Comments:
An Opinion: I Don't Use Facebook...
I don't use Facebook. Do you use Facebeook? What are your thoughts about the ethics and morality of the Facebook dilemma? Will you reduce or stop your use of Facebook because of what you've been reading about Facebook in the news?
Image Credit: Etadam via Google Images
Mark Zuckerberg, the co-founder of Facebook, was known to his classmates as an individual who committed unethical practices even in the formation of the company, such as reducing the percentage of ownership among his other co-founders.
Zuckerberg was also known to have his immature and politically incorrect business card...
Yet, society doesn't seem to care about ethics and morality. Society cares about what kind of platforms we can get for free. Billions of people support Facebook, a percentage know that the founding of the company was unethical from the start.
And we, society, through patronizing the Facebook platform, we reward Facebook employees and their founders to the extent that people like Sandberg and Zukerberg are some of the wealthiest and most powerful people in the world. Zuckerberg in my eyes can even be compared with The Pope or the Dalai Lama; but unlike the religious leaders whom have the intention of making the world a better place, Facebook is about making the world a tighter community for advertisers and marketers to reach! With 2 billion followers, and those average followers spending more time on Facebook than they do in their house of worship, I can present a compelling argument that Facebook certainly has attention and influence equating to a religious leader. It's just a PITY it's not being used for more good.
Image Credit: Etadam via Google Images
I wouldn’t feel good using it heavily for personal social media
but I gladly use it for watch groups and personal horological posts. Facebook is great for interaction - I love PuristPro but the technology is not very conducive to a fluid interaction.
Also, lots of charities do well from Zuck even if he is morally elastic!
Absolutely!
Facebook definitely has its strong points.
It's hard to design a system that works well; PuristSPro probably wants individual forums for brands, yet wants us all the partake in all of it. Plus, keeping it all picture rich means there isn't an off the shelf solution. Definitely a difficult thing to do!
While I'm pleased to state that Zuck does donate a lot of money with charitable intentions; it's still hard to say how "good" that is if the money comes from unethical sources... For instance, in an extreme example - it's a common tactic for drug dealers to be "patrons of art" and "philanthropists" but the funds can be ill-gotten.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
It's hard to design a system that works well; PuristSPro probably wants individual forums for brands, yet wants us all the partake in all of it. Plus, keeping it all picture rich means there isn't an off the shelf solution. Definitely a difficult thing to do!
While I'm pleased to state that Zuck does donate a lot of money with charitable intentions; it's still hard to say how "good" that is if the money comes from unethical sources... For instance, in an extreme example - it's a common tactic for drug dealers to be "patrons of art" and "philanthropists" but the funds can be ill-gotten.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
no fb account...got rid of it in the first week itself !
but after the series of exposures since couple of months...
I was expecting at least 50% ppl close the account but I guess no one cares about ethics anymore !
best,
Mahesh.,
I was expecting at least 50% ppl close the account but I guess no one cares about ethics anymore !
best,
Mahesh.,
50% is too much...
It'd be substantial if 10% of the US Population were to close their Facebook accounts. So, say 20-30 million persons would be an incredible hit!
I have FB
Since day 1, anything I have shared I feel completely comfortable with any friend/stranger/corporation to know, which btw is not a whole lot! I don't think anyone should be surprised these stories about them come up, or from any corporation or social media platform for that matter. They are in it for money, not for you or anyone else. We have never been asked to pay for FB in cash, so we will surely have to pay for it by other means.
Very fair!
Very fair and objective statement. But even though we give them the information so freely, does that mean Facebook has the right to package the data in a way where other companies/countries can manipulate the public to spend their money or spend their votes? A company has the right to make money, but when is that crossing the line? When is killing baby seals in their natural habitat a good business for humankind in the long-run?
I agree with you though, if I had a Facebook, that's how I'd use it. But, there will be a big segment of the population that probably puts too much on there... One could say, "if they're that naive to walk into a trap, then maybe they deserve it" but at the same time, if the vast majority of users are just that naive, what can we do?
I agree with you though, if I had a Facebook, that's how I'd use it. But, there will be a big segment of the population that probably puts too much on there... One could say, "if they're that naive to walk into a trap, then maybe they deserve it" but at the same time, if the vast majority of users are just that naive, what can we do?
I have an account since 10 years when I was a student abroad and found it quite useful at this time. I had at this time almost 150 friends which seems quite a lot for me
since 5 years, I no longer use Facebook as I used or how it should, I have 10 friends who are mainly artist I follow who don't have a regular Facebook page. My main use of Facebook is to receive informations; news, artists, galeries etc...
I had FB in the early days
when it was still cool.
I deleted my account a few years ago, getting fed up with the ever increasing nonsense in the newsfeed.
I can't think of anything worse wasting time than FB.
Haven't missed it for a second. For professional social networking there are good alternatives and with friends, i prefer a personal one-to-one communication.
CC
I always said, "I'm not important enough to have a Facebook."
So unless I become very famous, like a celebrity or a politician, I guess I won't have one.
I do not.........
use Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat or any of the other social media sites, I may be missing out on a lot but I find out who's doing what, going where ever from real social media, actually talking to people. I've worked in offices where everyone spent more time on the social media sites than actually working. Not only that, I think way too much info is posted on the sites by people, then they wonder why their house was robbed while they were on vacation, I've seen it happen. Guess I'm just not into what high school acquaintances are doing years later. Those I want to keep up with I do. Just my .02 cents.
I don't blame you...
People definitely need to be careful of what they put on FB. Don't post photos of you traveling while you're still traveling!
Mod query: does puristpro use the facebook pixel embedded on any page on the site? [nt]
No message body
I don't even know what a Facebook Pixel is. I hope other mods can chime in. [nt]
No message body
I'm not sure what your question is. Can you rephrase?
Or are you asking where the PuristSPro Facebook page is? If so, it's http://www.facebook.com/puristspro
All of PuristSPro social media links are at the bottom of every thread.
- AT
Class Reunion made Facebook compulsory
My class reunion made FB account compulsory to share our photos but I used false account.
I don't use social media because it's an additional source of bother when applying for travel visa.
I can honestly say:
"I do not have personal social media interactions".
"I do not have a monthly mobile phone account".
Apart from that, I don't care about who runs FB.
It's a simple equation: You go ONLINE or on SOCIAL MEDIA; you look after yourself.
No bodyguard, No nanny, No snowflakes.
You don't like it; Don't be there. Like Mr Miyagi said: The best defence is not be there!
MTF
Right, I can't complain about FB since I'm not there...
But... Now that FB's problems affect even non-users, especially in the United States of America, I'm starting to feel inconvenienced. Mr. Miyagi is right, but in this case even those who don't use Facebook are affected.
I'm not blaming him
He had an idea and was able to turn it into a multi billionaire company.
People, or followers, do voluntarily disclose their own businesses, thus no surprise that those datas might be used to target the followers as customers.
NSA is spying us for supposedly security reasons, but that's just the excuse behind which collecting informations and advantages for commercial and economic purposes.
I'm still in FB but what concerns me the most is the absolute lack of control for the informations provided.
Actually i must say bullshits (I know it's not netiquette) but when I see battles between scientists and people who believe that vaccines are useless and harmful (just to mention one example of unlimited ignorance), I wish FB would be shut down forever.
People, or followers, do voluntarily disclose their own businesses, thus no surprise that those datas might be used to target the followers as customers.
NSA is spying us for supposedly security reasons, but that's just the excuse behind which collecting informations and advantages for commercial and economic purposes.
I'm still in FB but what concerns me the most is the absolute lack of control for the informations provided.
Actually i must say bullshits (I know it's not netiquette) but when I see battles between scientists and people who believe that vaccines are useless and harmful (just to mention one example of unlimited ignorance), I wish FB would be shut down forever.
This is when government is supposed to step in...
Government is supposed to allow free economic and business policies proliferate. But, Government should help protect the people from their own lack of understanding to protect its own people. Governments require vaccinations of children because it's for the individual and greater good. Opium was eventually outlawed probably because governments realized that they had to protect their citizens of the highly addictive substance. Do we need governments to protect us from FB? I hope it doesn't get that bad!
The governments should first command these internet 's giants to pay some taxes
For "some", I mean at least few billions.
Google, or Alphabet, is the same.
I'm texting from my mobile, like millions of people, and every time an app ask for the permission to track my position, preferences, activity, they are simply spying my life.
Not for my safety, but because I'm a walking wallet and I'm always ready to buy something.
Unfortunately for them, watches i like are a bit expensive, so no matter how many times they show banners or invite me to travel abroad... 🤑🤑🤑🤑🤑 because I know my limit.
But I am just 1.
The largest threat is the ignorance'spread caused by the people, because FB doesn't control anything.
Anti vaccines conspiracies, New theories of the flat earth, aliens are amongst us... The fair of stupidity
Google, or Alphabet, is the same.
I'm texting from my mobile, like millions of people, and every time an app ask for the permission to track my position, preferences, activity, they are simply spying my life.
Not for my safety, but because I'm a walking wallet and I'm always ready to buy something.
Unfortunately for them, watches i like are a bit expensive, so no matter how many times they show banners or invite me to travel abroad... 🤑🤑🤑🤑🤑 because I know my limit.
But I am just 1.
The largest threat is the ignorance'spread caused by the people, because FB doesn't control anything.
Anti vaccines conspiracies, New theories of the flat earth, aliens are amongst us... The fair of stupidity
Absolutely....
agree with your statements and sentiments regarding faceboak (
), I had opened an account ages ago to see what it is exactly and closed it for good soon thereafter never sharing any remotely sensitive personal information. I feel the same way about other social media platforms (instagram is after all owned by FB) of which I only use Twitter under a pseudonym to follow 20-30 business accounts for news as they tend to break there first. I am also not religious and do not see any of it personally appealing nor is any religious leader someone I think of particularly well. Cheers, Filip
), I had opened an account ages ago to see what it is exactly and closed it for good soon thereafter never sharing any remotely sensitive personal information. I feel the same way about other social media platforms (instagram is after all owned by FB) of which I only use Twitter under a pseudonym to follow 20-30 business accounts for news as they tend to break there first. I am also not religious and do not see any of it personally appealing nor is any religious leader someone I think of particularly well. Cheers, Filip
Does Aston Martin have a Twitter Account?
You always seem to get the Aston Martin news faster than anyone! Is Twitter the secret?
Lol,
yes for the most part, the other part of it is that among those corporate accounts is a, relatively speaking, whopping nine personal accounts of AML employees some of whose personal emails and phone numbers I have x). Good guess . Cheers, Filip
. Cheers, Filip
I guess it's like anything else...
Used in moderation and with some responsibility, FB is no worse than any other vice.
That means we're doomed.
Seriously, my bigger concern is what is being done with the data collected and sold by this social juggernaut.
Even worse, is Google. Grrrr!
True...
But there seems to be more vices than "good things" these days. World is a dangerous place! They were almost thinking of labeling Coffee as a carcinogen in California!
Wait...isnt this post non-horological and politically motivated casting aspersions on an individual???
I thought these posts were against the forum rules?? Patrick I am not trying to target you here my friend - with all regards I actually stand by you for opening a debate. Just trying to understand the rules here.
This one is okay.
The "TimeOut" forum is a forum for non horological matters. So we're okay about posting "non-horological" stuff here.
While I can understand this post does seem to be political, it actually isn't, the topic is more about Facebook and ethics. The discussion of such is of an anthropology nature and the study of ethics, not a political nature. That's not to say that anthropology discussions can't get political neither, they certainly can and in those cases PuristSPro would take action.
The discussion so far has strayed from ethics, but it hasn't gotten political yet. As far as casting aspersions on an individual, when you're the leader of a multi-billion Fortune 500 company such as Zuckerberg and Sandberg, you do get mentioned by name a lot, often in a positive or negative light. In either positive or negative light it's not always politically motivated.
In April 2017, we had a discussion about United Airlines and the passenger dragging incident where the CEO Oscar Munoz was mentioned. He had doubled down and praised his staff and airport security for the swift removal of the belligerent passenger. While I was questioning the Munoz's decision and moral grounds, I wasn't being political.
Thanks for bringing this to my attention though. If you have any more questions by all means, please shoot me a private message. Thanks again for raising the question and we definitely do try to uphold the rule fairly and equally among all.