What is absurd is there is someone like you in every privacy-related thread claiming that everyone who is outraged is also a Facebook user, or somehow is fine with what Facebook does.
But here's the thing, you can choose to not use facebook or deploy some kind of mitigating strategies for online surveillance[1]. On the other hand ublock origin is useless to protect you from meat space surveillance and tracking.
Understand that surveillance in public space physical world is different from its online counterpart, that it is way harder to detect and counter and as such ought to draw a bigger outrage before it gets generalized.
If this is true, it's all stuff that they're taking by stealth.
You can choose not to use the Internet, or only use hardened devices over tor - but it's not exactly the same as "you can choose not to drink coca cola" (incidentally, it might be difficult in places to completely avoid products by the coca cola company, as opposed to just "coke, the coca cola soft drink").
Added to this, the network effect make fb hard to avoid - people use fb/messenger for a lot of communications, volunteer groups, political groups, education... You are free to argue it's I'll advised (and I agree). But wishful thinking alone does not mean "choosing not to use Facebook", might not include: missing social, educational and work opportunities.
I've chosen to not be on facebook and I've been shown an account in my name made by someone else, pictures where I'm tagged, public posts and comments mentioning me, private message mentioning me.
This is the tip of the iceberg, I have not been shown the facial features facebook has associated to me, the "social graph" they have linked to me and countless other internal facebook stuff the general public is supposed to not know about.