Slashdot Mirror


Why Facebook Is Stressing You Out

Hugh Pickens writes "Megan Garber reports that the more friends you have on Facebook — or, perhaps more accurately, the more 'friends' you have on Facebook — the more stressed you're likely to be about actually having them. The wider your Facebook network, the more likely it is that something you say or do on the site will end up offending one of that network's members. The stress comes from the kind of personal versioning that is common in analog life — the fact that you (probably) behave slightly differently when you're with your mom than you do when you're with your boss, or with your boyfriend, or with your dentist. A study of over 300 Facebook users found that on average people are Facebook friends with seven different social circles. The most common group was friends who were known from offline environments (97 percent added them as friends online), followed by extended family (81 percent), siblings (80 percent), friends of friends (69 percent), and colleagues (65 percent). Those are, in the sociological sense, very different groups — groups that carry different (and unspoken-because-obvious) behavioral expectations. Per the study's survey, 'adding employers or parents resulted in the greatest increase in anxiety.'"

227 comments

  1. Politics + Facebook = Pain by ohnocitizen · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This makes a ton of sense. There is a natural urge to share the things you care about deeply. Whether you are passionate about the environment, religion's role in society, or a particular conflict - you are bound to have friends who disagree with you. Sometimes passionately. At the same time there is a palpable pressure not to be political on Facebook. So when you (or a friend) posts something polarizing, the attention it gets (or doesn't get) can really stress you out.

    Its a shame, especially since political discourse is so very essential to a healthy society - that social sites like Facebook make it even more stressful than it already can be.

    1. Re:Politics + Facebook = Pain by Radres · · Score: 2

      The thing is, most of the people on your list already made up their minds who they're going to vote for. By posting political stuff on Facebook, you're alienating a large number of your "friends" to only reach a handful of undecided voters. It's not a good venue for reaching people, given the personal price you pay.

    2. Re:Politics + Facebook = Pain by Jetra · · Score: 2

      My "friends" happen to be zombies that idle on their FB accounts. They post stupid updates and they pretend they care such as "Twinkies are gone, OMG! Gotta stock up" followed by a picture. I told him off and got lashed at.by my "friends." It doesn't stress me out, I'm completely ticked off by how people fake care about most of the junk they post.

      I hardly ever go on mine anymore. It's awful just some of the stupidity that people will post just for a LIKE.

    3. Re:Politics + Facebook = Pain by swillden · · Score: 2

      Doesn't Facebook have something like Google+ circles? I thought they added that shortly after Google+ launched...

      Anyway, on Google+ I handle this by defining some "topic" circles into which I place people who are annoying about certain topics. Then when I post about those things, I don't include those circles. It'd be nice if I could actually specify "everyone but these" rather than having to manually click the set of circles, but it only takes a second or two with the current UI.

      I would think you could do the same on FB.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    4. Re:Politics + Facebook = Pain by SternisheFan · · Score: 1

      Sounds like you're ready to take that final, last step my friend and DELETE that fb account. Real life anxiously awaits your return. :)

    5. Re:Politics + Facebook = Pain by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 3, Insightful

      yes, but its a thousand times more difficult to use than in Google plus. Something as simple as draging contacts and droping them into various categories has completly eluded facebook's engineers.

      Its death by a billion configurations for every action and every thing you upload/tag/post/poke/etc that were bolted onto a system that originally only had two categories of people (friends, not friends).

      --
      Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
    6. Re:Politics + Facebook = Pain by fullback · · Score: 1, Interesting

      "There is a natural urge to share the things you care about deeply."
      Who says? Do you have any proof of this natural urge?

      "Its a shame, especially since political discourse is so very essential to a healthy society."
      Who says? Do you have any proof of this? The U.S. is obsessed with political discourse to the point of being a dysfunctional society.

    7. Re:Politics + Facebook = Pain by Seumas · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And that's why I don't use social networks (well, I use LinkedIN).

      I don't need to know every person I ever come in contact with at a deep level. I barely need to know most family members that well. So, I sure as hell don't need to know every detail and thought and view of my neighbors, my UPS delivery guy, the guy I traded business cards with at a conference last year, every person I ever have a conversation with at a bar, every person I interact with online in a community, family members, extended family members, in-laws, friends of friends, and colleagues at that level.

      There is value in just knowing that my neighbor is a nice guy and treats me well and that we can rely on each other for help. In trading a friendly smile and a brief conversation with the UPS guy or the person at the bus stop. In getting along with my coworkers and other acquaintances and family members.

      I do not need reasons to dislike these people. Their views on politics, religion, science, and current events are not relevant to me. The last thing I need is for the neighbor that I'll spend much or most of my life dealing with to leave me with a bad taste in my mouth, because I see his constant stream of "libtards durp durp durp" and "republithugs durp durp" and "fuckin' pinko communist atheist scientists need to accept that the world is created by gawwwwd" every day.

      In other words, there is a great deal of value in obscuring many thoughts and having various levels of interaction with people. I may need to know my potential mate that well. And maybe my closest family members (though not necessarily even that). I do NOT need to know all of that (nor the daily activities) of every other person in my life. They do more harm than good and knowing that someone I deal with on a daily basis holds some pretty repugnant views on the world doesn't improve everything. I can't do anything about it. All it does is colors every interaction I'll have with them in the future.

      So, I don't use social networks. If someone has something to tell me, they can call me or email me or even write a letter. I don't need to have them broadcast "at me" constantly. And I don't need to let my view of people be tainted by things that would otherwise NEVER HAVE COME UP IN OUR INTERACTIONS if it weren't for social networks.

    8. Re:Politics + Facebook = Pain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who says? Do you have any proof of this natural urge?

      Yes, facebook with many friends and tons of posts to those friends.
      Isn't the fact it was posted on facebook show there was an urge to post it? I don't use facebook and that is proof I don't have the urge to post about things to "friends" for comment.

    9. Re:Politics + Facebook = Pain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This makes a ton of sense.

      Really? I don't know about you but I deal with a wide circle of people each day and I know some won't like me. That doesn't stress me out.

      What stresses me out most about Facebook is
      - the endless spam which I can't opt out of (No I will never think Weight Watchers are anything other than parasitic leeches preying on the desperate),
      - the endless changes to the rules - what percentage of my friends' posts do I see now? How do the privacy settings work this week?
      - broken Facebook app that doesn't allow basic functionality and hapily throws away the post I typed up painstakingly on my celephone if the connection drops out

      I have recently switched from using Facebook as a social media site because people post a lot of nonsense, to an aggregator for special interest news - science and photography mostly. The latest changes and their attempts to "monetize" mean it's useless even for that.

    10. Re:Politics + Facebook = Pain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Although not directly political, there is a book that covers the relational aspects of communication. It will help in all relationships, and helps you discuss the values you care deeply about without damaging relationships in the process. Perfect for both the married and unmarried Slashdotters!

    11. Re:Politics + Facebook = Pain by JWW · · Score: 1

      Amen, brother.

      Hope that doesn't offend. ;-)

    12. Re:Politics + Facebook = Pain by PancakeMan · · Score: 1

      Its a shame, especially since political discourse is so very essential to a healthy society - that social sites like Facebook make it even more stressful than it already can be.

      I dunno, in my experience social sites like Facebook offer *opportunities for more* of the political discourse that is so essential to a healthy society.

    13. Re:Politics + Facebook = Pain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you use LinkedIn, you use Facebook. Lately, Facebook has been spamming Do you know... type e-mails obviously based off LinkedIn connections or same companies in common even with no connection. It is obvious that LinkedIn information gas found its way to Facebook through LinkedIn.

    14. Re:Politics + Facebook = Pain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Political discussion is not to be confused with A vs. B. discussion, which is what is being thrown around on facebook.

    15. Re:Politics + Facebook = Pain by Johann+Lau · · Score: 1

      I do not need reasons to dislike these people. Their views on politics, religion, science, and current events are not relevant to me. The last thing I need is for the neighbor that I'll spend much or most of my life dealing with to leave me with a bad taste in my mouth, because I see his constant stream of "libtards durp durp durp" and "republithugs durp durp" and "fuckin' pinko communist atheist scientists need to accept that the world is created by gawwwwd" every day.

      You know, I know this steak doesn't exist. I know that when I put it in my mouth, the Matrix is telling my brain that it is juicy and delicious.

    16. Re:Politics + Facebook = Pain by ultranova · · Score: 1

      By this logic there is no good venue for reaching people. After all, if they already made up their minds, your message is just spam.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    17. Re:Politics + Facebook = Pain by TranquilVoid · · Score: 1

      Well said. Facebook has no context which is why reactions to a political post may be amplified. In real life you may be at a dinner party where the conversation has moved in the right direction. On Facebook you just throw it out there and hit stressed parents, people who have just lost a loved one, hungover friends, etc. etc. Lots of people who just don't care for your opinion right now and may actively dislike the fact that they saw it. That's why most Facebook posts tend to be of the lowest common denominator.

    18. Re:Politics + Facebook = Pain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      THANK you! I realize you're being sarcastic, but it's unbelievably true.

      Guess what, some of us don't care even slightly what your political affiliation is, or religious belief... so PLEASE stop posting idiotic shit playing up one or the other on your facebook.

      Basically, when someone does that, but I still like them in real life (where in the particular example I'm thinking of, they don't bother to bring that shit up in person), their facebook feed is fast-tracked to the 'hide the facebook feed from this person' option. Hope you didn't have anything else important to put on facebook, because I'm sure as hell not going to see it.

    19. Re:Politics + Facebook = Pain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you demand written citations for everything everyone says around you in real life?

    20. Re:Politics + Facebook = Pain by sydneyfong · · Score: 1

      I do not need reasons to dislike these people. Their views on politics, religion, science, and current events are not relevant to me. The last thing I need is for the neighbor that I'll spend much or most of my life dealing with to leave me with a bad taste in my mouth, because I see his constant stream of "libtards durp durp durp" and "republithugs durp durp" and "fuckin' pinko communist atheist scientists need to accept that the world is created by gawwwwd" every day.

      You may be right, in practice. However, in theory, if all you care is that your neighbor is nice to you, why would you allow yourself to get upset with their political/religious views? Could you not make yourself believe and accept that there are nice people in the world who believes different things than you do? Would you not allow yourself to know (the fact) that there is so much diversity in the world, and not everyone necessarily subscribes with your worldview?

      --
      Don't quote me on this.
    21. Re:Politics + Facebook = Pain by Seumas · · Score: 1

      No, sorry. Once I find out that my neighbor tells racist jokes around the dinner table, thinks "fags are an abomination unto gaaawd", and goes on daily frothing mindless political rants about "libtards" or "republithugs", I can't deal with them in the same way again. If a neighbor beats his wife and kids, that doesn't impact me, either, but it will sure as hell change the frequency and way in which I deal with him. And I simply don't need to know all of these details about people who are at various distances from the center of my life. There is a reason we have relationships that consist of different degrees of closeness throughout our lives. Sort of how there are some people you ignore, some you nod to as you walk by, some you shake hands with, and some you go have lunch with.

  2. DROP TABLE 'friends' by cultiv8 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Did this about a year ago, dropped all friends except for a "close" 30 or so; my immediate neighbors, some close friends throughout the years, and family. No coworkers, no friends of friends, no one from HS or college or grad school.

    The great thing about growing older is that it no longer stresses me out when my parents find out I'm smoking pot with the neighbors. ;)

    --
    sysadmins and parents of newborns get the same amount of sleep.
    1. Re:DROP TABLE 'friends' by SternisheFan · · Score: 1

      Scott Adams had a Dilbert cartoon about how you can cut out about half the people in your life and still be produtive and happy. I got rid of some 'friends' that really weren't, sometimes that's what you have to do in order to learn who your real friends are.

  3. Hrmmm.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Paid for by Google? Sounds like Circles!

    1. Re:Hrmmm.. by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Paid for by Google? Sounds like Circles!

      Or you could set up some Facebook Groups. Even on Facebook, it is not that difficult to keep your family and coworkers from interacting with your vulgar fishing/drinking buddies.

    2. Re:Hrmmm.. by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1

      iirc any one in a group though can add anyone else to said group so do to the wonder of six degrees of separation a group of a few friends will end up including everyone on facebook in short order making your grouping pointless

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    3. Re:Hrmmm.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's worlds colliding!!! They're killing Independent George!

  4. How about... by Revotron · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You just stop giving a fuck about what people think of you?

    I find it's a lot easier to be myself when I maintain an internal locus of identity. If people don't like or at least respect who I am and what I say, why do I count them as my friend? Differences within a social circle can be healthy and rewarding. Altering your behavior to conform to a social precedent is not.

    1. Re:How about... by rudy_wayne · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You just stop giving a fuck about what people think of you?.

      Better idea: Stop giving a fuck about Facebook.

      Seriously. Why are people still paying any attention to that crap.

    2. Re:How about... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Because all it takes is for enough people to say "well, I don't really want to deal with you then". Then they won't hire you. And then your food and housing supply go away. You need them more than they need you. Humanity owns you, and if you don't get them to like you, you die.

    3. Re:How about... by ackthpt · · Score: 2

      They're obsessive compusives in training. Facebook has them hooked, they care a disproportionate amount about how they are percieved on it. Sometimes you need to turn off the computer and/or the mobile phone and get out and actually socialized with people face to face.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    4. Re:How about... by Dan667 · · Score: 2

      I agree with this. I don't use facebook.

    5. Re:How about... by santajon · · Score: 1

      Or at least treat everyone the same so you don't have to fight off the multiple personality disorder.

    6. Re:How about... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because you are Homo Sapiens, a walking talking highly social ape.

      QED

    7. Re:How about... by SleazyRidr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's not about having an identity, it's about what parts of that identity you choose to express, and the appropriate times and places for that. I know a few people who despite being Christian are very nice people, so I don't rant at them about inconsistency in the bible as I know it'll do nothing but aggravate them. I do however like to share funny anti-religious pictures/jokes/whathaveyou with my atheist friends. Having everybody pooled together on Facebook gives me that pause of "is this appropriate for everyone who'll see this?"

    8. Re:How about... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I say, one leads to the other. People who don't care what others think, don't care about FB either. Part of not caring about others. But then many of those are assholes, and who gives a shit about them anyway?

    9. Re:How about... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that is sad

    10. Re:How about... by Synerg1y · · Score: 1

      Some people include a lot of family and co-workers in their facebook friends list, this becomes a problem when another friend posts those new year's photos and tags you in them setting visibility to friends of friends... my personal opinion is it's none of their f'in business, but life doesn't always work that way.

    11. Re:How about... by Synerg1y · · Score: 2

      Because for some people it's almost replaced telephone communication. Also it's harder for a girl to ignore a wall post in front of all her friends than a 1on1 text message, there's other reasons... most of them indicative of our society going to hell & us thinking too highly of ourselves to engage in meager face to face conversation. Coincidentally, the amount of mass shootings has gone up considerably in the last decade.

    12. Re:How about... by somersault · · Score: 1

      I'm generally me, except when I get the urge to make, "like" or share harsh jokes about fat people. There are a couple of people that I may offend. About half my friends are religious though, and I openly post things making fun of religion at times. Weird.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    13. Re:How about... by ohnocitizen · · Score: 1

      Reasons I use Facebook: Events. I haven't found a site that is free, makes it as easy as Facebook does to invite friends and let those friends invite their friends. If you are involved in any kind of theater (especially comedy), this is a very valuable tool.

    14. Re:How about... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You just stop giving a fuck about what people think of you?

      How could I possibly stop posting on slashdot?
      Being noticed by slashdot moderationors is the only proof that I matter :)

    15. Re:How about... by Kjella · · Score: 1

      If you don't modify your behavior to the social context you're in, then you're the strange one. A working relationship is not the same as a friendship which is not the same as a relationship which is not the same as blood ties (well, hopefully not) which is not the same as old classmates and whatever else is on the Facebook list. Even in the cases where there's some "broadcast" news to announce to absolutely everyone I probably wouldn't tell everyone in the same way with the same level of detail. In real life this was rather simple, those that were there heard it and if you told more or less in different settings it wouldn't really be obvious and probably just adapting to the audience. With Facebook you're either posting to everyone, or it's often going to be obvious that you have tiers of information. There's way more "friends" on my list than I'd care to share my life with.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    16. Re:How about... by multiben · · Score: 1

      Because unless you're a sociopath, you need to have some degree of concern what people think of you. Can you honestly say that you behave the same way with your wife/girlfriend/boyfriend as you do with your boss or your mum or your grandma? When you're alone do you do things you wouldn't do in public? If not, then why not? Because you care what other people think about you even if you don't want to admit it.

    17. Re:How about... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Having some concern over opinions and obsessing over what people think and making changes in your core beliefs or attitudes towards things to fit in are two different things. The difference is comparable to being polite and respectful compared to doing whatever it takes to make sure you fit in. In the later, you are not being yourself.

      I swear less around some people and I don't talk about some passing womans hot body directly to my wife or kids but other than those two things, I am the same person all around. WYSIWYG about 99% of time with me.

    18. Re:How about... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not at all....if you dont do anything other people value, you die. Liking you has nothing to with it. Unless of course you dont do anything other people value; then if you cant get them to like you, you die. Or you use force against them.

    19. Re:How about... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hello...Evite.com

    20. Re:How about... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mass shootings have nothing at all to do with Facebook. I can assure you.
      I also think it's pretty hilarious that people on here are boasting about not having a Facebook account whilst posting on a message board. I ask you, what exactly is the difference? Still no face-to-face interaction.

    21. Re:How about... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Facebook let's me:

      -More easily keep in touch with remote family.
      -Plan events.
      -Manage groups of people (like my study group at school).
      -Replace IM.
      -Almost replace email.
      -Keep a larger circle of acquaintances.
      -Keep in closer contact with my closest friends.
      -Have yet another way to contact people I am trying to reach.
      -Share the things that mean something to me (like my writing).
      -Engage in a more social life (I see people MORE in "real life" because of Facebook).
      -etc.

      I'm sorry you consider it "crap" but I find it extremely useful.

    22. Re:How about... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Altering your behavior to conform to a social precedent is not.

      So I can admit my ephebophilia?

      http://www.flickr.com/photos/9031166@N07/3168503651/

      Nope. People still think it's pedophilia.

      As teen-agers we worry about everyone's opinions. Then we realize that they are as ignorant, lazy, selfish and horny as ourselves. We learn, usually as 20-somethings, some social precedents cannot be ignored.

    23. Re:How about... by djchristensen · · Score: 4, Funny

      Also it's harder for a girl to ignore a wall post in front of all her friends ...

      Now there's an auspicious start to a long-lasting relationship.

    24. Re:How about... by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1

      we are a group mostly anonymous people who happen to share a common intrest in science, technology, computers, gameing, hacking, and scifi fantacy games books and movies. where facebook is you annoyin aunt that you cant unfreind without pissing off your family memebers, the girl you met once at a party you coworkers and anyone else you may have thought you met. facebooks iq level is just slightly higher than 4chans iq on april 20th.

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    25. Re:How about... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, thanks for the insightful share.

    26. Re:How about... by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

      So theatre comedy is just that different from theatre drama? FB events are highly annoying for those who don't care about someone's event.

    27. Re:How about... by arkane1234 · · Score: 1

      I donno, why *are* you obsessing about it right now?

      --
      -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
    28. Re:How about... by arkane1234 · · Score: 1

      You'll learn quickly that you can't choose what other people do, you simply ride the wave and take the path of least resistance when it comes to the trivial stuff.
      It's a lot like saying "Hello... Evolution!" when someone says something about Outlook.

      --
      -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
    29. Re:How about... by arkane1234 · · Score: 1

      touchy... it's just in the corner of your screen to dismiss...

      --
      -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
    30. Re:How about... by Pollardito · · Score: 1

      It's worse than that. Even if you can manage to separate the different roles (or treat every post like it's completely public as a common denominator), if your friends can't do it too then you can get in trouble for things they post about you

    31. Re:How about... by ohnocitizen · · Score: 1

      Does Evite allow you to keep lists of friends, to easily keep inviting them to subsequent events? If you send an invite to your friend Captain Ahab, do you know the Captain will have a ready list of their own friends to invite? Evite.com doesn't provide the same convenience and reach that Facebook does.

    32. Re:How about... by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

      For the most part it is, but facebook has become more annoying about pushing things in your face that you try to ignore. though its instance to tell me on a near daily basis that a friend likes Amazon is far more annoying.

  5. Groups! by uacheesehead · · Score: 1

    I understand the premise of this entirely, and I agree. It doesn't have to be that way, though. I maintain several FB Groups, which help me segment those social circles, allowing me to freely post things among a smaller subset without worry of offending someone else or sharing too much with someone who doesn't need to see everything I want to share. Facebook Groups are fantastic. That is all.

  6. Parents? by Lanforod · · Score: 5, Interesting

    When my parents added me as friends, my facebook usage dropped from 2-3 hrs/wk to 10 minutes/wk. Actually lessened my anxiety and freed up my time!

  7. Why are people on FB by roman_mir · · Score: 0

    Aren't people on FB because they want to show off? They all want to be liked, so anything that hinders that is likely to stress them out and this includes having opinions.

    1. Re:Why are people on FB by arkane1234 · · Score: 1

      I donno, I have my friends (real life people! oooooo) on there to keep in a circle and everyone shares thoughts, events, things in life, etc.
      Well and shared pics, which is kind of cool.
      Basically, the same as any social network. (i.e. Myspace, etc)

      If that's showing off, I'm all for it.

      --
      -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
  8. I have no Facebook friends... by The+Archon+V2.0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... and I'm not stressed about it at all. Huh. My anecdote IS the singular of data!

  9. I'm stressed by the existance of Farcebook by magic+maverick+ · · Score: 2

    If Facebook didn't exist, I wouldn't be stressed about it at all. Instead, we get all these stupid stories about this website and stuff. That stresses the shit out of me. The fact that people think I should be using this privacy sucking tool of evil also stresses me. But having friends on that website? Well, I don't use it, so that doesn't stress me.

    Also, this is something that people on /. have been saying for ages. It's one of the reasons that Google Plus is meant to be wonderful. (I wouldn't know, I don't use it either.) Being able to separate work friends from pub friends from high school friends from family seems like a pretty obvious requirement.

    The idea of forgetfulness is another thing. If I say something stupid down at the pub, my workmates aren't likely to find out about it. The other patrons of the pub are likely to forget about it before too long as well (unless it was particularly stupid). But on the Internet...

    Gee, anyone else have any obvious differences between the Internet and RL?

    --
    HELP MY ACCOUNT HAS BEEN HACKED BY AN ILLIBERAL ART STUDENT SET TO DESTROY THE INTERWEBZ!
    1. Re:I'm stressed by the existance of Farcebook by ackthpt · · Score: 2

      Be glad you don't have a teenage daughter whose entire social circle revolves around her fb account. I've seen it and if she were my daughter we'd have a talk about only getting to use the stupid thing on weekends. Go out and visit with your friends in real life, rather than sweating over what will next pop up on your screen.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    2. Re:I'm stressed by the existance of Farcebook by bmo · · Score: 3

      Everyone goes through the phase where one learns (or not) the difference between persistent public communication, and forgetful (I'm glad you used this term) communication.

      IRC is forgetful
      Telnet chats are forgetful
      IMs and VOIP can be forgetful, depending on the service.

      The caveat is that everything that is over the internet can be logged by one of the participating parties, but in general, the default is no logging for these services.

      Everything that is a modern version of email, usenet, and BBSes are not forgetful. The default is that everything is a "permanent." It was laughable that people got their panties in a twist when DejaNews suddenly showed up - as if nobody ever saved usenet posts for fun and profit before DejaNews existed. The hand-wringing over FB and other persistent communication is just more of the same.

      The people who can't distinguish between these services are the ones who have a problem.

      I have the advantage in that I learned this shit back in the 80s.

      >IRL

      Wait... wait... with the availability of cameras everywhere, even embedded into eyeglasses with direct upload to Internet services, I have to say that your assumed "forgetful" drunken conversation down at the pub about how you lust after Justin Bieber, after ten gin gimlets, is going to be archived for fun and profit, for all posterity.

      --
      BMO

    3. Re:I'm stressed by the existance of Farcebook by AK+Marc · · Score: 0

      The fact that people think I should be using this privacy sucking tool of evil also stresses me.

      You must be a Republican. I don't stress over whether my neighbor is having sex with someone of the same gender, or whether he's smoking something not on the approved drug list. I don't care if Facebook exists. I can choose to ignore something, even if I see two men in bathrobes walk out hand-in-hand to get the morning paper. So, why does it bother you so much if others do something you would not?

    4. Re:I'm stressed by the existance of Farcebook by rmstar · · Score: 1

      IRC is forgetful

      Many irc channels have a logbot. I know one that has uninterrupted records of everything that was said on it for at least a decade.

    5. Re:I'm stressed by the existance of Farcebook by bmo · · Score: 1

      Yet you failed to read the following sentence where I said:

      "but in general, the default is no logging for these services."

      I know all about bots. We had them in telnet chats back in the 90s. But the *default* is no bots. If you are paranoid, tunnel ytalk or home-rolled voip over ssh. But while even that leaves one open to the person on the other end logging, the default is much more forgetful than the default modes of a web forum, usenet, blog, bbs, etc.

      --
      BMO

    6. Re:I'm stressed by the existance of Farcebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You make my point exactly. We live in three lives, now electronically bound together.
      http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3281089&cid=42125097

    7. Re:I'm stressed by the existance of Farcebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IRC is forgetful

      bash.org never forgets.

    8. Re:I'm stressed by the existance of Farcebook by bmo · · Score: 0

      It's like nobody reads past that line to the qualifying sentence.

      You should go back and sue your reading teachers for doing a piss poor job.

      Context, how does it fuckin' work?

      --
      BMO

    9. Re:I'm stressed by the existance of Farcebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I AM a Republican, and none of those things bothers me. Although, I admit that I find gay marriage pretty pointless, but hey, go right ahead. As for drugs, I think you should probably legalize it, tax it, and use the money to pay for the rehab centers, but you should only tax heavily if you insist on having government health care.

      Gay marriage isn't even worth having on a ballot, one way or another. And drug use is just another Prohibition fiasco. I just want the government to stop thinking it knows what is best for me and eating up my income. I admit that on our side, we have a bunch of corporate douchebags and anti-science types, but the way I see it, unless they broke laws, I certainly wouldn't go refusing their salaries, and the deniers are simply going to be removed by the fact that reality is eventually going to hit them hard on the head if they don't get with the times.

      I also think that the term "big tent" is code for "a bunch of people who probably dislike each other who are all looking for their own handouts". That's a lot smarter than some moron who can't figure out how babies are made, but at the same time, it's probably more destructive long term for the purposes of having a solvent, non-intrusive government.

      Of course, I'm probably what they'd call a RINO, but you telling me what you think I believe, is just about as annoying as the right-wingnuts telling me what they think I believe.

    10. Re:I'm stressed by the existance of Farcebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You rather sound like a classical liberal, actually; the sort of people RINOs should aspire to be.

    11. Re:I'm stressed by the existance of Farcebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How on earth did you get that out of that sentence?
      Maybe try read it differently: "people think I should use Facebook, and that stresses me".
      It has nothing to do with what other people do (apart from suggest to the GP to use FB).

      You must be a Democrat. Stupid enough to think that it actually matters. Republicans and Democrats, the difference is tiny.

    12. Re:I'm stressed by the existance of Farcebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DejaNews was the first to archive and make it searchable. X-No-Archive turned out to be a fraud in that it only flagged the post for no display, as seen when nuked posts appeared in Google Groups.

    13. Re:I'm stressed by the existance of Farcebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you know every nick on every channel you are on? Not too long ago I found out about an image aggregation bot in one of the channels I was on because of a google image search! After some detective work I found out which nick the bot was, and who ran it, and got the people most upset about their images getting leaked around removed from the repository. Some people don't see anything wrong with collecting all conversations on all channels they aren't even on themselves and making them google searchable, having the attitude "why do you keep your channel public if you mind what we do?". To get and keep the legitimate users of course!

      Don't count on the default state of IRC being "forgetful". Many clients have logging on by default and that data can be mined years later as well. The usual precautions of using pseudonyms and not disclosing identifying information really are a good idea if you want to keep your privacy.

    14. Re:I'm stressed by the existance of Farcebook by rmstar · · Score: 1

      It's like nobody reads past that line to the qualifying sentence.

      You should go back and sue your reading teachers for doing a piss poor job.

      Now, now. You wrote in a way that suggests that one can in general assume that IRC is not logged. That is simply nonsense. The caveat you added is so weak that it almost does not exist.

      Your aggresivity is simply disproportionate. You shouldn't really throw a tantrum over people not understanding your second-rate prose. You hastily wrote a comment on slashdot, and it was not of high literary quality. That's ok, just don't go ballistic.

    15. Re:I'm stressed by the existance of Farcebook by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      I'm not so sure about the default, either, if you account for clients. Doesn't mIRC log messages by default, so that it can show it to you again once you restart it and rejoin the channels? Granted, it's a rotating log for a certain not-so-large period of time, but still.

  10. This will solve all problems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stop being a pussy and get off the site.

  11. Another "Law" of Internet Headlines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If a blog or lifestyle/health article begins with the word "Why", the rest of the headline won't make sense until you substitute "Me" for "You" and "My" for "Your".

  12. meh by WillgasM · · Score: 2

    I tend to just say whatever I want and let people delete me if needed. I probably don't need to be friends with all my aunts and 8yo cousins. When some debate arises, I don't mind; I just win. All the work friends probably keep me from posting too many pot legalization videos and such, but that's what Tumblr is for.

    1. Re:meh by strikethree · · Score: 1

      When some debate arises, I don't mind; I just win.

      Debates are not about winning, they are about airing ideas. What happens when you win? Someone else is now forced to follow your mode of thought? You get to treat them like shit? What is winning in this context?

      Debates are a chance to reality check your ideas. Each person will still go away thinking whatever they want to think regardless of who won.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
    2. Re:meh by WillgasM · · Score: 1

      winning a debate is not about convincing your opponent; we all know that pretty much never happens. It's about convincing the rest of the audience that your viewpoint is the more rational of the two.

  13. Stop with the alerts... ffs. by ackthpt · · Score: 1

    Seriously, I don't give a rat's patoot that someone is trying to get ahold of my, tagged me or replied to something I said. If I feel like visiting fb I will, but I'm no slave to it and the more it pesters me the more I consider linking the stupid thing to a deal letter email box.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  14. Ultimate fix by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

    Remove one profile from Facebook, yourself.

  15. My wife has facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    My Wife has a FB account and she has a lot of "friends" who post political "opinions". All they do is parrot opinions of pundits - aggressively. Pin them down as to exactly why they have "their" opinion and they resort to the talking that they heard.

    Yeah, both sides are guilty of this, but I have to say, the folks on the right are the worst and the angriest.

    People don't have their own opinions.

    Fucking A! Sometimes I think I'm in an Ayn Rand novel with the one dimensional characters and a plot fit for a children's book!

    1. Re:My wife has facebook by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      My wife has an FB account and all they do is post bizarre stuff on her wall and make her feel uncomfortable. I cannot imagine why anyone would want anything to do with FB.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:My wife has facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Here you go:

      http://www.prochoiceviolence.com/index-of-criminal-activity

    3. Re:My wife has facebook by xaxa · · Score: 2

      My wife has an FB account and all they do is post bizarre stuff on her wall and make her feel uncomfortable. I cannot imagine why anyone would want anything to do with FB.

      Some of us don't have your wife on Facebook...

      Today, I was reminded about an invitation I'd received to a birthday party (the host noticed I hadn't responded), and after an enquiry from another invitee a couple of people have organised sharing a car to the house.

      Some friends are tracking how many hits their parody of Gangnam Style has (23,064 so far).

      A few others are debating the quality of the evidence for putting a minimum price on alcoholic drinks in England and Wales.

      My own profile doesn't have much recent activity: just a couple of "check-ins" from friends who were at the same places I was at, and me saying which party I'm going to on New Year's Eve.

      It's hardly critical stuff, and apart from the useful way to manage events I wouldn't really miss it if it went, but that doesn't make it useless or pointless.

    4. Re:My wife has facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think your point is a perfect example of how facebook manages toward the trivial .. exactly because of the phenomenon noted in the article summary above.

    5. Re:My wife has facebook by gmack · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The people who aggravate me the most are the ones who assume that being on "the wrong side" is evil, stupid or backward. Not just one side either and they are easy to spot by the way they spout off about "right wingers" , "repugnicans", "CONservatives" or the opposite site: "liberals", "LIEberals", "communists" etc. In general an extreme view from the wingnuts on both sides that fail to understand that it's possible for two people to both be honest people who love their country while having differing views on how that's done.

      Each side has valid points and restricting one's life exclusively to one side without considering the alternative is a recipe for disaster.

    6. Re:My wife has facebook by Sporkinum · · Score: 1

      My wife just joined facebook. It is under an alias that uses a different alias email address that was created only for facebook. It is only used to snark with friends from an online group.

      --
      "He's lost in a 'floyd hole"
    7. Re:My wife has facebook by asylumx · · Score: 0

      Does that somehow make terrorist bombings of abortions clinics OK?

    8. Re:My wife has facebook by icebike · · Score: 1

      How ever did you survive without this stuff swirling around in your life?

      And is your life really so drab that you ACTUALLY give a rats ass about the quality of evidence for minimum price of drinks in countries that you don't even live in?

      Wouldn't you be really happier without all that garbage do deal with?

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    9. Re:My wife has facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I don't think that pointing out that there are thugs who purport to be on both sides is meant to justify either one of them. Of course, being a "pro-life" clinic bomber is a very contradictory activity to say the least.

    10. Re:My wife has facebook by hodet · · Score: 1

      This is so true. In fact you have just described your average newspaper site comments section. They are the worst for this. I consider myself at the centre of the political spectrum, right leaning fiscally and left leaning socially. It makes constructive political discourse, everywhere on the internet, pretty much impossible. Has anyone ever found a balanced political discussion forum?

    11. Re:My wife has facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The people that don't know house to use a comma inside a quotation mark aggravate me most.

    12. Re:My wife has facebook by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2

      I said almost the same thing recently, in another venue. I disagree with almost everything the liberals are up in arms about. Does that make them all evil bastards? No - just a bunch of doofuses with whom I disagree. Ditto with the "conservatives". Are they evil, because of their opinions? Again, no - just another bunch of doofuses with whom I disagree.

      During the recent campaigns, both sides more or less said that if the other side won, it would spell doom for the United States.

      I DO happen to think there are some evil bastards on both sides. The most recent evil bastard in the news is Norquist. Anyone who meticulously signs up potential office holders to pledge their votes, in exchange for campaign backing and funds is evil.

      The problem is, why do hundreds of thousands of people support Norquist? The man is manipulating their elected representatives. If there is merit to Norquist's position, then a lot of those representatives will vote that way anyway. If Norquist's position is without merit, then representatives should be free to vote against it, without repercussion.

      Politics is a dirty business, and it looks to me like Norquist is the source of a lot of the dirt.

      Don't mean to pick on Conservatives only - the Dems have their own dirt balls. Ted Kennedy, for instance. I breathed a sigh of relief that he will never sit in Washington again.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    13. Re:My wife has facebook by baboo_jackal · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'm in the same boat. I'm pro-choice, and I don't care about marriage one way or the other (really, I think adults should just be left to make whatever contracts they want with each other). I want the US to have the strongest military in the world (I served in it), but I don't think we need to truck it all over the place, fighting other people's fights. I think we should help poor people, but I think that our definition of "poor" is not precise and our implementation is faulty, so we end up spending hundreds of billions on the wrong people - I think we spent close to a trillion dollars in 2011 on means-tested benefits - while some people are still having to skip meals. I firmly believe we can do a better job helping the truly needy, while spending a lot less.

      I want us to be fiscally responsible - maybe deficit spending works to stimulate the economy, and maybe it doesn't; I lean towards the opinion that economic activity is a chaotically complex system and we're kidding ourselves if we think we know with certainty what levers to pull, and what the second and third-order effects will be. But no matter what, at some point we have to pay back this massive chunk of debt, and we can't ignore it and hope that "growth" will save us. I could go on... .

      Maybe it's that we all feel the need to defend the party we vote for, and to tear down the opposition (whether it's just one party, or multiple). To paraphrase Tyler Durden, you are not the party you voted for. Maybe we all just need to step back and form some opinions of our own that may or may not perfectly align with a particular ideology or party platform.

    14. Re:My wife has facebook by baboo_jackal · · Score: 2

      Um this is Slashdot. Quotes typically delimit a string literal, so why would you put the comma inside? You're bitching up the wrong tree here.

    15. Re:My wife has facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is so true. In fact you have just described your average newspaper site comments section. They are the worst for this. I consider myself at the centre of the political spectrum, right leaning fiscally and left leaning socially. It makes constructive political discourse, everywhere on the internet, pretty much impossible. Has anyone ever found a balanced political discussion forum?

      Which is sad, because it's the mixture of all those ideas that creates new ideas.
      In other words : if you stick to one political view, you don't see much. If you are willing to see someone else's view , you can get a more balanced opinion, and possible gain new insights which can help everyone.

    16. Re:My wife has facebook by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1

      i know what you mean i pretty much only use it for its chat server other wise i would either have to get a dozen different accounts at different sites just to chat with friends i talk to regularly or build my own irc or xmpp chat server and hope my technology illiterate friends can figure out how to log on.
      i can't remember the last time i even posted something to my own wall.

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    17. Re:My wife has facebook by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1

      not everyone lives in the US. and some people may even have friends who happen to live in other countries than they themselves do.

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    18. Re:My wife has facebook by icebike · · Score: 2

      not everyone lives in the US. and some people may even have friends who happen to live in other countries than they themselves do.

      So what?
      How does that justify handing over your entire privacy?

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    19. Re:My wife has facebook by gmack · · Score: 1

      During the recent campaigns, both sides more or less said that if the other side won, it would spell doom for the United States.

      I DO happen to think there are some evil bastards on both sides.

      Which is absolutely hilarious when you consider that the two candidates really only differed in skin colour. Both candidates were pro choice(even if one pretended he wasn't for the duration of the campaign) and act often referred to as "Obamacare" was similar to something Romney did previously.

    20. Re:My wife has facebook by gmack · · Score: 1

      Indeed, I spent 8 hours a day either repairing systems, coding in C (sometimes PHP) or explaining to PHP programers concepts of programming so it's bound to affect my use of the English language.

    21. Re:My wife has facebook by gmack · · Score: 3, Interesting

      So true. I'm very complicated with my views. I'm a fiscal centrist, personal conservative but a social libertarian.

      Translated: I think the government should balance its budget but still have enough revenue to cover things like health care and social assistance for people who fall on hard times but nudge people out of the social assistance nest (don't pay people to be high school dropouts for the rest of their lives). For my personal life I'm conservative but I don't see where that gets me the right to tell anyone else how to live theirs so drink, smoke, snort, inject whatever you want and marry who you want(as long as your honest about it) but don't expect me to join you and I'm fine with it.

      The upshot is that I know a few people who agree with me but the vast majority of people on both sides get pissed off at me a lot although it has led to some amusing incidents involving people being shocked that I'm not going to preach at them about their lifestyles.

    22. Re:My wife has facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "not everyone lives in the US. ..."

      Like 75% of Facebook users.

    23. Re:My wife has facebook by asylumx · · Score: 1

      Ya, you're right, I'm just sick of the rationale for any political bad behavior being "Yeah, well your side does it, too!" as if that somehow negates the behavior. When one side is claiming to have the morale high ground yet the very people making those claims are doing things that are morally or ethically wrong, it really makes it impossible to listen to what they have to say.

    24. Re:My wife has facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. Slavery is a good thing.

      No need to say it directly, roman_mir, it has been known for some time that you subscribe to that school of thought. You posting history makes it abundantly clear that you favor slavery and treating human beings like material possessions.

      The real question though at this point is why are you using a sock puppet account when your regular account now posts at zero instead of minus one?
       
       

      you can be somewhat for slavery.

      That is contradictory to the point you were trying to make - I presume you meant to say "you can't be somewhat for slavery". That said, just because you have to be at one end or the other doesn't mean that being pro-slavery is a good thing. Your hatred of anti-slavery people is not a good argument on its own for your pro-slavery standpoint.

    25. Re:My wife has facebook by gmack · · Score: 1

      The idea is not to compromise on principals, the idea is to chose each on each issue based on it's merit rather than what side you think you are on.

      Countries too far to the right are heartless and favor the employer and if you lose your job or end up injured, you starve.
      Countries too far to the left favor the worker but end up with high taxes, a social system that encourages laziness and and laws that discriminate against employers (Spain for instance is a pain to do business in)

      Both are stupid.

      Countries that have a good left / right balance take concepts from both sides (yes they exist, Canada for example) try and take issues that matter to both sides. Fiscal responsibility (right wing), universal health and a social safety net (left wing), ease of starting a business (right wing), environmental laws (left wing). Each side wins some battles and loses some others.

      The ideal would be to have a debate that leads to lead to a consensus rather than just a screaming match filled with name calling and unfounded accusations.

    26. Re:My wife has facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The people that don't know house to use a comma inside a quotation mark aggravate me most.

      Well, I didn't know that House MD uses commas inside a quotation mark. I mustn't have been paying enough attention to the show.

    27. Re:My wife has facebook by Hatta · · Score: 1

      The people who aggravate me the most are the ones who assume that being on "the wrong side" is evil, stupid or backward.

      Sometimes it's true. e.g. anyone who supports the War on Drug Users is at least one of the above, and probably all three. Is this an assumption? No, I try to get them to explain themselves but every argument in favor of imprisoning drug users comes down to "Drugs are bad, mmkay?". We can't even get the government to make an actual argument against legalization, because there is none, they just ignore the issue entirely. Not every argument has two sides.

      In other words, I don't consider the opposition stupid and evil because I haven't considered their arguments. I consider the opposition stupid and evil BECAUSE I have considered their arguments.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    28. Re:My wife has facebook by gorzek · · Score: 1

      Why does shit like this get modded up?

      Facebook isn't coming into your house, raiding your fridge, going over your credit report, reading your medical records, monitoring your driving habits, etc. etc. etc.

      Facebook only knows what you tell it, with the exception of people who take photos of and tag you without permission. The solution to that is, of course, not to associate with people who don't understand how to ask permission or give basic courtesy.

      I'm not a big fan of Facebook by any stretch, but all this fearmongering about it is just absurd.

    29. Re:My wife has facebook by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      The upshot is that I know a few people who agree with me but the vast majority of people on both sides get pissed off at me a lot although it has led to some amusing incidents involving people being shocked that I'm not going to preach at them about their lifestyles.

      It's strange.

      I share pretty similar views. Much of your views can are essentially "if you're not harming anyone else, do what you want", with a bit extra about social security.

      Being from the UK, the last bit is pretty much a given as even dyed in the wool Tories don't support scrapping of all of social security.

      I agree about the need for a strong military because there are enough assholes in the world that want to take your stuff.

      Personally, I steer clear of smoking, snorting and injecting things.

      I feel that most of my views come from a very small set of rather simple premises.

      It always surprises me that so many people think I'm strange and politically all over the place, or confuse me for anything in the range of either a drugged out hippie, a raging conservative gun nut a wet terrorist apologist or a flaming bigot.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    30. Re:My wife has facebook by dev.null.matt · · Score: 1

      What is the middle ground between these 2 positions?

      1. Slavery is a good thing. 2. Slavery is unacceptable.

      How about industrial revolution style wage slavery where you live in the company town and spend all your pay check before you get it on stuff sold to you by your employer? You're technically not a slave, so the freedom crowd like it (more than slavery) and the factory owner gets the same net effect so he's happy too.

    31. Re:My wife has facebook by gmack · · Score: 1

      To be fair, those views tend to be reinforced by the suffering that hard drug use causes and images of skid row and the fear that more people would use them if they were legalized. Wrong? maybe. Evil? definitely not. You can't call the desire to prevent suffering evil even if it's misguided.

    32. Re:My wife has facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about industrial revolution style wage slavery where you live in the company town and spend all your pay check before you get it on stuff sold to you by your employer?

      roman_mir (aka udachny) would not even consider that to be a good start. he fully embraces the reintroduction of full-on human slavery, selling people like used cars on the street corner. under his view, if an employee is paid at all, that is at the grace of the employer - who owes nothing whatsoever to the workforce.

      You're technically not a slave, so the freedom crowd like it (more than slavery) and the factory owner gets the same net effect so he's happy too.

      roman_mir's fantasy cares not about people who view slavery as a bad word. all that matters is the bottom line; if a worker gets in the way of it, they are sold to someone else.

    33. Re:My wife has facebook by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Alcohol abuse causes more suffering than any illicit drug. We still decided that it was better for society as a whole to tolerate it. The only way you can advocate for drug prohibition in light of this fact is to either be ignorant of it (stupid) or hypocritical (evil).

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    34. Re:My wife has facebook by gmack · · Score: 1

      Only because alcoholism is more wide spread. I'm not a fan of banning drugs (mainly because it's not working) but I can tell you first hand that heroin addicts suffer a lot more than alcoholics do. As someone who has actually worked with a charity that deals with street people I can tell you that heroin addicts often need medical attention to cope with the withdrawal symptoms and tend to have much shorter lifespans than even the worst alcoholics.

    35. Re:My wife has facebook by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Only because heroin is illegal. If you provide heroin addicts with clean, cheap, metered doses, then heroin addiction is no worse for your health than caffeine addiction. It's worth pointing out that alcoholics can die during the DTs. Heroin withdrawal is only fatal to those severely weakened by AIDS or other health problems. And if they have a legit supply of their drug, there's no reason to force them through withdrawal anyway.

      All of these facts are easily verifiable with a little research. I stand by my assertion that there is no well informed, well meaning argument for drug prohibition. Every argument in favor is either based on ignorance or malice.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    36. Re:My wife has facebook by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      For my personal life I'm conservative but I don't see where that gets me the right to tell anyone else how to live theirs so drink, smoke, snort, inject whatever you want and marry who you want(as long as your honest about it) but don't expect me to join you and I'm fine with it.

      The personal part of it is not really a political position. It only becomes politics when you apply those positions to other people, and functioning of society in general (i.e. either saying that everyone should be able to make their own choices legally, as you do, or by arguing that it should be banned as immoral etc).

    37. Re:My wife has facebook by hazah · · Score: 1

      I think it's because of the stupid polarization, and the "are you with us or against us" mentality that is so simple to fall into. See, every-time I get entrapped into these arguments, it's almost always because I sense that with just a bit more thought process we can come to an understanding. Always disappointed though at the end. I can never imagine what it is that prevents people from thinking. I suppose it's because I lack the experience in that department, and so do you.

    38. Re:My wife has facebook by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      I consider myself at the centre of the political spectrum, right leaning fiscally and left leaning socially.

      I think this scares the hell out of arrogant assholes on both sides. To hear many Slashdotters talk, the above is the most terrible thing you can be. People on both the left and right want to co-opt the "L" word into meaning something unspeakable, instead of the above, which is actually what it means.

    39. Re:My wife has facebook by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      I would consider imprisoning people who use drugs because drugs cause people who use them to suffer to be both stupid and backwards (those two are frequently interchangeable though).

      It's like fucking for abstinence.

    40. Re:My wife has facebook by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      Not to mention that clean, adulterant-free opiates are dirt cheap to manufacture. It's also much easier to get clean if you decide you want to when you're already in contact with healthcare professionals.

    41. Re:My wife has facebook by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      Actually, given the spread of Facebook web bugs, they know a lot more than what people intend to tell them.

    42. Re:My wife has facebook by xaxa · · Score: 1

      And is your life really so drab that you ACTUALLY give a rats ass about the quality of evidence for minimum price of drinks in countries that you don't even live in?

      Not for more than a few seconds. I live in England. Anyway, I was just covering what was on Facebook on that day, not generally.

      Wouldn't you be really happier without all that garbage do deal with?

      I'd probably be happier without argumentative crap on Slashdot, but I still read it and sometimes reply to it...

  16. No politics no religion by alen · · Score: 1

    I have friends from different political views and religions and never comment on almost anything they write

    Anti Obama nonsense
    Nonsense about Muslims taking over or how America is a Christian country
    Etc

    Just ignore it

    1. Re:No politics no religion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Muslim takeover :D

      1. Buy Gas Station
      2. ???
      3. Take over America!

      When did the Simpsons start again? They've been working on this plan for a long time now. I don't think they sorted out the ??? part.

  17. Google+ and Circles by Stone316 · · Score: 2

    This is exactly why Google+ has a feature called circles. Given the audience here i'm sure I don't have to go into details.

    Unfortunately tho, Google+ hasn't really caught on outside some specific groups such as photographers. As well, while the tech savvy have no issues migrating to yet another social network, the problem is your not going to get most of your 'friends' and family to do so. I'm lucky my mom is on facebook, let alone trying to get her to move to Google+.

    Since I live away from most of my family I use facebook to upload pictures of the kids, keep in touch etc. So as long as even a few of them stay on facebook then i'm not going anywhere anytime soon.

    So given that, I basically treat facebook as a public bulletin board. I don't say or post anything there that I would be ashamed of saying in front of my mom or boss.

    --
    "Thanks to the remote control I have the attention span of a gerbil."
    1. Re:Google+ and Circles by DCstewieG · · Score: 1

      Facebook copied this feature a while ago with "Lists". For example, I have a Gamers list that's self-explanatory. You can post to lists or everyone excluding certain lists, like Coworkers.

    2. Re:Google+ and Circles by alen · · Score: 1

      google+ is nothing but an advertising path for bloggers and some other internet celebs

      i use it to kill time but don't think of it as a real social network. its like a forum where people post semi-cool stuff

    3. Re:Google+ and Circles by lennier · · Score: 1

      So given that, I basically treat facebook as a public bulletin board. I don't say or post anything there that I would be ashamed of saying in front of my mom or boss.

      Yes. This, exactly.

      Treat Facebook as a (sometimes lossy) broadcast medium to the entire planet which sometimes just happens to restrict itself to everyone you ever knew and everyone they ever know, and you'll be fine.

      Treat it as a private one-to-one messaging channel and you'll get burned very badly.

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    4. Re:Google+ and Circles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Problem is, things posted in one circle can find their way into another circle. I don't necessarily mean hacking, but if you post something, until you delete it, it's there to be shown to someone who can get access to it. That could be your one friend showing it to someone else. Or, yes, it could be that same friend who has his account compromised and suddenly the members of My Closeted Gay Lovers (which might include you) have themselves outed to their families by dickish crackers.

    5. Re:Google+ and Circles by Sporkinum · · Score: 1

      Why not run your own blog? That way you have full control over sharing pictures and who gets to see what? And then you are not feeding the beast.

      --
      "He's lost in a 'floyd hole"
    6. Re:Google+ and Circles by swillden · · Score: 1

      So people using Facebook shouldn't be stressed out by oversharing then.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  18. Worlds Collide by Hatta · · Score: 5, Funny

    GEORGE: Ah you have no idea of the magnitude of this thing. If she is allowed to infiltrate this world, then George Costanza as you know him, ceases to exist! You see, right now, I have Relationship George, but there is also Independent George. That's the George you know, the George you grew up with -- Movie George, Coffee shop George, Liar George, Bawdy George.

    JERRY: I, I love that George.

    GEORGE: Me Too! And he's dying Jerry! If Relationship George walks through this door, he will kill Independent George! A George, divided against itself, cannot stand!

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    1. Re:Worlds Collide by epSos-de · · Score: 1

      Good example. I think Facebook is only stressful, if you take it too seriously and too important. Just look at it as a form of new TV. People post some messages and pictures. You look at them once in awhile and post some too. How could this be stressful, if you take no major effort of any sort. I think facebook became too complicated for some, because they go around take 1000 pictures a day and want to upload all of them to the facebook servers. Then they have to write descriptions and only 10 or those pictures will actually end up with long term traffic. Seriously WOMEN, one pic a week is good enough to keep up a good profile.

  19. Google+ by GoJays · · Score: 1

    You can easily relieve this stress by using Google+ instead of Facebook. On Google+ you can setup said 7 circles without any problem, and drag each friend to the appropriate share group. I am aware Facebook is capable of doing the same, but it is not nearly as easy. For Example, I have Friends, Family, Coworkers, Acquaintances, Following and Public. I then can share whatever, with the appropriate group and not have to worry about the level of censorship.

  20. In Reverse by loom_weaver · · Score: 1

    I hardly post anything to mine. In fact I don't think I've posted a status since I joined back in 2007.

    However, I probably get more stressed reading other people's pages and comparing my boring life to them.

    Once I start feeling bad I try to remind myself that I'm comparing my life lows to their highlight reel.

    1. Re:In Reverse by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      I hardly post anything to mine. In fact I don't think I've posted a status since I joined back in 2007.

      However, I probably get more stressed reading other people's pages and comparing my boring life to them.

      Once I start feeling bad I try to remind myself that I'm comparing my life lows to their highlight reel.

      I'm willing to bet your life isn't *that* boring. At least five of my "friends" post photos of their meals, and one relative posted every title he rented on Netflix until I finally turned off his news feed. (He apparently watches a *lot* of TV...) How boring could your life be, in comparison to that?

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  21. disguise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My online presence is kept separate from my normal life. I just make sure no one around me knows my nick name.

  22. Well isn't it obvious... by 3seas · · Score: 2

    Given the history of usenet negative and troll postings as a rule of thumb... its the lack of a dislike and a "fuck you" button that causes peoples frustration to build up inside... (no vent release)...

    1. Re:Well isn't it obvious... by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      Given the history of usenet negative and troll postings as a rule of thumb... its the lack of a dislike and a "fuck you" button that causes peoples frustration to build up inside... (no vent release)...

      There is some truth to that. I guess my response would be, a well thought-out verbal poke in the right place might get a much more satisfying reaction than just punching a "you're a damned dirty troll" button.

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  23. Facebook is great in some ways... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Facebook is a great way to keep up to date with friends and family. Especially those you don't see or (want to) talk to often. However, Facebook has gotten worse and worse about privacy and the ads have gotten more and more intrusive. I used to be able to block most of that stuff with adblock but they get around it now.

    I'd love to switch off to somewhere else but everyone I know is on it and google doesn't offer the same ease and good ui.

  24. But but but.... by roc97007 · · Score: 1

    ...what if you ENJOY offending the easily offendable?

    I will note that the more "friends" you have, the more likely it is that whatever you write has a correspondingly increasing likelihood of offending *someone*. So why not just embrace it? Less stress. There, solved it for you.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  25. How to remove facebook stress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Facebook stress? There is an easy peasy way to remove all facebook stress from your life....

    Dont use facebook.

    Nothing of value will be lost.

  26. What?...Who, me?...Hahahahohohohee! by rts008 · · Score: 1

    I am not stressed out at all by Facebook. In fact, I have never even seen a Facebook web page in my whole life.

    The only reason I am aware of the existence of Fb is all the talk on /. about it.

    As an anti-social, outspoken oldster, I have absolutely on interest in that level of being social.../. is about where my threshold is.

    --
    Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
    1. Re:What?...Who, me?...Hahahahohohohee! by jitterman · · Score: 1

      Amen. My life is quite nice without an account on FB. My fiancee deleted hers just after the most recent US presidential election, as she got tired of all the posts claiming that "this is it - the world is now going to end, our country will become 100% socialist and fall apart" etc. She, too, is less stressed/annoyed without one. It's not very hard to survive cutting the cord.

      --
      For conscience is the wound, and there's naught to staunch it
  27. My favorite pastime... by roc97007 · · Score: 2

    ...is debunking, with references, all the crap forwards my "friends" Share in their data stream.

    I mean geeze, it takes less than 60 seconds to find three references that the "carjacker leaves leaflet on your back window" thing is a hoax, or that quote from Thomas Jefferson was four words taken out of context in a passage that means the exact opposite. But people whine "it's too hard to check and if it helps just one person it's worth hitting 'Share'". No, it really isn't. Snopes. Learn it, use it, live it.

    Every once in awhile I post a picture of an open front door with "Hit 'Share' if you know what this is and how to use it". Yeap, you're right, I'm not terribly popular with some types of people.

    I think there are people who are stressed, and people who cause stress. I'm proud to be one of the latter category. :-)

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  28. It depends on the person. by GreggBz · · Score: 1

    Facebook is a social outlet that acts as a microcosom for real life. The people I know that stress over facebook also stress over vauge text messages that might mean something negative, gossip, and what other people might be saying about them behind their backs. They also add more freinds because their level of insecurity goes down when the other person clicks "accept friend request."

    I also know people with a thousand or more friends who never get stressed in cyberspace or otherwise. They always post some joke, or some witty comment and just have fun with the whole thing.

    Facebook is just a reflection of who you are in real life. Facebook does not change you, you change it.

  29. So, don't use Facebook and skip the anxiety by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    N'est-ce pas?

  30. Not Stressed one bit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I dont use it . ( the usual comment ) Privacy concerns . That being used as a tool by the intelligence community . It's use by employers and investigative firms etc all makes fb something i dont need . Dont seress , delete the account and close it. Yes .. you can close it. Close it now
     

  31. Twitter? by sugarmotor · · Score: 1

    No such problem with twitter? Maybe twitter is for more easy going relationships, and facebook for more intense. S

    --
    http://stephan.sugarmotor.org
  32. How to solve those issues once and for all by rnbc · · Score: 2

    I solved those issues long ago by behaving in the same way for all social circles. I've set for myself what I think are acceptable and honorable behavior patterns and abide by them always. Take it, or just leave me alone, it's that simple. That includes my friends, co-workers, parents, and just about anyone I know. It means I have to restrict myself a bit, but it also means I'm essentially a better person.

    PS: yes, some persons don't like it, but they are a tiny minority.

    --
    You cannot proceed from the informal to formal by formal means
    1. Re:How to solve those issues once and for all by lennier · · Score: 2

      I solved those issues long ago by behaving in the same way for all social circles. I've set for myself what I think are acceptable and honorable behavior patterns and abide by them always. Take it, or just leave me alone, it's that simple. That includes my friends, co-workers, parents, and just about anyone I know. It means I have to restrict myself a bit, but it also means I'm essentially a better person.

      ++++++++++ this.

      If you're being stressed or shocked by the behaviour or social expectations of your Facebook friends (and you used the site as it's designed, ie, you friended people you actually know rather than a bunch of random strangers to get game points), then you either have terrible friends, or you have terrible social skills. Either way, it's a social problem, not a Facebook problem, and the solution is likely going to be a social one.

      It's the same thing with Wikipedia, which is a microcosm of academic debate as Facebook is a microcosm of social interaction. People disagree about the Israel vs Palestine conflict, when the Roman Empire ended or whether the media leans liberal or conservative? There's no single "authoritative right answer" to these questions? The person who shouts loudest or is more obsessive or can gather more friends wins the argument? It all looks like a big hideous mess and the supposed "truth" is just a loose consensus that gets constantly revised? Yes. Yes it is. And that's exactly how it works for the experts too. Have you read an academic journal, or watched a session of Congress/Parliament? The name-calling is slightly more polite, but it's almost exactly the same process.

      This is perhaps more shocking for those of us from STEM fields where there usually is a single correct answer and textbooks don't always lie directly to our faces and things are verifiable in the field and social graces haven't been the #1 requirement for progress up to now. But our field is the exception. The social-political world just is messy, and now the mess is migrating online. That's all. It's not the end of the Internet. It's the beginning.

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    2. Re:How to solve those issues once and for all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed! The only reason I have separate lists on Facebook is to maintain privacy. If it's an "acquaintance", I'm not going to let them know that I'm going away for the weekend...or where I work...or things of that nature. Other than that, people are going to have to take me as I am, warts and all. They are free to disagree and unFriend me, if they like. I do restrict myself a bit, as well, but not all that much,

      And no, Slashdot, I'm not an "anonymous coward" for not having a username. I'm an "anonymous lazy person". Duh!

  33. Facebook Lists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Solution: Facebook lists.

    Problem solved.

    Or just be yourself with everyone. Problem solved again.

    Can we stop complaining about Facebook now?

  34. No shit Sherlock by Dunge · · Score: 1

    I don't have facebook.

  35. My wife explains why she left Facebook in 2010 by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 2

    Highlights from: http://www.storycoloredglasses.com/2010/01/water-water-everywhere-nor-any-drop-to.html
    "There were three essential reasons I left Facebook after only a short time. First, the privacy issue was big. To begin with, I set up separate accounts for my work and personal selves, which I've read is something many businesspeople are doing. I managed it, but it was an uneasy start, and later I found myself going back to my privacy settings often to check and recheck that I had things properly set. The kerfuffle that happened a few weeks ago where you couldn't log on without being pestered to reduce your privacy was reminiscent of the guilty-until-proven-innocent feeling of just having bought a Microsoft product. ...
        Nobody has only one face ... The second reason for quitting Facebook was that I didn't want to know everything it told me. (You know that joke, "That was more than I needed to know!") People tell different people different things. They present different faces to different people. Facebook may have started with one face (college classmates), but now it mixes faces together, or at least it does if people are not scrupulous about setting up separate lists (and most aren't). Within minutes of starting to use Facebook I was seeing things relatives and friends said to their friends and relatives, things that I would never have known they said, things I didn't like, things that made me feel sad to find out that we have so little in common and disagree about so much. You could argue that I should revel in the transparency and argue with people and learn about them and wade deep into the mayhem, but hey - this is the real social world we are talking about, not a game. Some arguments can never be won, and the stakes are high, and I have better things to do with my time. ...
        The third thing about Facebook is, it sets you up for an obligatory time drain. It is so easy to "friend" somebody you barely know that you end up with social obligations that don't match the relationships. Putting my father in the same list as a guy I barely remember from high school just doesn't make sense. The obligations I feel towards those two people differ by orders of magnitude, but in Facebook it all looks the same. (No offense to that guy - See? I just felt a social obligation to say that!) I found myself feeling socially obligated to review and comment on things people I've never met have been doing, and I perused picture after picture trying to figure out if I knew any of the people in them. I only got up to 25 "friends" so I can see how this sort of thing could take up huge amounts of time. The social obligation to say something, anything, is overpowering. ..."

    Google Groups solves some of this, but not all.

    Disclaimer: She has ideas for something called Rakontu she feels would be better:
    http://www.storycoloredglasses.com/2010/08/steal-these-ideas.html

    --
    A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
    1. Re:My wife explains why she left Facebook in 2010 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your wife has self control issues.

      I don't have a problem setting aside time for Facebook when it's convenient and ignoring Facebook for weeks at a time when it's not.

      I can relate at different levels of obligation in real life even when my obligation to two people in the same room differ by orders of magnitude. Putting 2 people on the same list makes no difference.

      Finally while I agree you can end up knowing stuff you didn't want to, and that people share trivial silly things, you dont' have to read entire posts. You can be selective.

      The key is some self control.

      Facebook has other issues though. Not the least of which is latest changes to limit what you can see in an attempt to force people to spend money advertising. There's no way in hell I'm going to pay a cent to promote a post.

    2. Re:My wife explains why she left Facebook in 2010 by icebike · · Score: 2

      I have an even better system for managing Facebook.
      I never joined, and never will.

      That you need to set aside time, and restrict your usage at other times, says clearly you DO have a problem.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    3. Re:My wife explains why she left Facebook in 2010 by arkane1234 · · Score: 1

      I'm sure I speak for many people when I say I use facebook about as often as I use xkcd.
      It takes little to no time to read it (minute, maybe two?) and the only real posts I do are emailed pictures or quick blips of thoughts to facebook.
      The moment it actually becomes more than just another page on the net is when you know your either trying hard to avoid it or your obsessed as a user. (pick your poison)

      --
      -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
    4. Re:My wife explains why she left Facebook in 2010 by mopower70 · · Score: 1

      That you need to set aside time, and restrict your usage at other times, says clearly you DO have a problem.

      No, it means clearly you need to get out of your mother's basement and find something engaging to do with your life.

  36. BabeLust = Stress by sandysnowbeard · · Score: 1

    It's not getting laid by all the hot babes on mine Facebook that stresses me out, you insensitive clod!

  37. Why Facebook is Stressing you out by ThePeices · · Score: 1

    Facebook is not stressing me out.

    I dont use facebook.

  38. Zuckerberg's fault by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Mark has famously said that wanting to have multiple identities constitutes a "lack of integrity."

    Apparently, to the people running Facebook, you're not allowed to discuss different topics or to use different language with different people. After all, in real life you always talk the same way to the old ladies at church as to the guys at the bar, right? And the same way to your coworkers and boss as to your close friends, right? And the same to your parents as to your spouse in the bedroom, right?

    Of course, the reality of this is that Facebook doesn't give a crap about users. They just want to make money off of you. And the more interactions they can track, the more they know about everyone. That's why every so often they seem to expand the default privacy settings to make your information ever more widely available. Every time you "like" a comment, follow a link on your friend's post, etc., that's another datapoint.

    But if you restrict most of your posts to only a small group, that's fewer potential datapoints. Not good business for Facebook, who wants to sell your interactions to the highest bidder. If they made it ridiculously easy to have multiple identities or groups so you could interact like everyone does in real life, you're only going to share posts with people you think will already like it. And that's something Facebook probably knows already. They're more interested in making interconnections that could tell more about people than the obvious ones... so they force you to cast the net wider.

    1. Re:Zuckerberg's fault by drinkypoo · · Score: 0

      Mark has famously said that wanting to have multiple identities constitutes a "lack of integrity."

      And he's right.

      Apparently, to the people running Facebook, you're not allowed to discuss different topics or to use different language with different people

      If facebook doesn't let you use multiple languages at once, that's pathetic, and it should be addressed. But if Facebook only permits one account, that makes sense. And why it's an issue of integrity is that if you don't stand up for what you believe in all the time, that's clearly a lack of integrity. Yes, there are drawbacks to having that much integrity, and Zuckerberg is a fine one to talk about integrity anyway, but standing up for the world you want to create is what integrity is all about.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Zuckerberg's fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The point is, I might want to tell my friends a dirty joke. I might not want to tell my Grandmother that same dirty joke. With only a single Facebook account, I can only choose to tell everyone the joke, or tell no one the joke. I can not tailor my interactions to different audiences. This has nothing to do with integrity or its lack.

    3. Re:Zuckerberg's fault by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 1

      But if Facebook only permits one account, that makes sense.

      We're not talking about multiple accounts per se. We're talking about the ability to easily organize friends into particular groups, which will allow you to share specific information with those groups where it is more appropriate, will be most enjoyed, etc. If you want different groups to have different information about you, because it's most relevant to them, why not? What's wrong with displaying detailed contact information, detailed likes and dislikes, etc. to close friends, and only general information to the rest of the world? It's not a matter of "integrity" -- it's a matter of, "who needs to know or maybe would even care about X."

      And why it's an issue of integrity is that if you don't stand up for what you believe in all the time, that's clearly a lack of integrity.

      It's not even standing up for what you believe in. It's -- "this post might be of greater interest to my friends in the chess club than it would be to my friends in the skydiving club." That's just practical and reasonable. And if one set of friends has nicknamed you "DRINKY" while the other set calls you "POOBUSTER," well having separate ways to communicate with them probably will make things clearer for everyone.

      But it's also about privacy. I mentioned the example of the way you talk to your partner in your bedroom vs. the way you talk to your parents or your kids. Do you seriously think it's a lack of integrity if you don't say the same stuff to your kids or parents that you do in a private moment with an intimate partner? Or... I may want my family to see posts about my detailed whereabouts everyday, but I may not by default want the entire world to see that. It's a matter of security, safety, privacy... a lot of stuff.

      Not knowing the difference between social norms among different groups of people isn't integrity... it's social dysfunction. It's not recognizing that sometimes it's appropriate to wear a tee-shirt and ripped jeans, and sometimes it's appropriate to wear a tuxedo... standards of good behavior in society create situations that require one or the other. It's not understanding civilized behavior, manners, etc. And Zuckerberg fits into that category.

  39. I dont use facebook by Charliemopps · · Score: 4, Funny

    I was on facebook... and had several "incidents" Finally, this hippy friend of my wife started doing this psychedelic artwork that she was making prints of and selling on some art website. Don't get me wrong, she was really talented, and the art was pretty good. But she's a hippie and a pothead, so when she posted a particularly ridiculous 60's looking psychedelic painting and linked it on facebook, I went to the site, took the imagine, Photoshopped a pot leaf into the middle of it and re-posted it with "There, I fixed it for you." She replied "You're a jerk" Which could have been mad... could have been funny... hard to tell on facebook but oh-well.

    Well, it didn't end there. You see, in order to up the photo, for some reason I had to host it online. I can't remember why... anyways, so I just used the same art print auction site that she did. Well, my version of her print skyrocketed on the sites charts in a matter of a day or 2. I hadn't expected that at all, and wasn't really sure what to do. So I sent her the credentials to the bogus account I had made and told her to take it over so she could get all the proceeds. I didn't want to me making money off a joke version of her art. SHE DID NOT TAKE IT WELL. To say the least. I thought the money would have made her happy, but you'd think I'd killed her puppy.

    I no longer use facebook. After about 6 months she finally was willing to come to our house again, walked in the door and said "We shall never speak of it again" and we didn't. I wonder how much money it made her...

    1. Re:I dont use facebook by russellh · · Score: 1

      This is hilarious. I feel bad for thinking that... but it is.

      --
      must... stay... awake...
    2. Re:I dont use facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not really a Facebook issue, though. If two people don't interact well, something like that could happen off-line, as well. Basically, you two were bound to have a miscommunication at some point, regardless of the arena.

    3. Re:I dont use facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To say the least. I thought the money would have made her happy, but you'd think I'd killed her puppy.

      Of course. She's an "artist".

      You not only shat on her work, but your version was far, far more popular than her own.

      You may not have killed her puppy, but your excited puppy relieved itself all over her ego carpet. :P

    4. Re:I dont use facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you pulled a dick move in public and it backfired on you? Wow. Fuck those hippy potheads anyway.

    5. Re:I dont use facebook by segwonk · · Score: 1

      Link to the image? I'd like to see it!

      --
      - ------ Go 'til ya know.
  40. Everyone should be like me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Facebook-free since February 2004... and loving every moment of it.

    "Sorry, I'm not on Facebook." and "Nope, I don't want a Facebook account." are excellent replies that will enhance the quality of your life.

    There is a social life outside of 'social media', and only the daft ones think otherwise.

    Not only Facebook is a waste of time, it is perilous to surrender all your private info to Mark Zuckerberg (shady, shady character).

    You may not value your privacy. I do.

    1. Re:Everyone should be like me by mikaw · · Score: 0

      >"Sorry, I'm not on Facebook." and "Nope, I don't want a Facebook account." are excellent replies that will enhance the quality of your life.
      >
      >There is a social life outside of 'social media', and only the daft ones think otherwise.

      Well it might go other way too. 'Oh you don't have facebook account so you're not interesting and now I'll go talk to one that have it.' Needles to say that it might happen in other communications too but it's other thing.

      And yes.. I did remove my account few years ago. There's been few times it might still cool but I would say that prety much all the people I want to see do not require FB-account.

  41. Doesnt stress me out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mostly because I dont have a facebook account and think its one the dumbest things for people to get wrapped up in.

    Well I have have a facebook account, but its a fake name, fake pic, fake information that is tied to a dummy email address and the only reason I have it is to "friend" some company to get a free coupon or some free offer. Other than its a complete waste of time.

    Myspace, twitter, myspace are things people get way too wrapped in for absolutely nothing. Who cares if some guy from pakistan updates he had a good day, or your grandmas farmville farm needs watering but yet people act like facebook is the most important thing in their lives and that they have to constantly be on updating and checking status's. If there is anyone you truly care about you should be calling them on the phone, visiting them, eating dinner with them and so on but if you claim to think someone is a friend and is important to you but you only communicate through facebook then youre a fucking moron that has no idea what a friend is.

  42. Only idiots use Facebook. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am not an idiot.

    Therefore Facebook doesn't cause me the least amount of stress.

    I would like to read about Zuckerberg getting terminal cancer some day soon
    though. That would please me immensely.

  43. thank you (again), roman_mir by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you have shown us - yet again - that market-based solutions are seldom useful. you had a market-based solution right in front of you, but you instead soldiered - and bitched - on incessantly until you got the change you wanted without a market-based solution.

    it's a good thing you aren't here to advocate for free markets, because you would be doing a terrible job of that if you were.

  44. Don't want Facebook stress, don't use Facebook. by n6kuy · · Score: 2

    Also, if you don't want to get fat, don't eat;
    and if you don't want to get social diseases, don't have sex.

    See? Real easy!

    --
    If you disagree with me on social issues, then it's pretty clear that you are a narrow-minded bigot.
    1. Re:Don't want Facebook stress, don't use Facebook. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      food and sex are essential for continued life, facebook is not.

    2. Re:Don't want Facebook stress, don't use Facebook. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just not eating will solve all these problems pretty soon, and many more.

    3. Re:Don't want Facebook stress, don't use Facebook. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, if you don't want to get fat, don't eat;
      and if you don't want to get social diseases, don't have sex.

      See? Real easy!

      And if you don't want to read ridiculously bad analogies, don't read SlashDot.

    4. Re:Don't want Facebook stress, don't use Facebook. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You count Facebook usage as being an activity of similar importance to eating and sex?

      Each to his own, I suppose.

  45. 7 Circles of Facebook Hell by guttentag · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I only counted five in the summary. Heres the full list of the 7 Circles of Facebook Hell:

    1. Friends who were known from offline environments
    2. Extended family
    3. Siblings
    4. Friends of friends
    5. Colleagues
    6. Corporations like Zynga you've given access to your data (unwittingly or otherwise)
    7. Corporations Facebook has given access to your data

  46. Study this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Has anyone ever studied how many studies study truisms so true that stating the stated result of the results results in mere tautological tautologies?

    I swing way left, but bujebus, why in the name of jimminy do we pay credence to such tripe? What an utter complete waste of someone's money to pay for this stupidity.

  47. A Good Read! by SnappyCanvas · · Score: 1

    Never heard about stressful effect of Facebook until I read this post! A must read especially to Facebook users! Thank you for sharing this one.

  48. This article is shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This article is bullshit. Get this crap off Slashdot. It does not belong here.

  49. Only if by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... behave slightly differently when you're with your mom than you do when you're with your ... boyfriend

    Only if my boyfriend doesn't want a threesome.

  50. waaaah waaaah waaaaaa by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    I have over 100 friends on facebook. With just a couple exceptions, all of them are real acquaintances or friends, people who I would deliberately talk to if I ran into them on the street, and vice versa. In spite of this, facebook only stresses me out in the same way that face to face interaction does, when I get in an argument with someone. But I would get into the same argument with them if we spoke in person, so is that really facebook?

    I get way more stressed out by G+, because of all the dipsticks that come out of the woodwork to talk stupid shit. Like, when I reshared something someone said about ad blocking not being evil, some dipstick came with a bunch of bullshit anecdotes and logical fallacies and I took the hook. People who can't develop meaningful web content always have something stupid to say about ads.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:waaaah waaaah waaaaaa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The ads pay for the development of meaningful web content.

    2. Re:waaaah waaaah waaaaaa by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      The ads pay for the development of meaningful web content.

      And yet there is no correlation between the presence of advertisements, and the quality of the content. There must be something wrong with your argument.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:waaaah waaaah waaaaaa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, now you want to be pedantic, so you have to define 'quality content'. Support your argument with sites that do not rely on advertising.

      Would you rather switch to a subscription model? What is your alternative to ads?

    4. Re:waaaah waaaah waaaaaa by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Would you rather switch to a subscription model? What is your alternative to ads?

      I would be perfectly happy if many ad-supported sites disappeared. Some are worth subscribing to, however, as I have Netflix.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:waaaah waaaah waaaaaa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was hoping for an example of a news site instead of a place you consume entertainment (documentaries aside).
      However, if Netflix is your chosen icon of an ad-less business model you fail. Netflix relies on advertising to get subscribers. Word of mouth doesn't cut it. If ads go away, how else would people find out about netflix in your fictitious utopia.
      I will agree that there is a tipping point when word of mouth and a great service become sustainable, but it takes too long to get there without advertising.

      So let's look at it this way.
      Since you prefer the subscriber model, you would love it if every slashdot post/summary pointed to a paywalled article, right? That is the inevitable evolution of the subscriber-model. Oh right, its slashdot, you probably don't read the articles anyway.

      I agree that flash ads and crazy flashing images, (and ads in intrusive places) are examples of ads that go too far, but (crude metaphor ahead) you are essentially saying you don't like any books because you hate the ones by Steven King. To disregard the benefits of an entire medium because of the way a few shysters abuse it, is incredibly short-sighted.

      You have a low 6-digit slashID so I assume none of this can coax you down from your high horse. Get off your lawn and all that...
      Please regale me with tales of EBCDIC.

    6. Re:waaaah waaaah waaaaaa by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I was hoping for an example of a news site instead of a place you consume entertainment (documentaries aside).

      There is no need to support corrupt entrenched news organizations, just as there is no need for advertising. Technology has made it possible for individuals to report the news.

      Word of mouth doesn't cut it

      Why not?

      If ads go away, how else would people find out about netflix in your fictitious utopia.

      You know, I don't actually demand that advertising goes away. All that is really needed is that it be restricted to advertising facts.

      you are essentially saying you don't like any books because you hate the ones by Steven King

      That is bullshit, and you are bullshit for saying it. You are essentially saying that advertising is necessary because some authors depend on it. I am saying that they are not guaranteed the right to make a profit, it is not a right.

      You have a low 6-digit slashID so I assume none of this can coax you down from your high horse.

      Pot kettle black, you're the one who told me I don't understand any of this stuff, you're the one riding in here under a horse.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    7. Re:waaaah waaaah waaaaaa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I personally think that news should be provided by journalists. I also think journalists should take some kind of objectivity pledge similar to the oath doctors take.

      If you take away the advertising money from "independent bloggers", which is where you think news should come from, you will be encouraging corporate sponsored shills. Worse than what we have now.

      I completely agree with your point that ads should be forced to tell the truth. I thought your original point was to get rid of all ads.
      It was an easy mistake to make since you wouldn't actually answer my questions. Quoting them and then making two tangential statements isn't an answer.

      Even though you don't like it, they are guaranteed the right to make a profit. You also have the right to deny them profit by not using their sites. However, I think you indirectly use those sites every day by coming to slashdot. That's the problem with the world today, too many arm-chair revolutionaries.

    8. Re:waaaah waaaah waaaaaa by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      . I thought your original point was to get rid of all ads.
      It was an easy mistake to make since you wouldn't actually answer my questions. Quoting them and then making two tangential statements isn't an answer.

      When you finally asked me if I would outlaw advertising, I answered that question. If you want answers, you have to ask questions that prompt the right ones. Like, say, the question you want answered.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  51. So let me translate by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 0

    "right leaning fiscally and left leaning socially"

    Translated: You want the homeless taken care off but you don't want to pay for it.

    And people wonder why politicians don't listen to the voters. Same reason parents don't listen to toddlers who want to stay up as they are falling asleep standing up.

    I presume balanced in your mind means having your cake and eating it to. Yes, such forums do exist. Go an environmentalist site that uses power but doesn't want ANY kind of power plant build anywhere. Or bleeding heart conservatives who don't want to pay taxes but also want all their benefits increased.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:So let me translate by gmack · · Score: 2

      To be fair, he could have been saying he wanted a balanced budget but doesn't mind social things that fall left on the specrum.

    2. Re:So let me translate by Kelbear · · Score: 1

      To be fair, "social" used in this context (drawing distinctions between fiscal and social issues) typically refers to controversial social issues that hinge on moral arguments like gay marriage, abortion, assisted suicide, etc. In other words, subjects where the financial component is less important or not at all important.

      Taking care of the homeless would fall under fiscal issues in this context since the problem isn't "Do we prefer homeless people to live or to die?" but rather, "Can we afford to pay to keep them alive?".

    3. Re:So let me translate by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Left leaning socially is pro-choice, pro-drug-regalization, pro-gay-rights etc. Basically, keeping government from trampling over citizens' rights and freedoms. It does not cover "homeless taken care off", that's economic left, and he explicitly said that he's right leaning on that.

  52. A study of over 300 Facebook users ⦠by alfino · · Score: 1

    So someone asked his/her 305 facebook friends and called it a study. How representative!

    --
    echo mailto: !#^."<*>"|tr "<*> mailto:" net@madduck
    1. Re:A study of over 300 Facebook users ⦠by pep939 · · Score: 1

      Seconded. Slashdot looses credibility on stories like this... talk about "news for nerds, stuff that matters" ...

  53. Re:When did Analog become the opposite of Digital? by arkane1234 · · Score: 1

    I'd say analog became the opposite of digital about the time the definitions were created...

    --
    -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
  54. Surprise by ohpleez · · Score: 1

    Must be the reason why I don't have a Facebook account. Social = control. If I want control, I spend time in real life.

  55. I don't care if I piss of my friends by Nyder · · Score: 1

    Mainly when it over stuff I say. Generally people take it wrong, and get worked up over it, and I find it amusing.

    Someone is always going to get mad, or disagree with what you are saying. And thanks to modern technology, it's even easier to get everyone's opinions and beliefs on matters. While it's harder to ignore, you just need to exercise some self control and let it go.

    If you don't like what I say, good. If it makes you mad, even better. If you want to kill me because of it, sweet! I'm in Seattle internet tough guys.

    --
    Be seeing you...
  56. Thank you for this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am also a linkedIn only kind of guy, and I always have a hard time expressing why. This post captures my feelings pretty accurately and eloquently, and I have bookmarked it and intend to refer to it again. Thank you for this contribution.

  57. Separate Pages, Like Separate Email by assertation · · Score: 1

    It isn't all that stressful.

    You don't friend people you don't know somehow.

    You have one Facebook page for family or work........and another where you be more relaxed about what you say.

    Just like you have a personal email account separate from your work email account.

  58. I left facebook because of this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I got tired of being disappointed with my friends, whom I knew in one particular context, but turned out to be batshit crazy in other contexts. (ie. someone from a class at school who was maybe brilliant in math, but had really bizarre and offensive religious and political beliefs). I've been starting to have the same problem on Twitter, though on twitter it's far easier to unfollow someone.

    This is one reason that I like G+ better, actually -- since you can define your "circles" by social context, you can be sure that the people that are seeing your posts are the intended audiences -- that "versioning" is preserved. Many people just post everything publicly (I do a lot, too, when IDGAF), of course. But it's nice to have that option.

  59. Fake Account. by Westwood0720 · · Score: 1

    I have a fake account with two friends. Only reason is to play Words With Friends.

    Biggest issue I have is that I don't get invites to parties and stuff. I guess that's fine, but it annoys me. Just send me a text or hell, SWING BY MY HOUSE to chat for a bit.

  60. (offtopic) Re:Worlds Collide by GodGell · · Score: 1

    That's brilliant, where is that from? :)

    --
    [SHOW SOME LENIENCY TOWARDS ... I mean, FUCK BETA] Eat. Survive. Reproduce. GOTO 10