Seriously, if you use any of facebooks stuff, you clearly value something they offer more than your privacy. Everybody, and I'm not just talking about the HN crowd, knows how bad Facebook is when it comes to privacy.
Seriously, if you use any of facebooks stuff, you clearly value something they offer more than your privacy. Everybody, and I'm not just talking about the HN crowd, knows how bad Facebook is when it comes to privacy.
Yeah, sure, don't use Facebook. You're the guy who butts into conversations to tell everyone how you don't own a TV, aren't'cha?
Perhaps you could ask one of around 6 billion people in the world how they survive without this essential utility.
(The self-centered prick's response of "then they're not real friends"--which I am addressing because it frequently comes next--willfully ignores that said self-centered prick is making it harder on everyone else to include them. They get excluded because they're being annoying. You have to give to get, and part of your giving is not making everyone else's life difficult because you're frothy about a web company.)
In the U.S. at least, if you have a basic appreciation of people you have formed friendships with over the years, if you value interacting with them over that self-centered Facebook froth, it's not feasible to ditch it. But you can still express a desire for it to improve.
Frankly, I'm stumped.
There's nothing sad about pointing out that you clearly:
1) Understand the privacy costs associated with Facebook
2) Choose, Yes, Choose to continue using it
What's sad is that you feel it's impossible to continue your social life without it.
Network effects matter. That's not sad, that's simply reality. The lock-in effect is real and puts you in a position where, yes, you have to use it unless you wish to move out of contact with people. That doesn't mean you have to like it and it doesn't mean you can't, as the person you sneered at did, express a desire for its improvement.