This is off topic, but the next web really needs to make an effort to properly credit images. They've been called out on this a number of times before, but the way they credit image sources is just plain wrong. In this article, for example, at the very bottom of the page is a generic link that says SOURCES: IMAGE CREDIT. With this particular image, the photographer very clearly says "please, kindly credit me (Nan Palmero) with the photo and link back here" - nowhere do they credit him by name. A quick check of all of the other publications using her photo do properly credit her by name, but the next web can't be bothered.<p>If the author of this article is reading - PLEASE CREDIT THE PHOTOGRAPHER
Putting aside the issue that much of this data shouldn't have been sent anywhere in the first place, I'll never understand why, in 2012, SSL is still not used by default when sending any sensitive or private data across the network.<p>It's even more puzzling when we're talking about background data upload when the potential SSL handshake latency isn't going to pose any UX issue. This has boggled my mind for years actually. Why?
We've just posted a response about what we do and don't do.
<a href="http://blog.linkedin.com/2012/06/06/mobile-calendar-feature/" rel="nofollow">http://blog.linkedin.com/2012/06/06/mobile-calendar-feature/</a><p>Important point, all data <i>is</i> shared of SSL.
What I find interesting is how Linkedin's approach to their mobile app was treated as technological savvy a month ago.<p><a href="http://venturebeat.com/2012/05/02/linkedin-ipad-app-engineering/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Venturebeat+%28VentureBeat%29#s:1-linkedin-ipad" rel="nofollow">http://venturebeat.com/2012/05/02/linkedin-ipad-app-engineer...</a><p><a href="http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3920368" rel="nofollow">http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3920368</a>
This is only tangentially related but I really don't understand why anyone cares so highly about their contact list. Does it really matter? Why does it matter?<p>Concerns about spam seem anachronistic (in that you have to deal with spam and services like Gmail have become pretty good at countering it). Is it just privacy? If so, I'm confused.
Why would anyone be shocked at this?<p>They already spam anyone unfortunate to be in the Address Book of someone who signs up for this awful service and connects with their gmail whatever.