LastQuestion
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2011
- Messages
- 454
mmm, it's a low blow to get on someone for grammar inside forums but if you want to take the high-road in a discussion about ethics you might try showing a competency at grade school grammar.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Teachers Aide Fired For Not Handing Over Facebook Password
- Thread starter HardOCP News
- Start date
mmm, it's a low blow to get on someone for grammar inside forums but if you want to take the high-road in a discussion about ethics you might try showing a competency at grade school grammar.
MavericK
Zero Cool
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2004
- Messages
- 31,900
ITT: People that defend this shit who either a) don't have kids or b) don't want to have to take personal responsibility for paying attention to what their kids do.
Your argument is highly flawed and specious. Look up "Straw Man Fallacy" as well as "Slippery Slope."
You are saying to not allow the privacy of teachers (or presumably anyone who works with children) to be violated then we, the advocates of privacy are supporting pedophilia.
Get over yourself this is not the same thing.
Under that same excuse, the protection of "X" we must allow "Y" anything can be justified and the rule of law falls.
FYP.
The court of public opinion is already judge, jury, and executioner. One false allegation can ruin a teacher's career permanently, even if it was all fabricated.
SixFootDuo
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2004
- Messages
- 5,825
LastQuestion, spelling and grammar police. Took you long enough to pull me over
Someone's all riled up.
I'm not usually a person to take the giant stand on how everything is invasive of our privacy, because lets face it - our society is changing. But I think anyone has to look at this type of action as general practice and wonder where the lines are.
I think all communications, records, even personal conversations of all federal, state, and local governmental employees should be searched and posted to an open web page.
After all we have caught congressmen (republican, right?) molesting under age boys, thus all employees of our government are suspect.
Right? No?!?
Sound logic.
I love this thread so much!!! It always amazes me when people who want to wrap themselves up in the various trappings of "dur, don't let teh turrists win" or "think of the children" like it some some sort of security blanket. As I get older, I am coming across more and more of these idiots in the workplace who not only think it is ok to speak about their ignorance as so much breakroom conversation but they actually hold it up as a point of pride.
They always look at me in horror when I point out that pedophiles, murderers and rapists don't care about the law: that is what makes them criminals. It doesn't matter how much you legislate, ask for passwords and run background checks, hide behind your HOA fees and gates or how much you want to protect your little ball of innocence and sunshine... tragedy will find a way into your life. That is alot of what life is and the sooner people deal with that reality, the better.
They always look at me in horror when I point out that pedophiles, murderers and rapists don't care about the law: that is what makes them criminals. It doesn't matter how much you legislate, ask for passwords and run background checks, hide behind your HOA fees and gates or how much you want to protect your little ball of innocence and sunshine... tragedy will find a way into your life. That is alot of what life is and the sooner people deal with that reality, the better.
DeathPrincess
Fully [H]
- Joined
- May 15, 2010
- Messages
- 18,205
The problem is, it wont. You wouldn't you write on your profile you like licking spilt milk off the kitchen floor while dressed as a cat, because you know it's not socially acceptible. Most people have a darker side, but not many show theirs openly or discuss stuff they know will get them in trouble. Especially if they know it's being watched.
So what conceivable benifits are going to happen from this? None. It's just a parade to make people feel safer by doing the easiest thing they can think of. Which is a pretty stupid option as it neither deals with the source or giving any actual safety. It might make people feel safer, so they do less as everything is "being monitored", causing more of a problem. "The teacher did bad things!?!? How did this happen!?! We had their facebook page and they never mentioned abusing children!!!".
To deal with a problem you need to understand why it happens. As this kind of problem predates facebook, and the internet it's silly to think the solution is anything to do with it. The easy route usually gains the least ground.
Arcygenical
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2005
- Messages
- 25,066
"Sorry, I'm a professional. I don't use Facebook. Here's the login to my [empty] LinkedIn profile"
*Change FB to unsearchable. Change FB name to something silly and random like everyone else is doing these days... Such as Big Diesel Dan. And profit*
*Change FB to unsearchable. Change FB name to something silly and random like everyone else is doing these days... Such as Big Diesel Dan. And profit*
Seraphical
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2006
- Messages
- 351
It's sad that you are complacent when your rights and the rights of others are being slowly eroded in the name "think of the children".
Too many events in history have shown such complacency to be detrimental to the health of society in general. This is exactly how Hitler, Lenin and many other key players in some of the most tragic points in history started off. Knowing this... every time I see this bulllshit propaganda being blindly lapped up by lazy parents (in the guise of a fervent zealot of the children)...I have to shake my head in disbelief.
From the moment of conception, the child becomes the responsibility of the parent... not the village. You cannot expect others (read: strangers) to shoulder that burden.
Every person who has spoken out against your (what I thought was a lighthearted trolling attempt) post has good reason to do so. Thankfully, there are still enough sane people who won't sit idly by while others are punished to guard the perceived welfare of your children and the children of others.
nobody_here
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2006
- Messages
- 8,878
are you serious? so all of our lives, we have communicated by phone or email or you know...in person....but suddenly along comes Facebook, a way to live your life for the world to see. Obviously not for everyone, and nobody should be passively forced to live that way either.
so i do it for a little while, but day after day all i get is people's dumb ass opinions on what a piece of furniture looks like or what they had for dinner or what their fart smelled like....and in exchange for all of this important to the minute status updates I have to allow myself to be exposed....which is not okay with me.....and i think it's a bit voyeuristic to be honest.
so eventually I am like, screw this, Facebook is nothing but a marketing companies playground and a way for anyone to know more about me than they need to, or else I lock it all down and then it is pretty much pointless
and so because my siblings have decided to live their lives on the outside, and i chose not to, I am the one who is somehow in the wrong? are you fucking retarded? your own family cannot be bothered with picking up a phone to say hey you have a new niece? suddenly they can't be bothered to even contact anyone directly, they have to broadcast it across the "twittofacebookosphere"
do you realize how impersonal, and plain rude that is? obviously not. it's like the complacent people today who drive along in the left lane of the highway, blocking faster traffic, because they can't be bothered to actually pay attention to driving, they are too busy talking on the phone....in their own little bubble, fuck everyone else.....
todays society is a god damn greaseball of shit. nobody has self respect anymore and it shows
stop!theradio
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2007
- Messages
- 3,523
I'd gladly quit any job where the company demands my Facebook password. Why the FUCK would any company need that password? There's no excuse for this bullshit.
Thats the smartest reply ever...NOT.
This has nothing to do with America...it's all about liberal union fags who think they own their employees.
As well, I happen to like America, maybe you should stay out of America and see how much better life is in other countries.
And that is a valid reason to violate a persons privacy? So you don't mind giving us a key to your house do you, we want to be sure you are not doing illegal drugs in there either. You know...just to be sure.
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2004
- Messages
- 25,321
Yeah, not cool at all......I hope she sues and wins....then hopefully this alarming trend will stop
I think you missed the point. I have a facebook account with a lot of real life friends on it, I never go reading through the wall of crap people post, but if someone sends out a group invite or a personal message, it's there for me to read.
It's simply an efficient way of organising groups. Most people I know use it to give out invites. A couple of people have set up groups for alumni for my old race team, so I'm keeping in touch with the old guys who otherwise I probably would have never seen again in my life. My photographer friends post their work on it occasionally, so every now and then I'll check what new photos they've uploaded.
People assume if you're using facebook you have to be wasting 2 hours a day reading everyone's updates and commenting on what you ate for breakfast or some shit. That's not the way it works for most people.
Yes, you are the one who is somehow wrong for not keeping up to date with how people communicate through technology. Its kind of like when the phone became widespread, feeling it was terrible that people wouldn't just come and see you in person instead of ringing you up. It's a better way of interacting that doesn't interfere which compliments your existing forms of communication.
Seraphical
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2006
- Messages
- 351
I really think this should continue,
a) There is no reason people should be placing their entire lives on a webpage.
b) It should teach people the importance of strong random passwords and not just using the same thing for every one of your accounts.
a) There is no reason people should be placing their entire lives on a webpage.
b) It should teach people the importance of strong random passwords and not just using the same thing for every one of your accounts.
WTF are you talking about re "that word"? That you make ridiculous generalizations? I don't need Kyle to fight any battle for me - I'm certainly not afraid of an internet bad-ass like you. I'm suggesting that its odd that you would disparage the members of the forum and suggested that you take the advice you're giving me. Go read the drivel you posted about doritos, bawlz and xbox controllers and you'll get it. Sound out the words.
Whatever - I'll let you get back to fighting with the entire forum on this thread.
Kinda strange to agree with DeathPrincess for once. 
I'm pretty sure parents can "factually" check this out for themselves, both as a function of their parenting but also if they control their kids' facebook accounts. Later on you say about how kids try to get around controlling parental behavior, but...that's how it does, sir.
Also, what sort of society do you live in that all teachers are assumed to be as worse as possible? On behalf of the teachers I had or know that I adore and love for the people that they are, fuck you.
So we infringe on privacy to combat the *potential* for some wrongdoing?
Someone mentioned "slippery slope" in a response to you. I second that. Also, feel free to read 1984 if you want hyperbole in the opposite direction.
Someone also mentioned "strawman argument" to you. Again, I second that suggestion. This is the classic, "oh how can you be against this, if you're against this then you're against the children!" (spoken with sobs and a hand over my heart)
And you are clearly picking sides. Which is fine, in fact, if you just man up to it.
You're right. And how bad did it make us turn out to be? You make it sound like if parents don't absolutely clamp down on this, their little babies are doomed. Doomed to hell and predators and goblins who will take them away.
Kids are kids.
Besides which, yes parents can do more, and whatever point you're trying to otherwise make doesn't even matter in this topic. Mom and Dad are too tired so lets stomp around on the teachers? Seriously?
So you actually *do* have a side and a bias in this.
How is this widespread? I believe in another post you cry about "the real world" and then point to CNN.com (not sure if you were serious or sarcastic). I'm not sure your sample size (sensationalist media and a personal experience) are significant enough?
Were those childish comments/insults necessary?
Dialog? Oh, this is always a rich argument where someone spouts whatever claims, then clamps up and demands someone else solve the problem otherwise they declare themselves the winner.
Here's another solution: let's make sure teachers and students have no contact at all and in fact don't even know who each other are. They can be student 24979 and teacher Mr. J. They'll interact via isolate booths and simple teach and learn in the most sterile purile environment ever.
Dialogue? Solved.
Seriously, you've made your opinion known, which is perfectly fine, but unfortunately are not going to convince anyone else here of your viewpoint with this hamfisted logic and approach. I normally wouldn't post, but your continued, awful retorts, prompted me.
Troll +1 I guess.
I'm pretty sure parents can "factually" check this out for themselves, both as a function of their parenting but also if they control their kids' facebook accounts. Later on you say about how kids try to get around controlling parental behavior, but...that's how it does, sir.
Also, what sort of society do you live in that all teachers are assumed to be as worse as possible? On behalf of the teachers I had or know that I adore and love for the people that they are, fuck you.
So we infringe on privacy to combat the *potential* for some wrongdoing?
Someone mentioned "slippery slope" in a response to you. I second that. Also, feel free to read 1984 if you want hyperbole in the opposite direction.
Someone also mentioned "strawman argument" to you. Again, I second that suggestion. This is the classic, "oh how can you be against this, if you're against this then you're against the children!" (spoken with sobs and a hand over my heart)
And you are clearly picking sides. Which is fine, in fact, if you just man up to it.
You're right. And how bad did it make us turn out to be? You make it sound like if parents don't absolutely clamp down on this, their little babies are doomed. Doomed to hell and predators and goblins who will take them away.
Kids are kids.
Besides which, yes parents can do more, and whatever point you're trying to otherwise make doesn't even matter in this topic. Mom and Dad are too tired so lets stomp around on the teachers? Seriously?
So you actually *do* have a side and a bias in this.
How is this widespread? I believe in another post you cry about "the real world" and then point to CNN.com (not sure if you were serious or sarcastic). I'm not sure your sample size (sensationalist media and a personal experience) are significant enough?
Were those childish comments/insults necessary?
Dialog? Oh, this is always a rich argument where someone spouts whatever claims, then clamps up and demands someone else solve the problem otherwise they declare themselves the winner.
Here's another solution: let's make sure teachers and students have no contact at all and in fact don't even know who each other are. They can be student 24979 and teacher Mr. J. They'll interact via isolate booths and simple teach and learn in the most sterile purile environment ever.
Dialogue? Solved.
Seriously, you've made your opinion known, which is perfectly fine, but unfortunately are not going to convince anyone else here of your viewpoint with this hamfisted logic and approach. I normally wouldn't post, but your continued, awful retorts, prompted me.
Troll +1 I guess.
+1 !
Like another poster, me being an admin and in net security, this question being seriously posed tells me all I need to know about the culture of such an organization. And shame on me if I ever agreed to such egregious nonsense.
blitzkommando
Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2009
- Messages
- 888
That would make sense if every other form of electronic communication suddenly disappeared. But, phones, email, IM, and all sorts of other methods of communication still exist and are still widely used. In fact, I bet most of those people browse their Facebook accounts on their phones meaning that it is as 'difficult' to call as it would be to move ones fingers about the screen.
School boards are notoriously stupid. See: 'Hey! Lets teach about Jesus and his pet dinosaur Sparky in biology class even though out lawyer just called us retards for even thinking such a thing."
Kinda strange to agree with DeathPrincess for once.
I'm pretty sure parents can "factually" check this out for themselves, both as a function of their parenting but also if they control their kids' facebook accounts. Later on you say about how kids try to get around controlling parental behavior, but...that's how it does, sir.
Also, what sort of society do you live in that all teachers are assumed to be as worse as possible? On behalf of the teachers I had or know that I adore and love for the people that they are, fuck you.
So we infringe on privacy to combat the *potential* for some wrongdoing?
Someone mentioned "slippery slope" in a response to you. I second that. Also, feel free to read 1984 if you want hyperbole in the opposite direction.
Someone also mentioned "strawman argument" to you. Again, I second that suggestion. This is the classic, "oh how can you be against this, if you're against this then you're against the children!" (spoken with sobs and a hand over my heart)
And you are clearly picking sides. Which is fine, in fact, if you just man up to it.
You're right. And how bad did it make us turn out to be? You make it sound like if parents don't absolutely clamp down on this, their little babies are doomed. Doomed to hell and predators and goblins who will take them away.
Kids are kids.
Besides which, yes parents can do more, and whatever point you're trying to otherwise make doesn't even matter in this topic. Mom and Dad are too tired so lets stomp around on the teachers? Seriously?
So you actually *do* have a side and a bias in this.
How is this widespread? I believe in another post you cry about "the real world" and then point to CNN.com (not sure if you were serious or sarcastic). I'm not sure your sample size (sensationalist media and a personal experience) are significant enough?
Were those childish comments/insults necessary?
Dialog? Oh, this is always a rich argument where someone spouts whatever claims, then clamps up and demands someone else solve the problem otherwise they declare themselves the winner.
Here's another solution: let's make sure teachers and students have no contact at all and in fact don't even know who each other are. They can be student 24979 and teacher Mr. J. They'll interact via isolate booths and simple teach and learn in the most sterile purile environment ever.
Dialogue? Solved.
Seriously, you've made your opinion known, which is perfectly fine, but unfortunately are not going to convince anyone else here of your viewpoint with this hamfisted logic and approach. I normally wouldn't post, but your continued, awful retorts, prompted me.
Troll +1 I guess.
Nice: this saved me from going back and quoting all those SixFootDuo posts. The combination of "I'm not biased" + "I'm not choosing sides" + "I know a minor who dated a teacher" + "This is necessary to protect children" + "Only immature videogame nerds wouldn't agree with me" + no concept of what a slippery slope actually is was a little much. And there's no way he's trolling, he's just coming from an extremely biased position.
Agreed - a solid post by LonerVamp.
Lastly, assume a teacher gives up his password to his boss. Then teacher posts inappropriate things on his Facebook page to a student. Does he have plausible deniability that he posted it, since someone else on the same campus knows his password and could have done it?
I'm assuming Facebook has private messaging of sorts which is why actual account passwords need to be used. Sorry, I'm not an active Facebook user. But I do use other social networks and Internet communications devices (such as this forum). Shouldn't all of those, or rather in fact, a teacher's whole media presence be subject to scrutiny in a sort of bourgeois voyeur fantasy? I wonder how many bosses in that situation might blackmail or otherwise initiate inappropriate relations *that* way....
Is it just me or is it dumb that teachers have to make a secondary account just to give that one up and save their personal one? Doesn't that drive home that point that people want at least *some* blanket of privacy? Is it a bit ironic that kids do this same behavior to sneak past rules their parents make (the very parents who drive these rules on the teachers)?
Hrmm...I see a common component there but can't quite put my finger on it...
I'm assuming Facebook has private messaging of sorts which is why actual account passwords need to be used. Sorry, I'm not an active Facebook user. But I do use other social networks and Internet communications devices (such as this forum). Shouldn't all of those, or rather in fact, a teacher's whole media presence be subject to scrutiny in a sort of bourgeois voyeur fantasy? I wonder how many bosses in that situation might blackmail or otherwise initiate inappropriate relations *that* way....
Is it just me or is it dumb that teachers have to make a secondary account just to give that one up and save their personal one? Doesn't that drive home that point that people want at least *some* blanket of privacy? Is it a bit ironic that kids do this same behavior to sneak past rules their parents make (the very parents who drive these rules on the teachers)?
Hrmm...I see a common component there but can't quite put my finger on it...
nobody_here
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2006
- Messages
- 8,878
bad analogy, sending a text or making a phone call is not the equivalent of going to see someone in person
if we were talking about me missing out on an old school friends birthday because im not on facebook, sure....sue me, but when your own brother can't pick up a phone, that goes well beyond facebook as a communication tool. that's just plain old apathy
you still didn't answer to the fact that to even be on and use facebook i have to expose myself, my info, my thoughts and opinions, to the facebook community. or at minimum everyone in my "friends" list.
i am not anti-social. i carry an android phone with instant access to phone, text, email, etc.....and i always answer it when someone calls. i have a google+ profile even, because on google+ i am not hammered with a zillion farmville notices or don't have to weave through tons of ads or be asked for my permission a dozen times a week for a bunch of crap i don't care about....yes i realize you can opt out of all that garbage, but why the hell should i have to? i shouldn't. and i won't. not when i am sitting here with at least 5 other ways to instantly get in touch with me that don't require me to put up with all that bullshit
i seriously don't understand this attitude that says you should have to put up with all that bullshit just in order to make it easy for lazy people to contact you
fuck that noise, i am a 5 second keypress away, if you can't be bothered to do that much i don't really give a damn what happens
Social networking sites aren't going to replace other forms of electronic communication, they're just a more efficient method for group communication compared to trying to ring 50 different people or using those big arse group emails and such. I gave the examples for which I use facebook, and they're all things which would be much more annoying to achieve through traditional communication channels. Just because Facebook can be used from phone doesn't mean its just as easy to ring 10 people as it is to message those same 10 people an invite to, say, go out to the pub this friday or come to your birthday party.
nobody_here
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2006
- Messages
- 8,878
you can send a text to multiple people just as easily as making a facebook post, and you don't require anyone to subscribe to facebook, plus you only reach those you really want to reach instead of casting a net hoping to get a few
Its the Big Brother Syndrome. People in Power (Govt) believe that everyone is doing something or will do something they don't agree with and to squash that person before they spread any truth or untruth is needed to "Protect Children".
The "To Protect Children" reason is far overused and from what I see, its a last ditch effort to convince mindless dolts that unless this or that is passed we will be harming children and who wants to be on the other side of that argument?
I'm for freedom and that means ALL freedom. I don't need Big Brother telling me what to do or what to think. Unless there is "probable cause" and a warrant issued, I would never willingly answer any questions about any of my activities or political leanings or thoughts or passwords. And even then I have the right to remain silent, so good luck with that. I have nothing to hide but its nobodies business what I do or watch or read or listen to. And if my facebook is so god damned interesting to them, try and hack it.
Will the School District soon ask for your banking password because maybe you are taking bribes from parents for good grades or selling drugs and stashing money. Or maybe you are a hooker or stripper and if they only could have your bank account password to make sure you aren't, because we need to protect the children.
Why don't they ask for your craigslist account and password. Maybe you're selling stolen ipads and to protect the children you need to be stopped.
The "To Protect Children" reason is far overused and from what I see, its a last ditch effort to convince mindless dolts that unless this or that is passed we will be harming children and who wants to be on the other side of that argument?
I'm for freedom and that means ALL freedom. I don't need Big Brother telling me what to do or what to think. Unless there is "probable cause" and a warrant issued, I would never willingly answer any questions about any of my activities or political leanings or thoughts or passwords. And even then I have the right to remain silent, so good luck with that. I have nothing to hide but its nobodies business what I do or watch or read or listen to. And if my facebook is so god damned interesting to them, try and hack it.
Will the School District soon ask for your banking password because maybe you are taking bribes from parents for good grades or selling drugs and stashing money. Or maybe you are a hooker or stripper and if they only could have your bank account password to make sure you aren't, because we need to protect the children.
Why don't they ask for your craigslist account and password. Maybe you're selling stolen ipads and to protect the children you need to be stopped.
What the f**k are the parents over there? That's such a mild issue that's been blown way out of proportion.
It's not like your daughter had sex with her teacher...and then as the mother, you also had sex with that same teacher. And because of that, your daughter reported things to the school principal (and then the police) instead. Because you stole the teacher from your daughter! What kind of mother are you??? LOL (this actually happened in Japan)
It's not like your daughter had sex with her teacher...and then as the mother, you also had sex with that same teacher. And because of that, your daughter reported things to the school principal (and then the police) instead. Because you stole the teacher from your daughter! What kind of mother are you??? LOL (this actually happened in Japan)
Why can't you see the messages about your niece and ring them? Facebook is a great way of getting the news out there to a lot of people who might want to know, then if they want to contact you back about it personally, they can. Its just a more efficient way of doing things. I might want to know that my mate from University is having a kid, but I also might not want to ring them up about it nor they ring me about it.
I don't think you understand how facebook works. You don't have to expose anything, that's YOUR choice to do that. You know what I have on my facebook account? My name. My old University (where most my friends originate from). That's it. Its not even my full name, I only use half my surname. You wouldn't be able to find me on it unless I told you or added you myself. You know what thoughts and opinions I have on there? None. I almost never post on it. As I said on the previous page, people assume that by having facebook you in turn have to waste 2 hours on it every day posting your deepest darkest thoughts and opinions on it when reality is there's only a small portion of people who actually do that. I can safely say that 95% of the facebook comments I see are from the same 5% of people, and I simply don't read them (unless I'm looking for an excuse to procrastinate).
You don't have to put up with anything, you make an account, add friends, if you see a message it stands out, if you don't, you close the window. It goes both ways, if all your friends and family use it, they shouldn't have to put up with making sure they personally give you all information because you can't keep up with the times and just use a facebook account.
So go be a hermit and stop complaining. Or you could check facebook, see what news there is and choose to ring them instead of bitching about how people exclude you because you can't be bothered keeping up with their news.
And hey, people still do that, if they only want to contact a few people and only have to manage a few responses, text messages work great. But for certain tasks facebook is simply a more efficient way of doing it that doesn't require micromanaging things.
nobody_here
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2006
- Messages
- 8,878
facebook is an utterly unnecessary way to do what could just as easily be done in a much more personal, meaningful way that doesn't come across as lazy and apathetic, period.
sending out one email or text to a group of people requires no effort beyond a facebook post. and it doesn't require other people be a part of a "social experience"
it's quite confusing how readily people are willing to pimp out themselves to be so involved in everyone else's daily thoughts, because at the end of the day that's all facebook is. a socially acceptable way to be all about everyone else's business. which is rather sickening
sending out one email or text to a group of people requires no effort beyond a facebook post. and it doesn't require other people be a part of a "social experience"
it's quite confusing how readily people are willing to pimp out themselves to be so involved in everyone else's daily thoughts, because at the end of the day that's all facebook is. a socially acceptable way to be all about everyone else's business. which is rather sickening
You are aware, of course, that instant messengers have been around for over a decade... email has been around since the founding of the internet.
Why the hell does anyone NEED Facebook for sending quick instant messages between people?
They profile you. Anything linked to you will never die or go away.
If you aren't the customer, you are the product. Users of Facebook don't pay. They are the product being sold and tracked. It's the biggest screwjob of privacy in the history of humanity. What boggles my mind is why any person WANTS to use it.
Ten years from now, you may not want everyone to know you just went to the doctor to be sterilized right before your current wife files for divorce. But there it is, on your wall... with all your online non-friends commenting on it, with your linked location from your cellphone putting you at the doctor at that time.
Seriously, wtf?