SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the And-nothing-of-value-was-lost dept.
lhsi writes:
"The BBC is reporting that starting in early March, Facebook is ending its @facebook.com e-mail system, due to a lack of use. E-mails sent to a users @facebook.com address will now be 'forwarded to the personal email address from which the member signed up for the site'.
If this is the e-mail address that is the personalised user URL followed by @facebook.com, does that mean that users will potentially be exposed to e-mail spam through it? The @facebook.com e-mails can be pieced together easily enough (and go to an 'Other' folder in the Facebook Messages area without notifying users so can currently be ignored), but actual e-mail addresses, including ones that could now have e-mails forwarded to, can be kept private. There is little information about this at the moment, even on the Facebook newsroom."
(Score: 3, Insightful) by MrGuy on Wednesday February 26 2014, @11:44AM
It would be even easier to simply have a profile switch to allow people to decide whether to forward @facebook.com or not. You can even default it to "on."
Also, to your point, the really interesting thing is the light this casts on the WhatsApp acquisition. I'm not so interested in "open system to closed system." What interests me is "betting heavily on people using Facebook as the hub of their communications" when simultaneously realizing "people didn't seem that interested in Facebook being the hub of their communications."
People didn't jump on @facebook.com for e-mail. Why is "using Facebook's private e-mail-like thing that's not actually email!" a more fertile pitch?