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

321–330 of 376 posts

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

#321

Post by provemewrong »

Tharkun wrote: post #280

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...

I'm also in the same position. Currently using the Swipe application for Android, which is a wrapper around Facebook mobile with a hack to enable messaging. It works for now, but it's pretty much an uphill battle and I'm worried about the future.

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

#322

Post by pfranz »

Majestic121 wrote: post #305
ppopoff wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously? How about the McDonalds, and Ray Kroc? Never heard of those names?

I never heard of Ray Kroc. I just asked around and not one person knew who the CEO of McDonalds is. (Ronald does not count I guess) You're overestimating how famous this guy is.

I'd expect Ray Kroc to be at the level of a Jeopardy question. I wouldn't expect RMS to be a question. Michael Keaton is playing Ray Kroc in a film that will be released in two months.

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

#323

Post by raverbashing »

lunula wrote: post #293
raverbashing wrote: post #77

As much as I dislike Fb (though I am a user and their tracking is disabled through Ublock), Stallman articles are usually "Old man yells at cloud" thing) So yes, I do use Fb, I do use closed source software and I have better things than to care about my "alleged" freedom. I get more value from those than they get from me, I assure you.

I think his point is that you may feel this way now, but in the long term it will become apparent that the balance is not in your favor. If it is in your favor, then all the closed source systems and social networks have miscalculated and are in fact operating at a consistent loss. I am sure you are a smart person, but it doesn't seem likely that everyone has made a mistake in doing business with you and your data. H…

You're right that, in general, their business model is providing them a return.

> but in the long term it will become apparent that the balance is not in your favor. If it is in your favor

It is in my favor because I limit what I put there, and block tracking and ads. Yes, it might change in the future, but I suppose traffic would have moved to other places as well (hopefully not owned by fb - but all companies make a mistake sooner or later)

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

#324

Post by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC »

Udik wrote: post #194
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are validating RMS' approach without realizing it. Take the perspective that potatoes use us to reproduces themselves: Viewing things from that perspective is actually a useful device for explaining and understanding biological evolution. Just because it's an unusual perspective, does not mean that it's therefore invalid or useless or even just a bad idea. Also, to take the analogy further, bacteria and v…

I'm not saying that "used" is invalid per se, but rather that it is a perspective that is not justified simply by the fact that Facebook has an advantage from the user. I think your last question further clarifies the problem. Human beings are clearly used by viruses. Unless they use a virus to drive a gene into an organism. But sometimes things are harder to discern: are human beings users or useds of tobacco? Or of…

> I'm not saying that "used" is invalid per se, but rather that it is a perspective that is not justified simply by the fact that Facebook has an advantage from the user.

But are you saying that "user" is a perspective that is justified simply by the fact that the used has an advantage from Facebook?

> In the end probably it all depends on a value judgement:

Of course it does. Everything does. Even whether killing people is bad is ultimately a value judgement.

> But then Stallman should just say plain and loud what he means: that Facebook is useless to the people that spend their time on it.

Why should he? And doesn't he? Did you not understand him that you think he should express himself clearer?

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

#325

Post by jolux »

waterhouse wrote: post #174
beagle3 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Arguably, the terms "copy protection", "digital rights management", "intellectual property", and probably a lot more that aren't on the top of my head are the result of, to quote the GP, "warping the very language they use to support their point"; but the groups in favor of these things were there first, and so they got to define the terminology that we've all ended up with.

This is probably just me but I think when they re-word things they choose the clumsiest and least-sexy possible words to put into the acronyms. Digital Restrictions Management is not only a mouthful, it's also obtuse and why bother when you could have something cool like Digital Rebel Management?

That being said, if your claim is that the acronyms as they existed do not accurately describe what's going on, I fundamentally disagree. What's copy protection? It's technology that protects against copying. Protection and restriction might as well be synonyms. What's DRM? It's technology that helps rights holders manage the rights they have to their intellectual property. What's intellectual property? It's like physical property, but it's ideas instead of objects. Intellectual property is never safe from the fair use exception, which is what protects what one might call the "free flow of ideas" and such. It's simply there to protect exploitation for financial gain.

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

#326

Post by jolux »

kartickv wrote: post #225
nsgi wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Still don't understand the problem with the terms in your second paragraph. Copy protection protects CDs from being copied. Digital rights management manages the rights of the IP owner. These are just as valid. Then you have claiming Win32 is a subliminal message about winning rather than an abbreviation for Windows...

Copy protection doesn't protect the customer, nor does digital rights management help manage their rights. They are not benefits for the customer, only negatives. When my bank charges me a fee, they call it a fee, not a bonus, though it's the latter from their point of view.

It does protect the customer though, at the very least it means their money was well spent and other people can't violate that social contract by taking what they want for free.

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

#327

Post by andreyvit »

ppopoff wrote: post #282
Teever wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Seriously? How about the McDonalds, and Ray Kroc? Never heard of those names?

FWIW, as a single data point, I've never heard of Ray Kroc and didn't know that McDonalds was a name (although I would guess so if asked).

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

#328

Post by TheSpiceIsLife »

sordina wrote: post #275
TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Door-in-the-face[1] corresponds with what I was thinking of, thank you, though I seem to have it filed away in my brain under some other term still.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Door-in-the-face_technique

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

#329

Post by 746F7475 »

simbalion wrote: post #81

Stallman is my hero. All social media is terrible, and all of it is impossible to profit from, and I bet all of it will eventually fail. Facebook doesn't make any money from social media, they make money from side businesses that are tacked onto their social media platform. Anyone who is interested in social blogging should have their own website (wordpress.com is free) with RSS support so people who like what you wr…

How can wordpress keep it's doors open if all Facebook users started free blogs? Last time I checked it wasn't nearly as easy to create wordpress site or a blog post as it is to create facebook update. Same rings true with RSS, it's not nearly as easy as using facebook feed(s).

As for Zuckerbergs password, if you don't care about the account then password doesn't matter.

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

#330

Post by heroprotagonist »

hanspeter wrote: post #277
beagle3 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

While there is some truth in that, it feels a little hyperbolic. Not all websites are equally abusive of their users. They don't all run their own tracking beacons or store, extrapolate and sell the same depth and quantity of personal information.
Post reply on HN