I strongly agree with point 3. I just wish people would accept that FB isn't for them, and move on. Instead, there is so much signaling going on that it's dif

I strongly agree with point 3. I just wish people would accept that FB isn't for them, and move on. Instead, there is so much signaling going on that it's difficult to discuss real issues. I actually also agree with point 1, because I think that drug seekers are more rational actors than the average person. It seems indisputable that drug dealers provide value; the argument is that the long term harm outweights the immediate value, not that there is no value. With Facebook, I think it's much less clear that using FB causes harm, much less harm on the same level as an opiod addiction. (I'm aware of the research out there that correlates depressive symptoms with social media usage.)