Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Reasons not to use (i.e., be used by) Facebook

stallman.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 376 posts

Re: Reasons not to use (i.e., be used by) Facebook

#271

Post by atgb »

OT, but is Richard Stallman completely sane? Honestly a genuine question. I'm not poking fun at his mental health, I'm just curious after reading some of his requirements to have him as a guest speaker.

The questionable excerpts are here:

http://gizmodo.com/5853729/please-do-not-buy-richard-stallma...

Full post here:

https://groups.google.com/a/mysociety.org/forum/#!msg/mysoci...

He goes into great detail about the strangest things. Pets, food, temperature, beverages, not "supervising" him when he crosses the road? Just odd things to go into detail about..

Re: Reasons not to use (i.e., be used by) Facebook

#273

Post by Teever »

pyre wrote: post #261
jdietrich wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Breadth and depth of fame are orthogonal. Unless he does some remarkable philanthropy, Zuckerberg will be forgotten shortly after Tom from MySpace. Facebook isn't really fundamental to anything, it's just a business that executed an existing concept very well. RMS may never be well known to the general public, but his reputation within his field is likely to endure in a manner similar to Euclid or Eratosthenes. GNU a…

> it's just a business that executed an existing concept very well So is McDonald's, but I somehow think that they've managed to embed themselves into the culture/society enough that they won't soon be forgotten should they ever fall.

So what can you tell me about the founders or CEOs of McDonalds?

Re: Reasons not to use (i.e., be used by) Facebook

#274

Post by saynsedit »

zardeh wrote: post #230
saynsedit wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the OP doesn't intend to defend Facebook against RMS's claims, his criticism of RMS's rhetorical style is wholly irrelevant to his core point and, in turn, this discussion.

That's not true. You can criticize that which you respect, in order to improve it.

Yes, let's criticize arbitrary off-topic things ad infinitum, because we can.

Re: Reasons not to use (i.e., be used by) Facebook

#275

Post by sordina »

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #250
Retric wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's useful to have someone out the outer edge of a issue as a benchmark. At somepoint the person who compromises less wins. Copy protection does not protect copy's it prevents them. Calling it protection is letting one side win before you start talking.

There's a term for this in the realm of public debate, which I am presently unable to recall, but the gist of it is the idea that you ask for a much greater concession than you really want in the hope the stakeholders settle closer to your ideal than if you'd simply laid your cards on the table. By doing this repeatedly and over time we can (slowly, maybe less slowly?) change the course of history.

Anchoring, and door-in-the-face?

Re: Reasons not to use (i.e., be used by) Facebook

#276

Post by saynsedit »

Sanddancer wrote: post #217
saynsedit wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes yes, let's focus on the superficial components of his arguments via false equivalences and ignore the very legitimate criticisms he makes. RMS argues like an idiot therefore Facebook is probably blameless. Progress.

Rhetorical criticism is fairly common and vital, as the message and the medium are pretty closely intertwined. The twists of words Stallman uses are to cause a guttural reaction to what he is saying and to try to evoke a populist response. Much like speeches by recent political figures, such as Donald Trump, Stallman's rhetorical style will agitate people who already support him, but alienate him to the greater numbe…

I guess? If you believe that so much then have fun discussing the "RMS rhetoric problem," that will definitely help humanity make forward progress. The lot of us who already get his point will be discussing the Facebook privacy monopoly that actually affects humanity.

Btw, in case you didn't notice, I didn't like your rhetoric and I ignored all the logic in your post because it came across as preachy, or whatever. Next time be less preachy, or whatever, that will help, maybe?

Re: Reasons not to use (i.e., be used by) Facebook

#277

Post by hanspeter »

beagle3 wrote: post #71
mwfunk wrote: post #34

If someone can't state their point without warping the very language they use to support their point, it makes it very hard to feel like anything they're saying is credible. Example 1: someone is trying to convince me to vote Republican. They go through the Republican platform issue by issue, and compare/contrast it to the Democrats' stand. However, every time they use the word "Democrat" they instead say "Democrap"…

I do not use "democrap" or "republicant", as they do not promote the discussion or understanding in any way. However, I did adopt Stallman's "Copy Restriction" (instead of "Copy Protection") and "Digital Restriction Management" (instead of "Digital Right Management") - because they are a much better description of what the concept actually is for 99% of the people. I started doing this after I told someone that I wil…

> You are, indeed, used by facebook when you interact with it

All HN useds already realize this. If this by it self is a reason not to use a service, very few sites can be used.

Re: Reasons not to use (i.e., be used by) Facebook

#278

Post by _yosefk »

"Putting the photo of someone on Facebook (or Instagram) contributes to surveillance of that person. Please don't post any photos there that include me, and I suggest you avoid posting photos of anyone else too."

I wish Facebook (and G+ etc.) users cared, I really do. I also wish they didn't share their contacts with Facebook (and WhatsApp, LinkedIn, etc.) Of course nobody cares, so you can't really opt out of these social networks.

Re: Reasons not to use (i.e., be used by) Facebook

#280

Post by Tharkun »

A lot of my friends use FB messages/chat instead of e-mail. If i want to stay in touch with them, FB is the only way.

This used to be OKish, when FB did XMPP and i could use any client. That's since been shut down, and the mobile website no longer lets you read messages...

Post reply on HN