News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:LinkedIn is a Virus by notahacker on Monday March 11, 2013 @02:21PM (#5358650)
I think people have a right to expect "find contacts in your address book" not to mean "indiscriminately spam contacts in your address book", especially from a service marketing itself as being a professional network and whose user guidelines expressly forbid you from connecting with people you do not know. Its UI explicitly violates the guidelines it expects users to follow by defaulting to inviting people -thousands at once- and not asking you to confirm the nature of your relationship, never mind giving you the chance to personalise your email.

For that reason I've purposely avoided intentionally connecting my address book to LinkedIn (other than registering with a gmail contact address) and yet all its "suggested contacts" are clearly people I once shared gmail mailing lists with. It's clearly pretty aggressive about finding contacts in address books at one end or another.

It's not like the UI behaviour is consistent - sometimes clicking "connect" on an individual's profile allows you to edit a message before sending it, sometimes it sends the autoinvite email without further prompting (which is a great way to look like a dick to someone you haven't spoken with in three years). Sometimes if you choose not to edit an English message it decides to edit it for you, sending a user you've corresponded with elsewhere exclusively in English an invitation in German. Basically, if you designed a tool to help people piss off their business contacts, you'd probably come up with LinkedIn.

And yeah, some people don't know what browser tabs do. But it's not like LinkedIn has a visible "undo" feature...

Re:LinkedIn is a Virus by bsg75 on Monday March 11, 2013 @02:29PM (#5358697)
Valid points, but they don't support the unnecessary flame bait in title. A virus is something completely different from an inconsistent UI.
Re:LinkedIn is a Virus by crygin on Monday March 11, 2013 @02:39PM (#5358770)
And a viral pathogen is different from a computer virus, but that term has been adopted because it effectively used an existing term to clarify the behavior of an unfamiliar phenomenon. Like both, LinkedIn uses subterfuge to coerce a host into propagating it, often against the host's best interests.
Re:LinkedIn is a Virus by bsg75 on Monday March 11, 2013 @03:30PM (#5359068)
The blogger and his intended audience likely know the dangers of biologic and technologic pathogens. I don't buy the "but I didn't know it was not a good idea to practice safe contact(s)".

There is a wider implication when people who should know better about safe practices don't apply a little common sense. Claiming "virus" in this case removes personal responsibility.

If someone savvy enough to blog about technology voluntarily exposes their contacts, how will the general public ever be expected to act in a safe manner and thus limit social engineered privacy and security breaches?