[orthoganol]

I find it hard to grasp why any intelligent individual who knows what goes on with Facebook would still voluntarily remain on Facebook.

"Ah but the social ostracization!", seemingly the main reason why otherwise intelligent, informed people do stay on Facebook, just doesn't hold up anymore, as too many cool, socially active 20-somethings I know or are acquainted with have moved off of Facebook, mostly in last 1-2 years. Even if you're stuck in a gossipy friend group that would "severely judge you" for leaving Facebook, which is more likely in your own head than in reality, then that's probably a sign you need to find more down to earth friends.

[socket0]

I like to think that I'm "any intelligent individual", and I use Facebook. That's where some close friends and family are, and if I want to keep in contact with them, that's where I need to be.

I understand the nature of the data Facebook collects about me, and I understand what they would like to do with that data. They want to know who I am, what makes me tick, and use that knowledge to show me advertising I'm more likely to click on. They also want to draw me into their walled garden by promising me shiny things if I stay. It doesn't really work, because I see the same middle of the road content and advertising shown to my friends and family.

I also share my location on Messenger, although the friends and family I chat to might or might not be interested in where I am. I don't chat to strangers, or even "strangers". And if I'm somewhere people don't need to know about, I don't share my location. These are things we teach children about using the Net, or should be. Adults should be able to figure this out themselves.

And I explain the difference between myself and my devices to people; when Facebook tells them I'm at home, that's where my phone or tablet or desktop PC is connecting from. I might be there, I might be away, I might not even be awake.

The technology lies, and sometimes so do I.

[dublinben]

>if I want to keep in contact with them, that's where I need to be

As an intelligent individual, you must recognize that this isn't really true. You were able to communicate with your family and friends before Facebook existed. You can still communicate with them now, over other media like email, telephone, etc. You (and many others) are simply choosing to use a hostile platform to stay in touch because it is 'easier' or 'more popular' than the alternatives.

[socket0]

I used to live on the same continent as these people, and even then I would live a life parallel to some of these family members. Now I know what they're up to, am reminded of their birthdays, and get photographic proof of their successful reproduction. Social obligations fulfilled.

As for Facebook being a "hostile platform", that's not quite true, is it? When they park a self-driving car they bought off Google outside your house and broadcast your life to everyone you know, that's when they're hostile.

[darklajid]

That's a rather harsh argument and we could (not trying to derail this) proceed and say the same thing about people that use Google products, Twitter, WhatsApp, 'the cloud' etc. - and in the end we'll finally agree with Stallman.

I don't have a Facebook account and have to admit that I never truly understood the benefit, the appeal. It seemed full of ads, games, random pictures and without structure - i.e. you might read about people ranting about the current soccer game (I hate that), but miss an important update from a close friend.

Plus, as soon as email isn't a suitable format to exchange information, I have the impression that the communication is either too broad (shout to the public) or trivial (one liners about nonsense). I don't get it.

I DO get the network effect though. So while I agree with you that the 'why' might be hard to grasp, I don't like the stab at people's intellect. It doesn't matter if an individual is intelligent or not - not using a service that all your peers decided on using is hard.

Your last line about being severely judged by friends especially doesn't sit well with me.

For one, people might not judge you - they just might communicate less with you, forget you at times (because you're the one person that needs a mail or a text message or whatever).

And then there's the ridiculous 'find different friends' part. Seriously…

[lmm]

> Plus, as soon as email isn't a suitable format to exchange information, I have the impression that the communication is either too broad (shout to the public) or trivial (one liners about nonsense). I don't get it.

What do you do when you want to organize a party/group trip to a concert/etc. and invite several people?

* Email and reply-all? This means you annoy people who can't make it (they keep seeing all the replies), and people who are added to the list have to be re-added several times as people reply-all to old messages and leave them out.

* Create a mailman list for this specific event and require people to unsubscribe/resubscribe? That's a lot of overhead, and the UI is awful.

* Set up a website/blog for this one event? Even more overhead.

And none of the above approaches have decent calendaring integration - you can attach a .ics to an email but it's still a very manual process.

[darklajid]

Not sure if your question was real or merely a set-up for your bullet points. If the former:

Email. I don't tend to organize things with dozens of people on the list (for that I might be convinced that random mail threads might become cumbersome - I'm not convinced that FB is a solution!). If I want to go to a concert and discuss that with <= ten friends, mails are fine. That reply-all argument doesn't come up. If someone has to decline it's trivial for any participant to remove that address. Or he explicitly asks to be removed. Or - and that's probably the general case, that person doesn't care about a couple of emails and marks the thread as read. Done.

I don't claim that you make this issues up or that these things cannot be a nuisance for some people. I .. just don't have these problems, mails work just fine in all cases here.

I agree that a calendar is missing. I tend to use various things for that and don't have a good solution for this so far. Most of the time it's probably 'no calendar' and only a poll of sorts (think doodle or something similar).

[lmm]

Fair enough. I think other people tend to be happier with an "overflowing inbox" than I am; I ruthlessly prune mine (e.g. I don't sign up to mailing lists) to the point where any email should be important enough to interrupt me. And I find it particularly infuriating to keep getting emails about this cool party if I can't make it. But maybe that's just me.

[tdkl]

From my experience this is all depends on people in question. We've been experimenting in my circle of friends of about 20-30 people over these years with trying different solutions for event invitations : email, g+ events, FB events, SMS, various chat services.

The outcome was that some people simply aren't reliable to follow up if they're fine with the event terms or not, no matter what medium. It's not a tech problem, it's a people problem and everyone's responsible.

[psykovsky]

Maybe someone should do a startup with a service like that. It could be called Meetup.com or something.

[thoth]

I just remembered another thing Facebook lets you do that Meetup doesn't: have a virtual group.

All Meetup groups have to be face-to-face group with the intention of physically meeting, so if you want to organize your online play-by-email board games or whatever, or other groups that don't actually intend to meet very often (e.g. class alumni groups mostly for the purpose of distributing info), you can't have either of those be a Meetup group.

But Facebook doesn't care if you do that.

[thoth]

I've had 3 or 4 Meetup groups fold and migrate to Facebook, because Facebook offers basically the same features and some nice extras:

allows private/hidden groups (invite only; Meetup can hide the memberlist and require approval to join but the group existence is still searchable)

free (Meetup currently charges ~$70 for 6 months; source: I'm an organizer for a Meetup group and that's our semi-annual bill. I'm not sure if the scale slides based on membership numbers. I can't find the billing email for the exact number at the moment.)

While I do like Meetup and still use it, using Facebook for small group organization also makes sense.

[pmlnr]

maybe, but just maybe, paying cash is better than paying with every information available on your phone.

[thoth]

Phone? I didn't mention a phone; both Facebook and Meetup are entirely usable via their websites.

We have about 40-50 active and semi-active members (on Meetup), hold a fundraiser, and yet the organizers still have to chip in to make up the inevitable shortfall.

Whether or not to use Facebook (or Meetup for that matter) is something everybody gets to decide for themselves and preaching about what they should do is silly.

[__z]

Facebook groups don't require a cellphone. I participate in one (much to my dismay... but that's where the group is...) and I never "Facebook" on my cell phone - messenger, "app," website... none are loaded on my phone or ever used on my phone.

[lmm]

Meetup seems more oriented towards public events. I'm not offering an open invitation for random folks to come see [band], I'm trying to arrange it with these specific named friends. Who are already my friends on facebook (which is not to say we couldn't equally well become friends on meetup, but does it even have that functionality?).

[psykovsky]

Maybe they're missing on something if they have no such features.

[falcolas]

> and in the end we'll finally agree with Stallman

And that's a bad thing? If your friends get this much information out of messages you're sending them, how much does Facebook have? An individual employee at Facebook? An individual who compromises Facebook's servers? An advertiser who works with Facebook?

Agreeing with Stallman is a good way to start taking back control of what information is available out there about you - assuming that matters to you.

[darklajid]

Don't try to read too much into that comment of mine. I'm a Linux guy, hate G+, FB, WhatsApp etc. with a passion, subscribe to all things DDG.

The point I was trying to make is that one cannot/should not single out FB as anything special here (top-level comment) and that you probably end up somewhere on the privacy/freedom scale between 'posts restroom visits on social networks and shares the movie of ones wife giving birth' and RMS.

I personally lean towards the latter position. We're in agreement here. I wasn't bashing RMS, I was using him as THE example for someone trying to avoid all this nonsense.

[sixothree]

I am finding more and more that people who post on facebook feel like they've gone out of their way to inform you of something. Excluding yourself from facebook means excluding yourself from the events in their life.

[nl]

This is a genuine question: why does not caring that Facebook collects that data make me less intelligent?

Edit: Judging from the downvotes, asking this question is quite unpopular. Whilst I understand this opinion is unpopular I remain unconvinced it is less intelligent.

[stephengillie]

Just like getting a prenuptial agreement - don't worry about it if you don't plan on doing anything with your life.

It's easy to forget - but the information they collect can be used by the group that collects it, and by other parties (Gov't TLAs, hackers, insurance companies, banks, business associates, contractors, partner companies). This can happen now, or at some point in the future.

The data can be combined with other data, such as the National Insurance Database (which is illegal to publicly discuss), to draw conclusions about yourself - possibly based on untrue assumptions.

Master Data programs/systems/initiatives are consolidating, de-duping, and integrating data from disparate systems. It doesn't matter that you put down a fake address 100 times, you just have to put in a real address one time - these systems can collate all the data, validate each one against the USPS database, and toss the fakes.

[mynameisvlad]

Once again, the same question arises. "why does not caring that Facebook collects that data make me less intelligent?"

I don't really care that the data can be collated. I don't really care about the conclusions drawn. It's not just a "oh I haven't done anything wrong, why should I care" argument, it's past that. I couldn't care less that Facebook, the US government, or some intruder knows I went to Whistler last weekend with my family, and that I took a few photos at Squamish. That data isn't really useful in any context. Similarly, I don't care if they know what events I attend, or who I'm friends with. It just doesn't bother me. Does that make me less intelligent? I would say of course not. If I was ignorant about this information, sure. But knowing the information and simply deciding it's not worth it to care about who sees these trivial bits of data about me shouldn't be called "less intelligent".

As someone else posted below, I value my social life and being able to quickly and easily interact with family and friends from around the world more than the privacy I could attain by not posting these random bits and bobs about my life.

[stephengillie]

What if one of the people in your photos later turns up on a no-fly list, and that relationship complicates your run for Governor in 20 years?

It reflects a lack of concern for "future-you", a way of closing off certain options in life that might hurt you later.

[mynameisvlad]

Okay, you have to admit that's a pretty contrived example. Firstly, most people are not going to run for anything in 20 years. The chance of that alone happening is pretty slim. Secondly, how would that complicate my hypothetical run, anyway? If we were going to go by this insanely arbitrary requirement, then everyone in the US will most likely have a photo with someone that ends up on a no-fly list. It's really easy to be in photos with other people, you don't even have to know the person. So what, I knew someone 20 years in the past that had since been put on a list. That has absolutely no implications of my actions or connections in that present day. That said, I could see how the media might react, so that part wouldn't be too far off base in that regard.

But if that's the best argument against it, then I continue to not care about what I put on Facebook. If it comes back to bite me in the ass 20 years from now, then I can deal with it then. I'd rather not completely destroy my social life in the present for a hypothetical scenario that will probably never end up even happening.

[nl]

There are plenty of examples of successful politicians being former friends with actual terrorists. A facebook photo seems unlikely to make that any different.

[nl]

I do data science in my day job. I understand combining datasets.

Again, why does using Facebook make me less intelligent?

[dublinben]

If you cannot recognize the harmful implications of this mass data collection, then you are either ignorant or hopelessly naive.

[nl]

I'm asking for it to be explained.

I'm not arguing that data collection is never harmful. Driving a car is potentially harmful too and indeed caused more instances of actual harm than data collection does. And yet I drive a car, in full awareness of the potential harm.

I am saying that using Facebook - in full awareness of the data collected - is not an inherently unintelligent thing to do.

[xasos]

> I find it hard to grasp why any intelligent individual who knows what goes on with Facebook would still voluntarily remain on Facebook.

Why not? Keeping up with friends and family is extremely efficient, due to FB's algorithms giving me the most relevant content. There are many great products that the FB platform has to offer and it is the reason I don't need the more trendy social networks, a la Instagram/Snapchat.

Facebook Messenger is a fantastic product and it is the main communication platform that I use on a daily basis (you can easily send photos and files). Facebook Groups makes communicating within a group a lot nicer, since you can selectively choose notifications (where you can't on a normal mailing list).

Facebook events is great for inviting people to parties, social gatherings, study groups, etc. and you can invite by group.

[amyjess]

I simply don't care about privacy.

I value my social life, and I value being able to actually communicate with my friends.

I have made a conscious and rational decision that my social life is more valuable to me than my privacy.

[fuzzywalrus]

That's wonderful but your choice is your choice and shouldn't invalidate how others choose to live their lives.

[LLWM]

Since each app has to request your permission to access your location info, it sounds like you're happy with the status quo then.

[gutnor]

I'm not quite sure how that works for you but generally speaking, social life is all about privacy - yours and more importantly others.

You don't share everything to everybody or you end up being the sucker that gets the news late or not at all because he can never shut the fuck up.

Even if you are careful about others privacy, you can be a victim of the carelessness of others. As an example, we have friends on FB we can no longer read any news due to them friending people careless about their privacy wishes. Everything now is coded messages like "Worked better than expected. Next step tomorrow at 10", so you must have had a conversation with them outside of FB in order to know what the fuck is going on - which is the reason why we had FB in the first place.

[chadgeidel]

"Any intelligent individual" knows that all social networks track location/behavior. "Any intelligent individual" knows that DOJ/NSA/cell providers can track your position with your cell phone. "Any intelligent individual" knows that a collection of HTTP requests can quickly identify patterns in behavior and preferences. "Any intelligent individual" knows that a few purchases with the same credit card number builds a fairly precise understanding of age/demographic information.

What makes one person's personal privacy/communication breakover point better than another?

[bduerst]

I think they're conflating "intelligent individual" as sharing their own personal opinions on sharing meta data.

I could say that "intelligent individuals" don't project their personal views on favorable demographics, but then I would be doing the same.

[okatsu]

I'm glad the 20-somethings in your circle haved moved off of Facebook, but mine haven't, including my girlfriend. I'm just not willing to be the one guy always insisting we IM on something else. I might get rid of it upon graduation but until then it's the de facto communication tool and it's not worth the hassle to fight this.

[Osmium]

> then that's probably a sign you need to find more down to earth friends.

No faster way to get people to agree with you than to insult their friends ;)

I use Facebook, and I consider myself very privacy conscious. How do I reconcile that? I decide what I want to share (very little) and only log in occasionally, for the odd update. It's a pragmatic view and a reasonable one. I don't feel the need to cut myself off from a convenient social resource on principle alone. I have to make decisions on what personal details I share about myself all day, every day (such as commenting here, for example)–Facebook is just another example of that.

I agree that lack of user knowledge (and, therefore, consent) with location information on messages is worrying though, and should be addressed.

[eertami]

What are the downsides to using Facebook as a communication tool? I have: a fake email, a fake name, no mobile number attached and I don't post statuses.

Facebook groups and messages however are just so incredibly convenient and ubiquitous that you won't be able to convince entirely separate groups of people to leave and use a service you mandate - unless you are friends with solely technical people.

Could I be a member of the groups and organizations I am without being in the Facebook groups? Sure - but it would inconvenience everyone, if there's a discussion in a group, and someone tags me to get my opinion on something, I can fire back a reply. They don't have to call or email me separately.

[psykovsky]

So you think Facebook doesn't know who you really are? Just because you use a fake name and email and no phone number? That's cute...

[worklogin]

They know who you are. Rather, they know that someone exists with your cultural, political and social preferences, and with all the people with whom you're friends.

And then people tag you in their photos. So Facebook may not strictly know your name, but any agency (of course, never in America!) who backdoors or coerces Facebook could learn everything about you.

[e12e]

It's the network effect. There are no other good ways to keep casually in touch with people from 100+ countries that I know of. Sure, people you can just go and have a coffee with isn't a problem, but those you have to fly 4+ hours to see are a different matter.

These 20-somethings - they're also moving off of Google properties? Or is it just facebook data you're concerned about?

[gedrap]

I believe all of us here are with some intelligent. Therefore, we all know what facebook collects about us. So everyone makes a decision to use it or not. Plain and simple.

I don't agree with statements such as 'hard to grasp why any intelligent individual [uses it]'. If that's your opinion then great but not everyone should have the same opinion.

[Nexxxeh]

OP's inability to grasp something is entirely their problem, not Facebook's. I object when privacy is taken from me. I will, however, give up a degree of privacy in exchange for convenience. That is informed consent.

If one's news feed is full of gossipy rubbish and stuff they aren't interested in, then one either need to learn how to customise one's feed (easy) or get better friends. Facebook make it pretty damn easy to do the former.

Facebook is a content sharing platform and one's friends are making the content. If the content is rubbish, that says more about the people involved than it says about Facebook.

[wololongong]

I live in a different country to almost all of my friends and family. Facebook is how we stay in touch. Some of my friends don't check their emails on a regular basis and don't use Google Hangouts. Facebook is incredibly useful for people in my position.

[philh]

It's not necessarily about gossip and judgment. Consider two different kinds of friendship groups. There are small, close-knit ones, where everyone is friends with everyone, and everyone wants Alice to be there. And there are large, loose ones, where if Alice doesn't show up, nobody might even notice.

In the first case, if Alice isn't on facebook, they might make plans on facebook and someone will say "cool, I'll let Alice know". In the second case, they might make plans on facebook and nobody will think to do that. Her closer friends might - but her closer friends might not even be going, and that doesn't mean she doesn't want to go.

[WillHuxtable]

I came to the conclusion that I should leave Facebook quite a while ago now. However, almost all of my friends have and constantly use Facebook, and it remains almost their sole method of contacting me. My friend group and I are all around 16, so that likely explains things.

[Nexxxeh]

I'm not sure. Aren't teenagers supposed to be the demographic most likely to change networks?

There is an element of inertia and of being held hostage though. Why go through the hassle of everyone changing networks of Facebook still works? And no-one can leave on their own...

[mintplant]

Friend groups that use Facebook Messenger pretty much exclusively to stay in contact. Leaving it behind would mean losing touch, missing out on plans, etc.

[jklinger410]

I use Facebook for networking and marketing because there is no better option.

So there's one reason.

[thearn4]

At this point, I'm just on FB to keep up with family, and to share baby photos. Basically, a kind of glorified white pages.

[harryh]

The fact that you find this hard to grasp says a lot more about your intelligence than it does of the average Facebook user. It's not exactly a mystery.

[zem]

we can't all be cool, socially active 20-somethings :) my friends' demographic is definitely facebook-using