4 ms·

> A Meta spokesperson said: “People access our service for free. They choose our services because we deliver value for them and they have meaningful control of

> A Meta spokesperson said: “People access our service for free. They choose our services because we deliver value for them and they have meaningful control of what information they share on Meta’s platforms and who with LOL. lawyer speak statement of the century. you could always just kill yourself - you have definite and permanent control of your data. i am the last generation. i grew up outside but got a computer and cell phone in my teenage years. it truly saddens me that people think social media is a requirement for living. just dont do it, and dont let your kids do it.

lopis 5y ago
You don't need a facebook account to be tracked and to have a profile made of you. All your contacts have uploaded your contact information (Name + Phone Number) to whatsapp, facebook and instagram among others without your consent. With your first sentence I thought you realized this much, but then your second one doesn't make sense. Yes this response is purely lawyer speak and PR exactly because you don't control your data. Everyone on the Internet wants as much data as they can possibly grab.
thrwaway9871 5y ago
The biggest problem is that politicians use and legitimize social networks. The fact that fb/google etc. have detailed profiles on all world leaders and none of them care because in return they get to farm likes and get their tweets featured in media speaks volumes on how much governments really care about national security or even general privacy.
- eru 5y ago
  To be honest, for politicians and other public figures, Facebook (and Google etc) is no worse and probably better than the traditional paparazzi or yellow press.
  - Nextgrid 5y ago
    Paparazzis don't generally stalk what you do online in private. Facebook has embedded spyware in most mainstream websites & apps that stalks you all the time.
    - eru 5y ago
      They stalk your whole private and public life, if you are a person of interest to them.
      - Nextgrid 5y ago
        Do they routinely install malware on your machine to stalk your online activity?
Sebb767 5y ago
> it truly saddens me that people think social media is a requirement for living. just dont do it, and dont let your kids do it. In some ways, it is. News get shared over social media. Events get published (only) on social media. A lot of people organize hobbys or work on social media. You will miss a lot by choosing to ignore it. And yes, you can still live without it, but comparing it to a time when nobody used social media is just apples to oranges. We as adults can choose not to use it and deal with the social consequences. But other kids won't be understanding or even accommodating. Completely banning you kids from social media is just as bad as letting them use it.
- bodge5000 5y ago
  To my knowledge its not nearly as big a thing, but I heard about a kid who was essentially ostracised from his friend group because he had an android phone and they all used iphones, which effectively to them just meant his chat bubble in imessage was a different colour (I know there are legitimate advantages of imessage, but talking to people who use it, I doubt that was the issue at play). Eventually his parents brought him an iphone and he was allowed back into the group, but yeh kids can be brutal. If kids are that brutal over the colour of a chat message, you can only imagine how they'd react if they didn't have a phone at all (or have social media, they are essentially one in the same in this case).
  - jjk166 5y ago
    Kids were ostracizing each other from groups for dumb reasons long before phones or social media were ever invented, and they will continue to do so long after we move onto the next thing. There will always be some arbitrary way to define an ingroup and an outgroup, the fact that kids are brutal enough to exclude someone because of something as pointless as their text bubbles' color illustrates the futility of trying to avoid this fate by appeasement. At some point people just have to have that uncomfortable conversation with their child where they explain friends who abandon you at a drop of a hat aren't friends.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

lopis 5y ago

You don't need a facebook account to be tracked and to have a profile made of you. All your contacts have uploaded your contact information (Name + Phone Number) to whatsapp, facebook and instagram among others without your consent. With your first sentence I thought you realized this much, but then your second one doesn't make sense. Yes this response is purely lawyer speak and PR exactly because you don't control your data. Everyone on the Internet wants as much data as they can possibly grab.

thrwaway9871 5y ago

The biggest problem is that politicians use and legitimize social networks. The fact that fb/google etc. have detailed profiles on all world leaders and none of them care because in return they get to farm likes and get their tweets featured in media speaks volumes on how much governments really care about national security or even general privacy.

eru 5y ago
To be honest, for politicians and other public figures, Facebook (and Google etc) is no worse and probably better than the traditional paparazzi or yellow press.
- Nextgrid 5y ago
  Paparazzis don't generally stalk what you do online in private. Facebook has embedded spyware in most mainstream websites & apps that stalks you all the time.
  - eru 5y ago
    They stalk your whole private and public life, if you are a person of interest to them.
    - Nextgrid 5y ago
      Do they routinely install malware on your machine to stalk your online activity?

Sebb767 5y ago

> it truly saddens me that people think social media is a requirement for living. just dont do it, and dont let your kids do it. In some ways, it is. News get shared over social media. Events get published (only) on social media. A lot of people organize hobbys or work on social media. You will miss a lot by choosing to ignore it. And yes, you can still live without it, but comparing it to a time when nobody used social media is just apples to oranges. We as adults can choose not to use it and deal with the social consequences. But other kids won't be understanding or even accommodating. Completely banning you kids from social media is just as bad as letting them use it.

bodge5000 5y ago
To my knowledge its not nearly as big a thing, but I heard about a kid who was essentially ostracised from his friend group because he had an android phone and they all used iphones, which effectively to them just meant his chat bubble in imessage was a different colour (I know there are legitimate advantages of imessage, but talking to people who use it, I doubt that was the issue at play). Eventually his parents brought him an iphone and he was allowed back into the group, but yeh kids can be brutal. If kids are that brutal over the colour of a chat message, you can only imagine how they'd react if they didn't have a phone at all (or have social media, they are essentially one in the same in this case).
- jjk166 5y ago
  Kids were ostracizing each other from groups for dumb reasons long before phones or social media were ever invented, and they will continue to do so long after we move onto the next thing. There will always be some arbitrary way to define an ingroup and an outgroup, the fact that kids are brutal enough to exclude someone because of something as pointless as their text bubbles' color illustrates the futility of trying to avoid this fate by appeasement. At some point people just have to have that uncomfortable conversation with their child where they explain friends who abandon you at a drop of a hat aren't friends.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]