[slategruen]

> people are afraid of data collection now in a way they weren't in 2006

I disagree with this one. They might be afraid of sharing their data explicitly i.e. sharing everything happening to them for everyone to see (even strangers). The trend now is sharing content to people they only have very close relationships with. But them being afraid of big tech collecting and analyzing their data? I don't think so.

[yakak]

I think social media gives a distorted view given anyone you see has little problem with it. I've met a lot of people (out in the real world) who express disinterest in starting/restarting because of all these little razor cuts and extremely vague upside. In the early noughts, a lot more people expressed regrets like limited computer skills or some other personal limitation as a reason they felt left behind or less involved instead of having a reason they chose not to opt-in.

[ghaff]

What I see with my circle and Facebook isn't so much people having rage quit but just a lot lower level of overall activity.

[tenebrisalietum]

The only reason I keep my Facebook account is because my wife uses it on occasion.

[desindol]

I believe the world is way more anonymous now when I grew up you could basically take the phone book look a name up and just call them. That's now mostly impossible.

[ghaff]

Well, that's one specific communications channel. You mostly don't socially call people out of the blue outside of a very tight circle of friends and family--and cell phone numbers can't be looked up in general. However, many people--especially professionals--have LinkedIn profiles. And many in general can be searched on Twitter, Facebook, etc.

Given someone's name and maybe a little more information about them, you can often look up a lot more than a phone number and address.

[robertlagrant]

The point being was there used to just be a big book with everyone in it, and now there isn't, and probably never could be again with how we all now feel about and regulate data privacy.

[kritiko]

There are so many services now that have data scraped from various sources - many of them charge money, but they're readily available, even with increasing privacy laws.

[bcrosby95]

> The point being was there used to just be a big book with everyone in it

There was never a big book with everyone in it. Maybe everyone in your city (more accurately, every household). But it was never even close to the scale of the internet. Linkedin has orders of magnitude more people than your phone book ever did.

[ghaff]

Do you honestly think that you can't find out a heck of a lot more about people in general quite easily than you could in the white pages? (Which also required you to know the town/city where they lived.) For one thing, if you own a house, that's a matter of public record. Fortunately most of the deep search tools have gone behind paywalls but it's still trivial to find out a lot about someone especially if they have an uncommon name or you already know something about them.

[robertlagrant]

> Do you honestly think that you can't find out a heck of a lot more about people in general quite easily than you could in the white pages?

No. I never said anything of the sort.

Yes it's possible, but not as by design as a book delivered to everyone's dwelling with the express purpose of giving you some of their information.

[HeyLaughingBoy]

There isn't? I still get phone books every year from my landline provider. I haven't opened one in over a decade, but I still get them.

[jnwatson]

Not really. I had to look up the addresses of 50 distant relatives for sending out a graduation announcement and it was almost trivial to find everyone (along with their past addresses and possible associates). It just isn’t on well-known sites.