4 ms·

Eh, you want to use a free service and get mad when they dictate terms. This is why I don't use Facebook as a primary online presence. I don't give them all my

Eh, you want to use a free service and get mad when they dictate terms. This is why I don't use Facebook as a primary online presence. I don't give them all my data, and locations, and relationships, and baby pictures, etc. Author is just making a play at getting special treatment if her whiny article goes viral. Don't depend on things you don't control.

danso 11y ago
It seems you're getting downvoted even though you are mostly right (some people might have considered "whiny" to be unnecessarily pejorative and unhelpful). I have the same mindset...I like Facebook, a lot. I haven't yet reached the point of burnout, but that's because when I am in a negative mood -- which apparently is a bad time to be on Facebook because you subject yourself to a constant stream of your friends' happiness -- I log out. I actually set my password to a random arrangement of my fingers smacking the keyboard, which I copy-paste from a text file, and I move that file somewhere that's just annoying enough that I can't reflexively just recopy-paste the password. It's not hard to retrieve, and I can always reset my password...but it's annoying enough that the only time I'll go back on to facebook is when I really want to go back. But how to practice self-control and etc. is tangential to the OP's point. It's a little more complicated than that but I think much of it does boil down to cost and security. The pseudonym policy cuts both ways: it inconveniences those who have good reasons to not want to be easily found. But it also inconveniences those who use anonymity to abuse people. And when you're targeted by such people, you'll appreciate that flag button. So Facebook has to deal with both kinds of flagging. How does it do that so that it's not just a flimsy process that a troll can dodge, and yet not be overly burdensome to the innocent? Well, the answer is not (well, not yet, anyway), "more machine learning". The OP wants a (more) human decision and FB apparently thinks such a process is too burdensome to scale.
Retra 11y ago
If people didn't depend on things they didn't control, the economy would probably collapse and we'd all be hunters and gatherers again.
- cactusface 11y ago
  Well said. Also, there would be no interpersonal relationships.
peteretep 11y ago
There's this idea bandied about that Internet access is a human right. There are certain services — currently centralised — that are large enough to start to be thought of as utilities. My family, friends, and colleagues are 100% bought in to Facebook. Family reunions, and literally every social event I go to (except weddings) are coordinated via Facebook. Friends and families announce engagements, deaths, and major life events through it. I don't know the email addresses and phone numbers for many of my friends, because it all goes through FB Messenger. I don't live in the same city as many old friends, and I travel a lot, and I know when they're in town and vice versa through FB. This is not my choice. This is th collective choice made by friends and family. Stepping away from Facebook would mean my in-person social life would significantly diminish. I understand that some people's lives don't work that way, or they have fifteen friends from high school and three family members who are the only people they coordinate with regularly. Family alone accounts for 50 connections for me, and people I see in person at least once a month another 200. There comes a point where we figure out that Facebook and Twitter are monopoly utilities, and need regulation as such. I can't sever my ties with Facebook in any meaningful way, and it seems odd that they should be able to do the same to me; my water provider can't cut me off, and my electricity provider can't either without legal recourse — that Facebook can seems odd.

danso 11y ago

It seems you're getting downvoted even though you are mostly right (some people might have considered "whiny" to be unnecessarily pejorative and unhelpful). I have the same mindset...I like Facebook, a lot. I haven't yet reached the point of burnout, but that's because when I am in a negative mood -- which apparently is a bad time to be on Facebook because you subject yourself to a constant stream of your friends' happiness -- I log out. I actually set my password to a random arrangement of my fingers smacking the keyboard, which I copy-paste from a text file, and I move that file somewhere that's just annoying enough that I can't reflexively just recopy-paste the password. It's not hard to retrieve, and I can always reset my password...but it's annoying enough that the only time I'll go back on to facebook is when I really want to go back. But how to practice self-control and etc. is tangential to the OP's point. It's a little more complicated than that but I think much of it does boil down to cost and security. The pseudonym policy cuts both ways: it inconveniences those who have good reasons to not want to be easily found. But it also inconveniences those who use anonymity to abuse people. And when you're targeted by such people, you'll appreciate that flag button. So Facebook has to deal with both kinds of flagging. How does it do that so that it's not just a flimsy process that a troll can dodge, and yet not be overly burdensome to the innocent? Well, the answer is not (well, not yet, anyway), "more machine learning". The OP wants a (more) human decision and FB apparently thinks such a process is too burdensome to scale.

Retra 11y ago

If people didn't depend on things they didn't control, the economy would probably collapse and we'd all be hunters and gatherers again.

cactusface 11y ago
Well said. Also, there would be no interpersonal relationships.

peteretep 11y ago

There's this idea bandied about that Internet access is a human right. There are certain services — currently centralised — that are large enough to start to be thought of as utilities. My family, friends, and colleagues are 100% bought in to Facebook. Family reunions, and literally every social event I go to (except weddings) are coordinated via Facebook. Friends and families announce engagements, deaths, and major life events through it. I don't know the email addresses and phone numbers for many of my friends, because it all goes through FB Messenger. I don't live in the same city as many old friends, and I travel a lot, and I know when they're in town and vice versa through FB. This is not my choice. This is th collective choice made by friends and family. Stepping away from Facebook would mean my in-person social life would significantly diminish. I understand that some people's lives don't work that way, or they have fifteen friends from high school and three family members who are the only people they coordinate with regularly. Family alone accounts for 50 connections for me, and people I see in person at least once a month another 200. There comes a point where we figure out that Facebook and Twitter are monopoly utilities, and need regulation as such. I can't sever my ties with Facebook in any meaningful way, and it seems odd that they should be able to do the same to me; my water provider can't cut me off, and my electricity provider can't either without legal recourse — that Facebook can seems odd.