[colechristensen]

I bought an Oculus Rift.

I'm not going to be buying a Facebook device.

Facebook is creepy.

It doesn't matter how cool the technology is or what it can do, more and more people are becoming disturbed at the now common concept of consumer-as-product for Facebook, Google, et al. Even if they seemed open and friendly at first, I personally wouldn't trust that kind of technology in the hands of Google, Microsoft, or Facebook; end of story.

[jfoster]

"Facebook is creepy."

Definition of creepy: "causing an unpleasant feeling of fear or unease."

What is creepy about finding out what people are into and showing them ads relevant to those things? So many people are claiming that Facebook is creepy, but I just can't see it.

[Zirro]

A company keeping a permanent database of my interests, which sites I like to visit and any other information that it can access definitively causes a feeling of unease. What happens to this data if (or when) Facebook goes the way of MySpace? Will they sell it? Are they already selling it? Who could use it against me in the future?

[jfoster]

Well, my first thought is that if they go the way of MySpace, it will probably play out a lot like MySpace did.

I've yet to hear of anyone being extorted or having their data sold post-MySpace.

[forgottenpaswrd]

It is creepy to have a company know:

Your sexual habits. Haw many partners you have , how, where, when you have sex with them. Facebook and google log your mobile phone GPS coords.

Your political views.

What your friends thing about you better than you do(They control and store all of their private communications, including phone calls with Skype or Whasapp).

All your family and friends experiences and meetings.

Then they store this info and give it to the powerful companies and governments on demand, like we know via Snowden . For me it is creepy as hell.

[biff]

I don't disagree at all.

If Facebook puts itself to be in this position without possibility of opting out, that is what I hope would trigger people to seek an ethical competitor. And, similarly, that is what I hope would occur to them would be for consumers in aggregate to be an intolerable consequence of forcing on their customers Facebook's ability (and anybody's who could subpoena Facebook) to be privy to this sort of personal information.

I won't buy one of these if it can't be operated without a phone home. I don't mind sacrificing a bit of resolution or refresh rate with a competitor if the alternative is what you say. My hope is that Facebook recognizes that there is a significant market share they'd miss out on if they pushed that point... and, more importantly, that there would actually be a significant market share that they'd miss out on if they pushed that point.

[PavlovsCat]

People don't "claim" Facebook is creepy to them, it is. It's like when someone calls another person sexy, and you "just don't see it" -- so? You can ask them more in-depth to understand why it is that way for them, but they don't have to prove anything to you for it to be real, just for you to understand it.

[jfoster]

That's true. I should have asked what makes it creepy for him/her.

[PavlovsCat]

At least Carmack should really to be able to do better than dismissing it as "emotional and tribalistic", and asking for proof for the concerns being valid; that's not now how it works, and this is not a flaw. We can't really prove that having VR is better than not having it either, or that people being clothed and fed is better than naked people starving... doesn't stop us from feeling strongly about such things, nor should it. Communication can help, it is necessary, but proof? Not gonna happen. Let's say someone fears that data silos like Facebook might be really bad in the case of political tyranny -- let them be able to prove that it will be as they fear, then what? We can't prove that fascism is bad, so it gains us nothing.

FWIW, personally I don't find it creepy, I find it lame. My reasons have to do with human dignity, my stance on advertising (described in two words: Bill Hicks), and a certain little quote going something like "they 'trust me'. dumb fucks". I don't like the other big players either, who all want to be everything to everybody -- that is not a business model, that is creepyness made manifest.

Also, I think everybody should have their own homepage and that RSS is fine kthx, but that is neither here nor there.. though anyone who works on things that do not promote that, but offer people virtual "homes" they never fully own, cannot expect me to get excited about their work. Surely you can see how Facebook fits in there for me, when it comes to the web how I love it, they're with the lamers.

And in general I despise this age of coders and businesspeople considered as philosopher kings, and being against things as the default stance has proven to be useful time and time again, sadly. It's not like I have to convince Carmack or anyone that I have valid reasons to dislike VR, especially VR with which Facebook is in any shape associated -- it's the other way around, if they want to sell to me. But I don't see the point anyway, outside of remote surgery; I generally think alienation is the problem, and this is just another way to experience it more deeply, to get even more lost in the confusion of symbols and things.

Sorry for rambling, I would sum my feelings up with this Bill Hicks quote "it's a piece of shit, walk away". Which is not very helpful as an explanation, but for me it hits the nail on the head: I think the problem is not that some of us don't have all the facts; we are looking at the same thing, just coming to vastly different conclusions. Everybody knows what Facebook, advertising and computer games are, and VR is new in practice but very old coffee in terms of science fiction, so even that is not really new. And you know what, to the degree that those things are benign, their makers gladly would accept if some, even large, segments of the population would not ever accept them, right? Carmack asked for testable claims about Facebook being bad, well, here's at least a testable way to see if things are good, from which we can deduce badness to a degree. And Facebook for one fails it hard, failing it is kind of their mission statement.

[anonbanker]

Facebook tracks everything about you. They track what you like. They track what you don't like. They track what you click. They track what you don't click. They track what you erase in private messages, which means they're monitoring your private messages.

And now we've given facebook new sensors to track. Facebook would love to get the data on peoples head movements. They'll be able to track to the millisecond how much time you spend looking at an in-game ad. They'll be able to track your overall attention span. And those are the least egregious violations of your privacy you can expect from the company; If the company, that looks way too deep into your life already, begins putting something like Facebook Home on your head, I'd say that qualifies as uncanny-valley-scale creepy.

[scholia]

Gosh, you make it sound exactly like Google....

[anonbanker]

Am I the only one frightened by that truth?

[scholia]

Well, it scares me....

[venomsnake]

Lets start with the facts that facebook knows someone is gay way before the person comes out. Or that they can predict which people and when will enter relationships ...