| > But the risk of a bot snapping a shot of the statement before it gets deleted outweighs the reward of posting ephemerally, at least for me. Sure, that's valid. I guess I just don't see that risk as worth worrying about; I can't envision a scenario in which a future auditor (other than the government, perhaps) would resort to that kind of digital archeology to defeat my attempts at removing controversial statements. It's possible that I'm just really underestimating how much the average person has their social media statements cached and replicated across the Internet in a public fashion, accessible by a simple search for their name. In my opinion, if you say something and then have a program "delete" it after 48 hours, future employers or adversaries aren't going to see it unless: a) they happen to work for the social network in question and see no problem in digging through their own databases/backups b) they're a government agency with access to troves of archived communications Considering I find both scenarios to be fairly unethical, I don't think I'd want to seek employment from company A or government agency B to begin with. Of course, when we're talking about governments as adversaries, the rules go out the window. I'm talking more about barely controversial statements made by average citizens who might be a little concerned with how future employers view their public persona. I think that's a valid use case. |