

Quitting Facebook is pointless; challenging them to do better is not  - bootload
http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2010/05/23/quitting-facebook-is-pointless-challenging-them-to-do-better-is-not.html

======
pierrefar
A couple of things:

1\. I don't want to gamble again that Facebook will "do better". They've shown
many times they actually want to share my personal information in unexpected
ways under the cover of ever increasingly-confusing settings pages. Thanks,
but I'm done with this crap.

2\. From the post: _I do not believe that the tech elites who are publicly
leaving Facebook will affect on the company’s numbers_

Us alone will not affect the numbers but we take people with us. We tell our
friends and family to close their accounts.

------
lkozma
I'd argue that using FB is pointless, not quiting it. Not using it is the
default state of things, so the burden of proof should be on the other side.
It's a bit like with smoking.

~~~
loup-vaillant
The problem is, several of my acquaintances told me that "everyone is on
Facebook". When talking to them, the burden of proof is on _my_ side.

But I have a good case.

------
credo
Quitting Facebook is an effective way of challenging Facebook to do better. I
think Danah Boyd is mistaken in assuming that one precludes the other

~~~
scorpion032
If one is quitting, why would it matter to him that they do better, as he
cannot gain any benefit out of it.

I would rather join a group "Join this group to emphasize facebook to add
simpler privacy controls" than quit facebook. I don't want to lose it. I care.

------
humbledrone
Quitting Facebook is not pointless if one wants to maintain a certain level of
personal privacy.

~~~
rimantas
You can maintain it without any quitting: just think before you post anything.

~~~
Natsu
That's good advice everywhere, but one of the problems is that Facebook, via
your friends, links together all sorts of things that would otherwise be
scattered about the internet and nearly untraceable (unless someone had a lot
of time to devote to hunting them down). Also, you can't readily control what
your friends post about you. And you can't hide who your friends are.

All said, I don't regret not having a Facebook account. And even so, they do
still have data on me, thanks to family members and friends (who have sent
invitations to join, etc.).

Unfortunately, I don't think most people will care until they're made aware of
exactly how much information is being (and can be) collected and what people
can do with it.

Google is the same, actually, in terms of potential for misuse, except that I
trust the current leaders more. The worry, though, is how long that will last?

------
kordless
That's one long blog post! It could be summarized by saying the general public
doesn't know or care about the Facebook issues, so we technorati should stick
around to help them understand better how the are getting screwed.

------
loup-vaillant
I think this post get at least 2 things wrong:

(1) Even if decentralization is not a panacea, it remains the _only_ solution
for a host of problems. Including privacy on the internet. Also, personal
server as easy to use as Facebook itself are definitely possible. When such
servers actually ship, they _will_ be worth the hassle.

(2) Everyone should quit every centralized services on this planet, including
Facebook, provided there is an alternative. The logs they gather are just too
scarily comprehensive.

That, and 2 most disturbing points:

(1) This post actually encourages us to stay dependent on a big corporation,
in the hope that we could influence it for our own good. No, we can't. If we
are dependant, they can screw us, and will do so as soon as it yields money.

(2) It fears that more free systems could be used to do child pornography,
among other crimes. To me that's FUD: even if she's right, that doesn't mean
that the criminality will rise, nor that the criminals will be harder to
catch. And we already have Freenet.

------
adolph
Right on. Another thing to try is "speaking truth to power." It is probably
equally effective.

Sarcasm aside, as long as the service's users are not directly providing all
of the revenue to provide that service, there will always be a conflict
between the interests of the users (i.e. do not want info shared) and the
payers (i.e. want to know how best to advertise).

------
nandemo
I quit Facebook before they were uncool.

------
jimfl
Quixotic at best. Facebook provides value to two classes of user. There is no
question that the individual users derive value from Facebook, but the idea
that they're getting it for free is naïve.

------
apphacker
I don't care if they do better. It's not pointless quitting, I now no longer
have Facebook in my life. That was the point. "Challenging them to do better"
has a strange assumption that somehow we all stand to gain if we can just make
sure they get it right next time, or maybe the time after. They're not our
friends, they're not an Oxfam, they're a business with a shitty product. I
don't challenge Johnson & Johnson to get them to make a better band-aid,
because frankly, I don't give a shit. Same with Facebook.

>"I think that we owe it to the users to challenge Facebook to live up to a
higher standard, regardless of what we as individuals may gain or lose from
their choices."

People need to learn to think for themselves and live with the consequences of
their choices. It's not rocket science.

Just a weird article.

~~~
bootload
_"... I don't care if they do better. It's not pointless quitting, I now no
longer have Facebook in my life. ..."_

But your friends might and that is the problem.

~~~
bad_user
The most powerful thing you can do regarding any service or product is to vote
with your wallet ... or in the case of Facebook, with your subscription.

When Facebook loses one user, the quality of their network drops ...
insignificantly from a single user, but when speaking about multiple users
quiting, then you've got a network effect.

So ironically (thinking about TFA) if you care about the quality of their
service the most effective thing you can do is to just quit using it. That
will send a message more powerful than bitching and moaning about it in blog
posts.

~~~
bootload
_"... The most powerful thing you can do regarding any service or product is
to vote with your wallet ..."_

It is a big mistake to overlay a monetary system on your friends. This is one
aspect users are really getting riled-up with, _"monetising friends"_.

------
bad_user
Personally I love Facebook as a developer ... because Facebook continually
fucks their users, I can take advantage of their profiles without feeling
guilty about it :-)

Zuckerberg does have a point ... most users just authorize whatever app wants
permissions to their data with whatever permissions are asked for. This I know
from experiencing the integration of my app with Facebook.

~~~
bad_user
I know I have a cynical view on this, but it's consistent with the way many
app developers using Facebook think ... sorry about it, but that won't change
with a HN downvote ;)

For app developers Facebook is basically a "whois" for users ... with a single
and painless authorization you get access to their name, photo, email and list
of friends. If you want to change that, then provide a better alternative.

