Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If you don’t like Facebook, don’t use it. I don't use it. It doesn't prevent them from using me anyway though. They're happy asking my friends for their contacts list (so they can get my phone number) and setting cookies through their "Like" buttons embedded everywhere without ever asking for my permission. The only way to stop that company is to kill it, and these "ridiculous" pieces might very well be the only so…
So use an ad blocker. It's about thirty seconds to set up, and very user-friendly. Even with the default lists, they do a great job. The reason I take issue is the word you used above: "attack". I think its use is telling. The New York Times has broken newsworthy information that was against Facebook, which I think is their job and a good thing to do. Newspapers, however, aren't really supposed to "attack" things. Th…
Have you ever tried to set up ad/tracker blocking for a non-tech person? If it actually protects their privacy, then it's also a huge pain in the ass that randomly breaks things and requires constant attention. DNS- or IP-level blocking works best, but requires constant maintenance. Then there are the various caches. What breaks when you block "*.googleapis.com"? Then there's the question of which user-hostile JavaScript APIs you try to block. WebGL? WebUSB? And from whom? It's endless war.