At the core of all these worries, of course, is how many people share on Facebook, with whom and – perhaps most importantly – how well they understand the potential consequences.

The company tried to find a balance between giving users very little control over privacy and give them too much, for fear that he would not share at all. Seeking a golden middle way, Facebook has announced changes on Tuesday that it says will help users get a grip on what they share.

If changes are introduced on Thursday, Facebook users always add a picture, comment or any other content on their profiles, they can determine who sees it: all his so-called Facebook friends, specific groups of friends, and everyone who has access to the Internet. The will be marked with icons that replace the current, complex menu lock.

Similar controls will apply to information such as phone numbers of users and hometowns, and whether they like it says death metal in their profiles. Users no longer have to seek special protection of personal data to improve the site, who see how many of these personal data. Nor will not have to bother to remember what the settings are.

Company officials say they hope that changes to simplify the process of laying down, who knows what about his life on the Internet – and hopefully save some embarrassment and people unknowingly sharing power.

“We want those things absolutely clear,” Chris Cox, vice president products on Facebook, said in an interview. “It must be clear that Facebook is a leader in controlling how people see you.”

Implicit in these changes is a problem caused by their own success Facebook. It is used by 750 million people worldwide, with varying degrees of knowledge about what it means to have a life online. There is the looming possibility that the company goes public, along with ongoing concerns about possible government regulation, or litigation arising out of privacy issues.

Finally, it is necessary to cultivate the trust of its Facebook users, amid growing competition from the fledgling Google social network, Google Plus, which puts greater emphasis on communicating with various fragmented sets of friends and acquaintances.

Facebook rejected the idea that the changes were caused by disputes. Company officials took pains to tell reporters that they informed on changes to privacy advocates – including those who were critical of Facebook – and obtained their feedback.

It is too early to say whether users will find attractive and easier to change, or whether it will reduce what Kurt Opsahl, Electronic Frontier Foundation lawyer, called the “number of unintended oversharing on Facebook.”

Privacy advocates warn that the new tools did not address the interest of sharing the position. A Facebook user can publish information about someone else’s residence without his consent – whether it’s an employee at the beach the day he called in sick, or husband in the strip club without their wives.

Other privacy experts say that if users feel they have control over who sees what is more for sharing.

“I think it’s part of the development to move back to the notion that Facebook is trying to trick users into sharing,” said Jules Polonetsky future private forum, which is based in Washington. “You’re more likely to, you know what you’re doing.”

The new tools represent a departure from recent access Facebook, where users have found much of what contributed – tags, photos and so forth – that were widely available, unless stated otherwise. The default position in other words, decide what to share.

Mr. Cox said that the new tools were meant to demystify the control of privacy and to ensure that Facebook users were never “surprised” by what others can see about them.

Which contains images that have been “marked.” It is embarrassing or unflattering photos will appear on your profile page without your consent, but the publisher can still photographs and on his own page. Users will be able to approve each image, which are identified before they appear on their profile pages.