
Please get your parents off Facebook - markosaric
https://markosaric.com/off-facebook/
======
slipheen
College Humor had a bit that called Facebook "The Site That Commits Treason &
Tells You What Your Parents Are Doing". They (and the author here) aren't
wrong.

But what am I supposed to advise them to use?

The article doesn't make any suggestions on alternatives. It links another
article he wrote, which also doesn't suggest anything.

* Instagram is picture focused, which doesn't fit with 90% of my parent's posts.

* Twitter is public by default, which is less privacy than the soft-wall provided by FB "Friends". Maybe everyone could use private twitter accounts.. But the article argues

> "It (FB) is a megaphone and an amplifier of extreme views, easily disproven
> conspiracy theories, pseudoscience, superstition, magic cures,
> disinformation, controversy and hyper-effective propaganda."

If that's true of Facebook, it's certainly in abundance in twitter!

* Maybe Mastodon? They don't want or need to understand federation. None of their friends use it, so they can't keep in touch with their old co-worker from 3 jobs back.

* Discord/Telegram/Signal/Wire - They're all intended for live/dynamic use, while FB excels at async. Sure, you can go back and reply to old things, but that's not the intent or way things are typically used.

* The best I can think of right now is regular old Email.. It's pushed-based, and sends to exactly who you want it to. It handles comments (replies) and it can embed pictures/links/etc.

~~~
beams_of_light
Is it really the fault of the platform? I despise Facebook, and do not use it,
but the root of the problem, IMO, is that people are dumb. We'll never change
that - some people are always going to be dumb. Humans have been doing dumb
things in large numbers for a long time - witch hunts, public stonings, The
Crusades...Facebook just virtualizes their presence. Blaming Facebook for the
2016 election is my favorite form of misdirected ire. The real problems lied
in people manipulating people. That could have been done with billboards, TV
ads, newsletters, or phone calls just as easily. We're still learning how to
deal with the ability to communicate with one another instantly over large
distances, as a species. I do think we're in a valley right now, where
stupidity reigns over all, but believe that will change eventually.

~~~
Nextgrid
Somewhat agreed, but Facebook is also not doing anything to curb the
stupidity. They could very well ban whoever posts obvious misinformation or
scams and anyone who is repeatedly caught sharing such content, but they don't
because behind the scenes these same stupid users are probably the most
profitable for Facebook because they're more likely to click on ads.

------
chrisseaton
> Older people are less likely ... to be able to understand the difference
> between legitimate news and lies

Why do you think older people are more foolish than younger people?

This is so patronising! I'm wouldn't dream of telling my parents what to read
or not read.

~~~
JumpCrisscross
> _Why do you think older people are more foolish than younger people?_

There is a documented age bias in the sharing of fake news [1][2].

"Foolish" is the wrong word. "Unaccustomed to modern social media" fits the
bill better.

[1]
[https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/1/eaau4586](https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/1/eaau4586)

[2] [https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/10/us/politics/facebook-
fake...](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/10/us/politics/facebook-fake-
news-2016-election.html)

~~~
beams_of_light
I think they grew up in an era, as the post mentioned, where messages were
moderated in some manner before reaching your senses. Facebook removed that
filter, and they are overtrusting things because their "friend" vouched for it
in the form of a post. They trust their friend, and they inherently trust the
content of the message. Things will change.

------
Pfhreak
Also, get yourself off Facebook.

Honestly, ripping that bandaid off was one of the best decisions I made for my
own mental health, my time, and my ability to properly assess which
relationships in my life were worth maintaining. (Turns out it wasn't the
hundreds of people I was connected with on Facebook.)

~~~
beamatronic
But then how do you share pics of food, kids, and vacations?

~~~
yumraj
I'm assuming that the above comment is not sarcastic.

Ask yourself:

First, do you have to share pics?

If so, do you have to share pics of food?

Do you really want to share pics of kids in an open forum such as FB?

Above for vacation pics?

Do you really want to share _all_ the pics that you share currently, or just a
small subset?

If so, here are some much safer options:

1) email

2) instant messaging application of choice

3) shared folder in the cloud storage of choice.

~~~
beamatronic
“Open forum”? How is it an open forum if you lock down all the privacy
settings to only your most trusted friends and family? FB has those options.

I’ve always thought there should be a social network that is private by
default. With no concept of public anything. And you pay for it, so there are
no ads.

~~~
yumraj
FB, it's behavior, it's data collection and sharing policies and violations of
those said policies makes those settings irrelevant.

Agree with the second part of your comment.

------
jariel
I'm sorry but this is not a compelling argument and the author is missing the
point entirely.

My folks use FB to keep in contact with a large circle of family and friends
and it works very well for that, moreover, this is the case for literally
100's of millions if not billions.

I don't use it, but there's no reason for people not to if they find it
useful.

~~~
user00012-ab
Anti-vaxers find not getting vaccinations useful, how does that work for the
rest of society when they start getting other people sick, and bring back
things that were once eradicated.

A lot of people find not living in reality useful, AND they are still allowed
to vote; how is that working out for the rest of society.

Until we have a better system for running countries that doesn't allow crazy
and uninformed people to vote, maybe getting rid of some the sources of crazy
information can at least help.

~~~
cpr
But there are clear and compelling arguments that vaccines aren't safe,
whatever one thinks of whether they're useful or not.

RFK Jr has been leading the vax pro-safety charge for some time (not anti-
vax), and I think is making a difference.

(I know with all the closed minds on HN, this'll get downvoted to hell, but if
you haven't done your own research into the dangers of vaccines, then you'll
stay closed.)

~~~
jariel
"But there are clear and compelling arguments that vaccines aren't safe,"

No there are not.

Overall, they are exceptionally safe. When you combine the fact they are
reducing potential disease as well and then compound that because of the
externalization of the viral spread of such diseases (one infection creates
multiple more) then they are exceedingly safe.

And where there are 'issues', they are not in the range of the ridiculous
conspiracy theories thrown about.

The anti-vaxxers, especially celebrities, are a serious threat to public
health.

------
njstraub608
"Older people are less likely to be tech-savvy, less likely to use ad-
blockers, less likely to be able to understand the difference between
legitimate news and lies, and they’re more likely to spend longer time on
Facebook and share more information on Facebook."

While I would like to say I agree with this, it's due to confirmation bias and
an availability heuristic. If you don't provide data to support these claims
then you're assuming your readers are no better than the subject of your post.

------
downerending
...and your kids, and your friends, and yourself.

------
drosebudder
sure, you can get off facebook the site, but if you still want to keep in
touch w/ family and friends, you'll most likely use "whatsapp" which is owned
by fb. thoughts?

~~~
slipheen
Two thoughts-

1 - Maybe it's big in your circle, but not everyone has the same experience.

I literally don't know anyone who uses the app at all. (And I've asked around)

That's not to suggest your experience is invalid, just to point out WhatsApp
may be more popular in your social circle than ubiquitous.

2- Moving off of FB-the-app has advantages, even if you're using other FB-the-
company products. It's not all or nothing.

~~~
beams_of_light
WhatsApp might as well be SMS in many countries. Not so, in the US.

