to each other. Perhaps most significant, the social graph lets businesses like music service Spotify or streaming site Netflix more deeply integrate their services into Facebook.

"Imagine expressing the story of your life," Zuckerberg explained. "If the original Facebook was the first five minutes [of a conversation] and the stream was the next 15, what I want to show you today is the rest--the next few hours of a deep engaging conversation." Expect Facebook, in effect, to become our living digital scrapbook and even, eventually, perhaps our fossil.

Zuckerberg spoke to an overflowing mass of entranced developers who aren't kidding when they pronounce "f8" as "fate." If his announcements seemed confident and disruptive enough to border on arrogance, consider that we've seen this two-steps-forward routine before: First, Facebook releases numerous significant redesigns and new features. Then, users cry foul, often voicing concerns over privacy. The company, finally, pulls back on its plan and makes tweaks while we all settle down and adjust, building out the new features quietly anyhow.

Anyone complaining about the redesign of the newsfeed earlier this week would do well to remember 2006 when a more youthful CEO rolled it out in the first place. A Facebook group called "Students Against Facebook Newsfeed" attracted 740,000 members and a website called for a daylong boycott of the site, causing Zuckerberg to issue his first letter of apology and alter privacy settings. But he didn't back down on the core feature and it became the backbone for the social web. Now, the newsfeed might as well be an institution. And so far, Zuckerberg's mad impulse to force feed us sharing tools has worked.

At the moment, it would seem there's not much competition over who gets to control (and make money from) all of this sharing and connecting. In June, Google launched its new social product, Google+, to great fanfare and attracted tens of millions of sign-ups right away, but three months after launch it's not clear people are actually using it. (The company just recently opened Google+ to the wider public, hoping for a surge of new users.) Twitter is growing fast, but its scope is more limited and it has had considerable organizational challenges. MySpace is, well, dead.

What's more, as sharing becomes the dominant paradigm for how information is discovered and passed on, augmenting and in some cases replacing traditional search, web sites that choose not to integrate with Facebook increasingly occupy overlooked corners of a shadow web. Those that embrace these tools early can gain competitive advantage; the lucky few that develop alongside the company as launch partners receive huge boosts. Daniel Ek, CEO of Spotify, took the stage alongside Zuckerberg to show off the music service's new super ap. The bullet points above his head read, "More music, more variety, twice as likely to pay."

As the web expands beyond our computers, this puts Facebook everywhere -- as the dominant interface to our lives. As CEO of large digital ad agency AKQA with clients like Audi and Nike, Tom Bedecarre is thinking about a future in which Facebook is available on our TV sets and in our cars (voice-activated, of course). Says Bedecarrre, "For large marketers, Facebook is becoming the web."

But it's not a given that the web belongs to Facebook. These new changes are significant enough that they are sure to inspire intense reactions from users who may feel overexposed or simply overwhelmed by so much change. (Recent incremental changes to the site's interface have already significantly changed the way the site looks.) The potential for competition isn't limited to large social properties -- any fast growing web property poses a threat. And that's if Washington doesn't step in at some point over privacy or concerns about competitiveness.

Maybe that's why, as Zuckerberg's audience grows, he makes more of an attempt at humility. He began this year's event by inviting Saturday Night Live Star Andy Samberg up to make fun of him. "How many users does Facebook have?" Samberg joked. "Even more people than claim they invented Facebook." It was self-deprecating. It was funny. For a moment.

Can Facebook become the Web?

via:cnnmoney

What began a few years back as a fringe festival for hackers — Facebook's f8 -- has turned into the de facto ground zero for anyone interested in helping build the infrastructure of tomorrow's internet.

Mark Zuckerberg took the stage today at f8, Facebook's sort-of-annual developers' conference, to the screaming affirmation of thousands of laptop-toting fanboys (and also a few women) and a live-streaming audience that surpassed 100,000. What began a few years back as a fringe festival for legit hackers has become ground zero for anyone interested in helping build the infrastructure of tomorrow's Internet.

What's changed? A year and a half after the last f8, where the "like" button debuted, Facebook has increased its users 40% to 750 million and eMarketer estimates it will double revenues to an estimated $4.27 billion. Zuckerberg has become the Robert Moses of his generation, building out not just an operating system for the web or a way to organize it -- but the web itself.

As expected, Zuckerberg unleashed a dizzying number of announcements: He introduced a redesigned profile called Timeline; a new way to bring applications into the Facebook experience; and, an evolved version of the "social graph" -- the web of personal relationships that users map out by connecting to each other. Perhaps most significant, the social graph lets businesses like music service Spotify or streaming site Netflix (NFLX) more deeply integrate their services into Facebook.

"Imagine expressing the story of your life," Zuckerberg explained. "If the original Facebook was the first five minutes [of a conversation] and the stream was the next 15, what I want to show you today is the rest--the next few hours of a deep engaging conversation." Expect Facebook, in effect, to become our living digital scrapbook and even, eventually, perhaps our fossil.

Zuckerberg spoke to an overflowing mass of entranced developers who aren't kidding when they pronounce "f8" as "fate." If his announcements seemed confident and disruptive enough to border on arrogance, consider that we've seen this two-steps-forward routine before: First, Facebook releases numerous significant redesigns and new features. Then, users cry foul, often voicing concerns over privacy. The company, finally, pulls back on its plan and makes tweaks while we all settle down and adjust, building out the new features quietly anyhow.

Anyone complaining about the redesign of the newsfeed earlier this week would do well to remember 2006 when a more youthful CEO rolled it out in the first place. A Facebook group called "Students Against Facebook Newsfeed" attracted 740,000 members and a website called for a daylong boycott of the site, causing Zuckerberg to issue his first letter of apology and alter privacy settings. But he didn't back down on the core feature and it became the backbone for the social web. Now, the newsfeed might as well be an institution. And so far, Zuckerberg's mad impulse to force feed us sharing tools has worked.

At the moment, it would seem there's not much competition over who gets to control (and make money from) all of this sharing and connecting. In June, Google launched its new social product, Google+, to great fanfare and attracted tens of millions of sign-ups right away, but three months after launch it's not clear people are actually using it. (The company just recently opened Google+ to the wider public, hoping for a surge of new users.) Twitter is growing fast, but its scope is more limited and it has had considerable organizational challengesMySpace is, well, dead.

What's more, as sharing becomes the dominant paradigm for how information is discovered and passed on, augmenting and in some cases replacing traditional search, web sites that choose not to integrate with Facebook increasingly occupy overlooked corners of a shadow web. Those that embrace these tools early can gain competitive advantage; the lucky few that develop alongside the company as launch partners receive huge boosts. Daniel Ek, CEO of Spotify, took the stage alongside Zuckerberg to show off the music service's new super ap. The bullet points above his head read, "More music, more variety, twice as likely to pay."

As the web expands beyond our computers, this puts Facebook everywhere -- as the dominant interface to our lives. As CEO of large digital ad agency AKQA with clients like Audi and Nike, Tom Bedecarre is thinking about a future in which Facebook is available on our TV sets and in our cars (voice-activated, of course). Says Bedecarrre, "For large marketers, Facebook isbecoming the web."

But it's not a given that the web belongs to Facebook. These new changes are significant enough that they are sure to inspire intense reactions from users who may feel overexposed or simply overwhelmed by so much change. (Recent incremental changes to the site's interface have already significantly changed the way the site looks.) The potential for competition isn't limited to large social properties -- any fast growing web property poses a threat. And that's if Washington doesn't step in at some point over privacy or concerns about competitiveness.

Maybe that's why, as Zuckerberg's audience grows, he makes more of an attempt at humility. He began this year's event by inviting Saturday Night Live Star Andy Samberg up to make fun of him. "How many users does Facebook have?" Samberg joked. "Even more people than claim they invented Facebook." It was self-deprecating. It was funny. For a moment.

China Wants to Buy Facebook

On Thursday, Business Insider reported that China is trying to buy “a huge chunk” of Facebook.

According to the business news website, Beijing approached a fund that buys stock from former Facebook employees to see if it could assemble a stake large enough “to matter.”  Moreover, Citibank is rumored to be trying to acquire as much as $1.2 billion of stock for two sovereign wealth funds, one from the Middle East and the other Chinese.  Business Insider reports a third source, from a “very influential” Silicon Valley investment bank, confirms that Citi is representing China.

Should Beijing be allowed to buy a part of Mark Zuckerberg’s site?  Business Insider tells us there is “little need” for concern about Chinese censors looking at the photos and postings of the 700 million people who trust Facebook with their personal online activity.

First, China’s position won’t be large.  A billion-dollar investment does not buy much influence in a site expected to be worth a hundred times that when it goes public.  Second, Beijing will be acquiring nonvoting stock.  Third, shareholders don’t get the right to look at what’s on the site.  All of these arguments from Business Insider ring true.

Yet they are all beside the point—and there are other reasons to be concerned.  The business site says that “sovereign wealth funds are pretty distinct from their governments.”

Perhaps Norway’s fund is, but not China’s.  The Communist Party, despite three decades of economic reform, insists on its monopoly of political power.  And to maintain that monopoly, it tightly controls its own instrumentalities.  That’s especially true at this moment because the Party is in the midst of the most comprehensive crackdown on society since the 1989 Beijing Spring.  Chinese leaders clearly view social media as a threat to their rule, especially after seeing its force-multiplying effect in the ongoing Arab Spring protests that have toppled governments.

In short, China’s sovereign wealth fund, which is no more independent of the Communist Party than the Beijing municipal government, wants to buy a stake in the world’s most prominent social networking site because Chinese leaders want to control social media.  And they hope to do that as part of their comprehensive campaign to dominate the conversation about China—not just inside the country but around the world as well.

Beijing, during the last decade, announced initiatives to change discourse on foreign university campuses with its Confucius Institutes—now 322 of them—and Confucius Classrooms in elementary and high schools—369 of those.  Moreover, its “go global” initiative is trying to affect news coverage of China by opening bureaus outside the country to internationalize state media, especially Xinhua News Agency, China Central Television, and People’s Daily.

And this is where the Facebook founder is giving Beijing an opening.  Zuckerberg visited China in December and is scheduled to return, perhaps in September, in his bid to access the world’s largest online community, 457 million at last count.

“One big reason American firms stumble in China is that the government tends to favor locals when it comes to regulation,” Business Insider points out.  “One way to make sure that doesn’t happen is to allow the government to own a stake.”

Beijing wants to own stakes in foreign firms because it is trying to control them.  Its ambitions may at the moment look unrealistic to us, but that does not mean swaggering—and strategic-thinking—Communist Party officials do not hold them.

The cocky Chinese are not the only parties deluding themselves.  Zuckerberg, in the words of one reporter, “believes that Facebook can be an agent of change in China, as it has been in countries such as Egypt and Tunisia.”  After the disastrous China experiences of Yahoo and Google and the troubled history of Microsoft there—not to mention Beijing’s recent tirade against foreign social media—the Facebook founder appears both arrogant and naïve.

Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg is reportedly “wary about the compromises Facebook would have to make to do business there.”  If she loses her argument with Zuckerberg and Facebook enters China, the company will eventually be subject to demands to censor its sites, those both inside and outside China.  That’s apparently why the Chinese want to own a big stake in Facebook.  They are, in short, looking for control in the long run.  No other explanation is consistent with the Party’s other media and “educational” initiatives.

Of course, a Beijing-influenced Facebook will be hit by even more bad publicity—and inevitably defections.  Other social networking sites will spring up to capture fleeing users.  The genius of America is that its open and broad market eventually punishes the arrogant and the naïve by allowing choice.

So who says MySpace is dead?  Perhaps Rupert Murdoch sold it too soon.

 

Mark Zuckerberg's new personal challenge: Eating only what he kills.

Last year Mark Zuckerberg set out to learn Chinese. Now he's determined to get in touch with his food. If the goats, lobsters and chickens of Silicon Valley aren't trembling, they should be.

Mark Zuckerberg's new plan: Eat what you kill

The eyes of a hunter.

When he's not too busy connecting people across the universe, Mark Zuckerberg is pursuing a new "personal challenge," as he calls it. "The only meat I'm eating is from animals I've killed myself," says the Facebook founder and CEO.

It's an odd dietary direction for the 27-year-old Internet billionaire, but since he has taken to killing goats, pigs and chickens, "I'm eating a lot healthier foods. And I've learned a lot about sustainable farming and raising of animals," he says. "It's easy to take the food we eat for granted when we can eat good things every day."

Zuckerberg's new goal came to light, not surprisingly, on Facebook. On May 4, Zuckerberg posted a note to the 847 friends on his private page: "I just killed a pig and a goat."

This drew a stream of emotional comments, which were a mixture of confusion, curiosity, and outright disgust. Zuckerberg posted his own comment in response, explaining that he fixates on a personal challenge each year (in 2009, he wore a tie every day), and this year's is about animals and meat. (Click here to read Zuckerberg's May 4 comment.)

Zuckerberg's guide on this strange journey has been a well-known Silicon Valley chef named Jesse Cool. She lives in Palo Alto, eight houses away from Zuckerberg, and owns a local restaurant called Flea Street Café. Cool has introduced Zuckerberg to nearby farmers and advised him as he killed his first chicken, pig, and goat. "He cut the throat of the goat with a knife, which is the most kind way to do it," says Cool.

Killing is just the kickoff. After that, the dead creatures go to a butcher in Santa Cruz, who cuts them into parts. Zuckerberg and his longtime girlfriend, Priscilla, have been cooking what he slaughters, eating what many people would not dare consume. He recently ate a chicken, including the heart and liver, and used the feet to make stock. He posted a photo of the bird on his Facebook page, along with a list of the dishes he made from it.

Only Zuckerberg can explain what this is really about. Now in Europe for Facebook meetings, he sent Fortune an email detailing his thoughts:

To start, let me give you some background on what I'm doing. Every year in recent memory, I've taken on a personal challenge -- something to learn about the world, expand my interests and teach myself greater discipline. I spend almost all of my time building Facebook, so these personal challenges are all things I wouldn't normally have the chance to do if I didn't take the time.

Last year, for example, my personal challenge was to learn Chinese. I blocked out an hour every day to study and it has been an amazing experience so far. I've always found learning new languages challenging, so I wanted to jump in and try to learn a hard one. It has been a very humbling experience. With language, there's no way to just "figure it out" like you can with other problems -- you just need to practice and practice. The experience of learning Mandarin has also led me to travel to China, learn about its culture and history, and meet a lot of new interesting people.

This year, my personal challenge is around being thankful for the food I have to eat. I think many people forget that a living being has to die for you to eat meat, so my goal revolves around not letting myself forget that and being thankful for what I have. This year I've basically become a vegetarian since the only meat I'm eating is from animals I've killed myself. So far, this has been a good experience. I'm eating a lot healthier foods and I've learned a lot about sustainable farming and raising of animals.

I started thinking about this last year when I had a pig roast at my house. A bunch of people told me that even though they loved eating pork, they really didn't want to think about the fact that the pig used to be alive. That just seemed irresponsible to me. I don't have an issue with anything people choose to eat, but I do think they should take responsibility and be thankful for what they eat rather than trying to ignore where it came from.

While Zuckerberg's new diet hasn't exactly gone viral in the way that, say, Facebook has, he says he's seen some people warming to it: "I was surprised by how many of my friends have interests in some of the areas I'm exploring in such diverse ways. Many are vegetarian, some enjoy hunting and some even farm. My girlfriend is my main partner in this, though, since we eat the most meals together."

Zuckerberg's learning curve has been evolutionary: moving from sea creatures to land animals. His first kill was a lobster, which he boiled alive. He says it was a difficult kill, at least emotionally. He had an entirely new feeling once he took a bite: "The most interesting thing was how special it felt to eat it after having not eaten any seafood or meat in a while."

After the lobster, the next animal to fall at his hands was a chicken. What's next on this journey? He's told people that he's interested in going hunting.

Zuckerberg says the new kill-what-you-eat diet hasn't changed his frequent restaurant goings; he just limits himself to places where he can eat vegetarian. There has, however, been one unintended side effect: he notices that when he invites friends over to his house, they're loathe to eat too much of what he's making. He attributes that to them wondering if there's enough to go around. "I guess they feel like I don't have too much meat, so I should eat it myself," he says. "I prefer sharing though." Spoken like a true social media baron.

 

Facebook’s Plan To Plant Anti-Google Stories in the Press

via:mashable

Facebook has admitted hiring a PR firm to raise concerns about Google’s privacy practices. The campaign backfired though when an agent from the firm was caught trying to “help” a prominent blogger write a critical piece on one of Google’s services, according to The Daily Beast.

The PR firm is Burson-Marsteller. The blogger is Chris Soghoian. A Burson agent approached him to write a piece on Google’s Social Circle, a network of social connections that Google uses to deliver relevant search results. The Burson rep even offered to help write the piece and approached other news organizations, including USA Today, with similar offers.

Soghoian declined and instead decided to publish some of the emails from Burson. (They’re available here.) In one email, the Burson rep directly attacks Google, saying, “Google, as you know, has a well-known history of infringing on the privacy rights of America’s Internet users. Not a year has gone by since the founding of the company where it has not been the focus of front-page news detailing its zealous approach to gathering information -– in many cases private and identifiable information — about online users.”

The email goes on to describe Google’s service as the “latest tool designed to scrape private data and build deeply personal dossiers on millions of users –- in a direct and flagrant violation of its agreement with the FTC.”

When Soghoian asked who was paying for this campaign, the Burson representative refused to name the firm’s client. A Facebook representative confirmed to The Daily Beast‘s Dan Lyons that the company hired Burson for two reasons: “First, because it believes Google is doing some things in social networking that raise privacy concerns; second, and perhaps more important, because Facebook resents Google’s attempts to use Facebook data in its own social-networking service.”

It’s one thing to publicly voice your concern about another company’s privacy practices — Microsoft, Google and Facebook have been throwing jabs at each other for some time now — but hiring a PR agent to try to influence bloggers to write negative press about a competitor — that’s a PR catastrophe of the highest degree.

 

Inside Mark Zuckerberg's 'Opulent' New House

via:gawker


Just in time for his birthday, Facebook's CEO has acquired what will be his third home since September, a walled, 5,000+ square foot Palo Alto manse complete with a saltwater pool and music alcove. It cost $7 million. So much for Mark Zuckerberg's everyman lifestyle.

Zuckerberg won't move in for several more months, according to the San Jose Mercury News, but when he does the new place will be a convenient 10 minute drive from Facebook's new office space in Menlo Park. With its outdoor walls and trees, the estate offers more privacy than Zuckerberg's security camera studded, 3,800 square foot College Terrace rental. The new place has five bedrooms, the same as his current rental and up from four bedrooms at Zuckerberg's prior rental, which he was living in through at least September.

And if Real Estalker is right, the new pad is even more impressive than the numbers suggest. The blog has fingered a recently-sold turn of the century home in the Crescent Park neighborhood as very likely Zuck's new home. The property, pictured above, was sold for $7 million in March, features "privacy hedges" and was recently overhauled with a spa, outdoor fireplace and a lap-lane salt water pool.

"A wide rocking chair porch leads to an impress-the-guests entrance hall and reception area," Real Estalker writes, "banquet hall sized dining room.... [and] a glassed-in sun porch. The master bedroom includes a bathroom with twin Carrera marble topped vanities, separate soaking tub and shower and heated floors for tootsie warming on those chilly and damp NorCal mornings."

Zuckerberg is not expected to move into his new Palo Alto home for several months, and the prior owners reportedly still live there. But he may be itching for the wall and high shrubbery; as Facebook's valuation zoomed from $23 billion to $80 billion in less than a year, Zuckerberg's security has become a heightened concern. Earlier this year he acquired a stalker.

Of course, trading a streetside rental for a multimillion dollar walled compound gives Zuckerberg less purchase on his carefully cultivated image as a typical workaday Silicon Valley engineer in lifestyle and comportment. He may still wear sandals and hoodies, and Zuckerberg's home still looks modest next those of, say, Oracle CEO Larry Ellison (8,000 square feet) or Microsoft founder Bill Gates (66,000 square feet).

But the social networking kingpin is no longer on a month to month lease and his new place is twice the size of the home he was in last summer. Seven million dollars is a lot of money even by Silicon Valley standards.

Still, with Facebook reportedly approaching $4 billion in annual revenue, it's hard to dispute that the 26-year-old has earned a move up in the world. Besides, it's his birthday this week. Mazel tov, Mark.

 

Is Facebook worth $100 billion now?

Analysts were skeptical when investors valued Facebook at $50 billion. Now, people familiar with the numbers says it's more like $100 billion.Really?

via:allfacebook

Facebook is still a private company, but the moment it goes public, Mark Zuckerberg will really be rolling in it: The company is reportedly now valued at $100 billion.

Facebook is still a private company, but the moment it goes public, Mark Zuckerberg will really be rolling in it: The company is reportedly now valued at $100 billion.

Four short months ago, Facebook raised eyebrows when it was valued at $50 billion, based on a $1.5 billion investment from Goldman Sachs and Russia's Digital Sky Technologies. Now, people with knowledge of Facebook's closely held finances tell The Wall Street Journal that the social networking giant is on track to exceed its 2011 target of $2 billion in pre-tax income, and could easily be worth $100 billion or more. Is Facebook really worth more than Amazon and Cisco?

These numbers are dubious: Despite Facebook's impressive earnings, some "early investors are trying to cash out" now, worried that the company's valuation has inflated too quickly, says Ryan Tate at Gawker. It wouldn't be surprising if these same pessimists are trying to talk up the price of their private shares first — "classic bubble behavior."

Facebook is sitting on gold: These unfair accusations of "'bubble-like' talk" have been hurled at Facebook believers for years, says Nick O'Neill at All Facebook. But "everybody I talk to now is practically convinced that Facebook will become as big as Google," which is valued at $175 billion. In fact, Facebook's fledgling ad business will likely crush Google's AdSense platform in a few years. Most website owners are already giving Facebook "the keys to a massive vault."

It's all speculation till the IPO: When investors buy small stakes in privately held companies like Facebook, "the numbers put forward are always mind boggling," says Emil Protalinski in ZDNet. In the last value-setting transaction, a mere 100,000 Class B share pushed Facebook's valuation up to $80 billion. So is $100 billion plausible? Sure. But until Facebook goes public — which will probably happen next year — it's all speculation.

 

Facebook’s Complicated Ownership History Explained

Via:mashable

Facebook’s tangled founding story is about to get more complicated, thanks to a man named Paul Ceglia.

Anyone who has seen The Social Network knows about Eduardo Saverin and the Winklevoss twins. Facebook co-founder Saverin was forced out, sued Facebook and settled for a 5% stake of the company. Tyler and Cameron Winklevoss contracted Zuckerberg to build a Harvard-based social network for them, but when Mark Zuckerberg launched “TheFacebook.com” instead, the twins sued. That case was also settled, though the twins have been trying hard to rescind it in court.

But there’s more to Facebook’s legacy of lawsuits than the movie mentioned. Last year, Ceglia claimed he and Zuckerberg signed a contract giving Ceglia 50% of Facebook. Most legal experts dismissed Ceglia’s lawsuit as outlandish, but it has resurfaced this week with evidence that promises to make this a messy affair.

So what exactly happened at Harvard in 2003 and 2004? Why have so many people claimed an ownership stake in Facebook? Who is Paul Ceglia, and does he actually have a case?

To answer that, we need to explore Facebook’s complicated ownership history.


Eduardo Saverin


Until 2009 Saverin wasn’t even acknowledged as a co-founder. It took a lawsuit and a settlement to make that happen.

 

Both sides dispute the details of the case, but here are the basics. In 2003, Zuckerberg (then a sophomore at Harvard) approached Saverin (a junior) about TheFacebook.com. He asked Saverin to become his business partner and to put down $15,000 for the servers needed to run the site. In return, he’d get about 30% of the company.

When Facebook took off in 2004, Zuckerberg and another co-founder, Dustin Moskovitz, decided that they had to move to Silicon Valley. They got a place in Palo Alto and started coding. Saverin had an internship with Lehman Brothers in New York. According to Business Insider, Zuckerberg asked Saverin to take care of the paperwork, to get funding and to figure out a way to make money.

But Saverin was slow to make decisions and slow to sign off on the paperwork. Eventually, his role was taken by entrepreneur Sean Parker, who quickly secured a $500,000 investment by PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel. Zuckerberg was able to reduce Saverin’s stake in the company from 30% to less than 10% in short order. His equity was diluted from that point onward.

As detailed in The Social Network, Saverin eventually sued Facebook. The matter was soon settled. Saverin got about 5% of the company (worth more than $2.5 billion today) and signed a non-disclosure that has essentially kept him quiet since.


Tyler and Cameron Winklevoss


Zuckerberg just can’t seem to get rid of the Winklevoss twins.

 

In 2003, the Winklevosses and their business partner Divya Narendra approached Zuckerberg about their new project, HarvardConnection, a social networking site for Harvard students. Zuckerberg allegedly entered into a verbal contract with the Winklevosses, promising to help build the site in return for equity.

Meanwhile, Zuckerberg was deep in the development of TheFacebook.com. Between November and 2003 and February 2004, he communicated with the twins through a series of 52 emails and several in-person meetings. Zuckerberg launched TheFacebook.com in February 2004 and, two days later, the Winklevosses learned of the site in The Harvard Crimson. A few days later, the Winklevosses and Narendra sent Zuckerberg a cease-and-desist letter.

While HarvardConnection eventually launched a few months later, as ConnectU, it failed to gain traction. ConnectU’s founders filed a lawsuit against Zuckerberg in 2004, prompting a legal battle that dragged out for years. In February 2008, the two sides finally settled. Facebook acquired ConnectU’s assets in exchange for 1,253,326 shares (worth around $180 million today) and $20 million in cash.

That wasn’t the end, however. In March 2008, the ConnectU founders filed another lawsuit, attempting to rescind the settlement. They argued that Facebook misled them over the true value of the stock. The twins also sued their law firm, Quinn Emanuel, for malpractice. That’s not all: Wayne Chang, founder of a file-sharing service called i2hub that had partnered with ConnectU, sued the twins for 50% of the Facebook settlement.

It’s a confusing tangle of lawsuits, but the bottom line is that the Winklevoss twins settled their case with Facebook years ago. Their recent attempts to change that settlement are falling flat. A U.S. judge ruled this week that the settlement still stands. The twins, of course, are appealing that ruling.


What About Paul Ceglia?


Now for the question that has been causing headlines this week: did Zuckerberg potentially sell a 50% stake in Facebook for $1,000?

 

That’s the notion that Ceglia, owner of a wood pellet fuel company, put forth in a lawsuit filed last July. In the suit, he claimed that he and Zuckerberg had an agreement in which Ceglia would receive 50% of Facebook for a $1,000 investment, in addition to 1% of the company each day until a site called “the face book” was completed. Since the project was allegedly 34 days late, Ceglia says he was entitled to 84% of the company.

The story sounded outrageous on the surface, especially as Ceglia had waited a full six years before speaking up. Furthermore, Ceglia is a a convicted felon.

This week, however, the lawsuit resurfaced. Ceglia refiled his case with prominent law firm DLA Piper and said he has produced email conversations that support his claims. The lawsuit now claims that Ceglia offered Zuckerberg $1,000 to work on a project called StreetFax, as well as $1,000 to fund “the face book.” The suit claims the two met in Boston and signed a contract with a witness present.

Allegedly, Zuckerberg and Ceglia discussed details such as the site’s domain name and business model. The suit says Zuckerberg mentioned the Winklevoss twins in November 2003, telling Ceglia that he had “stalled them for the time being.” Eventually, according to the suit, Zuckerberg told Ceglia he thought that 1% of equity for each day of delay was unfair, and the two agreed to split the project 50/50.

Things allegedly blew up in April 2004, two months after Facebook’s blockbuster launch. Zuckerberg is supposed to have told Ceglia he was thinking of taking the server down and wanted to give Ceglia his money back. Ceglia responded negatively, claiming that Zuckerberg was pulling “criminal stunts.” The DLA Piper lawsuit asks for 50% of Zuckerberg’s stake as compensation.

Facebook insists that the emails and contract are fabricated. In an email to Mashable a Facebook representative said:

“This is a fraudulent lawsuit brought by a convicted felon, and we look forward to defending it in court. From the outset, we’ve said that this scam artist’s claims are ridiculous, and this newest complaint is no better.”


Next Steps


Facebook is seeking to dismiss this case, but the emails — fraudulent or otherwise — may be compelling enough for the case to move into discovery. It’s at this point that Facebook will be able to look at the evidence, including Ceglia’s emails and hard drives. If they can show that there was any tampering with the evidence, the case will be thrown out. But if not, the company may be forced to dish out money for yet another settlement, just to make Ceglia go away. DLA Piper, one of the world’s largest law firms, has agreed to take on the case — which is a sign that this dispute could be stuck in the courts for a long time.

 

Posterous theme by Cory Watilo