# Social Media



## hitest (Feb 10, 2019)

Over the last year or so I have disengaged from most social media platforms.  The last to possibly go is FB.  The problem is I have friends in a variety of communities.  I am weighing the cost/benefit ratio for staying with the platform.  I am leaning towards departure, I feel it is becoming a theft of time.  What are your thoughts about social media engagement?


----------



## Phishfry (Feb 10, 2019)

I pulled the Facebook plug when Facebook went public. I was dumbfounded that I make Zuck a billionaire.
Did not delete my profile and even hit on a few women I am friends with afterwords.
Now, fast-forward to today and I am so disappointed that Zuck knows who I am hitting on via PRIVATE messages.
There is no sense deleting any of it. Once the info is out of the bag there is no deleting your data.

I am a news junkie and I am so disappointed at the output at Google News.
They could do great work but they chose to push politics more and more.
I am tuning them out now.

I only use a flip phone with very limited browser. So not a cell phone == computer user.

If it wern't for Facebook I would not have heard of my High School 30th Class Reunion.
So there was value to me.
But before Facebook there was Classmates.com. A paid service.
Would you now have PAID for a 'classmates.com' if you knew your details were not whored out by data pimps.
Why yes I would have.


----------



## forquare (Feb 10, 2019)

I dislike Facebook much more than Twitter, specifically I dislike the concept of “Friends” vs “Followers”. 

On Facebook I (and others I’ve spoken to) feel obliged to accept “Friend Requests” from real life friends and family, occasionally work colleagues too. They then spout a load of stuff, Facebook then dredges through it and decides to show you the stuff that makes you feel like you’re the only one in the world not able to afford a holiday/kids/house, or whatever.
I’ve resolved to looking at Facebook once a day from my home desktop, which actually only gets powered up two or three times a week.

Contrast that to Twitter where I don’t feel obliged to “Follow” people I know, but rather people I like. I use it as a sort of interactive RSS feed. Plus third party tools (Tweetbot) allow me to hide tweets with specific words in so I can further curate what I want to see. 
Because of the relationship difference you can stop following me, but i am still welcome to follow you, and that’s fine. 

With the somewhat new ability to “unfollow” a Facebook friend, Facebook now struggles to find posts to show me. I often see a friends post, that I’ve already seen the day before, followed by three or four adverts, then the end of the feed…

Regarding the theft of time, I thought the same about Twitter a while ago. I trialled a week without it, but that didn’t work for me (actually I spent more time browsing here and other forums). When I returned to Twitter I decided one of the problems was I was following too many people.
After cutting the amount of people I followed from around 200 to around 60, I’d open Twitter to find nothing had changed then simply move on. 

Depending on where exactly Facebook takes your time, it may be a stepping stone to unlike groups or unfollow friends that don’t post constructive things for you, and even defriend people who you’ve not interacted with for some time.


----------



## Datapanic (Feb 10, 2019)

I spend just as much time here on forums.freebsd.org as I do on FB.  The difference is that on FB, I keep up with old friends, like from 50 years ago, that aren't going to be anywhere else.  The benefit of FB is that it can be used and you can control how it uses you.

That and my Mom is on FB and we are friends.  But she is not a BSD user, so here, I can freely say stuff without her reprimands!


----------



## ralphbsz (Feb 10, 2019)

Let's start with Google: It is a search company.  It's purpose is to give people those search results that the people want to see, meaning the results that they click on.  If Google News gives you too much politics, it is because either you yourself, or the average person is clicking on those results more frequently.  There is some way to tune Google news to emphasize certain sections over others, or to weight them, but I don't know the details (found it once, adjusted what I liked and disliked, reduced sports, turned off entertainment, increased international politics, and then forgot how to adjust it).  Do some web searches for it.

One particular aspect of social media is that much of it is simply a 1-on-1 communication mechanism.  These days, the communication techniques I use include face-to-face meetings (like driving over to a neighbor), paper letters (those are getting to be very rare and used for formal occasions, like legal proceedings), landline phone, cell phone, e-mails, and an insanely large variety of instant messages / voice / video calls, including at least cell phone SMS, Facebook Messenger, Skype, Google Hangouts, WhatsApp, Apple iMessage, Facetime, and so on.  And some of those work better than others in unexpected places.  For example, a few weeks ago I was in a strange foreign country, but staying in a nice hotel with good WiFi.  Long distance calls to home were very expensive, and had bad voice quality.  So instead I used Facebook Messenger calls to talk to my wife, and sometimes even Facebook video calls 3-way with my son and my wife.

But that meant that my wife had to create a personal Facebook account (she only had an account she used to care care of the Facebook page of some work-related stuff).  So now she is a Facebook "user", in the sense that she has an account, with nearly nothing posted.

Social media, and in particular Facebook and LinkedIn, are a two-edged sword.  As described above, to some extent they are simply a necessity: you have to sign up, just to use their free and very useful messaging / communication mechanisms.  I actually have quite a few friends that I can _ONLY_ reach via Facebook Messenger, or via LinkedIn.  While I fully expect Facebook / Skype / WhatsApp / Apple / ... to listen to my personal communications, I don't care: The NSA is listening to all my phone calls too, and privacy of communication is unfortunately a thing of the past.  If I really need to have a conversation that I expect others to not see, I either meet with them in person (with my wife, my manager, my doctor, or my lawyer), or I send a paper letter in a sealed envelope.

The other useful feature of things like Facebook is as a replacement for closed e-mail lists.  For example, a few months ago a group of about 20 friends found themselves having been kicked out of their favorite discussion forum (for reasons of power struggle among administrators of that forum). We had no place to connect.  What did we do?  We quickly created a secret and closed Facebook group.  Took less than a few hours, and we were communicating again.

The public features of Facebook and friends are not all that bad, if you use them correctly.  I post things there.  When I do, I first think about what I want the whole world to see about me.  My political views?  Hardly.  My preference in drinks, cars, and such things?  Only if I really want to.  My profession?  Not at all.  I do post pictures and texts about my hobbies there.


----------



## Crivens (Feb 10, 2019)

I find the effect of social media (which makes filter bubbles and detachment from reality almost a given) very very dangerous for people, families and cultures. In the end, a danger for humanity.

The feedback loops of facebook for example make divorce more likely.  You get to see so many happy people, models, whatever. Sadly, the human brain keeps track of 50, maybe 100 people (tribe, village, clan) so anything else does not really register. And so the world is full of happy princes[es], and you are the miserable one who deserves (!!!) better. So divorce rate correlates with face book usage.

In some decades, society will have adapted, IFF it survives. So do with social media like with adult beverages. Know the limit and keep it away from minors. Just go out and imagine each mobile smartphone in someones hand, lit up, was a bottle. You would consider THAT a huge problem, yes?


----------



## fernandel (Feb 10, 2019)

I have just net-im/uTox and I have friends and we are visited each other, sitting together and talking whatever we want, drinking and have a real life.


----------



## Birdy (Feb 10, 2019)

hitest said:


> What are your thoughts about social media engagement?



I don't participate in "social" media. If somebody posts anything about me or my family to them without my/our consent the person is banned for life. And apologies are not accepted.


----------



## Sevendogsbsd (Feb 10, 2019)

I only participate in Twitter and anonymously. My wife did pressure me to create a Facebook account (aaarrrggghhh) but I do not put pictures of myself, just my avatar which is one of my dogs. I also post a lot of technical (FreeBSD of course!) things like screenshots, or other things of that nature that drive her nuts


----------



## sidetone (Feb 10, 2019)

Off-topic of the FreeBSD forums is especially social media. All of the forum can technically be seen as it for the subject of FreeBSD, but it's useful.
It's ok, but I don't see as much discussion on setting up interesting or new features. There are, but some areas don't interest me, or fewer people participate in them. It's great when they do. There's a lot of complaints how they don't want the FreeBSD forums to be a social media, yet, many including myself seem to gravitate towards the subjects on these forums. There's also gravitation away from technical subjects, which is fine, but that is a social media habit. This type of arguably social media is fine, but not to get wrapped up in like how some absorbed self-serving companies (Facebook) promote (not the case here).

There's social media that's harmless or informative, then there's exploitative and (to various degrees) time wasting social media. Social media such as Facebook, I never understood its potential usefulness, and that was because it turned out later, it wasn't ultimately useful to anyone except for exploitation and far too often meaningless social circles: namely Zuckerberg', his associates, those who bought data to manipulate, then those who get trapped in it, but get used and still don't realize it. I read Twitter, and I don't see it like Facebook. Twitter is straightforward in its purpose and policies, has useful purposes, but it's not truly anonymous.


----------



## ronaldlees (Feb 10, 2019)

I was an FB member for only a couple months.  That's all the time it took me to figure out it was really just a network metadata collector.   I was a Gmail beta tester, and thought it was OK at the time, but that was _before_ the (ahem) "new and improved" privacy policy.  I never agreed to the update, but they didn't kill the account.  I rarely use it anymore.   Forums are social media.  They're media (connect people), and that's social.  But, forums are a long way removed from the big-data oriented _social media for the masses _sites.   I stay away from the latter.


----------



## Vull (Feb 10, 2019)

Facebook gives me a way to get in touch or stay in touch with people whose telephone numbers I don't have, but I don't hang out there. Most of the people on my contact list there don't hang out there either; rather, there are maybe 10 or 20, out of about 300, who actually do seem to check in regularly every day, and who seem to spend a lot of time there. Of those, many of them seem to be there mainly for political trolling, but there are also a few who use Facebook to organize real-life social events, or post their vacation pictures, pix of their kids or themselves, cartoons, gags, artistic efforts, philosophical diatribes, or even mundane stuff like photos of what they had to eat for dinner sometimes.

Even if I had no account there, my name and picture would still be on there, due to friends and relatives posting their own stuff that sometimes has me in it.


----------



## Deleted member 9563 (Feb 10, 2019)

Facebook is anti-social because it separates people from the internet. That is a travesty.


----------



## hitest (Feb 11, 2019)

Just deleted my FB account.  It is good to be free of that.  Many thanks for your comments, observations, and critiques of social media.


----------



## Phishfry (Feb 11, 2019)

Can you imagine people sending in their DNA to a website. Upload your whole genealogy.
"For Free" they said. Wow what a great deal.

Before Facebook there was Myspace. AOL bought them on their death spiral.

Was Usenet Social Media?
Looking back I think so.
IRC Social Media... yup


----------



## Phishfry (Feb 11, 2019)

Datapanic said:


> That and my Mom is on FB and we are friends.


I share this experience.
My Mom uses it in a business capacity. (Exectutive Resumes-Career Services)
I was spewing vendom about NSA spying.
Makes her look bad.


----------



## sidetone (Feb 11, 2019)

Phishfry said:


> Can you imagine people sending in their DNA to a website. Upload you whole genealogy. For Free they said.
> Wow.


They've solved 20 year old crimes from DNA from a scene that was matched up to someone who've never had their DNA tests, because they narrowed them down from extended relatives who submitted DNA.


Phishfry said:


> I was spewing vendom about ...



Anyway, while I see the dangers of Facebook, the government is not likely out to get people, unless they do something like try to build a bomb, make a corrupt person upset, are a target for a corrupt person, or if they express their opinion in an authoritatian country. Calm down.


----------



## Deleted member 9563 (Feb 11, 2019)

Phishfry said:


> IRC Social Media... yup


I use IRC as a social thing. It's been wonderful, but it does not offer a way to connect people except the few on your channels. For actually connecting people, and me with them, I use the internet.

It is unfortunate that the internet, or perhaps more specifically, the WWW, is not something that people feel is theirs and they steadfastly refuse to take an active role and instead just watch - completely passively. I make sites for people and that helps them, but in terms of an actual "social network" kind of function, I made a simple page with some basic stuff that I feel distinguishes me on a personal or family level. Unlike Facebook, this is picked up by search engines. From that I have gotten emails and telephone calls from long lost friends and others from half a century ago.

PS: I actually put my email, telephone, and address, on that little page. In a period of 10 years or more, that has not resulted in any security or privacy issues. Many people are surprised that they can just "google" me for my contact info.


----------



## ProphetOfDoom (Feb 12, 2019)

I'm a social media hypocrite. I know what Facebook does is wrong, but I use it anyway, because everyone else does.
My best friend is working all the hours God sends and trying for a baby... If I told her she must use another app specifically to contact me, we'd never talk. I doubt she could even log in to IRC - it's too technical for her. My favourite thing is computers; her favourite thing is nice shoes .
I long for the MSN days when conversations were only logged if you chose file->save. That seems much more obvious/intuitive/civilised.
Just on a purely technical level, Facebook's web UI is awful too. So cluttered.


----------



## ronaldlees (Feb 20, 2019)

OJ said:


> ... Unlike Facebook, this is picked up by search engines. From that I have gotten emails and telephone calls from long lost friends and others from half a century ago.
> 
> PS: I actually put my email, telephone, and address, on that little page. In a period of 10 years or more, that has not resulted in any security or privacy issues. Many people are surprised that they can just "google" me for my contact info.



I have been the recipient of contacts from my ancestral land, via a small site I used to run.  I think blogs on big commercial blog sites are actually de-rated in search engines, so they're sort of anti-connect, anti-social sites.

Anyway, I easily found your city, as it's in your forum profile.  That's a little refreshing.  The "wolf under every tree" mentality that almost every netizen feels has driven the population into self induced permanent anonymity from the rest of the population (you mostly only know other netizens as screen names) - while crooks and gubmints can know you better than any of your nameless screen friends.  Doesn't seem right.  The mentality keeps the individuals in the population isolated from each other, actually.

I looked up your locale on Google maps - you have hundreds of miles of national forest to your south, and virtually nobody within maybe 50 miles on the other sides?  Plus, it's probably cold up there?  So, you're perfectly safe up there!  (except for bear, of course  ).

BTW: Good to see you posting again,
   - Ron


----------



## kpedersen (Feb 20, 2019)

It is all fine in moderation. I scan through facebook about once a week to see if anything is happening; then I get back to work the FreeBSD forums.
Things like Twitter and Facebook only get bad once people invest their lives in passively consuming content and uploading all their information.
If any social media requires information from me, I just mash the keyboard and send them jibberish. No commitment, 100% safe and no real loss of functionality.

Social media is just like the tax man... Try to send him as little correct information as possible


----------



## hitest (Feb 20, 2019)

kpedersen said:


> It is all fine in moderation.



Sure.  I'm glad that you're able to consume social media responsibly.  I am 10 days clean of FB and I don't miss it.  More time for blogging, photography, reading, walking, etc.


----------



## Phishfry (Feb 21, 2019)

Next up ditch the fitbit or smart phone and get a phone with a removable battery for true locational freedom..
Allow yourself to be free from the digital pimps.


----------



## ronaldlees (Feb 21, 2019)

Phishfry said:


> Next up ditch the fitbit or smart phone and get a phone with a removable battery for true locational freedom..
> Allow yourself to be free from the digital pimps.



Very true statement.  Ultimately, if you don't have what you term "locational freedom," you will eventually not have any freedom at all.  In countries where they _ask for papers_ at strategic points on public travel conduits, they are using that process to eliminate "locational freedom".   People think such phraseology sounds antiquated, because it's no longer necessary to _ask for papers_ at checkpoints, since that process has been automated with technology.  However; while the process can now proceed clandestinely with automation, the same dangers still exist whether it's enacted via persons or instead by technologies.

People who believe that all the collection will always be used just for digital pimping are being short sighted and naive.  What amazes me is how people are so willing to accept the referenced technologies - such that they make fashion statements by adorning themselves with it.  I hope they understand whose fault it is at the point where the downsides are easily recognized.  These concepts are really connected with social media too IMO.

Don't assume your battery can't track you, and keep wearing your IR/5.0 welder's glasses (new term to know is "tracking photon")  .

  -Ron


----------



## tingo (Feb 21, 2019)

How far are you gonna go?
Today it is almost impossible not to be tracked.
Example:

cards (for payment, access to public transportation, etc.). Are you able to do daily life without any? If not, you are tracked.
cars (both personal cars and carpool / rental services): all modern vehicles are tracked through their internal systems, and all vehicles through traffic surveillance
identification: any place you need to identify yourself (for example to get access to a service or a place) you can be tracked.
web browsers:  don't get me started. Many browsers track you whenever they can; if they can't get an id (from a sign in for example) they use a fingerprint instead.


----------



## ronaldlees (Feb 21, 2019)

tingo said:


> How far are you gonna go?
> ...  Today it is almost impossible not to be tracked ...



So True.

Yet, the ultimate result of accepting this meme on its current trajectory could mean that things go to a point that is as wrong/bad as anything my mind could ever conceptualize as wrong.  Apathy is not the answer.


----------



## Crivens (Feb 21, 2019)

Well, 1984 was a warning. NOT a bleeping instruction manual.


----------



## ronaldlees (Feb 21, 2019)

These automated processes that are embedded in social media sites, other sites, and also in software and hardware are being used already in ways that should raise eyebrows.  Here is just one recent example:






						Reverse Location Search Warrants - Schneier on Security
					






					www.schneier.com
				




The entities using these types of searches are very reluctant to talk about it.  That seems reasonable.


----------



## ralphbsz (Feb 21, 2019)

If you don't want to get tracked, make sure to not wear your face or body in public.  Where I define "public" as places where you can be seen.

If it isn't obvious: this post is a mix of reality and irony.  For the last ~50,000 years, humans have not had absolute privacy in public.  The moment they can be seen, they can be identified, and therefore track.  The only change is that the technology for identifying and tracking has become more accurate and efficient.  Even 2000 years ago, a sufficiently powerful adversary could station enough of their henchmen at every corner and every tree in the forest to find you.


----------



## Phishfry (Feb 21, 2019)

tingo said:


> cards (for payment, access to public transportation, etc.).


Vanilla Visa PrePaid Debit cards


tingo said:


> cars (both personal cars and carpool / rental services): all modern vehicles


I drive an older vehicle. Fsck onstar and cellular modems I can't control.


tingo said:


> identification:


I wear my Guy Fawkes mask everywhere I go...(Just kidding on this one)


----------



## Phishfry (Feb 21, 2019)

I need to figure out a digital curtain for my car license plate. Readable by human eye but not machines.
Something to screw up the focus of cameras.
The cops in my area are starting to adopt plate scanners.
Totally unconstitutional searches taking place. I did nothing wrong. You have no right to automatically check my tag.
Innocent until proven guilty?


----------



## ralphbsz (Feb 21, 2019)

Phishfry said:


> Readable by human eye but not machines.


Depending on your state you'll very likely violate some law if you do that.



> Totally unconstitutional searches taking place.


You were searched?  The plate scanner stopped you, made you comply with an order to not leave, and then searched you?  Probably not.  I don't think you understand what "search" means.  

The constitution doesn't say that the police (whether human officer or automatic device) don't have the right to look around.  They are allowed to see everything that happens or is visible in public.  That includes from example your face, by which you can be very likely identified.  For cars, our society has decided that they need to have visible identification marks; and we have to assume that it is constitutional, since no court of last resort has ever declared it unconstitutional.



> Innocent until proven guilty?


You were not found guilty; scanning plates does not automatically create convictions.  Until you have been arrested and convicted for driving a stolen car (as an example), you are actually innocent.  Even if the cop's automated device has seen your license plate, and has reasonable suspicion (a term of art) that this car was stolen.  "Innocent until proven guilty" doesn't mean that law enforcement can not investigate things that might be crimes (even though in most cases it is not).

Remember: Your opinion (and my opinion!) on what is constitutional is worth exactly nothing.  Only the opinion of courts count, in particular the courts that create precedent, in particular binding precedent.


----------



## ronaldlees (Feb 21, 2019)

Phishfry said:


> I need to figure out a digital curtain for my car license plate. Readable by human eye but not machines.
> Something to screw up the focus of cameras.



Some states are toying with the idea of LED license plates.  Prototypes are indistinguishable from the real thing except at close-up distances.  A small MCU and memory would hold the account info for the number on the plate.  Can't imagine that'd ever get hacked.


----------



## Phishfry (Feb 22, 2019)

ralphbsz said:


> You were searched?


They scan your tag and then search a database of tags.
With no probable cause.


----------



## Phishfry (Feb 22, 2019)

In the old analog days a policeman was not allowed to run every tag in a parking lot for no reason.
With an automated tag scanner the process is now allowable?
If the data was destroyed immediately I might be OK with it. I have nothing to hide.


----------



## Phishfry (Feb 22, 2019)

What really made me laugh is that NYC Police were beefing on Waze because they were giving away locations of speed traps and checkpoints.


----------



## Deleted member 30996 (Feb 22, 2019)

Phishfry said:


> In the old analog days a policeman was not allowed to run every tag in a parking lot for no reason.




The building complex liaison to Local Law Enforcement ran my tag last night when I was sitting in my truck on the lot smoking a stogie. He recognized my plates had recently changed and sat behind me while he ran them but did not approach the vehicle.

A Passive-Aggressive Personality trait I had already identified in him from past encounters and easy to spot in others. Though he was well within his rights to carry out.


----------



## Crivens (Feb 22, 2019)

ronaldlees said:


> Some states are toying with the idea of LED license plates.  Prototypes are indistinguishable from the real thing except at close-up distances.  A small MCU and memory would hold the account info for the number on the plate.  Can't imagine that'd ever get hacked.


Never. Hacking is verboten! 

Trihexagonal that behavior can backfire. Sadly not often enough. Like doing a house search without a warrant, waking the owner and then suddenly recognizing that face after he had donned his house gown. Say hello to Mr. State Attorny and good bye to your career.


----------



## Deleted member 30996 (Feb 22, 2019)

Crivens, I've lived there for 11 years now and only had dealings with him a couple times. 

Once when his puppy dog got him to tag my car for parking in what he thought was his space, which ended up with my car hours from being towed, me in his face and him packing black powder rifles in their case out to his truck as an attempted means to intimidate me. 

It didn't.

The constable in question tried to defend him by saying "They were only black powder rifles."

I asked him if he knew how many people were killed during the Civil War with black powder rifles.

Anyway, that guy is the newly crowned building Security Guard and in his glory at the moment, so we'll see how this goes. I can deal with it.


----------



## Crivens (Feb 22, 2019)

_Ouch_ passive aggressive with new powers and tools. What can possibly go wrong?


----------



## ronaldlees (Feb 22, 2019)

Trihexagonal said:


> Crivens
> ... packing black powder rifles _in their case_ out to his truck as an attempted means to intimidate me.
> 
> It didn't. ...



In my territory, we had a similar circumstance, but the guns (yes, there were two of them!) - were tossed onto the front seat of the vehicle. When he tossed them I waited for the sound of an accidental firing (which put visions of ambulances in my head).  I have two bullet holes in my house, but they were not from this guy.  This was many years ago.  Things are a bit calmer in this area now (at least in some respects).  Lasers seem to be the new thing.

The new normal for people is not really normal.  Part of  the problem are the food additives.


----------



## Deleted member 30996 (Feb 22, 2019)

That's how he got away with it, they were in a case. He doesn't get a bullet with his new position, much less a gun. Just a free apartment and a title, which puts him under a new set of rules as an employee for me to work with.

He may feel a sense of power with his new position, but I specialize in slow learners and have no plans on moving.


----------



## Deleted member 30996 (Feb 23, 2019)

ronaldlees said:


> The "wolf under every tree" mentality that almost every netizen feels has driven the population into self induced permanent anonymity from the rest of the population (you mostly only know other netizens as screen names) - while crooks and gubmints can know you better than any of your nameless screen friends.



There may not be a wolf under every tree, but the forest is full of trees.


To bring myself back on topic, I'm old and feeble minded, consider it a breach of security to have a plethora of personal info presented for public perusal on platforms like Facebook.

IMO, the average person is only feeding their own ego or engaging in self-promotion and as long as they don't have controversial political views or create conflict could go on to be a youtube star and eventually end up on TV like Diamond and Silk. And while they have their haters due to said expression of political views, it comes with the territory. They're strong and intelligent enough to deal with it.

Then there is Elmer Fudd who wanders into the forest going wabbit hunting with black powder gunz-a-blazin' only to find himself a mere babe in the woods at the mercy of that wascally wabbit.

T-t-t-t-that's all, folks.


The Security Guard and the Constable are two different people if I didn't make myself clear. The Security Guard is the one I had conflict with. He's a former Corrections Officer that got fired for sexual harassment and brown-nosed his way into this job acting like it was only a transfer when he moved in the building. He's in tight with the Constable but only a resident and at one point people talked about getting a petition up to get him out.


----------



## Nicola Mingotti (Feb 23, 2019)

I like to post bullshit on Facebook, in the last one i pretend to be Jacques Cousteau. this is the only use i see for Facebook: share comic content with my far friends. 

i spend about 10 minutes every 3 days on FB. In the past i used to spend there a lot more time.


----------



## michael_hackson (Feb 23, 2019)

I was slow on getting Facebook and the only social media I really liked was the MSN Messenger. What I never liked about Facebook was that everything about you was on display for "the people allowed". I didn't find it appealing to have any possible "flaw" about myself out in the open linked to my personal details; also: Where is the fun in getting to know a person you already know everything about?

Had Facebook for a few years because of peer pressure and the fright of being left out alone 'til a day I simply just couldn't stand logging in 8 times each 20 minutes checking the feed of plain "nothing". I quit and started focusing on other areas in my life and realised I had a lot of time to spend on other more important things.

The positive thing about Facebook would be for marketing and politics.

The main social media I use today is an old forum for rockers and occationally I lurk the websites for dating when wanting to meet someone new.


----------



## hitest (Feb 24, 2019)

Phishfry said:


> Next up ditch the fitbit or smart phone and get a phone with a removable battery for true locational freedom..



I've removed all traces of FB from my smart phone.  The unit does have a good camera which is lighter to lug around than my Nikon.  I like taking pictures with my phone.  You are correct in that we are constantly being tracked.


----------



## Crivens (Feb 25, 2019)

Did anyone know that your Tesla is phoning home with position and speed every beeping second?


----------



## bookwormep (Feb 25, 2019)

I am not much of a participant on Social Media. Sure, I write a few posts here. The Electronic Frontier Foundation has an excellent webpage detailing the use/abuse of Automated License Plate Readers.
My local news media sources described how a law enforcement officer became the target of many
unauthorized searches, by other law enforcement officers! Maybe those are government checks and balances, but I kind of doubt that.


----------



## cynwulf (Feb 26, 2019)

bookwormep said:


> I am not much of a participant on Social Media. Sure, I write a few posts here. The Electronic Frontier Foundation has an excellent webpage detailing the use/abuse of Automated License Plate Readers.


Interesting article thanks.

Sadly ANPR is only advancing and being extended in the UK.  Unlike the US, there is really nobody interested in fighting the fight for privacy and pushing back against the onset of these Orwellian technologies.  I think it's been said that we have more CCTV here than anywhere else in the world.


----------



## Crivens (Feb 26, 2019)

cynwulf said:


> I think it's been said that we have more CCTV here than anywhere else in the world.


And did they figure out that each video of a crime on these cameras is proof that these cameras don't prevent crimes?


----------



## cynwulf (Feb 26, 2019)

Well, to pull out a specific example: https://www.statista.com/statistics/410943/london-public-transport-crimes-by-mode/

So London Transport, a network of busses, trains and underground which is peppered with CCTV - and recorded crime is rising rather than falling.

So you have nearly a decade of cuts to policing and social care, cuts to mental health services, youth services, overflowing prisons and the answer is of course, still to throw more money at surveillance...


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Feb 26, 2019)

cynwulf said:


> recorded crime is rising rather than falling.


It wasn't recorded at all before. Now it is. Thus the reason recorded crime is rising.


----------



## ronaldlees (Feb 26, 2019)

cynwulf said:


> ...
> Sadly ANPR is only advancing and being extended in the UK.  Unlike the US, there is really nobody interested in fighting the fight for privacy and pushing back against the onset of these Orwellian technologies.  I think it's been said that we have more CCTV here than anywhere else in the world.



Isn't it interesting that the author of 1984 was an Indian/Englishman person (real name Eric Blair)?  I think part of the problem with England is that it has no constitution.  Is that still a correct statement?  Anyway, one of those fancy documents tends to slow down the march of such things as we're talking about here - but eventually it seems that founding papers get put into museums and shoved aside anyway.    I think the real problem is part of the human genome.


----------



## cynwulf (Feb 26, 2019)

drhowarddrfine said:


> It wasn't recorded at all before. Now it is. Thus the reason recorded crime is rising.


Nope, it has certainly been recorded before those data sets were published.


----------



## PMc (Feb 26, 2019)

cynwulf said:


> So you have nearly a decade of cuts to policing and social care, cuts to mental health services, youth services, overflowing prisons and the answer is of course, still to throw more money at surveillance...



Government is not to be mistaken as general therapist and full service institution. During 99.99% of history people had to eat just the beet they had planted themselves. And the problems started after that was no longer the case.


----------

