Assumption you're making: That FB is overvalued currently, and has 15% to fall (it's at 20 now, and you are saying it will go down by $3 by the 18th [tomorrow!!!])
I'm not sure where that $0.48 is coming from in your comment. At expiration (when an option has no time value), a put should be worth StrikePrice - StockPrice. So if Strike is $17, and stock is... say... $15, the option will be worth $2 ($200 since each option actually controls 100 shares). That math changes with the stock price, so I'm not sure what you're talkinga bout with $0.48...
Also note that spreads at the low end of options will eat you alive. Specifically you should expect to pay upwards of $10 or even $15 to get anybody to fill you on those options. The $4 amount is highly unlikely to get filled, especially at the qty you are talking about.
Basically, this is a bad idea, and will just lose you $400.
How long has it been like this?
It's still perfectly possible to be a fundamentals trader/value investor and make a decent income. Look for undervalued companies or those everyone is selling, buy their stocks, hold them for the long term and be prepared for a bit of up and down. But there people who want to buy and sell these complex derivative contracts (well actually an option is pretty much the simplest derivative contract there is), and so the market will join them up with each other.
This is, of course, in contrast to a lot of financial instruments (particularly in the last couple of decades) that are needlessly complex (where at least some of the value for the issuer is in obfuscating the actual implications of the security from the buyer).
On one hand, you can have infinite risk strategies, on the other, you can lock in a stock price almost exactly, with little market risk. And then everything in between (ie, you can easily build something that's like: "I think this stock will go up a few bucks, but nothing crazy", or maybe: "I'm worried about a horrible plunge, but a minor decline is fine, I'll buy a put out of the money and have coverage for the plunge".)
And really, it's fairly simple, a lot of the stuff I said about "time value" and such was related to how you value options, not the actual complexity of the thing itself. "How much is this worth" is always tricky, even for something as easy to understand as a bond.
Organized markets, and bubbles, and derivatives are all old. And they aren't inherently bad either.
You have to look at futures & options as a way to sell or buy risk. If you're willing to pay somebody, they'll take your risk away. And the other way, if you want to take on some risk in exchange for money, you can do that.
(note, that last thing sounds scary, but how about this: sell a put [ie, promise to buy a stock at a certain price] right near where you want to buy the stock anyway [with a traditional limit order]. If it gets to below that level, you get 'assigned' the stock, which you wanted anyway, at the price you wanted anyway. If it doesn't hit that, then you wouldn't have bought the stock anyway. The counterparty gets insurance against their stock dropping. You take on the "risk" of it dropping, but you've set yourself up so that it works out for everybody involved).
(note that last strategy doesn't work if the stock temporarily dips, then pops back up. You probably won't get assigned in that situation, where a limit order would have triggered. That risk is what you get in exchange for getting paid for selling the put).
Presumably the point is that not everyone is expecting the next couple of days to be "normal", given the amount of shares potentially going on the market as the lock ups end. Obviously that doesn't necessarily make the mentioned deal a good one, but it doesn't make much sense to assume anything about the stock price movements today based on the limitations of yesterday.
How would you evaluate the risk/reward profile of this option?