The Week in Your Words: bring on the Facespooks

• 
• 

 1 of 2

Gallery

By Stuart Turton

Posted on 27 Mar 2009 at 18:06

In a week that saw the Government become an unwelcome friend on Facebook, Google shock us all by revealing it employs designers and a suicidal satnav cause a stir, we take a look back to see what you've been saying.

The Government is... watching you on Facebook

Labour is clearly very bored of being in power. How else can you explain its plan to monitor all of our communications on Facebook? It's a move so obviously designed to be unpopular that you can't help but feel Gordon Brown must stay up nights sharpening his sword and humming a funeral dirge.

"I've always said I understand the need to look after national security, but where does the line get drawn?" Wonders hjlupton, who rather sweetly still believes there's a line. "This has gone beyond maintaining security, the Government has absolutely no right to come into my home like this."

gavinduff, however, took an altogether more startling approach: "It is an inevitable part of the expansion of electronic communications that the Government wants the power to listen in. By passing laws, it means that we know for definite the authorities are listening in rather than it being done in secret. In some ways, it's a bit more honest - even if it does seem rather draconian."

This sort of man would thank a dictator for not making him dig his own grave. catnipdave, it's fair to say, isn't quite this nice.

"I've always felt putting personal details online is a dodgy thing to do, and to be honest those who do it are just asking for trouble. If it's not someone trying to sell your details to god knows who for a profit, then it's going to be some idiot in government using the national security angle to justify harvesting all this personal info. Either way - you have to know you are giving up your privacy when you start yapping on about yourself online."

Google designer quits over (41 shades of) the blues

This week also saw Google's lead designer quit over the company's preoccupation with data over design. Being forced to focus group 41 different shades of blue finally pushed Douglas Bowman over the edge. We confidently expect the web giant will notice within a fortnight, the next time it needs to alter the logo on its homepage and wonders where that guy with the single blue crayon went.

dukeinlondon sympathised: "It must have been a struggle seeing how little design is visible on any Google app. But Google thrives on putting results people are after first, rather than style."

miliganp, however, was halfway up the fence and climbing: "So what do Google do? Render 10 million pages in each of the 41 shades of blue and then see if there is a variation in click-through rates? I'm not sure if that requires a 'wow!' or an 'aargh!"

It's much the way we felt after seeing the giant, naked blue man and his giant, naked bits in recent travesty Watchmen. Still scarred.

"How dare Google actually make decisions based on real data," proclaims bobbdobbs. "This sort of thing should be stopped right now. Maybe Google should have a search engine that relies on groovyness rather than those pesky algorythumthingywotsits."