matlag

>The idea that all of the 'scandals' and morally repugnant behavior within Facebook management and in the company as a whole has been reported and revealed is so laughable that I cannot believe anyone would try to suggest this with a straight face.

The point is not that all potential scandals have been reported. The point is the ones that have been uncovered have been extensively reported. And that didn't change anything to the majority of users.

So why would you think more scandals will do?

> Most users stayed due to lack of a good alternative, not because they felt any affinity for Facebook.

When asked what the alternatives miss, the answer is almost always the network. When you ask to contribute to alternative so you grow that network, it's "meeeh, too complicated to use 2 networks". But it's not too complicated to use FB, and Twitter, and Instagram, and Linkedin, and...

"There is not good alternative" is a lame excuse. The honest answer is: "I don't want to do any effort nor any kind of compromise whatsoever".

And if you don't want to change anything, in my view, you're fine with the status quo.

How do you know for sure the "other places" are any better? FB is much more scrutinized than other companies.

And as I wrote earlier: scandals were largely reported and extensively covered. Most users stayed. So if users are happy with it, why should the employees quit a good job?

Most people have no issue going through FB, Twitter, Instagram, etc on a regular basis.

But when you say we should start using alternative tools in parallel to FB so that we contribute to grow these networks and reduce our dependence, then it's suddenly a huge cumbersome task.

Let's admit that the vast majority of users is actually ok with what FB does with their data. Showing concerns about privacy without actually doing anything is a cheap way of looking good.

> FB has done sketchy things in the past, but there’s so much government regulation and increased scrutiny, none of that would fly in 2020.

You really believe that? Because FB was caught in scandals after scandals, and never seemed to change its approach on any issue. At this stage, it's not "some sketchy things", it's a mindset at top level.

Don't get me wrong: If we were scrutinizing all large corporate the way FB is, and ask people to quit if we found anything ethically questionable, there would be no large corporate and probably a high unemployment rate.

But let's keep in mind how FB "behaves" -Cambridge analytica -Selling users pivate messages to third party with a highly questionable excuse of users consenting -Threatening to leave Europe or Australia if they pass regulations FB doesn't like

And what fundamental changes were made at top management to give the company a radical different orientation preventing more scandals in the future: -

But my final point will be: all of these were well reported and described in details. FB users cannot say "we didn't know" in good faith. Fool me once: shame on you. Fool me twice: shame on me. Users have the absolute right to not give a damn, and FB has the absolute right to test the limits of acceptance. We're not talking about a charity organization here.