Not that they aren’t reselling the data to advertisers as well, but Google and Apple both have maps/directions apps that really incentivize providing your location.
Hey you know that coworker you like to sexually harass at work, and who is always trying to avoid you, and just get about her day, because she knows complaining will go nowhere except making her life miserable because her supervisor is also a fucking creeper, and she can’t risk her job because neoliberal evangelicals have dismantled workers rights? She lives, like, a couple blocks from you!!!
Love, Facebook
4 Likes
So, you’re saying it’s okay when one group does it but not the other? Because I’m pretty sure there would be Facebookers who are really excited about friending everyone at their location.
My point is that your phone allows you to have control over it. So, exercise that right.
Because we all know the world just didn’t exist before facebook.
/Eye-Roll
And just what does that have to do with the users not owning facebook?
There are other ways you know: Phone’s, Email, or maybe dealing with people IRL?
Again: Don’t like the policy’s, don’t use the service.
Hell, Maybe … Just maybe someone will create a non-evil facebook clone. but most likely not. as it’s easy to whine about something that is not yours to start with than build something.
2 Likes
Hey! Come join our hundreds of people!
There are a few I can think of, but none of them have the traction FB does, privacy or other features be damned.
3 Likes
Guess I was a tad wrong, Thanks for pointing that site out.
Nice to see some taking the effort.
No, if you understood what I was trying to say you probably would have mentioned that Google and Apple have maps/directions apps that provide good reason to provide those organizations with your current location.
Want to try again?
Well, the world existed before penicillin or running water. Does that imply that losing those things does not impact quality of life for the worse?
(Typing “/Eye-roll” right after saying something stupid is kind of a bad look.)
Yes, but there are differences between those services and facebook. For example, to call someone on the phone, I have to use one hand, I can’t look at pictures while I talk to them; a phone call is necessarily synchronous, in most cases it’s one on one and it gets harder to use the more people want to join in a conversation at once. Email is necessarily asynchronous and different people have different email habits that can make it hard to coordinate conversations or use it to keep in touch. Also, most email is spam so in my experience, very few people actually use it for communication these days.
Dealing with people “IRL” is great when you can, and I’ve noticed that facebook users even use facebook to facilitate meeting face to face. Your simplistic model of using each of these as alternatives doesn’t seem to take into account the complexity of human interaction.
The problem with creating or even using a non-evil facebook clone is that everyone is already on facebook. A large proportion of most people’s social networks are not early adopters who are willing to learn new interfaces every few weeks. Going to a facebook clone is useless if the people you’re using facebook to connect to aren’t already using that service because the whole point.
(Also, mischaracterizing your opponents’ points as “whining” is a childish way to argue. I could frame what you’re doing as whining about people’s internet habits, but doing that would make me look immature and like I don’t have a real argument, so I try not to do stuff like that.)
One could easily have made a completely analagous suggestion to yours 60 or so years ago: “If you don’t like Bell Telephone’s policies, just don’t use telephones. Or better yet, start your own multi-billion dollar nationwide network of copper cables, high-tech relays, thousands of skilled workers, and all the rest of the infrastructure needed to allow near-instantaneous point-to-point communication!” It would have been exactly as reasonable then as your suggestion is now.
(“Come on, you can just write a letter or meet face-to-face! That’s exactly the same or better than talking on the phone, and there is nothing the phone provides that those media don’t! Believe it or not, the world existed before telephones! Watch me roll my eyes and call you a whiner! Are you convinced by my brilliant arguments yet?”)
3 Likes
What a fun game!
If you understood what I was trying to say you would have noted that you find the maps/directions apps good reason to provide those organizations with your current location.
The same way that others find good reason to provide Faccebook with their current location.
So, you’re saying it’s okay for maps and other apps but not Facebook?
1 Like
There’s also Ello, but it also deals with the same issues of lack of people.
1 Like
Define “okay”. I’m not saying anything about the morality of collecting someone’s personal location. I’m talking about the utility.
I’m saying that since there is more utility in letting Google and Apple have your current location than in letting facebook have your current location, that people might feel more motivated to allow Google and Apple to have their current location. Especially if they’re lost and are trying to get directions to where they’re trying to go next.
Does that help at all?
1 Like
Unless you’re using a Facebook invitation to get to Phil’s rager, in which case they have the same motivation. Because Facebook has that capability.
The utility is the same for all three parties to have your location data. I’m saying it’s up to the user to determine this anyway with their choice to turn on their location.
1 Like
Honestly, All I see there is a bunch of excuses, Like a child would…
Good luck with that attitude tho!
1 Like
Yeah, you too chief!
“Excuses”, huh? What is it you think I’m trying to excuse?
To put this in context, you said:
My response was to try to help you understand.
An “excuse” is just a reason you don’t want to understand.
Then again, this part certainly wasn’t an excuse:
One could easily have made a completely analagous suggestion to yours 60 or so years ago: “If you don’t like Bell Telephone’s policies, just don’t use telephones. Or better yet, start your own multi-billion dollar nationwide network of copper cables, high-tech relays, thousands of skilled workers, and all the rest of the infrastructure needed to allow near-instantaneous point-to-point communication!” It would have been exactly as reasonable then as your suggestion is now.
I don’t suppose you have a response to that?
Here’s yet another perspective that you may not have considered: people tell corporations what they do and don’t like about their services all the time and in any context but internet privacy this is not perceived as a problem. In fact, corporations even pay money to try to get feedback from customers on what they like and don’t like about their services so that they can be improved! Customer dissatisfaction is an opportunity to make even more money! In this context, why shouldn’t people articulate what they don’t like about facebook?
2 Likes
I’m wondering the same thing.
Yes, I don’t use the app and it’s location-aware.
1 Like
It may make me a terrible person, but in not willing to give myself to Facebook - even for family.
I’m certain it makes socializing more difficult (Facebook events are the one aspect I ever liked), but I just can’t bring myself to spread my life out for Zuck. Google has a similar business model, but manages to be far less creepy (for me at least) about it most of the time. They also offer far more user-friendly controls over your info than Facebook.
3 Likes
Sigh… last dip in this pool.
You see, If you paid for that service that would be one thing. But your attitude is something akin to being invited to someone’s house and think you own the place. And then, start to tell the home owner what to do.
That just don’t wash with me.
I think the proper term I’m looking for now is:
Good Day to you.
The mobile site used to be a reasonable alternative, but they’ve been making it harder and harder to use over the last year.
Facebook makes organizing group activities easy in a way nothing else does. Even without that, trying to get people to switch means getting their network to switch. Ad infinitum. And practically no one will use multiple social networks.
Not using Facebook is great for the people who are willing to put their principles before their friends and family. Or who only have like minded friends. For the rest of us it’s a necessary evil.
Wait, they can do that? Where the hell are my puppies! Puppies! Want puppies now!
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
