Err...what's the point of this 6 year old article, OP? Are there any specific issues about it that make it relevant now or that you wish to discuss? If so, if would help if you'd put them in the post.
While this article might be old as fuck, it's still relevant IMO.
Morally speaking I'd say that it is a duty, but a weak one, since it depends on:
I don't know if it's a duty but it is a damn good idea and has been for awhile now. I left Facebook in 2014 and I can't even imagine how much worse the last 10 years would have been for me if I'd been part of that shit show.
And for those paying attention, the last 10 years have not exactly been a blast anyway.
2016 for me, and yes. It was specifically family that drove me off, believe it or not.
I see so many people recommending deleting your Facebook account. As far as I am aware, that only removes your ability to control the information they collect. They will create a shadow profile of you anyway.
If you've already accepted their terms of service and have an account: Best thing to do is to lock down the privacy controls, audit the "off-facebook-activity" trackers once in a while and avoid those websites in the future, and never use the account. Give them no wiggle room.
Whatever data you gave them was theirs to begin with. You can't change that even if you delete it. The best you can do is remove the app form all devices and not interact so that you give them no more.
The major thing it does is stop you logging into Facebook. This is by far the best thing you can do to make yourself happier.
No, but there may be an ethical one, depending on your ethical standards.
That said, I highly recommend you leave Facebook. I did many years ago, and have decided to never touch Meta products again. I suggest you do the same, not because of a moral or ethical obligation, but because you dislike the platform.
I think you could make a case for a moral basis, provided your morality stems from the "harm reduction" philosophy.
For my part, privacy was my biggest concern. I was tired of being "the product" and being fed to the ragebait algorithm with no say in how my data got used (and the fact that you can't trust that opting out will be respected). Leaving that abusive relationship was one of the best decisions I ever made, and everybody else would be wise to do the same.
ETA: I'm even hesitant to follow a Threads account via Mastodon, because I can't trust that Zuck won't use that link as an open invitation to gobble up all my data again.
For me, it was mostly privacy and being a time suck. I got very little value out of it for how much time I spent on the platform, and them being openly hostile to my privacy made it that much worse. So it was very much a selfish decision, not a "moral obligation" or whatever.
Morality would only get into it for me if they were complicit in protecting child abusers or something. But giving people what they say they want isn't immoral, but it's borderline unethical if they know what people claim they want is harmful. But honestly, I don't think any tech platform should be deciding what is good or bad for people, they should merely provide a service. I see Facebook as essentially just providing a service, and they do a really good job at that, but whether that service has value is another discussion (I don't think it does, at least not positive value).
So I don't think Facebook is immoral, and whether they're unethical really comes down to what obligations you think a tech platform has. I think people shouldn't leave Facebook for either reason, they should leave because they'll likely have better mental health, lower risk of being radicalized, and more time to pursue things they find value in. Take all the energy you spend on Facebook and make your corner of the world just a little bit bitter.
Yes.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The United Nations has blamed Facebook for the dissemination of hate speech against Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar that resulted in their ethnic cleansing.
This influence on others is known as a (positive) network effect, where increased numbers of people improve the value of a product.
In doing so, one could be helping Facebook to refine its algorithms so that it can better single out specific individuals for certain purposes, some of which could be as nefarious as those of Cambridge Analytica.
For those of us who do not engage in such objectionable behavior, it is helpful to consider whether Facebook has crossed certain moral “red lines,” entering the realm of outright wickedness.
Likewise, Facebook would have crossed a red line if it had intentionally assisted in the dissemination of hate speech in Myanmar.
The recent worrisome revelation that Facebook hired an opposition-research firm that attempted to discredit protesters by claiming that they were agents of the financier George Soros is not encouraging.
The original article contains 997 words, the summary contains 162 words. Saved 84%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
I have a facebook account. I only use it for very narrow purposes. my condo association informally discusses things there and as connection point in case someone I know does not otherwise know my current email or such. like a third cousin or something who I met a few times at weddings/funerals. What I don't get is why folks can't not use something. I have some others that I made just to sorta stake my name but I only really interact on non real name using stuff because F that creepiness.
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
