Openbook

This is almost an argument for having open status updates: these are hilarious.<p>On the other hand, had I not just deleted my FB account, I would have been upset over this. Zuck's gang recklessly opens up whatever they see fit: it could easily and quite possibly be photos tomorrow and your wall the next day, and (as before: <a href="http://cl.ly/16wW" rel="nofollow">http://cl.ly/16wW</a>) your "private" chats the day after that.<p>Irresponsible and disrespectful.

After a few test searches I couldn't really find anything interesting. It's actually kind of amazing to see so many people saying basically the <i>exact same things</i> Strength in numbers? I learned some people I don't know are going to strip clubs. I learned some people I don't know are watching TV shows and movies. I also learned that people I don't know are eating various things and they are yummy. Is this something to be concerned about? People who have friends &#38; family on Facebook, so the vast majority of the users, are already self censoring.

<i>Are people really deleting their Facebook accounts?<p>It looks that way. Currently delete facebook account is one of the top searches on Google. [ <a href="http://www.google.com/insights/search/#q=delete%20facebook%20account&#38;cmpt=q" rel="nofollow">http://www.google.com/insights/search/#q=delete%20facebook%2...</a> ]</i><p>No no no no <i>no</i>, that's <i>not</i> what those graphs show. They <i>all</i> hit 100%. It's growing <i>extremely</i> quickly, but the graph shows <i>nothing</i> more. By the same graphs + the flawed interpretation, in July 2008, "Batman robin" accounted for <i>every</i> Google search. Look! 100%! <a href="http://www.google.com/insights/search/#q=Batman%20robin&#38;cmpt=q" rel="nofollow">http://www.google.com/insights/search/#q=Batman%20robin&#38;...</a><p>Why do I see this continually misinterpreted? The "learn what these numbers mean" link is pretty darned clear, and it can easily be grokked by doing more than one search.

Not a big user of either twitter or facebook, But I am trying to understand this. How are these two examples different?<p><a href="http://i.imgur.com/ZuDt1.png" rel="nofollow">http://i.imgur.com/ZuDt1.png</a><p><a href="http://i.imgur.com/U3xcm.png" rel="nofollow">http://i.imgur.com/U3xcm.png</a>

awesome! Fastest/Cheapest way to teach laypeople about Facebook privacy issues.

Has FB bashing fallen to this level, querying "going to the strip club" and listing the results with a big "see, I told you so"? I scrolled through maybe two hundred of the "strip clubbers", most seem to be the kind of people who put this in their status updates for sensationalist value, judging from their pictures.<p>I also queried "I love my wife", "I love Shakespeare", "quaternions" and wound up wasting more than an hour on this site. It's fascinating and not all in a bad sense. In fact, we should have a Digg-like "best 100 best statuses of the day" site.<p>Point of the matter is: If you don't want your statuses to be public, adjust the settings. At this age and time arguing most users don't know how to do this or were somehow duped is appalling.

Just don't write this stuff on the web and have your identity attached to it. It's asinine.

This is interesting actually. Browsing some common keywords it seems that out of 200 million users very few seem to have open status updates compared to the same test 6 months ago the number has more than halved.

Search for horny, limit results to girls (or guys depending on pref). Win!

So what's up with all the links to hottie223? Did people get hacked, or paid to post the links or something?<p><a href="http://youropenbook.org/?q=hottie223&#38;x=0&#38;y=0&#38;gender=any" rel="nofollow">http://youropenbook.org/?q=hottie223&#38;x=0&#38;y=0&#38;gen...</a><p>[edit] Nevermind, as I scrolled down, the profile pictures started repeating, guess it's just ordinary spam[/edit]

Hmm, this is interesting.<p>My Facebook profile is "open" by default [1] ( particularly my status updates) but I can't get my statuses to show no matter what queries I try.<p>Has anyone been able to nail down:<p>- what exactly gets pushed into this feed<p>- what privacy settings remove you from or ad you to the feed<p>(kmavm, anything you can add in here?)<p>1. <a href="http://www.facebook.com/errantx" rel="nofollow">http://www.facebook.com/errantx</a>

Probably the best example of why Facebook's privacy policy is broken. If you do a search for "drunken" I'm sure that most of these people only intended the photos to be viewed by their friends. Such material could easily be used to embarrass, bribe, bully or discriminate against people in job applications.

I think it's pretty obvious that once you put your photos on your Facebook (or other social media channel) profile they are pretty much public. I don't really understand why people would upload sensitive information about themselves in the first place.

There are a bunch of fake profiles that includes all the default search keywords. While that's fun, it may destroy the authenticity of the message this site is trying to spread.

Interesting, that's almost a carbon copy of another project that someone showed here a few days ago. That one had more queries than just 'rectal exam' though.

Did you try the other searches? I'm literally astounded to see what people write on Facebook. I would never write those things on a public place.

Nice UI element on the search by male / female.

If people don't mind friends and people they actually know reading such updates, why would they care about strangers?