3 ms·

If the EFF wants to write an article arguing that privacy violations are widespread, and therefore viable privacy-respecting options aren't available.. then I'm

If the EFF wants to write an article arguing that privacy violations are widespread, and therefore viable privacy-respecting options aren't available.. then I'm all ears. Here's what the EFF says about Facebook: "Deleting Facebook is not a choice that most of its 2 billion users can feasibly make. ... Without viable general alternatives, Facebook’s massive user base and associated network effects mean that the costs of leaving it may not outweigh the benefits." Imagine that, a service a little over a decade old is now a dependency for life. It's not "feasible" to leave. Apparently privacy violations must be weighed against the size of the user base and network effects. Last I checked, phones still worked. Messaging still worked. All of the solution that existed a decade ago are still there. You CAN leave. I look forward to the EFF proposing a legal solution to privacy such as GDPR in the US. They haven't done that, and in the meantime, there should be consequences for Facebook. The EFF shouldn't be arguing for the lack of consequences for this specific privacy violation, without proposing a solution to the problem across the industry.

SllX 9y ago
I am much more in your court than you think, yet somehow Facebook has become a way to make and break relationships and/or businesses for people who are not us. I'm not going to pretend to know what all the individual edge cases are spread out across 2 billion people preventing some of them from leaving, but I'm not going to dismiss the notion simply because I don't personally have that problem and I generally expect the people I associate with to not have that kind of problem. There absolutely should be consequences for Facebook specifically, I vehemently agree with you! I don't think even the EFF is saying there shouldn't be, just that it is not part of their mission to advocate one way or another on that matter. That said, I think, and I think what the EFF is saying here, is that it is unproductive to contain the conversation solely to Facebook. Facebook is the problem right now, and probably not the only one, and definitely not the last one to be developed with that business model. Whatever services we use, there needs to be a baseline for what we should be able to expect in terms of privacy and data portability, a baseline that favors the users of the platform. Personally, I think #DeleteFacebook does matter, and I think people honestly should, but now is the time to be thinking about the long term. GDPR-like laws are one possibility, and as a society we should be figuring out if we want to go that route, or a different route altogether.
watwut 9y ago
EFF is not saying that people should not leave Facebook. It is saying that currently for most of its 2 billion users, leaving Facebook is too difficult, they wont do that and if they did that they would loose too much. Your argument is phone and messaging which does not replaces Facebook for most of those people. Phone being completely irrelevant. Just because those people are not exactly like you, dont have same needs, same usage patterns and similar social groups around them as you have, does not mean they don't exist. Nor it means that EFF should not use them as an argument.
- mirko22 9y ago
  So you are arguing that in the information age the only way to communicate for some people is facebook? why can’t phone, sms or email work? on the othe hand, how hard is to tap someones land phone and listen in to their conversations, yet people still used it a lot before so i think expectations of privacy in public space is just a fantasy... If you really cares about privacy you wouls not use facebook, and you would look for encrypted communication channels, most people don’t care however...
  - christofosho 9y ago
    How does one find old friend's phone numbers or emails, when they want to reconnect, nowadays?
fwn 9y ago
This is just what the revealed preferences of Facebook users suggest. My friend count did not decrease the slightest since the recent Facebook attention. Close to nobody quits. The article channels the concern with Facebook away from the specific brand and towards the universal problem that emerges in our current digital economy. Which I think is vastly more productive.

SllX 9y ago

I am much more in your court than you think, yet somehow Facebook has become a way to make and break relationships and/or businesses for people who are not us. I'm not going to pretend to know what all the individual edge cases are spread out across 2 billion people preventing some of them from leaving, but I'm not going to dismiss the notion simply because I don't personally have that problem and I generally expect the people I associate with to not have that kind of problem. There absolutely should be consequences for Facebook specifically, I vehemently agree with you! I don't think even the EFF is saying there shouldn't be, just that it is not part of their mission to advocate one way or another on that matter. That said, I think, and I think what the EFF is saying here, is that it is unproductive to contain the conversation solely to Facebook. Facebook is the problem right now, and probably not the only one, and definitely not the last one to be developed with that business model. Whatever services we use, there needs to be a baseline for what we should be able to expect in terms of privacy and data portability, a baseline that favors the users of the platform. Personally, I think #DeleteFacebook does matter, and I think people honestly should, but now is the time to be thinking about the long term. GDPR-like laws are one possibility, and as a society we should be figuring out if we want to go that route, or a different route altogether.

watwut 9y ago

EFF is not saying that people should not leave Facebook. It is saying that currently for most of its 2 billion users, leaving Facebook is too difficult, they wont do that and if they did that they would loose too much. Your argument is phone and messaging which does not replaces Facebook for most of those people. Phone being completely irrelevant. Just because those people are not exactly like you, dont have same needs, same usage patterns and similar social groups around them as you have, does not mean they don't exist. Nor it means that EFF should not use them as an argument.

mirko22 9y ago
So you are arguing that in the information age the only way to communicate for some people is facebook? why can’t phone, sms or email work? on the othe hand, how hard is to tap someones land phone and listen in to their conversations, yet people still used it a lot before so i think expectations of privacy in public space is just a fantasy... If you really cares about privacy you wouls not use facebook, and you would look for encrypted communication channels, most people don’t care however...
- christofosho 9y ago
  How does one find old friend's phone numbers or emails, when they want to reconnect, nowadays?

fwn 9y ago

This is just what the revealed preferences of Facebook users suggest. My friend count did not decrease the slightest since the recent Facebook attention. Close to nobody quits. The article channels the concern with Facebook away from the specific brand and towards the universal problem that emerges in our current digital economy. Which I think is vastly more productive.