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

Reasons not to use Facebook

stallman.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 376 posts

Re: Reasons not to use Facebook

#281

Post by okbake »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #271
spinchange wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't use Facebook, yet lead with claim that it doesn't invade anyone's privacy... Regrettably there are numerous, well documented cases of Facebook doing exactly this. They've literally been taken to court over it several times (look into "Sponsored Stories," "Beacon," etc). Even if you don't use it, they have a shadow profile of you over there waiting, with relationships pre-graphed, simply by virtue of being i…

Even your mentions of when they violated people's privacy, those instances were still 100% based on what the user decided to share with Facebook - which I believe was the parent's point.

I'm comfortable sharing my phone number with friends and acquaintances because they're inside my network of trust. Maybe one of them is writing my number on the walls of bathroom stalls or selling it to spammers, who knows, but I guess you take that risk implicitly whenever you give someone your number. I trust my friends though.

I would say most of my friends have no idea that when they install the facebook app they are giving all of their contact info away to facebook. Sure, they click the button to give facebook permissions to "access their contact list", but I don't think most people assume the worst. That just what it takes to participate in the modern culture.

So when facebook is making a shadow account using my number and connections with friends, my privacy certainly feels violated. I did not choose to share anything with facebook. I chose to share things with my friends, and they unwittingly shared it with facebook. Giving your phone number to a friend is a reasonable thing to do. Someone wanting to install facebook on their phone is a reasonable thing to do. Facebook tracking connections of people who choose not to use (or participate in any way with) their service by essentially exploiting peoples naivete about its intentions, is not reasonable to me.

I can educate the people I know about it, but I doubt I will change anyones minds. Facebook has become a part of our culture, I certainly can't blame anyone for wanting to take part in it. I just wish facebook would leave me out of it and it doesn't.

Re: Reasons not to use Facebook

#282

Post by click170 »

raphael_l wrote: post #268
Moru wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't control what others write about me.

You also can't control what others say about you. Or post on any other website about you. Or someone showing a friend of his a picture of you. (excluding malicious intent of course)

You can't control what others say about you, but you can control who your friends are.

I don't tolerate friends who do not respect my privacy.

Re: Reasons not to use Facebook

#283

Post by rdtsc »

michaelmior wrote: post #183
rdtsc wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Does this make his opinion on Facebook or privacy or freedom any more correct or valid? No. And whose opinions are correct on the topic? Who should we listen to then? Opinions are opionions and we can all evaluate them. Hopefully we can evaluate them objectively regardless who came up with them. > he obviously fails to understand the entire point behind many of these companies. He doesn't huh. Ok, if it is so obvio…

You said that your editor is free software, meaning that no one made money on you using it. I'm not sure how this refutes the point about a "_viable_ company." (Given that viable necessarily includes making money.)

RedHat is a very _viable_ company that uses and writes free software for example.

Re: Reasons not to use Facebook

#284

Post by okbake »

jessaustin wrote: post #237
tedunangst wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess the question is, what would happen if everybody actually listened to RMS and stopped using cell phones?

This is not a valid way of judging RMS or his claims. He isn't complaining about the concept of a technology that allows people to talk while on the go. Rather, he is complaining about the specific implementation of mobile tech with which we're currently saddled. To answer seriously, however, the largest effect of reduced cell phone use would be that automobiles would be much safer, for their passengers and for every…

Then again, in the case that an auto accident does occur, there might not be someone with a cell phone to immediately call emergency services.

Re: Reasons not to use Facebook

#285

Post by joesmo »

abdias wrote: post #20

Considering that Zuckerberg is a great admire of China and apparently socialism[0], it doesn't come to me as a huge surprise that these "ethics" are guidelines for Facebook. “I’ve also bought copies of this book for my colleagues,” Zuckerberg was quoted as saying by a Chinese news website. “I want them to understand socialism with Chinese characteristics.” [0]: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/1…

"socialism with Chinese characteristics"

He means communism, which is essentially a tyrannical dictatorship. Not surprising indeed. What a scumbag. Supporting communism is no different than supporting naziism.

Re: Reasons not to use Facebook

#286

Post by MCRed »

joeyspn wrote: post #120
MCRed wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you give an example? For instance, I was aware of Stallman in the 1980s, read his writings back then, didn't think they were correct, and the future he predicted has not come to be. Yes there are some of us who are that old. Specifically, he said that without the virility of his license, there would be no free/open source software and that all software would be locked down and proprietary. The entire open source…

Here's a funny one: Stallman came to my uni to give a speech to CompSci alumni 10 years ago, and he told the audience that he didn't own a cellphone, cos phones were being used to track people. He also talked about the backdoors in several OS's. Everybody was laughing at his words. We're talking 10 years ago. Few months ago remembering this speech with old uni mates we talked about how damn right that excentric man w…

Except that we knew all this 20 years ago. He's not really extremist at all. I guess he is just good at finding audiences that aren't up to speed.

Re: Reasons not to use Facebook

#287

Post by jdkanani »

mtarnovan wrote: post #269

First I thought it was a typo, but it can't be, there are too many occurrences - looks like Stallman is intentionally referring to FB users as 'useds': > Facebook carefully studies all the text that its useds type in and then don't submit. > Facebook, as an "experiment", collected the text its useds started to enter as status updates and ultimately did not send.

At the end, he wrote "We call them "useds" rather than "users" because Facebook is using them, not vice versa."

Re: Reasons not to use Facebook

#288

Post by thirsteh »

karmacondon wrote: post #227
SeanDav wrote: post #218

There seems to have been a sea change in opinion of many HN posters here, especially among the more recent visitors to HN. A couple of years ago Facebook was considered by many here to be an invasion of privacy and just not worth the effort. That general opinion seems to have changed for some. A lot of newer posters seem to be of the opinion that lack of privacy is a cost worth paying for convenience and will apologi…

Facebook doesn't invade anyone's privacy. They aren't going into your house and rifling through your things. People post things on facebook because they want other people to see them. If you don't want to do that, then don't use facebook. You can't stop other people from talking about you, or from taking pictures of you or relating stories that involve you. That's always been a part of social life. If you consider th…

> Facebook doesn't invade anyone's privacy.

What do you consider the Like, Connect, etc. buttons that are tracking virtually every page you visit, Facebook user or not?

Re: Reasons not to use Facebook

#289

Post by pessimizer »

SeanDav wrote: post #218

There seems to have been a sea change in opinion of many HN posters here, especially among the more recent visitors to HN. A couple of years ago Facebook was considered by many here to be an invasion of privacy and just not worth the effort. That general opinion seems to have changed for some. A lot of newer posters seem to be of the opinion that lack of privacy is a cost worth paying for convenience and will apologi…

I think that a higher percentage of people that post on HN work for facebook or companies with even more invasive business models than once did. The privacy questions hasn't changed, it's just that most of the adults have left.

Re: Reasons not to use Facebook

#290

Post by MCRed »

emilsedgh wrote: post #228
MCRed wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you give an example? For instance, I was aware of Stallman in the 1980s, read his writings back then, didn't think they were correct, and the future he predicted has not come to be. Yes there are some of us who are that old. Specifically, he said that without the virility of his license, there would be no free/open source software and that all software would be locked down and proprietary. The entire open source…

The entire open source movement is a disproof of stallman's position from that period. Open Source movement did not happen in vacuum. It was a direct followup to 'Free Software' movement. He has repeatedly claimed that companies won't contribute to open source, and so you have to force them to with the GNU license, and yet history has disproven this one. You do know that the Linux Kernel, among the most important sof…

> Open Source movement did not happen in vacuum. It was a direct followup to 'Free Software' movement.

I was there, buddy.

The Open Source movement existed before GNU. The homebrew computer club and magazines and BBSes of the day all involved people sharing their source code with each other without a license in most cases, or explicitly in the public domain. The FSF GNU license was a reaction to this, to try and shut it down.

How old were you in the 1976-1986 period? Were you there?

The whole "FSF created open source!" is post-hoc ergo propter-hoc rationalization to grandstand and justify his campaign.

> You do know that the Linux Kernel, among the most important software projects in the world

Oh, no, I've never heard of Linux. Do tell!

Seriously, I was there. I was doing open source between GNU even existed. It was how things started out-- with hobbyists sharing code.

Post reply on HN