Inciting violence vs freedom of speech - <AUTHOR> https://blog.namecheap.com/inciting-violence-vs-freedom-speech <comment><USER2> This is turning into a virtue signalling circle jerk.

The _one_ quote provided is nothing near incitement violence, in the legal sense. I'm now in the icky position of defending Daily Sturmer because I believe in the First Amendment and this latest campaign against _one_ web site feels so contrived and politically correct. Yes yes, I know that the First Amendment doesn't apply to Namecheap or godaddy or cloudflare. But this has gotten downright silly.

As another commenter noted, these large companies have no compunction hosting/registering domains for sites that actually do incite violence and actively ruin people's lives... like jihadist groups or ripoff report, a site that makes it an active business model to defame people online, destroy lives and careers, and then extort people to remove that content.

This whole daily sturmer campaign has gotten to the point of being nothing more than a way for companies to pretend like they care or want to prevent a type of speech they don't like, but in reality is picking on one site that is mild in comparison to the other things these companies tacitly approve of.

Edit to add a link that apropos: The Seductive Appeal of the "Nazi Exception" [https://www.popehat.com/2017/04/18/the-seductive-appeal- of-t...](https://www.popehat.com/2017/04/18/the-seductive-appeal-of-the-nazi- exception/)

<comment><USER3> I agree with you.

We're in such a state of things that people feel compelled to upfront state that while they don't support the thoughts of these sites, they support their right to free speech.

It used to be assumed that in supporting free speech one did not agree with the most vile of those expressions. Now we're compelled to say that up front lest someone conflate the two.

This re-interpretation of free speech is just as likely to come back to apply to the people now in favor of kerbing free speech.

One of the most obvious is religion and people holding views opposite to it. Or, what if you espouse Marxism. That could be incitement to violence, in this interpretation.

Today one groups is in control of what acceptable speech is. Tomorrow it will be someone else. And I will still be supporting free speech whoever is under attack by the contextual free speechers.

<comment><USER4>
        > This re-interpretation of
        > free speech

This is an exceptionally American-centric view. The rest of the civilised world outlawed hate speech and moved on a long time ago.

<comment><USER2> Good for you. We hold sacrosanct the view that free speech is free speech and governments shouldn't be the arbiters of what is and isn't "hate."

<comment><USER4> No, you don't.

[https://www.hg.org/article.asp?id=34258](https://www.hg.org/article.asp?id=34258)

<comment><USER5> No mention of the word "hate", because there are no exceptions for it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This claim keeps coming up that "hate speech" isn't allowed and isn't legal. It is kind of funny to read since legally no such thing as "hate speech" exists. SCOTUS has carved out only a few exceptions to free speech. The one relevant here is "fighting words" and it doesn't apply since saying "all $X-attributed people should be killed" is LEGAL. It does not CAUSE immediate harm. But, saying that to an armed angry crowd MAY be illegal. Websites, at least how SCOTUS saw it, cannot by definition be fighting words and thus anything you say on a website would be protected under 1st amendment

This doesn't matter much, of course, because the amendment only applies to government shutting you up, not a private entity.

BUT, I hate how all of these bozos keep making the excuse that these websites wouldn't even be protected by 1st amendment so they can be banned from the internet. This article does this too. It is annoying since this basic premise itself is wrong.

<comment><USER7> Further amplification of the point, "Supreme Court unanimously reaffirms: There is no 'hate speech' exception to the First Amendment":

[https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/volokh- conspirac...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/volokh- conspiracy/wp/2017/06/19/supreme-court-unanimously-reaffirms-there-is-no-hate- speech-exception-to-the-first-amendment/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I'm pretty sure that statement they quoted is vile and disgusting, but certainly not incitement to violence as the courts understand it.

Of course, Namecheap can probably choose their customers however they like according to their own TOS. But don't delete someone off the Internet who is saying things you don't like and spend the whole post patting yourself on the back for following principles of free speech.

I think it's pretty simple -- if you don't believe that Nazis should be able to voice their vile and disgusting opinions openly, you don't believe in free speech. If you don't believe that Nazis should get to organize a nonviolent protest, then you don't believe in freedom of assembly.

The Washington Post featured an article 'Who are the antifa' [1] by Mark Bray who is the author of "The Anti-Fascist Handbook" which explained, "Antifascists argue that after the horrors of chattel slavery and the Holocaust, physical violence against white supremacists is both ethically justifiable and strategically effective."

Of course we see how effective it is, because defending the bedrock principles of freedom of speech and assembly when the speakers are Nazis now apparently puts you at risk of being labeled a Nazi sympathizer / white supremacist / racist yourself.

I'm not sure exactly when it became impossible to have an adult conversation on the matter. When did it become impossible to understand that a protester can represent abhorrent viewpoints without it being OK to throw bags of urine and paint at them? That a protest can turn violent and even deadly without being able to then condemn every single protester that was present? And that we should not be celebrating, but in fact be very worried if not outraged, that private parties who have gained superuser access to parts of the internet through their course of business are now leveraging that power to police content they find personally offensive, or which they takedown for PR reasons to appeal to a populist mob.

[1] - [https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/made-by- history/wp/2017/...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/made-by- history/wp/2017/08/16/who-are-the-antifa/)

</comment><comment><USER9> Quote from [https://blog.namecheap.com/we-say-no-to- sopa/](https://blog.namecheap.com/we-say-no-to-sopa/)

"Why are we against the proposed SOPA legislation? It's very simple; at Namecheap, we believe in internet freedom.

When you register a domain name, you can do anything you wish with it within the confines of the law."

You find how much you believe in your principles, when they lead to outcomes you don't like. Given their actions now, namecheap's SOPA opposition now sounds like just a cheap publicity trick they did to distinguish themselves from GoDaddy.

</comment><comment><USER10> As someone who is facinated by what is happening I spend a decent amount of time spelunking in the dark web.

The Neo-Nazis are not that upset by this. They want to use the same tools to boycott the Zionist and Jews. It's actually one of the many things the Alt- Left and the Alt-Right agree on.

In addition we're making them into martyrs. Banning and suppression was counter productive on the original Nazis and it is counter productive here.

This should be we'll know by those who read civics. It is even codified in the book Rules For Radicals by Saul Alinsky. It makes me wonder what books Antifa are reading as they are doing all of the wrong things.

I get that it feels like we're (non nazis) are winning but we're not and this is isn't helping.

<comment><USER2> You're right, this is giving an inordinate amount of free publicity to daily stormer and is making people (like me) who support free speech uncomfortable. I'm now instinctively supporting their right to free speech against the horde of disingenuous virtue signallers.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> >"It doesn't take a Ph.D. in mathematics to understand that White men + pride + organization = Jews being stuffed into ovens."

To me, out of context, that reads as anti- White men, not anti-Semitic. Or at least ambiguous. Certainly not an outright endorsement as such.

I haven't read the material, and I'm sure it's as hateful as they say. But as their entire argument is predicated on how beyond the pale that statement is, and if "the site spends considerable effort demonizing Asians, Blacks, Mexicans, etc" \- they could probably have found a better example to make their point.

<comment><USER12> Wow, what an amazing quote to pick since that is exactly the kind of thing a far-leftist would say.

If the site is as bad as they say they should have picked a better quote than that obviously ironic one...

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Why are registrars doing the policy decisions when its the registries has the mandate to control and policy the domain name system?

If IANA decide that .com address should not be used for sites like this, then at least it would be their decision to make. They also already thought about how to handle this type of questions, and drawn the lines where the consensus says they should be. If people want to change them, the process to do so is likely well documented.

</comment><comment><USER14> I guess I won't be down-voted for posting this, right?

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect)

</comment><comment><USER15> All these companies tripping over each other to ban DailyStormer while at the same time they won't take a position against similar sites that are just as unquestionably immoral/illegal as DailyStormer (Torrent sites, ISIS sites). One might be forgiven for thinking that this sudden moral awakening of 'Big Internet' is nothing more than a selfish PR stunt.

<comment><USER4> If you think torrent sites are "just as" immoral as White Supremacy sites, your moral compass is unambiguously broken.

<comment><USER16> Well you didn't mention the ISIS sites. Much of the torrents are actually illegal, the hate speech is protected speech.

<comment><USER17> The 1st amendment protects speech from being suppressed by _the state_. Private entities may ban whatever they see fit, basically; you know they do if you ever read a end-user license.

<comment><USER16> Yes, I know that. We are talking about a public communications medium. If they can throttle hate speech, they can throttle Netflix. So they won't host it, they won't provide DNS resolution. How far does it go? Can't get a static IP?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Seems like the proponents of net neutrality have a dilemma on their hands.

There are neo-nazi shows on cable access channels, so I'd think the same legal reasoning applies to the internet.

</comment><comment><USER18> >: Daily Stormer: "Summer of Hate Edition." The site spends considerable effort demonizing Asians, Blacks, Mexicans, etc.

I am an Indian and every single "crossover" indian youtube video is filled with "Designated Shitting streets [1]" comments. I really don't give a shit( pardon the pun) about those comments. Do majority of "Asians, Blacks, Mexicans" in America want this kind of censorship on their behalf ? Really curious.

1\. [http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/designated-shitting-streets- po...](http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/designated-shitting-streets-poo-in-the- loo)

<comment><USER4> Is there a history of large-scale and state-enforced discrimination against Asian Indians in the US?

<comment><USER18> That sentence has "Asian" in it. I am not so sure, assumed Asia includes India. Is "Asian Indian" a separate category ?

Also are "Asians, Blacks, Mexicans" only three groups that those rules apply to? Noone else has a 'history of discrimination'?

<comment><USER4> America also uses the term Indian to mean Native American, so I was attempting to distinguish between the two. East Asians (as against separate from Indian Asians) -- or at least Japanese -- have indeed been the victims of state- sanctioned discrimination in the past.

<comment><USER18> well we were 'historically discriminated' via colonialism too. But, I think you saying that these rules should specifically apply to groups that were discriminated in America. Vast majority of mexicans and asians in America are immigrants in last 3 decades so that definition doesn't really apply to vast majority of them either.

But I guess you can see that how vague and meaningless defintion you have come up with to decide which cites deserve to be censored.

I have a feeling all these people are just following a trend, there is no solid principle, any rhyme or reason to what they are doing. Its literally this- 'oh google banned site X, we don't want to get called out, lets ban it too'

<comment><USER4> The Americans didn't colonise India. Is history education there really that poor?</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


The Universe Within 12.5 Light Years - <AUTHOR> http://www.atlasoftheuniverse.com/12lys.html <comment><USER2> Many of these stars have planets orbiting them, likely discovered after the author wrote this page. There are some references to planetary systems, but few compared to what has been discovered since. Proxima Centauri has at least one planet orbiting it (in the habitable zone!), for example: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxima_Centauri](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxima_Centauri)

Barnard's star also has a planet, contrary to the claim on the page: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnard%27s_Star#Planetary_sys...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnard%27s_Star#Planetary_system)

<comment><USER3> Yup - the page has basically not changed since it was first crawled by archive.org ~14 years ago: [https://web.archive.org/web/20060401051712/http://www.atlaso...](https://web.archive.org/web/20060401051712/http://www.atlasoftheuniverse.com/12lys.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Playing Elite Dangerous, a lot of these names are quite familiar. I have at one point held base at Wolf 359 at least :)

Maps like these are so fascinating, anyone know of something similar with updated planet information?

<comment><USER5> As soon as I opened that page I had a flashback to playing Elite on my ZX Spectrum as a 10-year-old. I had to look twice at the map to check it didn't show Lave and Reidquat.

And that's really weird, because now I look into it, I think there's no way I saw a map like this in that game. Nor Frontier on the Amiga, as far as I can see. But when I look at the map, Elite is all I can think about, somehow I feel certain that's where I've seen it before, even though the evidence suggests I'm wrong. There's _some_ strong association going on there. Weeeeeeird.

Edit: I think it might actually just be that I first saw this page so long ago that it feels the same... As soon as I zoomed out I knew I'd seen it before, but not for a long long time.

<comment><USER6> The Map Is Not the Territory. Your memory of the mental model of our local neighbors that you'd worked out is overriding the actual memories.

Something similar happens when we remember childhood houses. Spaces where there was a lot of activity seem bigger, because we've mapped those areas extensively.

<comment><USER7> Interesting. I'm aware of the common feeling that one's childhood room seems "much smaller than I remembered" when it's visited in adulthood (especially after a long time away), but I had never heard that feeling tied to level of time/activity done in that space.

It makes a lot of sense in retrospect.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Was fun zooming out and comparing stars to the cubic area. If it's a sphere, we're at about 250 cubic light years per star at both 12.5 lt yr out, and at 20. It heads to around 900 ly^3 per star when you look at everything within 5000 lt yrs.

Makes sense, given that the Milky Way--while 150-200 kly wide--is only about 2000 light years thick.

Of course, we could rapidly zoom much, much farther out, like in this intergalactic redshift survey:

[https://www.universetoday.com/21914/the-closest-galaxy-to- th...](https://www.universetoday.com/21914/the-closest-galaxy-to-the-milky- way/)

Space is incomprehensibly big.

<comment><USER9> In a similar vein, Scale of the Universe: [https://htwins.net/scale2/](https://htwins.net/scale2/)

<comment><USER10> can some1 please please make a html/pwa version of this?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> If you had a suitable form of transport, which of these 33 stars would you visit? Red dwarfs are probably not very interesting places to visit. Sirius or Procyon (which I'd not heard of before) sound the most interesting:

 _Sirius A,B - Type=A1+DA, Magnitudes=-1.4+8.4, Distance=8.60 ly

This brilliant white star is the brightest star in the night sky and the most luminous star within 25 light years. Its white dwarf companion was first seen in 1852, the first white dwarf ever seen. The orbital period is 50 years.

Procyon A,B - Type=F5+DA, Magnitudes=0.4+10.7, Distance=11.41 ly

A brilliant yellow-white star, and the eighth brightest star in the sky. With twice the diameter of the Sun, Procyon is also the largest star within 25 light years. Procyon is orbited by a white dwarf companion first seen optically in 1896. The orbital period is 41 years._

</comment><comment><USER12> And Voyager 1, the furthest man made object has already completed 0,0023 lightyears from the 4.3 lightyears to the nearest star Alpha Centauri. But its heading in the wrong direction anyway...

<comment><USER13> I wounder what would need to be done in order for a computer to still work that far out?

Even removing every single point of failure, statistically the other components would still fail over time.

I think whichever system you build, it would somehow need to be self- repairing.

<comment><USER14> Voyager 1 is still functioning, but within 10 years will finally run out of power. That's going to be the limiting factor even for self-repairing systems:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyager_1#Future_of_the_probe](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyager_1#Future_of_the_probe)

<comment><USER15> It's somewhat a very sobering thought that there is no intelligent life in all of solar system. The neighbouring stars are too far away for us to visit in our lifetimes.

Man I feel so alone.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> One of google's experiments presents a very cool visualization of a map of our stellar neighbors. See:

[http://stars.chromeexperiments.com/](http://stars.chromeexperiments.com/)

</comment><comment><USER17> I can remember that star names from the very similar map in Frontiers: Elite 2.

<comment><USER18> Ah, the old Ross 154 <-> Barnard's Star milk run.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> I guess it is an old site, before Kepler discovered planets around many of these stars?

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nearest_exoplanets](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nearest_exoplanets)

</comment><comment><USER20> Note - this seems to be about 20 years old. The nearest stars list is different now plus so many discovered planets.

</comment><comment><USER21> My take on this: [http://uncharted.bpodgursky.com/](http://uncharted.bpodgursky.com/) (out to 75 lys, w/ click-around exploration)

(not super maintained, apologies for visual glitches or stale data)

</comment><comment><USER22> Players of Aurora 4x will recognize those names. Fun fact, new version developed in C# will be released in March for testing.

</comment><comment><USER23> It would be interesting to have the relative speeds of all these stars visualized as well.

</comment><comment><USER24> I guess we should feel lucky that there aren't that many stars nearby...

</comment><comment><USER25> I wish these were 3d or animated, to give more perspective.

<comment><USER26> You can try Stellarium, a multi platform software that lets you navigate instantly across space: [https://stellarium.org/](https://stellarium.org/)

Not sure if you can get as far as this, but certainly worth a try if you are looking for a more detailed experience.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> [https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Battle_of_Wolf_359](https://memory- alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Battle_of_Wolf_359)

<comment><USER28> Sleep. Sleep, Data.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> 3D star maps would be a great application of VR.

<comment><USER30> The closest I know of to a true "map" you can search for things in, put all of space into any scale, move around in, is SpaceEngine. The VR support is a bit unwieldy but still impressive. You might want to turn off the procedurally generated stars and planets if you want a strict map. The procedurally generated stars are interesting because you can get a sense of density at various scales.

[https://store.steampowered.com/app/314650/SpaceEngine/](https://store.steampowered.com/app/314650/SpaceEngine/)

Titans of Space Plus is probably the most educational space VR program I've used. It takes you on a guided tour of our solar system and puts everything into perspective at various scales, including some other stars. But it's not a map of the stars very much. It does the best job of conveying the relative sizes of things.

[https://store.steampowered.com/app/468820/Titans_of_Space_PL...](https://store.steampowered.com/app/468820/Titans_of_Space_PLUS/)

Universe Sandbox isn't a map either, but it's worth mentioning as as a VR astronomy program.

[https://store.steampowered.com/app/230290/Universe_Sandbox/](https://store.steampowered.com/app/230290/Universe_Sandbox/)

I have not tried this one: [https://store.steampowered.com/app/751110/OVERVIEW_A_Walk_Th...](https://store.steampowered.com/app/751110/OVERVIEW_A_Walk_Through_The_Universe/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> Why 12.5?

<comment><USER32> That'd be a 25 light year sphere, but then that just leads to the same question with a different number.

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> Whenever life gets you down, Mrs. Brown,

And things seem hard or tough,

And people are stupid, obnoxious or daft,

And you feel that you've had quite eno-o-o-o-o-ough,

Just remember that you're standing on a planet that's evolving And revolving at 900 miles an hour. It's orbiting at 19 miles a second, so it's reckoned, The sun that is the source of all our power. Now the sun, and you and me, and all the stars that we can see, Are moving at a million miles a day, In the outer spiral arm, at 40, 000 miles an hour, Of a galaxy we call the Milky Way.

Our galaxy itself contains a hundred billion stars; It's a hundred thousand light-years side to side; It bulges in the middle sixteen thousand light-years thick, But out by us it's just three thousand light-years wide. We're thirty thousand light-years from Galactic Central Point, We go 'round every two hundred million years; And our galaxy itself is one of millions of billions In this amazing and expanding universe.

Our universe itself keeps on expanding and expanding, In all of the directions it can whiz; As fast as it can go, at the speed of light, you know, Twelve million miles a minute and that's the fastest speed there is. So remember, when you're feeling very small and insecure, How amazingly unlikely is your birth; And pray that there's intelligent life somewhere out in space, 'Cause there's bugger all down here on Earth!

John de Prez / Eric Idle

<comment><USER34> ... and it's still kind of sad that we (or anything like us) will actually, realistically never ever venture far enough to even reach the nearest star to us.

I genuinely think it _is_ sad, but it is what it is. Interstellar space is so unimaginably huge (insert HGoG reference or excerpt here). At least you won't be alive to experience the time when the expansion just overtakes everything and leaves "us" a lone galaxy pondering why here is no light from others like us.

Hit #subscribe for more depressing space-facts! :|

<comment><USER35> This doesn't strike me as sad.

What _really_ strikes me as sad is:

Despite understanding how inaccessibly distant alternative _potentially_ habitable planets are, people here on earth seem utterly incapable of living sustainably on what will very likely be the only planet their species will ever comfortably inhabit.

<comment><USER36> _This doesn 't strike me as sad._

Me neither. But it used to. I was a Star Trek (TOS) kid and grew up assuming I would at least visit planets in adulthood, if not have a modest spacecraft of my own. Also that the Earth's warring tribes would do away with war & poverty in some utopian approximately Federationish style.

I'm not sure which seems sillier now.

 _What really strikes me as sad is ...people here on earth seem utterly incapable of living sustainably_

That was my post Star Trek dreams phase, which probably lasted through much of my 30's.

Beyond that I've come to accept that it was never biologically plausible that a fairly clever social primate species would (magically?) be able to extend its social/cognitive/conative/affective capacities, evolved to negotiate small group survival and interaction, to the competent management of an entire biosphere.

<comment><USER37> Also consider that we, the Earthbound humans, will probably never live comfortably in space, or low gravity environments. We're just not built for it and there are many physiological issues we'd face.

That of course doesn't mean humans never will, future generations, should they go to space, will adapt and evolve to their new environments, whether naturally or through deliberate selection. You and I, we never will. But our descendants might.

<comment><USER36> I suspect if our 'civilisation' continued long enough to do serious manned space exploration, low gravity is an issue we'd find a technical fix for. Your guess is as good as mine though.

It's pretty clear however that we're unlikely to make it that far.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> [Fermi Paradox Intensifies]</comment>


Don't talk about VCs - <AUTHOR> http://scripting.com/stories/2012/07/15/dontTalkAboutVcs.html

<comment><USER2> May be tangential, but I've been reading Dave Winer off and on for several years, and I always have such a hard time figuring out why he feels so slighted? Either he suffers from a serious martyr complex, there's a grand conspiracy going around to hinder his greatness from blooming or I've simply never grown accustomed to his slightly boastful writing (seriously, the ratio of blog posts where he mentions he invented RSS should be the basis for a measure like the Winer Self-Aggrandizement Index or WSAI).

</comment><comment><USER3> _One of the unwritten rules of tech blogging is that you don't write about VCs. Or if you absolutely must, if it's unavoidable, it's always in glowing terms._

Do I live in some weird insulated pocket of the Internet, or is this a narrative Winer has just invented for himself to occupy? Or does "Tech blogger" have a different meaning to him?

<comment><USER4> I think his definition of "tech blogger" includes "...who wants VC investment in the future."

<comment><USER3> How many people have ever not gotten a VC investment because of the way they wrote about VCs? If the numbers make sense to them, VCs will invest. If anything, from how I understand it, VCs use social signals in exactly the opposite direction: people who are overly nice to them are not alphas.

<comment><USER4> Well, I don't think that the OP is advising people never to write "about VCs" so much as he's commenting on the groupthink and tendency to protect their own and remarking that, therefore, a person who exposes one bad apple will offend them all. I've heard of people having trouble raising money because they blew whistles on unethical VC practices from unrelated investors. The problem is that VCs all talk to each other and compare notes far beyond what any reasonable person would consider appropriate.

<comment><USER3> I'm using this comment to again dispute the idea that writing nice things about VCs will help you score a round, or that writing mean things about them will prevent you from doing that. They certainly do compare notes, but they're way more afraid of losing out on a good deal (remember: one good outcome pays for much of the portfolio) than they are interested in swinging their dicks.

They're comparing notes to see if the others in herd view the company as an alpha. Not to blackball people who write negative things about VCs in the abstract.

<comment><USER5> Job-seekers are always advised not to be negative about past employers. In other situations it is considered prudent to avoid this kind of talk, and I think it is strongly against norms of American business.

I am sure that most of the best classical artists had to watch their tongues around patrons.

So I'm interested to know: how is it really different with VCs?

<comment><USER3> The VC/company relationship is really not at all like an employer/employee relationship.

It would probably be very bad form and inadvisable to write something nasty about a VC you had worked with directly.

But otherwise, we're talking about what is by necessity a highly mercenary part of the market.

<comment><USER6> "The VC/company relationship is really not at all like an employer/employee relationship."

They can fire you, and you can't fire them. That means you are the employee, and they are the employer. If everything goes great, you'll never have to put that relationship to the test. But things don't always go great...

<comment><USER3> If you're an early stage company, the pre-revenue kind that we tend to think about when we talk about VCs on HN, the VC is buying a stake in 2-4 years of your output when they invest in you. Sure, they can "fire" you, in the sense that they often have the ability to vote you out of the company you founded, but this is usually a loss for them, not a win; they staked you, and you end up walking.

Anyways, the number of instances we can cite of a VC removing an officer of a company because they were discovered to have written mean things about VC in the abstract is... let me go out on a limb here...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Virtually every great tech company was built with the help of VCs. Google, Amazon, Facebook, Reddit, Twitter, Yelp, etc.

The alternatives to these companies winning was not an open solution run by a co-op of hippies. The alternative was some shittier solution by Microsoft, MySpace, Yahoo, or even nothing at all.

It really might be nicer if The Search Engine (Google), The Message Broadcasting Platform (Twitter), The Social Platform (Facebook) were NOT run by private companies, with all their faults and biases. It would be better for the world if every person and company could build on them in a completely competitive and fair way. We would get better stuff.

It just doesn't seem to work out that way. Either people aren't motivated to do it or it's not possible. Whatever the case it's just not how things work (for now).

Given the way it does work VCs contribute in a very important way. Their effect seems to be purely additive. They don't _prevent_ anyone from succeeding by alternative means.

Mitt Romney seems like a very different kind of VC than helped tech companies. He handled much later stage stuff (IIRC), making him more of an investment banker type.

</comment><comment><USER4> I don't have any reason to like or dislike VCs on personal experience. The ones I've met randomly (e.g. running in Central Park) seem to be nice enough, and I'm sure that a lot of them are good. But VC-istan is full of deeply unethical people (those I have met, unfortunately) who don't deserve to be funded and I can't believe that the VCs aren't aware of what these people are doing. VCs need to stop funding unethical people, who get money just because they're well-connected, outright. Plus there are horrors like multiple liquidation preferences, which exist to reassert the social superiority of the VCs and leave me feeling it wouldn't be so bad if VC-Istan disappeared. Technology doesn't need it.

</comment><comment><USER8> > like the American workers who Romney's tactics cost their jobs and pensions

Wait, what??</comment>


Code Keyboards - <AUTHOR> https://codekeyboards.com/ <comment><USER2> For people who want an ISO layout, custom keycaps or greater choice of switches, the WASD V2 is identical to this except without the backlighting (how often are you at your desk with the lights off?). I've owned one for a year and it's been fantastic.

[http://www.wasdkeyboards.com/index.php/products/mechanical-k...](http://www.wasdkeyboards.com/index.php/products/mechanical- keyboard/wasd-v2-104-key-custom-mechanical-keyboard.html)

<comment><USER3> I don't understand the attraction of backlighting in "programmer" keyboards. Seems like it would only benefit people who look at the keyboard. Which explains why it's popular on consumer laptops, but not why any computer professional would want it.

<comment><USER4> I wouldn't think so either until I received my first one - its surprisingly useful. In fact my current backlit mechanical keyboard is one of my favorite purchases in the past few years for me - for something I use so much, spending $100-$200 is as much of a no-brainer as a great office chair.

<comment><USER5> You didn't explain what makes it so useful, though.

Because I'm a touch typist I keep my back-lights toggled off.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I would really love a mechanical keyboard in the split ergonomic layout of a Microsoft Natural Ergonomic keyboard. Something about that shape feels right to me, but most mechanical keyboard either use a standard layout or something radically different (I'm looking at you Ergodox).

<comment><USER7> You should look at the Kensis Advantage, though it may border on too "radically different" for you. It takes a bit of getting used to, but everyone I know who has one swears by it (myself included).

<comment><USER8> How well can you switch to a "normal" keyboard? I worry that with some of the more extraordinary designs switching between them and my laptop or a random keyboard at university would be annoying.

<comment><USER9> I haven't owned a Kinesis but I've owned and used Japanese keyboards (which have a different layout for many of the symbol keys) and various ergonomic keyboards and found being able to switch between them isn't such a big deal.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I really want someone to make a mechanical keyboard with a nub mouse. Even with xmonad/amethyst, I still can't stand having to take my hand off the keys to move a cursor.

Until someone does do that, I'm going to stick with a Lenovo USB keyboard. But when they do, I'll be the first to buy, especially if it has n-key-rollover for plover stenography.

<comment><USER11> The TEX Yoda looks pretty good for this: [https://www.massdrop.com/buy/tex- yoda](https://www.massdrop.com/buy/tex-yoda)

<comment><USER10> On mobile that link redirects to a generic landing page, but thank you.

Web marketers take note. If you redirect from a product page to a landing page, you are making it harder for people to give you money and harder for people to spread the word about your products.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I have one, and I love it. It's loud, feels great and the dipswitch settings on it make me not have to worry about any software to make it work exactly as I like.

The backlighting on it is also perfect.

I don't DVORAK, but the included keypuller makes it simple to swap keys around if you are so inclined.

Buy one.

<comment><USER13> > the included keypuller makes it simple to swap keys around if you are so > inclined.

You know what would be nice? If the keyboard had enough intelligence to read the keycaps and modify which codes it sent based on which keycaps are attached to which switches.

OS key remapping tends to vary from 'xmodmap' to 'worse than xmodmap', in my experience. It would be nice if the stupidly obvious thing worked for once.

<comment><USER8> Normally keys are scanned group-by-group digitally, but Cherry recently came out with a keyboard that uses analogue readout of the key matrix. They now put different resistors at each switch and measure the voltage (so they save delays introduced by the scanning and can sell it as "super fast" to gamers …)

If they put the resistors in the keycaps and managed to get stable contacts to the switches below working, one might be able to get a feature like that in hardware.

But allowing to reprogram the keys in the keyboard controller probably is easier. Longer initial setup time, but how often do people change their keyboard layouts?!

<comment><USER13> > Normally keys are scanned group-by-group digitally, but Cherry recently came > out with a keyboard that uses analogue readout of the key matrix. They now > put different resistors at each switch and measure the voltage (so they save > delays introduced by the scanning and can sell it as "super fast" to gamers > …)

Interesting to imagine most keyboards are that primitive.

It's also interesting to see gamers continuing to push technology forwards.

> But allowing to reprogram the keys in the keyboard controller probably is > easier. Longer initial setup time, but how often do people change their > keyboard layouts?!

It's worth it if the setup is obnoxious enough, and, well, this is something which _should_ be possible, and it's annoying that it hasn't been done yet.

<comment><USER14> There needs to be a utility that will set the keymap for you, given a photo of your keyboard.

<comment><USER8> That's actually a really clever idea. Secondary levels take manual work of course, but the basic principle should be viable, especially if you have a "default" layout photo to compare.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> What makes this different to the keyboards with the exact same feature set that are established for years and years already (Filco, DAS, happyhack...)?

<comment><USER16> The Code name as far as I can tell. Got three different cherry red/black 87 keys (AKA tenkeyless), including a Filco and a cheapo chinese one. And I can not see what this one bring to the table.

This is the keyboard Jeff Atwood was talking about I think: [http://blog.codinghorror.com/the-code- keyboard/](http://blog.codinghorror.com/the-code-keyboard/)

<comment><USER15> I was genuinely curious as this keyboard propped up a couple of times in different places over the last weeks. But it seems there is no innovation here, just one more for the pack.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> It's a pity it is only available in US layout. I can't get used to that small Enter key having used ISO layout my whole life. I personally use a Filco with MX Browns and am really happy with it.

<comment><USER18> I can understand why you'd call the US Enter key small, but speaking as a Canadian who often has to pick between US and "Canadian Multilingual" keyboards, it's the international Enter key I call small -- I'd much rather have an enter key that's longer in the home row so my pinky doesn't have to reach as far. Of course I'm also the type to prefer Caps Lock as Backspace and I use Colemak. And it's hard to adjust to a new way of typing when you're used to another keyboard. Still funny to see this -- I make a point of only buying or recommending the US layout for ergonomics, myself...

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> I have been an owner of the 87-key version for 4 months. Cherry MX.

My observations: The keyboard itself is heavy and feels nice. I love the lack of obnoxious branding. The backlight is actually pretty useful and has a few settings for brightness. I primarily use this one at home, but I've considered getting another one for the office. Would recommended.

</comment><comment><USER20> Wow, guess I'm just weird for liking the flat keys of a Apple keyboard.

I need to get my hands on one of these mechanical keyboards just to see what I'm missing I guess.

<comment><USER21> I have a CM Storm with Blues, and it really is awesome (as awesome as getting a new keyboard can be!) You should buy one for the ~60-70 USD if you're interested, worst-case you have a new keyboard (probably one that is known to be reliable), best case you're a whole lot happier typing!

<comment><USER22> The CM brand sort of surprised me. I am a keyboard snob and didn't really consider them as they are marketed as a "gaming" keyboard. Then I saw they had a "Hybrid Capacitive" (read: Topre) keyboard, which is my absolute favorite switch type -- but this had a unique spin, Topre + Cherry Caps...

I was able to get my hands on one, and it felt perfect... tenless, nkey rollover, topre, cherry mx keycaps, removable cable and built like a truck (thing is like 2 pounds).

<comment><USER21> Yup! Pretty good for the price, too. TKL is actually a minus for me, but given how much I like the keyboard I got over it ;)

<comment><USER22> Additional benefit of the TKL: office friendly with included dampeners, first mechanical(ish) I feel non-rude wanting to use in a shared office environment.

Just realized I didn't mention the actual keyboard, too much inside baseball on this thread I guess -- you knew what I was talking about at least, the Novatouch TKL: [http://gaming.coolermaster.com/en/products/keyboards/novatou...](http://gaming.coolermaster.com/en/products/keyboards/novatouchtkl/)

It is interesting that in the time since I purchased it, they toned down the gaming aspect in the marketing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Anyone have one of these? I'm in the market for a mechanical keyboard. Noticed they have several switch options. From what I've been reading, Cherry Browns are the ones they most people seem to go with.

<comment><USER24> I have one with Cherry Greens. Have been loving it so far. I prefer a really heavy action and this pretty much gets me there. The keyboard is solid, like really heavy. It's nice to finally have one that doesn't feel like a piece of cheap plastic. It's my first mechanical keyboard, so I may not be a good point for comparison.

<comment><USER25> I also have one with greens + o-rings (I work in a shared office environment) and love it.

Some people may think the greens are too heavy, but I love the weight behind the keys.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I've been using TypeMatrix 2030[1] for about four years. While not a mechanical keyboard, it still feels much like it. Together with the Programmer Dvorak[2] keyboard layout, I cannot really think of a better "code keyboard".

[1] [http://www.typematrix.com/2030/features.php](http://www.typematrix.com/2030/features.php) [2] [http://www.kaufmann.no/roland/dvorak/](http://www.kaufmann.no/roland/dvorak/)

</comment><comment><USER27> Could someone explain what makes this a "code" keyboard? I was expecting to see a keyboard with some actual ergonomics to help reduce wrist strain.

<comment><USER9> It's being hawked by Jeff Atwood. That's the only reason.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> I've got the one with the Cherry MX Clear switches. It feels overly "springy" when you first get it, but if you're a heavy typer it's pretty excellent to type on once you get used to it. It's also quiet enough to use in the office, and the backlight is very nice to have. One protip: you will definitely need to get a wrist rest for this keyboard, since the front edge is about an inch off the desk.

At home, I use a Das Keyboard with Cherry MX Brown switches, because they're more responsive for gaming and the Das Keyboard has dedicated media buttons and volume wheel.

Before that, I had an Aivia with Cherry MX Brown switches, which had a lot of the advantages of the Das Keyboard but had a very annoying light in the corner (although it might be possible with some hackery to turn it into a useful status light, as it changes color). It did have USB and audio passthrough though, which the Code and Das Keyboard do not have.

</comment><comment><USER29> Filco with reds or browns are the greatest regular (non-ergonomic) keyboards I've used by a huge margin.

<comment><USER30> Got a Filco with browns, and dampening O-rings. It's really loud though. I'd like something quieter, the Cherry Clears sound good.

<comment><USER31> Have you tried putting a small towel under the keyboard? It seems like a little thing but it made a big difference at my desk.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> Fair enough, looks like a nice product.

As I'm not looking for a new keyboard I was just hoping for some innovation in keyboard layouts. The thing has the same damn keys like every keyboard out there. How about something that actually makes coding more efficient. Maybe an extra row of keys below F1-F12, for language-specific keywords or code snippets.

Programming requires me to deal with abstract and unintuitive concepts all the time ... which are then broken down from programming constructs, to words, all the way to the individual letters which I have to type in one by one.

But maybe keyboard design has already reached perfection and all that remains is choosing green or brown Cherry keys.

</comment><comment><USER33> Some people have these at work and seem to love them. I really love my Kinesis keyboard though...once you get used to it, it really is easier to type on. Plus you can map any key to any other key, which is great.

<comment><USER34> Assuming that you mean the Advantage, the brackets were always awful. I gave it up for a HHKB

<comment><USER35> When you say that the "brackets were always awful", are you referring to their placement? If so, the Kinesis Advantage is programmable, so why didn't you relocate the brackets?

<comment><USER34> Yup, the placement. but where would I put them? The keyboard wasn't full of space.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> I don't need the numeric keypad; I'd rather have that space for my mouse. But I do need an ergonomic angle between the left and right sides.

I've been waiting for such a keyboard for 15 years.

<comment><USER37> There are plenty of ergo/split keyboards without numeric pads.

[http://www.microsoft.com/hardware/en-us/p/sculpt- ergonomic-d...](http://www.microsoft.com/hardware/en-us/p/sculpt-ergonomic- desktop)

[https://www.trulyergonomic.com/store/index.php](https://www.trulyergonomic.com/store/index.php) (mech switches too)

[https://www.kinesis-ergo.com/shop/freestyle2-for-pc-us/](https://www.kinesis- ergo.com/shop/freestyle2-for-pc-us/)

[http://www.goldtouch.com/ergonomic- keyboards/](http://www.goldtouch.com/ergonomic-keyboards/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> Cherry MX Green? Clear? I think these guys are being different for the sake of it.

I really don't like any Cherry switches. They are for point of sale terminals.

I'm saving up for a Realforce (Topre keys). My little Happy Hacking Lite has excellent (non-Topre) keys, though I don't know what's under the key caps. Some sort of high quality membrane technology.

<comment><USER15> Keyboards are very personal and imo more expensive is not necessarily better.

At home I have a DAS MX brown, but at work I'm using a <10$ IBM 7953 rubber dome one and it beats the MX's (for me) for progging by a mile.

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> Yawn!

I've been using my HP c3753a for 18 years now (same layout as these, great feel and sound (similar to IBM M)). If it ever dies, I'll just use the backup I grabbed 10 years ago.

It's kind of like buying new antique furniture. I'm sure the keyboard is solid and will last, but I've got the original...

<comment><USER16> One major drawback with this one is the connection. Unless you have hacked it to have a USB connection ....

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> Cooler Master Storm QuickFire style keyboards (available with or without backlight and TK) are 90$ at Amazon. They are asking a lot of coin for features I wouldn't use.

I use a Kinesis Advantage so I haven't gotten around to buying one for myself, but I want it every time I do something with it.

</comment><comment><USER41> Just throwing a shout out to Unicomp, in case anyone is looking for new a IBM Model M-type keyboard, with bulking spring switches.

They're also working on a new ten-keyless model that should be out "soon"...

[http://unicomp.com/](http://unicomp.com/)

</comment><comment> vhost- I have one with Green switches and I love it.

I took out the o-rings because they made it too gummy. It was very stiff for a bit when I did that, but I got used to it and now I can play games of CS:GO and code on it just fine.

I recommend it, it's simple, small and feels solid.

</comment><comment><USER42> " Is the CODE keyboard available in ISO layouts? No, we currently only have the CODE available with the standard US ANSI layout. We do not have plans for an ISO layout, but we will try to come up with a solution for that in the future."

sad

</comment><comment><USER43> I have one with MX Clears, got it as a Christmas gift, love it.

<comment><USER44> Have you used any other MX switches before?

Wondering how the MX Clears compare to MX Blue; I'm currently using a Ducky Shine 3 with MX Blue, I attempted to put on some o-rings to quiet the clicks, but lost a lot of tactile feedback which annoyed me.

<comment><USER45> They're more stiff. Same with reds - they're more stiff compared to browns. If you really want to try it yourself, you can order MX switches sampler (something like this: [http://www.amazon.com/Max-Keyboard-Keycap-Cherry- Sampler/dp/...](http://www.amazon.com/Max-Keyboard-Keycap-Cherry- Sampler/dp/B00N6DXTW4)).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER46> This looks very dated. Looks just like an old HP keyboard from 2000. I have yet to find a keyboard better than Apple's.

<comment><USER47> I'd be willing to bet you haven't looked very hard. Sure the Apple keyboards look nice but the feel and responsiveness of the keys are far from the best.

<comment><USER48> The keys are honestly _terrible_ in that they wear down quickly. The plastic is soft, which feels nice, but eventually rubs or scrapes away way faster than the harder plastic in older keyboards.

That aside, the low-travel feel is fantastic and it's worth the trade-off.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> A friend has one, while trying it, I found the space bar is to long, felt pain when pressing the alt keys with the thumbs.

</comment><comment><USER50> The switchable layout is a nice touch. Programmable layouts would be nice. And a version without any key labels.

</comment><comment><USER51> I really need a curved keyboard, typing on a straight one just feels cramped. Other than that, looks fancy.

</comment><comment><USER52> Where are the ergonomics?

</comment><comment><USER53> I would prefer MX Blue over MX Green switches.

</comment><comment><USER54> which reminds me of the pre-assembled ergodox from ergodox-ez.com

<comment><USER55> now on indiegogo.

[https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/ergodox-ez-an- incredible-...](https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/ergodox-ez-an-incredible- mechanical-keyboard/x/10327881)

</comment></comment><comment><USER56> > Sound dampening O-rings

Copy editors: you mean "Sound damping".

<comment><USER57> > damping, adj

> 1\. a decrease in the amplitude of an oscillation as a result of energy > being drained from the system to overcome frictional or other resistive > forces.

vs

> dampen, v

> 2\. make less strong or intense.

I'm pretty sure they meant what they said.

<comment><USER56> [http://grammarist.com/usage/dampen-damper- dampener/](http://grammarist.com/usage/dampen-damper-dampener/)

So you're correct -- I remember reading articles about suspension (ie: bicycle shocks) where they talked about the damping adjustments, and went through pains to differentiate between "damping" (ie: damping the rebound effect of the suspension spring) versus "dampening" (to make something damp (ie: wet))... but I guess "dampening" works all ways... I thought it was an annoying common-ish mistake, and here I am in error...

Edit: more etymology -- [http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/67497/is- it-dampi...](http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/67497/is-it-damping- or-dampening-when-referring-to-sound)</comment></comment></comment>


Part of BT is down again - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/BTCare/status/756032905361690624 <comment><USER2> It's been like that for a while now, and similar to yesterday's issue.

[http://downdetector.co.uk/problems/bt-british- telecom](http://downdetector.co.uk/problems/bt-british-telecom)

And seems to be related to the same issue

</comment><comment><USER3> Made the news again: [http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-36854916](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-36854916)</comment>


Ask HN: What do you think of my app [2]? - <AUTHOR>

Last month, for the Android version, we have gathered a lot of feedback from various source and we have been working to improve the app and the global experience. We had 700 new downloads. We have fixed a couple of things on the back-end and the app has been stable for few weeks.
The iOS version has been released after all. It's still a MVP and we are working on an update to keep up with the Android version.
For those who don't know Jungl, it is a place to share and discover mobile apps with your friends and people you can relate to. Everyone selects their favorite apps. You can browse other people's selections and see their discoveries. Like Tinder, Jungl is a swipe left or right and learns from your habits.
We are working at putting out new updates as people find things the app needs, so please let me know of any feedback! <comment><AUTHOR> [https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.jungl.andr...](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.jungl.android)

[https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/jungl/id966840643](https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/jungl/id966840643)

FAQ: [http://www.jungl.com/wp/?p=338](http://www.jungl.com/wp/?p=338)

Here the link to my previous thread: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8984047](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8984047) Thanks to all the guys that tried the app and gave me their feedback. It is very much appreciated !</comment>


Show HN: Rhythm – a daily markdown notebook, calendar, and task list - <AUTHOR> https://getarhythm.com/ <comment><AUTHOR> This is my first show HN, and honestly I'm a bit nervous. I have been working on building this web app in the background for quite a while. I initially built it because I was doing a lot of consulting work and needed a simple interface that would allow me to keep track of all of my tasks and events in one place. Without distractions.

After using it personally for several years at this point I've decided to see if it would be useful for anyone else. I'm currently collecting feedback. Any input on what works, or what's confusing about the app is helpful.

Thanks, and Happy New Year!

–Daniel

</comment><comment><USER2> I like the typography, I dislike the name as -in my opinion- it lacks connection to what the app does.

I'm not your target audience, I do not use these kind of apps (and I tried several), but even so I find that the landing page does not refer to anywhere with more information. An starting guide (open to the world) or something similar as to visually see how the app works (at length) would help discoverability for people that consider that free registration is a cost too high to pay.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks that's definitely useful feedback. The app was originally called Progress Wall, but I renamed it because the name became problematic given current politics.

<comment><USER3> okay, but fwiw nobody is using the name [https://google.com/search?q=inurl%3AProgressBoard](https://google.com/search?q=inurl%3AProgressBoard) [https://www.godaddy.com/dpp/find?domainToCheck=ProgressBoard](https://www.godaddy.com/dpp/find?domainToCheck=ProgressBoard)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Had a quick glance and it seems like a good start. Not sure why it hasn't got any upvotes yet.

Edit: then again, -a number of other interesting stories are failing today. Maybe try again in a few days and maybe even contact the mods; I think they might help you if you have a good story.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for checking it out!

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Good to see. May I know your infrastructure and cost of monthly deploying. I have one app and want to deploy so looking for cheap options.

<comment><AUTHOR> The app is built with Rails + JS. It's hosted on Heroku, so the monthly costs are reasonable and I have the flexibility to scale the server and database up or down when needed.</comment></comment>


What should you think about when using Facebook? - <AUTHOR> http://veekaybee.github.io/facebook-is-collecting-this/ <comment><USER3> This is an excellent blog post, though it made me sick reading it.

I recently made the switch. I went from trying to limit how much I log in (to once or twice a week), to actually not logging in. I've been cold-turkey for two months (except for a couple of times when I had a very specific reason to check something).

I thought it would be difficult. Turns out it's not so hard, and it's the fear of reduced social contact (or dopamine withdrawal more likely) that was stopping me. If you have a plan to replace the social interactions with other forms, you realise that the rest is just dross. If I really want to know what my friends had for breakfast I can phone them up and ask. On balance, I'd rather not.

I'm not at the point of deleting the account yet. Small steps.

Here were my reasons FWIW: [http://blog.afandian.com/2017/01/why-i-am-giving- up-on-faceb...](http://blog.afandian.com/2017/01/why-i-am-giving-up-on- facebook/)

If you're reading and considering whether or not you can withdraw from Facebook, you can do it!

<comment><USER4> > Turns out it's not so hard, and it's the fear of reduced social contact (or > dopamine withdrawal more likely) that was stopping me. If you have a plan to > replace the social interactions with other forms, you realise that the rest > is just dross.

This is the problem for me right now. I don't have a plan for replacing the social contact of facebook (and facebook isn't giving me anywhere close to what I need). I'm also struggling with depression right now and pretty socially withdrawn. As soon as the current blues pass and I'm able to come up with a real life third place [1], I hope to start limiting how much time I spend there and eventually quit altogether.

[1] From the article - [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_place](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_place)

<comment><USER5> I feel lucky in that I have a job that involves social interaction, but moving to a new city left me without any "third place". I definitely empathize with the loneliness that can stir up and so many public spaces seem designed around creating new social interactions between people who aren't already associated.

I read an article not long ago about upscale private clubs. I'm strongly attracted to the status/networking aspect often involved, but the idea of a place gather and socialize that doesn't _require_ buying alcohol/coffee/food is appealing. Place it in a neighborhood. Keep the membership fees accessible to the people who live in that community and then offer some small perks that bars/coffee shops don't (e.g. free billiards on a real table). Hopefully, membership would make people a little more open to socializing with whomever show up, rather than the typical bar in which most people stick to their own group.

Does anyone have experience with private clubs (of any kind)? Did they open up social interaction in this way?

<comment><USER4> That's a cool idea, yep. My thing used to be volunteering at bike shop. It was free as long as I was working (which I enjoyed) and there was a lot of interaction. Having it fee-based instead of work-based would be cool too.

<comment><USER5> Volunteering is definitely a good way to meet people (as is joining a dance group or sports team) - but just having a space to hang out, play a social game, and/or talk with people would be nice. I imagine having a small membership fee could strengthen the "in-group" mentality causing people to open up a little.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I experienced first hand the drug like quality of Facebook when I made the decision to finally quit..I started asking friends if I had an up to date contact number for them as I was planning to leave the site.

Every single one of them, EVERY one of them made it a mission of sorts to keep me from leaving the site.

"Just unfollow people, spend less time on the site"

Well by spending NO time on the site I AM spending less time on the site so hey we both get what we want right?

One friend went armchair psychologist on me about the affair.

It was an interesting week between emails,phone calls and text messages asking me where I had gone and why. "was it something I posted?"

For my part three months later...I've been reading a lot more and my grades in pre-law are improving, and that's all the feedback I needed to know I was on the right track to removing unnecessary cruft from the life.

<comment><USER7> Yes, it's really bizarre, even the application/website itself has a whole guilt-trip gauntlet when you choose to deactivate your account. Not to mention that you cannot actually ever even _delete_ your data, you can only put your account into a suspended state of stasis.

The only people I know of who have success in their facebookian encounters are:

\+ activists \+ artists (who connect under pseudonyms) \+ businesspeople (who connect under the umbrella of their company)

<comment><USER8> Data created on someone else's computer cannot ever be owned by you. Data created by someone else's proprietary software on your locked computer is probably never exclusively yours either.

<comment><USER7> Yes! Software "ownership" is a fascinatingly blurry ground.

Still though, just because I upload a picture to [f], it is no longer information regarding me? Perhaps it is a greater question of associability of information.

Why is not the great battle of the 21st century the right to privacy? Brand valuability and Information Collection are becoming synonymous.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Last week I permanently deleted my FaceBook account. All my data since 2007 (10 years) and friends gone. Well...apparently my data is still somewhere to be used as metadata...

Still, I must say, this was a liberating experience. I don't go there anymore to see another cat/new born/fake news posts. I don't get get angry with dumb comments. I don't have to see at my friends are eating, selfies, etc..

My closest friends and family are reachable one whatsapp/imessage/phone call away. The other hundreds "friends" I had on FB, I don't even remember their names anymore...

<comment><USER10> To my knowledge, your account is never actually gone but instead deactivated. Not sure if there is a grace period to that, but as anondon said you can get an archive of all your data (which is what I did before deleting my account).

<comment><USER11> Facebook provides a real delete option. It's hidden but it's there.

[https://www.facebook.com/help/delete_account](https://www.facebook.com/help/delete_account)

<comment><USER12> Does this delete your data too? I spent about 2 days the other day running a script to delete all my data way back to 2010.

<comment><USER11> I'm pretty sure it's a genuine delete button.

<comment><USER13> No way do they actually delete your information

It's replicated all over the planet many times over and they share it with other businesses and agencies

Even if they did, your friends and family talk about you and they're not going to censor all that information too

<comment><USER14> It gets deleted. Facebook Ireland Audit Report.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Permanently Delete it here: [https://www.facebook.com/help/delete_account](https://www.facebook.com/help/delete_account)

If you are considering getting off of it for any of these reasons then why haven't you already done it? You feel you might somehow need it, just like a heroin addict has trouble imagining a life without drugs.

It is horrible for your privacy. They collect EVERYTHING about you!

It is in their best interest to manipulate your attention, which to me is terrifying.

It is horrible for your relationships, cut the acquaintance you met 5 years ago that YOU WILL NEVER SPEAK WITH and force yourself to make more intimate connections with the people that actually matter.

It is horrible for your mind, you have a constant bombardment of instant gratification and self reinforcing ideas.

<comment><USER16> Gotta love the fact that when you're not logged in to FB, clicking on that url shows you the FB login page with a parameter where to redirect you next, which is normal enough, but it also has the referer URL (this HN comments page) as another parameter. They want to know who's linking to their delete page!

(OK they probably have that in every login page redirect, and the cleverer way would be to silently record the HTTP header...)

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Not long ago I was sitting with some long time friends I hadn't seen in a few years. It was one of those really great visits in which you remember exactly why someone is an important person in your life.

One of the things we ended up talking about was physical photographs and how our families had developed a natural curation and annotation system. "Keepers" get sorted and labeled on the back with names, dates, brief notes, etc. and placed in albums. There were a bore when we were younger, but now we appreciate having some long-lasting artifacts of our families' lives and history. This is a nice thing and differs in importance to my every day interaction with personal media.

If I had the talent, I would make a small journaling tool for myself. All I would ask it to do is remind me once a week to select a favorite photograph and make a brief note about who's in it and why it's important. Really, just 30 second a week. Then, one a year a nice, archivally printed photo album would show up on my doorstep with all of these photographs arranged and discretely tagged with names, dates, and notes. That's it.

<comment><USER17> I like it. My wife subscribes to a service that will automatically print and mail her a small printed photo book for every X photos she favorites on her phone. It doesn't have the nice tagging and dates and notes, but it creates a chronological hard copy series of photo books that are great to have around, without requiring much forethought.

<comment><USER18> What's the service?

<comment><USER17> Chatbooks[1] - they're not glossy or high quality, but then a lot of the time the photos aren't either beyond the associated memories. And they're cheap so you don't have to stress over whether to hit the favorite button.

[1] [https://chatbooks.com/favorite-photo- books/](https://chatbooks.com/favorite-photo-books/)

<comment><USER5> That service is pretty close.

It's also where I feel my otherness. My father was a professional photographer, I grew up playing around in the darkroom, so I do recognize that I have a bias toward high quality photo prints. One of those 'ignorance is bliss' things maybe.

The photos wouldn't need to be large, but the quality would need to be there or else I won't value them long term as distinct from digital files (which still command many advantages over physical media).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Even though Facebook by itself doesn't seem to provide much value anymore, it's incredible how much of a platform lock-in the have. For example, Facebook login becoming essentially a universal identity provider. The worst thing is even when you create a new account under a different name they still manage to track you down, and start suggesting adding friends from the old account. I wonder how they do this, by tracking cookies and fingerprinting your browser?

<comment><USER20> I've wondered this too. I have friend suggestions for my work colleagues, even though my Facebook email is my own private address and I've never emailed them from that address. It's amazing and bothersome

<comment><USER21> Have you used it on mobile and shared your contacts? Might they have had access to your location(GPS or maybe to which wifi you're connected).

Interesting article: [http://fusion.net/story/339018/facebook-psychiatrist- privacy...](http://fusion.net/story/339018/facebook-psychiatrist-privacy- problems/)

<comment><USER22> Or they just suggest people based on common locations that you and they visit and where they spend their time.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> The funny thing is, these are exactly the things I think about while on facebook. By being online for almost two decades I've developed a 6th sense for sketchy services and the whole UI of Facebook screams "SCAM!". The periodically reoccurring messages harassing you into uploading a picture of yourself, the prompt to denounce people who you believe are using a fake name or the vaguely described privacy settings don't help either.

I only log in when I get an e-mail notification for a message I've received. Some time ago you could simply reply to that e-mail but that doesn't work anymore. Furthermore, you can't say: I just want a notification in case of a message. You have to accept some other stuff as well. I've told my spam filter to delete every e-mail from facebook that doesn't include "message" its the subject.

<comment><USER24> I deleted facebook app from phone (android) and occasionally was visiting facebook website after notifications received. And apparently you cannot neither read nor reply to messages via browser anymore, you asked to install messenger app and it's not a "BETTER EXPERIENCE VIA APP (thank you, continue to site)" type of modal, there is no tiny text option to proceed with web

<comment><USER25> > And apparently you cannot neither read nor reply to messages via browser > anymore

You can, but they try to make mobile users think you can't; you have to either use the desktop version of messenger.com (e.g., with "request desktop version" from a mobile browser) or use mbasic.facebook.com

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I left Facebook three years ago or so. It did not offer any value for me - <USER2> I couldn't stand the quality of "information" on that platform. To much crazy stuff in my stream, things I am not interested in, stupid games, ads, click bait, and so on.

I also left twitter months ago. The people seem to be better there, but I have the image of twitter being a bad company. And the time spent there didn't provide enough value to me. It was too easy to get disrupted at work. And after keeping apps closed, the service became useless for me.

Most of the people I have contact with are developers, and like 99% don't have a Facebook account either.

</comment><comment><USER27> Can someone make a browser plugin that will send fake data to facebook? Instead of hiding your own behavior, might as well poison their database.

<comment><USER28> A few of us were joking about poisoning the location tracking database of site along a similar vein. Have an app masking your location to some place in the pacific ocean to any app running in the background asking for location (without the user's intent of using it).

<comment><USER16> On Android, Xprivacy uses hooks provided by Xposed to "MitM" a lot of functiom calls. Don't want an app to know your phone's serial number? That function call returns a spoofed one. Same with GPS location.

<comment><USER29> I love Xposed. I just wish using it didn't mean I couldn't get regular Android updates (I have a 5x).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> I treat everything I do on Facebook as public and permanent information. With that mindset the experience is rather pleasant.

<comment><USER31> Not public, privately own by facebook (and partners and clients) and aggregated with everything that is actually public and every other privately own data they could gather.

Then used to target you in every possible ways.

<comment><USER32> I get most of the personal data concerns, but what exactly is the issue with targeted ads?

<comment><USER33> Changing your behaviour.

Ads are a hostile action.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> Genuine question : do you think a privacy oriented social network where users pay a small annual fee (around $5) would work? Think Whatsapp (use phone number as an id, no native discovery, only connect through phone contacts, encrypted user data only to prevent database leaks from causing damage) + Facebook (feed like feature, share photos, videos, direct messaging, group messaging). No user tracking, no ads, just a no bullshit social network where the average Joe would feel right at home and also one which the HN crowd would use, assuming social networks have a place in their lives.

<comment><USER35> Not a chance. You want people to pay for that ? Even free alternative social networks like Diaspora or Ello failed to gain any traction. The network effects are just too strong.

The next wave that will eventually unseat Facebook (the product) will have to be something entirely different. And it might even come from Facebook (the company).

<comment><USER36> Agreed. app.net was such an attempt to offer a paid alternative to Twitter, and that went exactly nowhere.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> Many people in the tech industry don't realize the tradeoffs they are making by participating on FB. This is to say nothing of the nontechnical crowd who make up the overwhelming majority of the site.

My wish is that mainstream news media would cover these issues. It'd be great if most of FB's users thought about the troves of personal info that they are providing not just about themselves but their friends as well.

<comment><USER38> UK press has been covering this, and the EU has frequently shown itself ready to push back: [https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jan/10/whatsapp-...](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jan/10/whatsapp- facebook-google-privacy-rules-ec-european-directive)

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> There is a solution that can help you get here, and it worked for me: unfollow everyone and everything.

By unfollowing everyone except a handful of boring sites that barely ever publish anything, my newsfeed has become very boring and I rarely feel the pull towards it or any of its addictive power. The end result is that when I do log in, I only see notifications for a couple of groups full of my friends or interests that are truly relevant and I don't waste any time scrolling.

At this point in my life, Messenger (not from the main site, but from its own site) and Groups are quite convenient, and both are a bit necessary for me at the moment, so I can't quite disable Fb, but I'm very happily giving up on the feed for good.

I might eventually quit altogether, but this method has worked for me quite well for the last few months.

<comment><USER10> This works well for any follow or subscription based network. Taking the instant gratification and new-content-every-five-minutes aspects out, just leaves you with something that does not incentivise you to keep returning so often (and therefore waste your time).

I have several friends who would benefit a lot if they stopped following hundreds of accounts, keeping their feeds and brains busy with "nothing."

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> Another comment has mentioned poisoning the FB database with fake clickstreams, etc.

It looks like skillful black hat marketers have already succeeded at poisoning FB's content. Read this Vice story, then delete your FB account and delete the cookies from your browser. Friends don't let friends use FB.

[https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/big-data- cambridg...](https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/big-data-cambridge- analytica-brexit-trump)

<comment><USER41> The video referenced in that article is truly amazing/disturbing [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8Dd5aVXLCc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8Dd5aVXLCc)

</comment></comment><comment><USER42> Start using other apps with better privacy for communication. Get a real website or blog for your PR needs.

<comment><USER43> _> Get a real website or blog for your PR needs._

Btw if you weren't already aware... a lot of small businesses (e.g. mom & pop restaurants, handymen contractors, yoga studios, etc) actually _did have a real website_ but they abandoned them and only maintained their Facebook pages.

The behavior pattern is the same: the "real website" whether it was a CMS built on PHP-Drupal or a Wordpress blog was too complicated for owners to mess with. (e.g. "uh, what's this domain renewal email I just got from Godaddy have to do with my website?!?") The real website then suffers "digital rot" or they expire.

Facebook pages are _easier_. Therefore, advising them to maintain real websites isn't going to convince them. They've already _" been there done that"_ and saw no value in it. As far as privacy and data collection, businesses don't care -- it's their public storefront.

<comment> at-fates-hands >> businesses don't care -- it's their public storefront.

Until they land in the news for something and then people can go back and start digging up and doxxing people at the company and any other nefarious information they can get their hands on. ANY information on a business FB page is like a gold mine for social engineers. Everybody on FB eventually "over shares" information they think is safe, but its really not.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> Bit unrelated, but there's a working way to get rid of FB addiction. Just start unfollowing everything that you see in your "news feed". It's not visible to anyone, and you will gradually (a couple of weeks in my case) phase out of FB, just because there's nothing to see there.

But the very first step, for sure, is to admit that you have the addiction.

<comment><USER45> I did this maybe a year or two ago. I un-followed all of my Facebook friends. No more Facebook updates, no changes to any of my relationships (e.g., nobody gets "unfriended",) more time to focus on my own stuff.

And you can re-follow people any time if things get quiet.

</comment></comment><comment><USER46> If you're looking to use Facebook less (but can't bring yourself to quit) I just launched a tool for that!

[http://youjustneedspace.com](http://youjustneedspace.com)

The iOS version is a web app because Apple rejected our native app. They said any app that encourages you to use your phone less is not appropriate for the app store.

<comment><USER47> Did you bring up the number of apps which either block a tone of sites with a simulated con or notify you until you reopen the app to keep you off you're phone?

<comment><USER46> We're going through the appeal process right now. We've gathered lists of web content block apps, workflow style apps, and icon skinning apps. I'm not familiar with that last category of apps (notify you until you reopen the app to keep you off you're phone). Can you give me an example?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> The linked "Blue Feed, Red Feed" from WSJ is impressive and scary.

[http://graphics.wsj.com/blue-feed-red-feed/](http://graphics.wsj.com/blue- feed-red-feed/)

</comment><comment><USER48> A long while back (2012?) i deleted my Facebook account without really thinking it through, and i lost contact with a bunch of people i'd met during an overseas period. I still find that a bit of a pity, but ultimately (as cynical as it sounds) life goes on, and i've found more compatible people whom i care more about in the meantime.

However, a few years ago i recreated a Facebook profile (this time a pseudonym with initially 0 friends) because some of the events i'm interested in (local music/art galleries for example) _only_ publish their events on Facebook, it seems. No mailing list available, invariably. This is a pity, because i don't have friends to rely on to drag me to the good gigs (i like to keep up-to-date with local experimental music, for example, which my friends don't care for).

And, the problem too, is that inevitably, i've made one or two friends with that account, partly with my previous FB experience in mind, and partly because they seemed belligerently anti-email (and texting isn't practical when you're in another country). So now i'm far from being back to square one, and i only look at Facebook about once every month, but i still would love to just get rid of it, except i don't really know how to handle musicians and artists who only publish their upcoming events on Facebook. But aside from that, the comments are spot on. If people can't be arsed to email me if i prefer email (and i, too, believe that i am easily google'able), they're probably not really worth chasing.

Does that exist? Like-on-Facebook-and-relay-via-email-as-a-Service?

</comment><comment><USER49> A related question is "Should you sign up for Facebook today?". Five years ago I killed my Facebook account (and LinkedIn and G+) and it hasn't bothered me, but... am I missing out on something?

<comment><USER50> Facebook it the only way I see my second cousin's kid's piano recital. It is a valuable way for me to know something like that happened (they live more than a thousand miles away). It lets me keep up some of the people who I went to high school with - we were not really friends but we had a connection. Facebook is the easiest way to ensure my parents (300 miles away) see pictures of their grandkids doing cute things.

Unfortunately it sucks me into political fake news and lots of other bad things. Blocking all games helped greatly.

On balance the real purpose of Facebook: keeping up with distance family and friends; is a very useful part of life. Thus it is worth it.

<comment><USER51> This is me - only I'm on the other side of the Atlantic from family. In fact, this was the only reason I signed up for facebook 3 or so years ago. It is also the reason I have some loyalty: The main drawback of other social networks is the lack of cross communication between chats and some people's pages.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER52> Zuck: "Facebook is not and has never been part of any program to give the US or any other government direct access to our servers." Oh, well, but they seem to be hooked in there anyway: [http://web.archive.org/web/20150826205104/https://bosnadev.c...](http://web.archive.org/web/20150826205104/https://bosnadev.com/2015/04/14/facebook- chats-are-being-scanned-by-a-cia-funded-company/)

<comment><USER53> The US government definitely has at least "indirect" access to Facebook servers.

What does "direct access" mean exactly? Does having to enter a password constitute indirect access?

</comment></comment><comment><USER54> I think facebook is the most dangerous spy of the world. let me tell you a story, once I was setting with my friend and he was using his facebook app in android phone, and suddenly I saw, "Invite your friends to facebook" and the number and name down this statement was personal contact, and she don't even know what facebook is? you would wonder how I came to know about that number so quickly, becuase my nameing convention for contacts is very different i.e. like I write "C" before every classmate contact and "F" before every friend things like that. and then I stopped using facebook in my phone.

</comment><comment><USER55> I keep my social media accounts locked down and off search engines, so I was surprised to see my name, photo and a link to my profile appearing in a Facebook list of people with my name when I self-Googled. The problem seems to apply to localized versions of FB (it-it, en-gb) so it is probably a bug.

Google Plus had a similar problem, but for much longer. Even though my account was locked down, the people who had me in their circles were showing up in Google search results for my name, so I deleted my Google Plus profile, and advised my friends and family to do the same.

I nuked my Pinterest profile after it was scraped despite being locked down.

FB also did something rather disturbing the other day that reminded me why vigilance is critical. It generated a (private) music video about my friends, but freakily, the person who it started up with was a secret crush -the attraction was mutual but never went anywhere-from 15 years ago (we became FB friends a few years later). The two of us don't interact much on FB, so it must have inferred this based on her ongoing views of my profile, or vice- versa. My wife has no idea about this crush, and is friends with the other person. Our circle of mutual friends does know about it, but has kept it secret for years. Having it appear on my FB timeline would have been awkward, to say the least.

</comment><comment><USER56> Never used Facebook, though I'm postive they have a lot of data on me, for which I never agreed to share with them, cannot see, have no way to opt-out of, etc.

<comment><USER57> You can "opt out" of a lot of the data collection by editing your hosts file.

127.0.0.1 facebook.com 127.0.0.1 fbcdn.com etc.

Multiple people maintain lists of Facebook and other surveillancecorp domains.

</comment></comment><comment><USER58> My take. I have been using FB since 2007 I was a sophomore in high school. A couple years ago I didn't use FB as often as I did, but just this past year I started to use FB more frequently.

The change has to do with the people I actually network with on FB. I always have friends, real life friends on my FB, but most of them aren't very active on Facebook. This past year I met a bunch of new friends and they are the social bunch. I started to post more of my social life on Facebook. It's been fun to actually see what's happening in everyone's life. With the recent political shit storm in America, FB is becoming more active.

I also started to follow a bunch of pages ranging from food to inspiration quotes to news page. They have been helpful to get me through my day, learning new perspectives and finding more interesting things.

I've used other products such as quora, flipboard, etc but they don't provide the same conveniences as FB does. I have family members actively on FB (my father and my sister in particular), and I enjoy sharing my moments with them.

I know there's a lot of privacy concerns with using FB but I simply try to accommodate it. I believe in controlling my privacy but I also enjoy using the product. As far as I am concerned, if I am not leaking my social security number or talking shit about my work on FB, I am not too concerned.

But in the future when I become a parent, I would certainly be concerned of the safety and the privacy more and more, specifically how it is easy for someone to look at another person's profile for as long as the profile is shared with friends and friends. Fake news and the left/right war on Facebook are also quite problematic.

</comment><comment><USER59> I think it's interesting that despite deep and widely-publicized privacy concerns, Facebook's users have mostly been loyal to the platform. Myself included.

Data collections seems necessary to monetize the platform. Are there any alternatives, or do we just need smaller more close-knit social networks?

</comment><comment><USER60> I think about it as a simple Message and Event's calendar that my friends have access to me once per week when I look at it.

Also occasionally use it as a login systems for sites I don't want to sign up to.

What else does it do? I unfollowed everyone/thing from my wall ... which seems to improve it somewhat!

<comment><USER61> I still use Messenger, but my Facebook account is deactivated. I finally gave up after clicking "Hide all from..." for the 10,000th time. It seemed like an increasingly losing battle. The more I unfollowed, the more it showed me things I didn't want to see, and more ads! My entire interaction had devolved into scrolling slowing and clicking "Hide all..."

So tell me how you got your feed to stop being full of bad things? :)

<comment><USER60> I just did about 25 per day for what seemed like forever but I wasn't about to let it win!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER62> Going on two years without Facebook. At first I thought it will be hard to stay in touch with friend but it is the opposite, I get to hangout more often with my friends, our conversations are more intimate, we genuinely want to know what happened since we last saw each other. As far as news goes I subscribed to news paper, have dozen email subscriptions which delivers it to my inbox every morning.

I started making photo albums again and putting my pictures in there whenever friends come over I get to show it to them.

As far as cat videos goes I get to watch them on YouTube

To be honest it has been the most productive time of my life since I deactivated Facebook and my friendship has become stronger

Moral of the story yes you an live without Facebook

</comment><comment><USER63> Nice Post! Learned a lot. Thank you!

I've removed my Facebook account 3 years ago and never looked back. Everyone who should be in touch with me have my e-mail address and mobile phone number, other's who actually want to take a sniff into my life try to trick me creating one, but hey - I've been there, f*ck off. Nonetheless I relocated to the US, Boston, 7 months ago and haven't acquired any meaningful friendship with anyone, I still don't care. I better off read Literature and Philosophy rather than infinite stream of non-sense.

GJ

</comment><comment><USER64> I wonder if the edge case has been tested wherein someone turning 18 retroactively withdraws consent their parents gave when uploading information about them while they were minors. Taking photos of other people and data mining them, especially minors, seems like something that is very probably illegal in at least a few states. Would be very curious if on someone's 18th birthday they can actually force Facebook to delete everything they have about them.

</comment><comment><USER65> I've always had the wrong birth date on Facebook because I'm not comfortable with sharing too much personal information with that company. So people have been congratulating me on the wrong date. Which doesn't bother me at all because keeping track of peoples birthday is impossible. But I've gotten the impression from some that I've broken a taboo and that they think it is deceptive of me to have the wrong birth date displayed.

</comment><comment><USER66> >As you are crafting your message, Facebook collects your keystrokes.

Does anyone have evidence of this? Not surprising or difficult, of course, but while watching ajax traffic and typing into a status box I don't see obvious posts with either the text I'm typing or obscured blobs. On the other hand, there's plenty of ajax traffic polling for updates and sending other analytics.

<comment><USER16> I recently got the option to save post drafts, so I could type something, it would save it automatically, and I could continue that post in another browser if I wanted (similar to Gmail's compose window). But the option was very visible. I can't recall if I dismissed it forever or it disappeared by itself.

If they're malicious they could wait a few minutes before reporting what you were thinking of posting.. or they're using websockets, which you may have missed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER67> "A similarly-sized company of 15,000 might have 5 data scientists" \- this is so far off the mark I don't even have a response.

<comment><USER68> The definition of data scientist is really skewed. It's a buzz word every hot shot identifies themselves with.

</comment></comment><comment><USER69> Deleted FB years ago and haven't missed it one bit. Get out while you can and block all FB domains via hosts or on your router.

</comment><comment><USER70> Does anyone have suggestions or best practices for using facebook securely (ie to maintain an account but not let it be linked w/ all of your other browsing activities)? I was thinking something like hosting a hardened/non- fingerprintable browser from a VPS/cloud provider somewhere and only using that to interact with the site.

<comment><USER71> Noscript can block js from Facebook, except when you're on Facebook.com.

<comment><USER72> How do we know facebook doesn't serve up tracking scripts from other domains?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER73> With respect to tracking you throughout the interwebs, Amazon is as bad. It pisses me off when I look at a pair of shoes then start seeing amazon ads on every site I go to for months, hey remember the shoes you looked at?

</comment><comment><USER74> Related: Now Facebook has been pushing the Moments app to share photos. I don't want to use it but a lot of people around me do. Can anyone recommend an alternative photo sharing app?

<comment><USER75> Google Photos works well.

<comment><USER74> That's true, I'm currently using them. But of course Google comes with their own set of privacy concerns as well.

<comment><USER75> That's true. I've been considering the idea of building my own personal replacement for several Google services - Keep, Drive, and Photos mainly. Haven't decided it's worth the effort yet.

<comment><USER53> I would _love_ a self-hosted Google docs clone, that I can access from an Android App and the web. That would also replace Evernote.

<comment><USER75> I've been tempted to look into things like ownCloud ([https://owncloud.org/features/](https://owncloud.org/features/)), but I just haven't been excited by what I've seen so far. What I'm thinking of is more of a single user web app that I build myself so that a) it does exactly what I want and nothing more, b) I know exactly how it works and what it does with my data, and c) there are no other users to support.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER76> What I think about when I use Facebook: don't use Facebook.

</comment><comment><USER77> I usually think, why am I on Facebook? I just want messenger to open already.

</comment><comment><USER78> I think it is very simple. We should think positive update status. If we won't tracked as a 'blacklist' we should have decorum or ethical.

</comment><comment><USER78> I should think, can I beat Facebook? If no. So give up. If yes, make something interesting than Facebook.

</comment><comment><USER79> Facebook is good for one thing only: organizing political protests.

</comment><comment><USER80> Damn you, Tinder.

</comment><comment> jeffrey-sean Whether you realize it or not, your posts are being analyzed by everyone.

Use a free service like Rep'nUp to identify all unprofessional posts, images, and tags. You can then link back to each post and curate if needed.

[https://www.repnup.com/](https://www.repnup.com/)

<comment><USER81> Please clearly disclose if you have an affiliation with this service.</comment></comment>


Chocolate v1.5 - <AUTHOR> http://chocolatapp.com/blog/one-five

<comment><USER2> Definitely going to have to give this editor another look. I was impressed when I used it before, but it didn't offer anything that ST2 didn't have. This looks pretty awesome though.

</comment><comment><USER3> Too bad it's another OSX-only editor.

</comment><comment><USER4> *Chocolat</comment>