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

321–330 of 376 posts

Re: Reasons not to use Facebook

#321

Post by WalterSear »

rquantz wrote: post #320
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…

The mobile app turns on the damn mic I checked my iphone privacy settings because this sounded preposterous, and the Facebook app is not listed as having requested microphone permissions. Is it able to turn on the microphone without requesting permission?

Are you talking about the regular facebook app or the messenger app.

Re: Reasons not to use Facebook

#322

Post by apetrovic »

hnnewguy wrote: post #316
apetrovic wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What exactly is a "problem"? I don't live in US. Ordering books online and shipping them to my house used to be slow and expensive process. Now I can buy books from Amazon, for a half the price than printed books (3x the price if I account the shipping). Yeah, I can't read that book on anything except Kindle (device or Kindle app). But I know what I'm buying, and I'm ok with that. I enjoy the option to have my books…

> But I know what I'm buying, and I'm ok with that. Apparently you don't, because you aren't really buying anything. You're licensing it. You don't own a thing in your Amazon library. They can, and have, taken books "back" based on user-agreement violations. Yes, it's convenient for you to have all your books, synced, in one place. But there are negative implications of having all that information controlled.

Ok, I know what I'm renting and I'm ok with that. I pay less money to have quick access to books I like. If in some time in future Amazon suddenly became evil and deletes all my books from my library (let's for the sake of the argument forget that I actually have a backup for all these books), I'll... I actually will not give a fuck. I'll just stop using Amazon for anything. And buy (or rent) these books I want to read again on some other place.

*

Yeah, I understand that Stallman and his flock is greatly concerned with possible "negative implications" of DRM-ed ebooks, mobile phones, non-GPL software and whatnot. But I'm 44 years old, I don't need help to decide what is good for me and what is not, and I actually enjoy living in the future, with mobile phones, ebooks and everything else. I enjoy having (and making) a choice instead of avoiding everything that can have "negative implications" or isn't "free" (by Stallman's standards).

Re: Reasons not to use Facebook

#323

Post by ta0967 »

MCRed wrote: post #95
kragen wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People value Stallman’s opinions on these matters so highly because he has a remarkable history of being right about them ten or fifteen years before it becomes clear to everyone else that he was right, and he takes the risk of saying what he sees even when it will offend people. In fact, that’s why he’s famous; he’s certainly a good hacker, but the world has quite a number of good hackers who aren’t famous because t…

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…

i suggest that anyone who is malinformed enough to believe MCRed's perversions of RMS's positions goes and reads the stuff themselves. i'll just say that the world is full of people who are "that old" and full of it.

Re: Reasons not to use Facebook

#324

Post by ta0967 »

okbake wrote: post #284
jessaustin wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

"911, 911, we had an accident because everybody in the car kept texting and facebooking during the whole ride. 911, 911, it's a good thing we have cellphones and tablets with us!"

Re: Reasons not to use Facebook

#325

Post by ta0967 »

ericfontaine wrote: post #306
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?

as jessaustin remarked, "[RMS] is complaining about the specific implementation of mobile tech with which we're currently saddled." Listening to RMS would mean that if you do carry a mobile device, that it would use entirely free software including all drivers and bootloaders, that it only communicates with other hardware running entirely free software (i.e. only basetowers or wifi routers running free software), and…

yes, though the specific softwares are unimportant. anyway, what is your point?

Re: Reasons not to use Facebook

#326

Post by yeukhon »

bo1024 wrote: post #216
jfoster wrote: post #47

I view my decision to use Facebook as a transaction. Sure, I lose some "privacy", but I also get a lot of value in return. I use quotes around "privacy" because I'm not sure I understand it the same way that Facebook critics do. When I'm using a changeroom, I expect privacy. When I take on a pseudonym and don't identify myself by name, I expect privacy. When I'm knowingly uploading photos that I am happy for the worl…

I think a main point is about indirect effects of privacy loss that are hard to see and reason about directly. Example #1: You visit a website completely unrelated to facebook. The site has a "like" button on the page enabling them to access Facebook's data about you (depending on cookies etc). You observe advertisements or content tailored based on your personal information or things you like. Maybe you are offered…

1) This is more of how Facebook makes money with ads and providing "personalized experience" just as Google does. Fundamentally not a flaw in Facebook, but a debatable practice. And do you have source Facebook would share my age and my gender to third-party even if I list them to be private? The only thing that might be possible is Facebook internally does the calculation. Giving away to third-party vs FB doing the computation aren't exactly the same.

2) If you join an online community, you have to pay a price. You might tagged your friend or your friend tagged you and the setting is not strict enough, then how is that Facebook's fault?

3) Again, that's the price a social network has to pay.

Back in the days people take film-based pictures and there is no way to massively store and distribute to the world. Now the digital age has changed the way we distribute information about one another.

Doesn't matter if Facebook is 100% free software and decentralized. One person leaks everything leaks. There is no real 100% anonymity. You have to make contact with another human being.

Re: Reasons not to use Facebook

#327

Post by mtarnovan »

jacquesm wrote: post #270
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.

I often have multiple really dumb typos in my text when I'm using an unfamiliar keyboard and they're remarkably 'internally consistent'.

This is not a typo, see jdkanani's comment.

Re: Reasons not to use Facebook

#328

Post by Create »

“As your client knows, Mr. Zuckerberg goes to great lengths to protect the privacy of his personal life.”

Which adds a wrinkle: Some people requiring nondisclosure are the very ones who have built an industry on its opposite, the disclosure of personal information.

Re: Reasons not to use Facebook

#329

Post by spinchange »

raphael_l wrote: post #267
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…

> The site "Likes" things on peoples behalf just because they talk about it (even negatively!) with others. It occasionally automatically "friends" people because you looked at their profile and mutual friends in common. It constantly takes liberties with people's relationships, friends, and preferences, without asking. The mobile app turns on the damn mic to listen to ambient noise in the background so it can try le…

Here's a link about harvesting likes from private messages: http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2012/10/03/how-private-are-your-...

and subsequently a class action suit was brought against them over it: https://gigaom.com/2014/01/02/facebook-reads-private-message...

another suit brought over false likes: https://gigaom.com/2014/01/10/facebook-hit-with-lawsuit-over...

facebook recycling "likes" under guise of promoting "related stories" users didn't endorse: http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonykosner/2013/01/21/faceboo...

The autofriending thing is less publicized and I don't think they've ever been sued over it, so it probably hasn't been in the headlines. If you search Facebook's /help/community/ pages, you'll find a lot of users reporting it. It's happened to me. It's happened to my wife. I've had friends tell me similar stories. In every case, it seems like something algorithmic, like Facebook thinks the person is someone you should be friends with because of mutual connections or something like that. It isn't a spammy thing as much as it is...creepy, like you, as a user, don't have your own agency. It's weird and off putting to see an accepted friend request you didn't make, from someone you expressly don't want to have any contact whatsoever with, let alone be "friends."

Re: Reasons not to use Facebook

#330

Post by honeybooboo123 »

detaro wrote: post #153
gbog wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I'm reading the Histoire de la Revolution Francaise (Michelet) right now, and something very stunning is that everyone, even the most faithful revolutionnaries, was still "royalist" in 1790. They all had "thought about all these arguments and decided it is worth it to them", because of perceived "common sense". Being a republican was considered extreme even in the left wing of the nascent Assemblee Nationale. A…

Ok, yes, I agree in so far that what counts as common sense is temporary. Added a "current" to my post above.

Instead of "common sense", it's more like "popular opinion". Reason, logic, and sensibility all remain the same regardless.
Post reply on HN