Slashdot Mirror


Current Doctor Who Warns Against Facebook

judgecorp writes "Matt Smith, the current actor playing Doctor Who, doesn't use Facebook or Twitter, despite his geek icon status. He worries that social media encourages us to create "surrogate versions" or "celebrity versions" of ourselves. He also, arguably, doesn't need their help, being a celebrity already. Smith made the comments in St Petersburg, where he hosted the final of Microsoft's Imagine Cup for student inventors, won this year by a British team with a mesh music-playing application."

218 comments

  1. Does anyone care? by redmid17 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Use it or don't. Plenty of celebrities fall on both sides of the fence. Some love their privacy. Some embrace the public light and social media for all it's worth. This doesn't need to be a slashdot post.

    1. Re:Does anyone care? by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Some love their privacy

      Davros (Revelation of the Daleks, Pt.2): You can not steal what already has been abandoned.

    2. Re:Does anyone care? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Redundant

      As they say: Fuck Facebook.

    3. Re:Does anyone care? by alex67500 · · Score: 1

      Some love their privacy

      Davros (Revelation of the Daleks, Pt.2): You can not steal what already has been abandoned.

      Or as kids say it, "Finders, Keepers" ;-)

    4. Re:Does anyone care? by radiumsoup · · Score: 1

      Sensible?

      /IdoNotThinkItMeansWhatYouThinkItMeans.jpg

    5. Re:Does anyone care? by gmuslera · · Score: 1

      In the other hand, dismissing anything just because a screenwriter wrote around it (i.e. a small example) wrote it is beyond dumb. Heck, i could use most of Discworld novels as real life lessons.

    6. Re:Does anyone care? by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      That you would assume the GP lives his life by quotes from a TV show, as opposed to simply being a fan who happened to have an apposite quote float to the forefront of his mind, and then that you would be unable to resist the urge to publicly upbraid said poster simply because you don't like how you've assumed he's going about his business just goes to show what a dick you are.

      Wise words are still wise, no matter who writes them.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    7. Re:Does anyone care? by minstrelmike · · Score: 1

      That you would use a remark written by a screenwriter as a guiding principle for your life
      is so far beyond pathetic that there are no words to describe your sorry state.

      Seek and ye shall receive. Of course, that was written before the age of screens so I'm not sure what epithet you should call the author.

  2. To quote daleks by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    E.x.t.e.r.m.i.n.a.t.e!

    1. Re:To quote daleks by sjwt · · Score: 1

      Ex-ter-mi-nate!

      TFTFY

      --
      You have 5 Moderator Points!
      Which Helpless Linux zealot/MS basher do you want to mod down today?
  3. NEWS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Famous man bucks trendy thing

    Approved by guy who certainly does not to own television by his own repeated admission.

    You may now affix your sunglasses

    1. Re:NEWS by Mitchell314 · · Score: 1

      And bowtie!

      --
      I read TFA and all I got was this lousy cookie
    2. Re:NEWS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And fez!

    3. Re:NEWS by frank_adrian314159 · · Score: 1

      And don't forget the fez. Fezzes are cool.

      --
      That is all.
  4. The Doctor by Galaga88 · · Score: 1, Informative

    Before anybody rants about them calling him "Doctor Who" rather than The Doctor: I'm a huge Who fan and I call him Doctor Who when talking to people who aren't necessarily fans. Saves a lot of time and confusion for everybody.

    1. Re:The Doctor by SJHillman · · Score: 1

      I like to call him Herr Doktor and picture him with a monocle. Then I pretend he's the antagonist. It really makes you understand why everyone wants to kill him.

    2. Re:The Doctor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      ah, thank goodness.....

      I was about to rant about them calling him "Doctor Who" rather than The Doctor. But now I know how *YOU* call him, everything is alright.

    3. Re:The Doctor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm a huge Who fan and I call him Doctor Who

      What's being a Who fan got to do with anything? I mean I like their music, but I don't see the connection.

    4. Re:The Doctor by Noughmad · · Score: 1

      Well, he did save Hitler.

      --
      PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
    5. Re:The Doctor by TWX · · Score: 5, Informative

      In everyone else's defense, they've been terribly inconsistent about the "the Doctor" versus "Doctor Who" throughout the show's 50 years. There was an era when the license plate on a vehicle of the Doctor's was "WHO", and the credits have occasionally listed the actor as "Doctor Who" as opposed to "the Doctor". Then there was the overemphasis on the question mark throughout at least Peter Davison's and Colin Baker's years, and that might have extended into the Sylvester McCoy years, can't remember for certain.

      In my opinion, the 1996 TV movie that everyone claims to abhor has a lot more in common with the modern show than it does with the original run. It's almost like we needed a scapegoat for the change to be accepted, like how the George Lazenby James Bond movie is less well received even though one could argue that it's a much more coherent story than many of the other movies...

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    6. Re:The Doctor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it is VERY imporatnt to know that both the good DR and myself have got a juicey boot-tay!

    7. Re:The Doctor by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 3

      I'm not a Doctor Who fan, and when I first heard "The Doctor", I thought of the holographic Doctor on Star Trek Voyager.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    8. Re:The Doctor by camperdave · · Score: 1

      That was an accident. As I recall, they left him locked in the closet.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    9. Re:The Doctor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's because you were exposed to ST before Doctor Who.

    10. Re:The Doctor by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      I thought of the holographic Doctor on Star Trek Voyager.

      I remember that character, but I always want to call him "Dr. Cinnamon" thanks to a Mad Magazine parody of Voyager.

      The screwy stuff our brains retain and subsequently cobble together...

      Side note: Chris Eccleston was a better doctor than a lot of people give him credit for; second best, IMO, just after Tennant.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    11. Re:The Doctor by jratcliffe · · Score: 1

      It's almost like we needed a scapegoat for the change to be accepted, like how the George Lazenby James Bond movie is less well received even though one could argue that it's a much more coherent story than many of the other movies...

      Most reviewers regard "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" as one of the better Bond movies, if not the best.

    12. Re:The Doctor by Holi · · Score: 1

      I agree, but only if we are talking about the current run.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    13. Re:The Doctor by lamplighter · · Score: 3, Informative

      Sylvester McCoy's umbrella had a question mark incorporated into the design of its handle.

      The phrase "Doctor who?" and similar ones have appeared as a running joke throughout the run of the series, including a "Doctor Whoever-you-are" from Tegan when she first met the Doctor in "Logopolis." The only time the Doctor has actually been referred to as "Doctor Who" in the series was in a First Doctor story, "The War Machines" (1966); this is acknowledged as a mistake. The title of the series comes from the first story, in which hapless humans Ian and Barbara assume his name is Dr. Foreman (not too outlandish an assumption, as their student Susan Foreman calls him her grandfather) and he responds, "Doctor who?" Recent episodes, leading up to the 50th anniversary special, make much of the fact that we do not know the Doctor's real name, making the question "Doctor who?" part of the actual storyline.

      There were two Doctor Who movies in the 1960s, starring Peter Cushing as a character who is actually called "Doctor Who," but they are considered non-canon.

    14. Re:The Doctor by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      Adding to the confusion, he was referred to as "Doctor Who" once (The War Machines) and one story was titled "Doctor Who And The Silurians" onscreen.

      You're right about the question mark theme. Sylvester McCoy (nice man) had a question-mark handle on his umbrella and a jumper covered in the things, though they did start to tone it down towards the end.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    15. Re:The Doctor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Indeed. Of all the Bond movies based on Fleming's books, OHMSS is the one which stuck closest to the story ... quite possibly because the producers were nervous about Lazenby as Bond. Then they brought Connery back for "Diamonds Are Forever" and totally went off the rails story-wise.

      (And to bring this sub-thread back on topic, we all know that Bond is really a Time Lord, right? I mean look at how many times he's regenerated...)

    16. Re:The Doctor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I liked "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" when it was called 'Dr Goldfoot and the Bikini Machine' whose premise was actually more believable.

    17. Re:The Doctor by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      we all know that Bond is really a Time Lord, right?

      Timothy Dalton was the president.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    18. Re:The Doctor by BenSchuarmer · · Score: 1

      Obligatory xkcd: http://xkcd.com/1221/

    19. Re:The Doctor by lgw · · Score: 1

      The question marks on the collars started late in the Tom Baker years - IIRC they showed up in "Full Circle". It was a John Nathan-Turner thing, and the question mark was part of the costume through most of his run as producer.

      Totally wrong in-character, but I suspect it helped make the show more accessible to new viewers, worked better in press shots, and the like. The days when basically everyone who got the BBC live knew who he was had passed, and the show was in decline, so maybe it helped. (The raw audience numbers just for the BBC Doctor Who broadcasts in the 70s - often passing 10 million, sometimes by a lot - would be quite impressive for a 21st century to the far larger American market.)

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    20. Re:The Doctor by TWX · · Score: 1

      I like OMHSS best too, as many of the characters showed real character development, including 007. In most other movies there is no real character development, even when the lead goes through experiences that should lead to some.

      I think that's why I liked the modern Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace, Craig's portrayal is allowed to both suffer and grow from his experiences.

      Haven't seen Skyfall yet to see if that continues or not. I hope that it does.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    21. Re:The Doctor by Noughmad · · Score: 1

      I like to call him Herr Doktor and picture him with a monocle. Then I pretend he's the antagonist.

      Do you also scream EXTERMINIEREN?

      --
      PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
    22. Re:The Doctor by i.r.id10t · · Score: 1

      WVO 2M, driven by the 3rd incarnation (Pertwee?) - don't recall Tom Baker driving. And all of Peter Davidson's driving is stuck in my head from All Creatures Great and Small

      But then the last time I watched an episode was in '86 or so, and then it was only up to the 5th incarnation.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    23. Re:The Doctor by TWX · · Score: 1

      Yep... If I remember, Tristan wasn't an especially good driver either, and Sigfried's Rover spent a lot of time in the body shop on account of that...

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    24. Re:The Doctor by Nyder · · Score: 1

      I'm not a Doctor Who fan, and when I first heard "The Doctor", I thought of the holographic Doctor on Star Trek Voyager.

      And we feel sorry for you.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    25. Re:The Doctor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Voyager? P-Shah! The Doctor is McCoy.

    26. Re:The Doctor by aled · · Score: 1

      Lord President Rassilon to be more precise.

      --

      "I think this line is mostly filler"
    27. Re: The Doctor by Mabhatter · · Score: 1

      That was the only thing I didn't like about Skyfall, that they tried to make the character actually named "Bond".

      Much like Doctor Who, I always pictured the change in Bonds with a new agent picking up the 007 super spy slot (with the name to keep up the mystique) when the previous "retired" rather than always being the same person.

    28. Re: The Doctor by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      James Bond is British (sounding, at least) and changes his appearance every so often. Clearly James Bond is a Time Lord and just regenerates after every few movies. One of these days he's going to whip out a sonic device and disappear in a vessel that's bigger on the inside.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  5. Surrogate versions? Andy Warhol said it best. by MisterSquid · · Score: 5, Interesting

    He worries that social media encourages us to create "surrogate versions" or "celebrity versions" of ourselves.

    Creating a surrogate or celebrity version of oneself is precisely the point of Facebook. It is a version of the self that can be exchanged through a social medium with others. That "surrogate" self can be be cited, exalted, devalued, and circulated. It's "celebrity" for people who don't necessarily have access to major media channels and networks of people to promote a traditional media celebrity self.

    Everyone's gonna get their 15 minutes.

    The question, to my mind, is why Matt Smith believe this is any different than the media that have made a surrogate version of him.

    --
    blog
    1. Re:Surrogate versions? Andy Warhol said it best. by slashmydots · · Score: 1

      For a couple weeks, I had a fake account representing Rusty Shackleford from King of the Hill (a notorious anti-government, pro-privacy character of course). There were a couple hundred other Rusty Shacklefords too. Is that not what you meant by celebrity version of myself? lol.

    2. Re:Surrogate versions? Andy Warhol said it best. by war4peace · · Score: 1

      Judging by the rate at which EVERYONE creates accounts on Facebook or Twitter, soon enough (few years) you could be famous for NOT using it.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    3. Re:Surrogate versions? Andy Warhol said it best. by jbeaupre · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I believe the term surrogate here is being used to mean substitute. As in abandoning ones real personality and substituting one created in social media.

      In the past, it was accepted for some people to have stage names (or nom de plume). It was a way to separate work from private life. The stage name could go with an invented personality. Sometimes it was a character name that became associated with an actor. They could ham it up, then go home. It only got weird when someone permanently became the caricature they created.

      With traditional media, that was limited and controlled. Not many people had reasons for stage names, and when and where they had to use it was easier to define. And the true wackos (unless it was matched by great talent) were sidelined.

      With social media, everyone is creating a stage name. And blurring the lines of when they are using it. They spend huge amounts of time polishing the image they project. They use it as a substitute for real interactions with other human beings. For some, it becomes a warped substitute for their actual personality, which they neglect. Not for everyone, but all to many people.

      As the actor playing the Doctor, Matt has seen some of the pressure to become the surrogate personality. To become the Doctor 24/7. He believes social media increases that pressure. So he's opted out of social media. And he's suggesting that others would benefit from opting out too. Not because there isn't anything to be gained, but because creating and becoming a surrogate personality is not worth it.

      --
      The world is made by those who show up for the job.
    4. Re:Surrogate versions? Andy Warhol said it best. by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      well you can do the alternative with hotmail and ms services. create a real version of yourself for ms/nsa. the info is more useful if it's not beautified for fb.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    5. Re:Surrogate versions? Andy Warhol said it best. by avandesande · · Score: 1

      But why? If everyone is a celebrity then the value of being one is nil. I know several wise and effective people who never draw attention to themselves- and most of their associates hold them in high regard.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    6. Re:Surrogate versions? Andy Warhol said it best. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      With social media, everyone is creating a stage name. And blurring the lines of when they are using it.

      Not me, but maybe I should. I should create a fake personality for use on Slashdot that doesn't get upset when people say things that they would never, ever say to my face. Because these are the kinds of things I would say to them in person if they spouted that kind of offensive bullshit in the same context. That is, during the time when such things have happened.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    7. Re:Surrogate versions? Andy Warhol said it best. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was under the impression that having a stage name was still the norm (for actors) and though commonly used to genericize/accentuate some aspect of your image (like ethnicity), it's mostly done to have a unique "trademark" to have your worked be referenced by. I saw a talkshow with a current actor recently who mentioned he had to pick a stage name when he got his actors card and ( because some other current actor was using his real name) chose something other than that.

    8. Re:Surrogate versions? Andy Warhol said it best. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, OK! I ll write and narrate continuously so that people reading it get a complete view of my person and not just highlights...

  6. Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by neminem · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Or just, 'Matt Smith Warns Against Face Book'. We know who Matt Smith is.
    I stopped watching Doctor Who after all of season 5 blew huge balls, and the first handful of episodes of season 6 (except, partially, the one written by Neil Gaiman) were even worse. Still, given they've in the past mercilessly made fun of stuff like people relying on their GPS, I would not have been at all surprised if Current Doctor Who had indeed warned against Facebook, which could have been amusing. But why should I care about the opinions of a random actor?

    1. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I read that title as:

      Yet Another Quack That Warns of the Perils of Facebook

    2. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by Eunuchswear · · Score: 3, Informative

      I stopped watching Doctor Who after all of season 5 blew huge balls

      What? Patrick Troughton was great, and I loved the Yeti in the web-filled London Underground tunnels. (And Lethbridge-Stewart showing up for the first time).

      Or are you talking about someother season 5?

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    3. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by neminem · · Score: 1

      Shush. You know what I mean. (Though I have watched some of old-actually-season-1. I thought it was extremely dull. I haven't gotten around to watching any of the *later* old-DW, though.)

    4. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 0, Troll

      To me, leftist politics ruined the last two seasons of Dr. Who. The utterly unnecessary multiple militant homosexual and cross species relationships and homosexual characters ruined it for me.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    5. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or just, 'Matt Smith Warns Against Face Book'. We know who Matt Smith is.

      But more people know what Doctor Who is.

    6. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is getting really old. It's like he is trying to beat Davis for overto

    7. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by kaizendojo · · Score: 1

      Single quotes would have made all the difference to me. Current 'Doctor Who' warns against Facebook. I would have no idea who Matt Smith was until I saw the reference in the article. But I *do* have an inkling of who Doctor Who is despite not being a fan.

    8. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 0

      Or perhaps I've just been homosexual blind for many, many, many decades. And they've just started making it more explicit.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    9. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

      Hah. I watched it when it was first broadcast.

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    10. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by camperdave · · Score: 4, Funny

      Hah. I watched it when it was first broadcast.

      Did you tape it by any chance? I'm missing a few episodes.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    11. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by camperdave · · Score: 1

      Just because some people are taking things out of context and twisting them into pro-homosexual innuendo, does not mean that that's what was meant. Sometimes gay and queer simply mean cheerful and strange.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    12. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by Holi · · Score: 4, Funny

      Hah, I am watching it when it was first broadcast.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    13. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Sounds to me like it's homophobia that has ruined Doctor Who for you. Why do homosexual characters have to be necessary? Can't they just be characters that happen to be homosexual? What exactly is "leftist" about acknowledging that homosexuals exist, and that they form relationships like anyone else?

      That Vastra & Jenny bother you and Amy & Rory do not says a lot more about you than it does about Doctor Who.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    14. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by LoRdTAW · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My problem is it feels like the writers shoehorned the characters in to appeal to the gay community. It is said that Dr. Who is very popular among the gay population as the character of the Dr is indifferent to things like religion, race, sex, etc. He is always on the side of good, he fights for everyones rights. So they jumped on that train and awkwardly shoved gay characters into the story.

      Its so in your face that it feels fake which ruins the story.

    15. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by sociocapitalist · · Score: 1

      Hah. I watched it when it was first broadcast.

      Did you tape it by any chance? I'm missing a few episodes.

      Sure - you've got betamax right?

      --
      blindly antisocialist = antisocial
    16. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by sociocapitalist · · Score: 1

      My problem is it feels like the writers shoehorned the characters in to appeal to the gay community. It is said that Dr. Who is very popular among the gay population as the character of the Dr is indifferent to things like religion, race, sex, etc. He is always on the side of good, he fights for everyones rights. So they jumped on that train and awkwardly shoved gay characters into the story.

      Its so in your face that it feels fake which ruins the story.

      Just out of curiosity, do you feel the same way about what's happening in the real world these days?

      --
      blindly antisocialist = antisocial
    17. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Its so in your face that it feels fake which ruins the story.

      Do you feel the same way about Amy & Rory's in your face heterosexuality?

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    18. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by aicrules · · Score: 1

      Yes, because Rory is/was clearly just in the closet still.

    19. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      Shush. You know what I mean. (Though I have watched some of old-actually-season-1. I thought it was extremely dull. I haven't gotten around to watching any of the *later* old-DW, though.)

      Of all the Doctors, it embarrasses me to admit I like the original one the least. He was a lying, pompous cowardly old weasel, or such was his affectation, anyway. Then again, he'd apparently spent several hundred years wearing out what may have been his original body and that's enough to make anyone's joints ache.

      The first season of any TV show tends to be a bit rough, though. It got better. Helps if you can enjoy budget special-effects.

    20. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by philipmather · · Score: 1

      It's okay if not, thanks to the unique way the BBC is funded they'll no doubt be repeating it on Dave-5*+1 at the same time every night for a month before moving on to the next episode.

      --
      Regards, Phil
    21. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      multiple militant homosexual and cross species relationships and homosexual characters

      Is that leftist politics for your? If you got a Tardis to spare, visit the Soviet Union and Communist China. That might change your view on things.

    22. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 0

      No, only in the fake worlds of Hollywood (where apparently 95% of the fictional population is gay) and the Supreme Court (which has always been more fictional than reality based- on anything).

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    23. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      How are two right wing dictatorships (and they were conservative, even if communist) leftist politics?

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    24. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by sjames · · Score: 1

      It seems to me that with the many many people he's met over the years, it's remarkable that only 2 were clearly gay and one pansexual (what else could you call Jack?)>

    25. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      I'd think that too, but previous seasons had plenty of homosexuality, and in fact, bisexuality was a central part of the character of Captain Jack/ the Face of Boe (complete with a pregnancy!) - and that didn't bother me one bit.

      No, I think it started with the gay horse and went on from there.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    26. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by Nyder · · Score: 1

      Shush. You know what I mean. (Though I have watched some of old-actually-season-1. I thought it was extremely dull. I haven't gotten around to watching any of the *later* old-DW, though.)

      I love it when the random internet wanker says 1 thing, then claims the "you know what I meant." No, I don't know what you mean. I do not have ESP, I can not read fucking minds. I do know what you typed and posted and it says something different.

      Season 5 of Doctor Who was in 1967. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_Who_(season_5)

      What they call "Series 5" started in 2010. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_Who_(series_5)

      Or you say, Season 5 of the 2005 reboot.

      But saying Season 5 refers correctly to the 1967 season of Doctor Who.

      But sure, we know that you meant you are too lazy to type the correct info for people, because you don't give a fuck if people know facts, or shit that you make up because you are too lazy to check it.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    27. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by Nyder · · Score: 1

      My problem is it feels like the writers shoehorned the characters in to appeal to the gay community. It is said that Dr. Who is very popular among the gay population as the character of the Dr is indifferent to things like religion, race, sex, etc. He is always on the side of good, he fights for everyones rights. So they jumped on that train and awkwardly shoved gay characters into the story.

      Its so in your face that it feels fake which ruins the story.

      It's odd, but there are gay people in the world. So to have gay characters on his show isn't a big deal.

      But lets get real here. I have noticed in the last 10 years that "gay" is the new cool. I read comics books, and you know how many super heroes are declaring themselves gay now? Quite a bit. It's cool to be gay. Which is good, since it's better then being cruel to the gays.

      But anyways, just like Nerds & Geeks got their 15 mins, it's the gays turn. So if seeing gay people on TV make you uncomfortable, I suggest you stop watching TV, or just watch old Doctor Who Episodes, where everyone was strait, married members of the opposite sex and, um, didn't sing show tunes.

      Your last line though cracked me up. "Its so in your face that it feels fake which ruins the story." Doctor Who stories are fake. Doctor Who is fake. Time travel isn't possible and the Doctor Who universe isn't real. Gay people are real, so to be honest, if there is gay people in doctor who episodes, that is about as real as you can get in a doctor who story. Nothing else is real. No dude who travels the universe in a police box, that picks up hot chicks and don't sex them. No frozen warrors from mars, no cybermen (though you can cyber).

      Doctor Who stories are fake, sorry to disappoint. Gay people on the other had, are real.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    28. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by camperdave · · Score: 1

      It's okay if not, thanks to the unique way the BBC is funded they'll no doubt be repeating it on Dave-5*+1 at the same time every night for a month before moving on to the next episode.

      The BBC wiped their tapes. They don't have the old episodes anymore.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    29. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Actually, yes. In the old days, when an assistant/companion fell in love, it would be the cue for them to quit the show and settle down to a comfortable retirement with the adored object.

      Having an ongoing romance in the show just detracts, no matter who it is. (Even so, Amy & Rory isn't as objectionable as those assistants in the early days of the relaunch who persisted in falling in love with the Doctor himself. Worst of all was Billie Piper, because he seemed to reciprocate. That was an all-time low.)

    30. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by LoRdTAW · · Score: 1

      With a lot of PC related things in general, yes. I feel that we are in a period where the media presents a phony, forced acceptance of sensitive issues. As if media has to say "LOOK WE LOVE %s", where %s is gay, racial tensions, feminism etc. It does not feel sincere and comes off feeling like some writer thought "Lets throw a flamboyant gay character or couple into the script to make the queers happy and show everyone that we are progressive and gain a larger audience" then proceed to pat themselves on the back.

      During the beginning of the zimmerman/martin incident I was driving and flipping through the AM dial. The thing that caught my attention was randy rhoads on air america radio blathering about how she loves black people. She sounded like she was not in a radio booth but on the streets telling black people she loves them to their faces. Seriously? You have to announce you love black people as if by default being white makes you a racist and you have to force the point that you aren't. Why would you ever need to say that? WHY!?

      I went to a community college, had two black lab partners, one who was a very lovely girl from jamaica. I could tell she liked me and I thought why not ask her out? I did and I never once had to say well you're black and i'm white so how does this work? I never had to tell her that I am not a racist or that my family isn't in the KKK, that I love black people or how jamaica is so great. I didn't have to kiss ass or apologize because there was no fucking reason to. We were just two horney young adults. Though, I did come away from that relationship with a better understanding of why african hair is a pain in the ass to take care of when she took her hair off and it turned out to be a wig.

      Same with my friend from Sri Lanka who married a white girl. I never had to tell him that I accept his marriage, in fact I was his best man. I even dated one of his cousins.

      Point is people who go around and have to vocally proclaim they accept something constantly feel fake. Same for any other form of media including TV, movies, games etc. Its awkward and it's not going to suddenly boost acceptance of sensitive issues with hateful assholes.

    31. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by LoRdTAW · · Score: 1

      Lets get this straight. I am not uncomfortable with the fact that they are gay. It feels as if they put the characters in there to appease the gay community and not as a genuine acceptance. As if there was a board meeting where someone was looking at a marketing report and said "The gays love the show. Lets throw and obviously gay couple into the story to make them happy." And it was only in one of the most recent episodes that it felt phoney. Can't remember because I wasn't that crazy about the latest season, kinda forgettable.

    32. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, I forgot the political left and right have the more different meanings the closer you live to the former Eastern Block. It was an Internet comment fast drawn at noon in front of the town hall.

    33. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

      Hah. I watched it when it was first broadcast.

      Did you tape it by any chance? I'm missing a few episodes.

      No, but I did some drawings in crayon on wrapping paper.

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    34. Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' by sociocapitalist · · Score: 1

      With a lot of PC related things in general, yes. I feel that we are in a period where the media presents a phony, forced acceptance of sensitive issues. As if media has to say "LOOK WE LOVE %s", where %s is gay, racial tensions, feminism etc. It does not feel sincere and comes off feeling like some writer thought "Lets throw a flamboyant gay character or couple into the script to make the queers happy and show everyone that we are progressive and gain a larger audience" then proceed to pat themselves on the back.

      During the beginning of the zimmerman/martin incident I was driving and flipping through the AM dial. The thing that caught my attention was randy rhoads on air america radio blathering about how she loves black people. She sounded like she was not in a radio booth but on the streets telling black people she loves them to their faces. Seriously? You have to announce you love black people as if by default being white makes you a racist and you have to force the point that you aren't. Why would you ever need to say that? WHY!?

      I went to a community college, had two black lab partners, one who was a very lovely girl from jamaica. I could tell she liked me and I thought why not ask her out? I did and I never once had to say well you're black and i'm white so how does this work? I never had to tell her that I am not a racist or that my family isn't in the KKK, that I love black people or how jamaica is so great. I didn't have to kiss ass or apologize because there was no fucking reason to. We were just two horney young adults. Though, I did come away from that relationship with a better understanding of why african hair is a pain in the ass to take care of when she took her hair off and it turned out to be a wig.

      Same with my friend from Sri Lanka who married a white girl. I never had to tell him that I accept his marriage, in fact I was his best man. I even dated one of his cousins.

      Point is people who go around and have to vocally proclaim they accept something constantly feel fake. Same for any other form of media including TV, movies, games etc. Its awkward and it's not going to suddenly boost acceptance of sensitive issues with hateful assholes.

      There are a lot of people who probably say such things to convince themselves as much as to convince anyone else - especially when they are unfamiliar with being around other cultures or shades of skin color.

      That is people in general though, and I was wondering if the OP was feeling a bit...overwhelmed by the generally increasing public acceptance / support (and it's relative coverage in the media).

      As an aside I strongly suspect the whole gay marriage issue was thrown at the media by the white house so people wouldn't focus on Obama's general uselessness.

      --
      blindly antisocialist = antisocial
  7. Tell that to clevernickname by mamer-retrogamer · · Score: 1

    NT

    --
    Schrödinger's cat is not amused—maybe.
  8. Eleventh Doctor doesn't care for it, either. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCa1hyTAqTY

  9. Unfortunately, not all of us have that choice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A few years back when I was looking for work out of college, virtually every prospective employer asked to be friended, or asked what my FB/Twitter/etc. accounts were. When I told them that I didn't bother to spill my guts online to all and sundry, the interview was terminated, and was told something along the lines of , "no FB account is like not having a phone or E-mail address, and we don't want any useless Luddites blocking progress in our company."

    So, I made dummy accounts, threw some sanitized posts on them, and was able to pass that hurdle.

  10. Finding old friends by kannibal_klown · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Honestly, I'm not a huge fan of Facebook or Twitter either. I DO think they have their uses, such as Facebook finding old friends you lost touch with years ago and to be hang-outs for fans and clubs and whatever. And some Twitter feeds are quite useful, giving news or humorous anecdotes.

    But yeh, I've seen what Matt Smith is talking about. People exaggerate how "into" something they are, yet I know them in real life and the cause / sport / whatever they claim to be so into.... they maybe spend one weekend a year doing.

    And some twitter rants: they just forward something they heard on Twitter and feel it's the truth, when you dig past the onion layers and find out it's not. But, I read it on Twitter Umm, good for you? That doesn't make it true.

    1. Re:Finding old friends by gl4ss · · Score: 2

      the problem with his comments is that it applies to .. well, everything social.

      especially so to even letter correspondents which used to be popular for people to communicate - a lot of it was so full of formal bullshit fantasy they're not even funny to read, but that was the 'facebook' back then, you'd get maybe an introductionary letter from someone else in your field or whatever and start the letters... and people would write beautified versions of events in them - of course back then it was easier to get away with it too than on fb(fewer people potentially calling on your bullshit).

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  11. Re:Duh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Thank you Captain Obvious.

    That's Doctor Obvious.

  12. Not as simple as that by vikingpower · · Score: 1

    We all seek to create representations of ourself, so-called "personae". We don quite another persona when seducing a potential partner than when we work with a colleague or talk with a friend. Facebook has extended the possibility, for John Doe, to do this, namely online. Of course one can choose not to have a Facebook persona, so did I. But having "surrogate" versions of ourself implicitly states that there would be, somehow somewhere, a "real" version. Which one, pray, would that be ? This alone underscores the vacuity of Smith's utterings.

    --
    Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
    1. Re:Not as simple as that by Jmc23 · · Score: 2

      Believe it or not, some of us aren't liars and pretenders and actually try to always be ourselves. This is very hard for the liars to grasp.

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    2. Re:Not as simple as that by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      Believe it or not, some of us aren't liars and pretenders and actually try to always be ourselves.

      Indeed; conversely, however, some of us who aren't liars or pretenders have had to develop social masks as a means of survival, as our default personality types do not necessarily conform with what employers/other people in general find to be acceptable behavior, even if it harms no one.

      FWIW, while I firmly believe complete honesty is always the best policy, my experience is that being honest tends to do more harm than good, especially in employment-related situations.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    3. Re:Not as simple as that by Jmc23 · · Score: 1

      Very true! Automatons who can forget they're human are in high demand.

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    4. Re:Not as simple as that by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      Very true! Automatons who can forget they're human are in high demand.

      Whatever, dude. You can try to pretend that you're somehow different (and thus, in your mind, better) than the rest of us, but I'd put dollars to pesos that you act differently around your parents than you do when with people you're trying to have sex with, just like the rest of us.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    5. Re:Not as simple as that by Jmc23 · · Score: 1

      No, I don't act differently. I don't even try to have sex with people. I actually value this thing called a relationship based on honesty. I know liars find it hard to believe, but you can attract people by just being yourself! In fact, when you love yourself and be yourself authentically you attract a lot better quality of people. You know, people you can respect instead of seeing them as a simple masturbation tool.

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    6. Re:Not as simple as that by vikingpower · · Score: 1

      No, I don't act differently. I don't even try to have sex with people. I actually value this thing called a relationship based on honesty. I know liars find it hard to believe, but you can attract people by just being yourself! In fact, when you love yourself and be yourself authentically you attract a lot better quality of people. You know, people you can respect instead of seeing them as a simple masturbation tool.

      There is some sort of contradiction there. Somehow you are trying to make us believe that, no matter when and where and with whom, you, the great Jmc, are always the same. Congratulations sir, that is a near-godlike quality. On the other hand, you implicitly grant that you, the great Jmc, can either "respect" people or else see them as "simple masturbation tool". Hence, you are able to have at least two different attitudes toward people. Which seems in blatant contradiction to what you want us to believe.

      --
      Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
    7. Re:Not as simple as that by Jmc23 · · Score: 1
      No, I can see how other's see them as a masturbation tool. I see them as 'not-for-me'. It almost amazes me how most people cannot distinguish the people they have deep connections with.

      It might be godlike, it's using your god hemisphere as opposed to your me-me-me hemisphere. That and an autistic childhood will do wonders for honesty!

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    8. Re:Not as simple as that by vikingpower · · Score: 1

      I am in serious doubt as to the veracity of your allegations. Whoever possesses the virtue of honesty does not mention it. "I am always honest" can not be but a blatant lie, at most a clever disguise. Pardon me, sir: you have failed to convince me, and I believe you not.

      --
      Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
    9. Re: Not as simple as that by Jmc23 · · Score: 1
      Dude, this is real life, not D&D.

      Ever observe ANY human interactions ever? Deceit declines into drama. So why bother with it? I prefer a peaceful life.

      ...unfortunately, one must learn the appropriate manner in which to convey the truth or you get beat up a lot!

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
  13. Fine, no one is making you by TWiTfan · · Score: 1

    But don't get all preachy about it either. Just because you don't watch TV doesn't mean you have to be the snob prick at the party who has to constantly remind everyone "I don't even *OWN* a TV".

    --
    The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
  14. Geeks don't use facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    " doesn't use Facebook or Twitter, "

    Facebook is the province of teenage girls, and senior citizens.

  15. Re:Unfortunately, not all of us have that choice.. by kannibal_klown · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You see, THAT annoys me.

    Personally I stay off Facebook. I made some dummy account years back just because I was unsuccessfully try to find an old friend I'd lost touch with. It's still there gather dust, I have ZERO friends on it and no posts since the day it was created like 3 years ago.

    I'm in IT and I know people that feel the same way, they don't want to bother with the fake socialization or post stuff out there linked to their real name for the whole world to see. I have 10 years of experience behind me and a Masters in Computer Science. If that's not enough to show I'm in the IT field then it's a sad state of the field that someone with 1 year of experience and a FaceBook account would get preference.

  16. Re:Unfortunately, not all of us have that choice.. by Overzeetop · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Funny - I tell prospective colleagues that my FB account is for my hobbies; if they would like to connect to me professionally they may send me an invitation on LinkedIn. On a related note, I also don't give out my personal cell phone number. If you want to get in touch with me, call my office phone and leave a message or send me an email, or send a text message to my office number.

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  17. well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    some of us use it to keep in touch with distant family and friends, especially those who aren't tech savvy enough for skype.

    1. Re:well by JackieBrown · · Score: 1

      I use it for moments I want to share. It's a public journal. I also remember my audience. My mom is listed as a friend as well as my boss. This helps keep me from posting stupid, compromising stuff. People that do post that kind of stuff would find another outlet to make public fools of themselves if there was no facebook.

      When my wife pasted away in May, it was extremely useful for contacting her friends and posting rosary and funeral information. It also gave people a public outlet to for them to pay their respects. It meant a lot.

      (Of course, our families and close friends, I notified over the phone or in person.)

  18. Re:Duh. by TWX · · Score: 5, Funny

    Doctor who?

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  19. Matt, wake up. by girlintraining · · Score: 1

    . He worries that social media encourages us to create "surrogate versions" or "celebrity versions" of ourselves

    It's common knowledge that in a new relationship, the first year with someone you don't really meet them, just their representative. Everyone puts on a different face in public, or for new people. This isn't news to anyone who isn't Forever Alone guy. Social media doesn't "encourage" us; We already do it anyway. Social media just allows this to be more transparent.

    It's no surprise Facebook doesn't have a "dislike" button, or that there's no notification if someone "unfriends" you or blocks you. Even the website itself tries to hide negativity. Everyone lies. Ask any interrogator. Every, mother effing one of you is a liar. Of course, it's mostly small lies, like how girls lie about their age or guys lie about how great they are at sex, or how we lie about how much we're enjoying it anyway... oh and the list goes on... those are just stereotyped examples.

    Social media didn't create this trend, Matt. Hop in your TARDIS and fly back a thousand years and you'll have Kings and Queens demanding the painters take a few extra pounds off their royal portraits...

    --
    #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    1. Re:Matt, wake up. by Jmc23 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not everybody lies. It's what makes some of us 'socially'' awkward.

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    2. Re:Matt, wake up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everyone puts on a different face in public, or for new people.

      Ah! That's what I've been doing wrong! Thanks!

      -- Forever Alone Guy

    3. Re:Matt, wake up. by girlintraining · · Score: 1

      Not everybody lies. It's what makes some of us 'socially'' awkward.

      Liar. You're socially awkward because you never leave the basement. :D

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    4. Re:Matt, wake up. by Jmc23 · · Score: 1

      Oh god, what I wouldn't give for a nice cool basement in this heat instead of being at the top of a furnace loosely disguised as an apartment!

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    5. Re:Matt, wake up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everyone lies, to a certain extent. Even if you are completely honest, you will exaggerate and present the best sides of yourself, while minimalizing or not revealing the worst sides. And yes your kind of right. If you don't behave like this, and show your bad qualities as equally as your good ones; you won't keep a date, because they will assume not that you are presenting yourself equally, but that it will be even worse when they meet the "real" you.

    6. Re:Matt, wake up. by nmb3000 · · Score: 1

      It's what makes some of us 'socially'' awkward.

      You have no idea how much those unbalanced quotes are bothering me....

      er... what were we talking about? :)

      --
      "What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
      /)
    7. Re:Matt, wake up. by Jmc23 · · Score: 1

      You should see me do 'air quotes"! Seriously though. Thanks for pointing that out and passing on the annoyance! /s

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    8. Re:Matt, wake up. by Zape · · Score: 1

      Social media didn't create this trend, Matt. Hop in your TARDIS and fly back a thousand years and you'll have Kings and Queens demanding the painters take a few extra pounds off their royal portraits...

      I hate to nitpick but since it does go to your point, actually if you went back you would find Kings and Queens demanding extra pounds added to the portraits. Being overweight was a sign of wealth and very much in style. It isn't just about the images we present to others but also the interpretations a particular culture will make of those images.

    9. Re:Matt, wake up. by Jmc23 · · Score: 1

      Actually, I'm opposite person so I tend to talk about my negative qualities. Positive qualities are easily shown through one's actions, but negative social awkwardness I talk about upfront (because it's easily missed through all my awesomeness) so they don't get disappointed when they find out I'm not 'normal'. :)

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
  20. Bit odd for some one by mjwalshe · · Score: 1

    who makes a living as an actor to rail against "alternate versions" of our selves after all we present differently at work with family, friends and loved ones - I do wonder if hes suffering from the same sort of angsty issues about acting that Harry H Corbet did

    1. Re:Bit odd for some one by Jmc23 · · Score: 1

      not odd at all. He's just pointing out that he's better than everybody else because he created his persona without fb.

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    2. Re:Bit odd for some one by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      ...and he gets paid to do it!

  21. Jokes on him by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm just as silly, brutally honest and disgusting as I am on Facebook, Google+, Myspace, Bebo and any other site I have ever had an account on. Including here, but I cannot for the life of me remember what the account was again, so I am too lazy to re-register.

    I prefer not to lie to myself or anyone I know. In fact, I never do. Why lie to people you supposedly care about?
    Lying gets you nowhere. Except in to the pants of some awful horny teenager in a bar.

    Why be friends with people you dislike? Why be friends with people you share nothing in common with? It is like people that play League of Legends. Why torture yourself? Maybe you are in to that, but then, why not tell your friends you like stabbing needles in to your nipples or getting slabbed with leather whips just so you can suffer a little more?
    Why be friends with prudes? More like blend yourself in to a delicious pudding since that is your only use. If only humans were tasty.
    Why be friends with boring people? They hold back EVERYTHING. They are the reason we aren't in space yet or have 5-boobed females and ballsacks on our necks to we don't sit on our balls!

  22. Seems pretty geeky by Sheik+Yerbouti · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I know tons of geeks who eschew social media so I think it actually gives him geek cred.

    1. Re:Seems pretty geeky by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was thinking the same. Using Facebook and Twitter rather disqualifies one from being a geek.

  23. Age by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's really an age thing, and I mean that in a non-discriminating way. I'm 22, and to me and the people around me, it's simply the de facto mode of communication, for better or worse. It functions very much like a public forum (in the Roman Forum way), the central place of the village where everybody hangs out and exchanges news. If you're around 40 or 50, I understand very well that you'd find Facebook useless and pointless.

    1. Re:Age by clarkn0va · · Score: 1

      The more serious objections to Facebook are not that it's useless or pointless, but that it is a handy tool for various governments and corporations to exploit and/or violate your privacy. Facebook is the Free Candy of this generation.

      --
      I am literally 3000 tokens away from the chaotic crossbow --Stephen
  24. Doesn't sound like much of a warning ... by Meetch · · Score: 1

    ... more of a commentary around the importance some people place on social media. Slightly tabloid, this slashdot article is. Mmmm...

  25. not surprising by slashmydots · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I noticed that a ton of IT students at my college don't use Facebook. And it wasn't some hippie fine arts college or something with people bringing typewriters in to be ironic, it's a low cost public one. So I researched it and in the #1 most likely demographics to use Facebook, the least likely group within it is IT professionals. I have a feeling we're all on to something, as I don't use it either.

    1. Re:not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's only because they have no friends, obviously!

    2. Re:not surprising by Bigbutt · · Score: 1

      I initially set up an account to let the folks on my forum know when the server took a dump since most of my users are also on Facebook. Now I'm using it when I go on hikes or motorcycle trips. I can double snap a picture; one on my tourist camera and one on my iPhone in order to post to Facebook for my friends to "like".

      And I've been into computers/in IT since 1980. So count me in the 'least likely' group. There are a few of us (I'm not quite in the Senior Citizen group...)

      [John]

      --
      Shit better not happen!
    3. Re:not surprising by MrTester · · Score: 1

      I think Facebook today is what AOL was 15 or 20 years ago.
      AOL packaged up the ISP access with a web and email client. Users didnt have to be tech savvy and didnt have to know about the other ways to accomplish "getting online." It was easy. But savvy users found it limiting and too expensive for what it did.

      Similar thing with Facebook. Savvy users consider the privacy issues too burdensome and find other ways to accomplish the same things. But for the masses "it just works."
      As the masses become more and more savvy Facebook will be forced to change, or will go the way of AOL.

    4. Re:not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quickly! Someone make a 'Facebook for IT people!'

    5. Re:not surprising by sociocapitalist · · Score: 2

      I noticed that a ton of IT students at my college don't use Facebook. And it wasn't some hippie fine arts college or something with people bringing typewriters in to be ironic, it's a low cost public one. So I researched it and in the #1 most likely demographics to use Facebook, the least likely group within it is IT professionals. I have a feeling we're all on to something, as I don't use it either.

      Sounds like a good "Ask Slashdot" poll idea

      --
      blindly antisocialist = antisocial
    6. Re:not surprising by houghi · · Score: 1

      Or geeks are in their parents basement for a reason: they are not the most social people.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    7. Re:not surprising by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Hmm, I'm not IT, but I don't use it because it seems faddish first off. I'm not google though, with very few people on the list since I don't go out and add everyone possible. Though given the idiocy that arrives there at times I can only imagine that Facebook is one hundred times worse.

      At times I am tempted to go to facebook just to look someone up, but then the feeling passes. If I keep ignoring an invite request will that person think I'm being rude? If I don't invite someone will they also think I'm rude? Not worth the hassle.

      If you don't really have a lot of friends and then you have a hundred on facebook, to the smart person it reinforces the fact of having few real friends, but to the dumb person they are just excited to have so many friends...

  26. Lots of Faces to any person by oxnyx · · Score: 1

    Having spend some time during my BA in History reading copy books (books with copys of letter that people sent out) and other stuff they wrote - keeping a collection of selfs is normal. People behave differently to their family, around different friends at work and to neighbors. My sister I understand when her sisters aren't around is very talkative. At home Mom put in a 30 sound bite summary of the day rule in at dinner when she was in high school because otherwise she'd never tell us anything. Facebook is what the person lets it become. You can says some really dumb things; it could be an insight into your heart or you can fill it up with quotes write over pictures. As a historian I say fill it up or not...it will make nice essay for future Historians to try pick into something useful later.

    --
    Life is like untied shoe laces; it always tripping you up and getting in your way.
    1. Re:Lots of Faces to any person by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is precisely what I thought of. I had a wonderful CS lecturer in college who explained, when talking about online privacy issues, that part of the reason we need privacy is that different behavior is appropriate in different social groups. You don't talk to your boss the same way you talk to your friends at a bar, lest you get fired; you don't talk to your friends at a bar the same way you talk to your boss, lest they think you stiff and withdrawn; you don't talk to any of them the way you talk to your spouse. This is normal and healthy social functioning, and none of it works if every group is listening to you all the time.

      And that's the problem with Facebook et al -- exchanges that we think of as private (in the sense of, for all my friends to see but not my boss) spread around to unintended contexts where they aren't appropriate. So Mr. Smith seems to have it wrong: Facebook's problem isn't that it lets you create a surrogate version of yourself; it's that it lets you create only one.

  27. orly? by slashmydots · · Score: 1

    I noticed during my limited interactions with Facebook that people who are morons in real life are twice and annoying, rude, and stupid on Facebook. So much for an idealized, sanitized, celebrity version of themselves. I don't think it's true for everyone or even close to the majority.

  28. Despite?! by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 4, Insightful

    [someone] doesn't use Facebook or Twitter, despite his geek icon status.

    Emphasis mine. That's like saying someone doesn't smoke, despite being a doctor.

    --
    "Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
    1. Re:Despite?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's like saying someone doesn't smoke, despite being the Doctor.

      FTFY

    2. Re:Despite?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, many doctors smoke because their insane hours are stressing.

  29. He makes sense by houbou · · Score: 1

    There is a lot of smart about Matt Smith. I have a facebook account, but only use it when truly necessary, usually for development. I've always known there is nothing for free in this world and I value my privacy more than free internet socializing. I would rather PAY for an account with the guarantee that everything is 100% under my control.

  30. Re:Unfortunately, not all of us have that choice.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Personally going to dump my cellphone after this one dies. (its a nokia dumbphone however, so that will probably be around 2036)

    I just don't trust them nomore. I know its a great convenience to have a cell phone, but I can live without that convenience.

  31. Odd by Tolkienfanatic · · Score: 0

    That he would make these comments at an invent that probably spawned a lot Facebook and Twitter wannabes

  32. Sounds like... by 3seas · · Score: 1

    ... elites not wanting their status undermined.

    Technology that has brought people closer together has allowed a great deal to be changed in the perception of things in many fields.
    I.E. Music, Movies, and more.... and now there is what he is concerned about.... star status

  33. Re:Unfortunately, not all of us have that choice.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Any company with an attitude like that is in for more problems than just Luddites blocking progress, unless the company's entire business revolves around making insipid privacy-violating Facebook games.

    At least twice now, I've interviewed for jobs (and got them) and when asked about Facebook I told them that my part-time side job was teaching advanced web design at the local university, and I didn't have a Facebook account because their interface was offensive. Both jobs were in IT, and one of them involved re-building the company's internal data tracking web application. In that case, my disagreement with Facebook was what got me the job.

  34. Bleeding of groups by intermodal · · Score: 1

    I have a problem with Facebook because I keep it around mostly to keep in touch with very different groups of people. I have a bunch of cousins and uncles and such in other states, and then I have a bunch of people I used to go to church with in another state. And somehow, everything gets weird when they blur together in a thread. People are, socially, different dependent upon which group they are around, and it almost forces the creation of a new you. Not on purpose, just that need to conduct oneself in a way that makes sense to everyone.

    The NSA on top of that makes it even more uncomfortable.

    --
    In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
  35. Re:Duh. by war4peace · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Funny as it sounds, I read the title as "Doctor, who warns against Facebook" - so I read on thinking it was about an actual doctor warning against Facebook for some weird health reason.
    So it should have sounded as "Current Doctor Who who warns..." :)

    --
    ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
  36. Not the best candidate for anti-facebook by s.petry · · Score: 3, Funny

    Numerous studies have been done indicating that it's not just an alter-ego problem. Here is a fantastic post on the deeper issues. As with TV, there are addiction mechanisms build in to keep you doing it. Of course lets not mention altering your brain waves and making you less able to process information.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    1. Re:Not the best candidate for anti-facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Listen to the doctor, he been to the future and saw more people having pleasure using Ass-Wipe instead of FB.

  37. old school by Connie_Lingus · · Score: 3, Interesting

    yes back in the late 80's i owned a software company that wrote addons for a BBS system called the MajorBBS that was really one of the first true multi-user online systems available for the general public to own and deploy. the interesting thing was that, consistently, when sysops ran the numbers, online chat represented 85-95% of the use of these systems that allowed all sorts of other really cool things to do, in real-time, with other users.

    the point of this is that facebook and twitter are really nothing more then personalized chat rooms, and looking back it isnt surprising at all that they represent the 800lb gorillas of the internet because, to be honest, it seems that all everyone really ever wanted to do online is chat (besides pr0n and "research" of course).

    i think a facebook backlash is inevitable, like everyone hating nickleback or david guetta...i stopped using it except to get a hold of my kids about a year ago, and i enjoy letting people know i think its a total waste of time...now if i was younger i could see a lot more useful uses for it, like hooking up...but im sure Matt Smith isnt hurting along those lines.

    --
    never bring a twinkie to a food fight.
  38. Hu's on first by tepples · · Score: 1

    More like Dr. Hu.

  39. so? by crossmr · · Score: 0

    He's a pretty shit doctor.
    I've continued to watch in the faint hope that it will get better, and thankfully with a regeneration coming up, maybe..just maybe..

  40. More accurate than Surrogate by sl4shd0rk · · Score: 1

    "Surrogate versions?" that's kind of funny when you consider the vast complexity of what you're actually creating. social media is a not-so-private index-able record of events and contacts in your personal life complete with timestamps, pictures, anecdotes and exacting degrees of separation to others -- added bonus is the illusion of privacy. It's hardly surrogate when you consider the social profile may actually be MORE accurate that the IRL version.

    --
    Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
  41. Actor is a geek status symbol? by davydagger · · Score: 0

    *spits*

    A fucking actor?

    I think its time we give the hipsters the nod they aren't welcome here. Scene killers.

  42. Re:Unfortunately, not all of us have that choice.. by Bigbutt · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That's too bad. I purposefully do not link my Facebook account with anyone at work (anyone at all). I have to work with these guys. Finding out they're racist assholes makes it a bit harder to deal with them without having to think about their personal beliefs.

    [John]

    --
    Shit better not happen!
  43. New Summery for you. by sjwt · · Score: 1

    "Matt Smith, the current actor playing Doctor Who, doesn't use Facebook or Twitter, despite his geek icon status. He also worries that social media encourages us normals to have more outstanding view points and to express our selves rather the welcoming our new meta-media overlords" -I for one welcome our new Microsoft music playing overloads.

    --
    You have 5 Moderator Points!
    Which Helpless Linux zealot/MS basher do you want to mod down today?
  44. Re:Duh. by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

    Except "Doctor Who" is just a common response to the character's name "The Doctor" so to those familiar with the show, your parsing still makes more sense.

  45. Actors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thank god we all listen to actors on how to run our lives... especially ones barely old enough to shave!

  46. Doctor Wut?

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  47. Agreed: by punk4evr · · Score: 1

    Freaking Journalists today, apparently, never went to school! They seem to have no idea how to form correct methods of communicating things accurately! So why in the hell do the Editors even keep them?

  48. Beware the advice of the successful, by jythie · · Score: 2

    For they do not wish company.

    1. Re:Beware the advice of the successful, by Pecisk · · Score: 1

      Yeah, Facebook and Twitter makes your really famous...ok, I couldn't say it with straight face.

      Seriously, YouTube - maybe, but Facebook or Twitter alone? Never.

      --
      user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!
  49. Re:Don't use non-MS products by Endovior · · Score: 4, Funny

    The tinfoil is strong with this one.

  50. "Despite" his geek status?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think you mean "fitting with his geek status".

    You're not a geek, are you?
    PROTIP: Owning an iDevice or any other kind of dumbed-down e-penis/e-tits does not make you a "geek". And no self-respecting geek would go even close to Twatter.

    Geeks use IRC (duh), XMPP+Jingle+OTP, and e-mail over IMAPS and SSMTP, using GnuPG on top of it.
    Frankly, we don't even need a phone. Just a portable computer. (An actual one, not a gadget implemented on a locked-down one.) Nobody calls us anyway.

    1. Re:"Despite" his geek status?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      s/OTP/OTR/

      Blame my new German geek keyboard layout and keyboard.

    2. Re:"Despite" his geek status?? by uCallHimDrJ0NES · · Score: 1

      I agree, but I'd take a step farther. Today's geeks can be measured by their use of completely offline systems whenever possible or appropriate. If you're not even thinking about unplugging yet, you're far too behind the times to count as a geek in my book. That said, I think Smith's observations are far more about personal sanity and quality of life than about technical concerns or privacy. His motivations for telling people to get off facebook are somewhat similar to a parent saying to children, "stop watching that tv and go play".

      --
      Cloudiot: A person who does not see offsite storage as a way to lose control over access to his or her own data.
    3. Re:"Despite" his geek status?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, that doesn't make sense. The old school geeks never were anxious about networking. Not social networks and www, but IRC and other services with TCP/IP ports.
      A real geek strives for control over the *biggest* network of computers. Not to intentionally cripple himself. He would never doubt his ability to handle incoming crap from the outside. A well-designed security and crap-filtering system is the pride of many geeks. Only an iHipster... in other words a wannabe / fake... would intentionally cripple himself. (Because for them, "shit" apparently equals "good" exactly because we consider it to be "shit"... bit like actual punks, but way lamer because punks at least had their own direction [none], while hipsters just hold a inversion filter over society and then exactly imitate that... which is just as non-independent.)

      Or did you mean "cloud", "webmail" and other such retarded "online (read: www) services" by that? In that case: Yeah; but then you're not a geek either, because a geek wouldn't call only that "online".

      I never had that non-social aspect of geek personality anyway. I'm far too emotional for that. And I stopped being anxious about human interaction, when I noticed that what's cool is only a matter of confidence, and that hence, being exactly how I am, liking what I like, and (even fake-)confident about it, made me *more* attractive. Inside I'm still super-needy for love [but not attention] though. ;)

      Maybe you should detox from the Prozac... (Btw: I'm also very well versed in neurology, and I can tell you that *any* such pill can *never* help with any problem. It only makes it worse. Like all other drugs. [E.g. alcohol.] Apply the rules for alcohol to it, and you're good. Or heroin. Because that's more realistic for typical "happy pills". )

  51. Re:Duh. by Kookus · · Score: 1

    Doctor Obvious

  52. Twitter quote from The Doctor by Megane · · Score: 1

    Well then, I'm glad I have at least one thing in common with Matt Smith.

    And The Doctor (the character) apparently isn't very impressed with Twitter either:

    Amy: Have you seen my phone?
    The Doctor: Your phone?
    Amy: Yeah.
    The Doctor: Your mobile telephone. I bring you to a paradise planet two billion light years from Earth and you want to update Twitter. (This line is delivered with wonderfully gushing disgust.)
    Amy: Sunsets, spires, soaring silver colonnades. It's a camera phone.
    The Doctor: On the counter by the DVDs.
    Amy: Thank you.

    (From 6-10 "The Girl Who Waited") The line in question is part of the main promo commercial that my local PBS station currently uses, so I get to hear it a lot.

    --
    #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  53. Re:Duh. by jxander · · Score: 1

    Knock Knock.
    Who's there?
    Doctor.
    Doctor Who?.
    Correct

    --
    This signature is false.
  54. Re:Duh. by war4peace · · Score: 1

    You only know it's about the show AFTER you read the summary. The title doesn't tell you that at all.
    Sadly, I am not really familiar with the show either :)

    --
    ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
  55. How dare he suggest that we think? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't agree with him, but there is merit to the idea of being careful. No one can argue that "social media" has literally changed society, and the good will come with the bad. Historians will probably teach that it had as big an effect as widespread acceptance of the car: had a lot of benefits to society, and caused some problems as well.

    Either way - Isn't Matt Smith now a former doctor technically?

  56. hello by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    where did anyone say it was "a guiding principle for his life"?

  57. Re:Unfortunately, not all of us have that choice.. by jones_supa · · Score: 1

    A few years back when I was looking for work out of college, virtually every prospective employer asked to be friended, or asked what my FB/Twitter/etc. accounts were. When I told them that I didn't bother to spill my guts online to all and sundry, the interview was terminated, and was told something along the lines of , "no FB account is like not having a phone or E-mail address, and we don't want any useless Luddites blocking progress in our company."

    I suspect you are lying.

  58. Re:Duh. by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

    Except "Doctor Who" is just a common response to the character's name "The Doctor"

    Oh, it's a lot more than that now. See link in my sig for more information ;)

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  59. Re:Duh. by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

    That's poor use of a comma. "I helped my Uncle Jack get off a horse." Simple.

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  60. Re:Duh. by gmuslera · · Score: 1

    Is amazing how much can progress in life a baseball player

  61. Re:Duh. by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

    Knock knock.
    Who's there?
    The Interrupting Cow.
    The Interrupti-
    MOO!

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  62. Rule One by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

    The Doctor Lies.

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  63. Ironic by KingTank · · Score: 1

    ...coming from an actor.

  64. Re:Unfortunately, not all of us have that choice.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're making shit up.

    Real companies will ask for Linkedin accounts if anything. I've been looking for a job for a month now and I haven't even heard the word 'Facebook' in the dozen interviews I've been on.

  65. Re:Don't use non-MS products by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At least he can spell "paedophile" correctly so that it refers to child lover rather than foot fetishist!

  66. Re:Duh. by lgw · · Score: 1

    That's only relevant in-character. To the outside world, the character is "Doctor Who", like it or not. Doesn't help any that for a few years his costume included question marks on the collars, at JNT's insistence - the battle was lost in the Baker years.

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  67. Just the Opposite by wisnoskij · · Score: 1

    Every single celebrity I have ever social networked with online has completely broken any celebrity preconceptions I had.
    You, the fan, should not add any celebrities you really like to your FB or twitter feed. As it is impossible to keep the celebrity mystique without writing and CGI staff.

    I was so disappointed after adding Riddlick that I unfollowed him.
    And it was only last week that I got into an argument with the writer/designer of Babylon 5 on FB. And I came away from that with far less respect for him as a writer, if also more because he is so willing to interact with the fans.
    And then Sulu posted the most offensive thing I had ever read on the Internet earlier this month on FB.

    --
    Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
  68. Just wow! by he-sk · · Score: 1

    An actor who is afraid that other people play out their acting fantasies.

    What a dick.

    --
    Free Manning, jail Obama.
  69. Re:Duh. by MMC+Monster · · Score: 1

    Except "Doctor Who" is just a common response to the character's name "The Doctor" so to those familiar with the show, your parsing still makes more sense.

    Except that in that case the who is superfluous (it makes it sound as if there's a line of doctors waiting for their turn to warn us about Facebook). It should be "Current Doctor Warns Against Facebook". Which makes me wonder who gets a doctorate in current...

    --
    Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
  70. The Doctor Helps His Fans Find Reality by ioconnor · · Score: 1

    It would be great if more people did not use facebook and twitter. Hopefully The Doctor will help influence more people to break free and live in the real world.

  71. Re:Unfortunately, not all of us have that choice.. by flimflammer · · Score: 1

    You for real? Does no one remember the "Give us your facebook password so we can log into your account and look through all your posts and friends to clear you as a potential employer" shit that was going around, which actual *laws* were created in the US to stop?

  72. Re: Duh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, it's like you kill one, and the next one regenerates and carries right on preaching against social networking. Weird, huh?

  73. Re:Unfortunately, not all of us have that choice.. by HappyHead · · Score: 1

    You do realize that Facebook has fallen in popularity a lot since things like Linkedin and G+ came into existence, right? Those things weren't always around, and before they existed, a lot of places would demand access to their potential employees' facebook pages. There were even slashdot articles about what to do when an employer demanded access to your facebook password, like this one and this one

  74. I agree. by Molochi · · Score: 1

    Though I would think that if I were a successful TV actor, that my publicist or assistant would be charged with maintaining a Twitter feed and an official Facebook page for me. I would expect to use social media as a revenue stream just like any other official public appearance or interview.

    --
    "The Adobe Updater must update itself before it can check for updates. Would you like to update the Adobe Updater now?"
  75. Despite being a geek? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Using facebook or twitter doesn't make you a geek... at all. You're just casual scum.

  76. Matt Smith? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Nay... Matt Smith is *NOT* the current Doctor. Someone needs to catch up. ;)

  77. Re:Duh. by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Apart from in the Vincent Price version where he introduces himself with the line "I am Doctor Who", but most people who've seen that movie like to file it with Highlander 2 and other things that were a waste of film.

  78. Peter Cushing by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Wrong actor - Peter Cushing was the doctor in a couple of movies with terrible scripts.

  79. Re:Unfortunately, not all of us have that choice.. by dbIII · · Score: 1

    No, real HR people will ask for whatever fad they are into - don't make the mistake of thinking of them as "professionals" no matter which company they infest.
    They keep saying things like "we need facebook to check out prospective employees", which is a pretty bad way to to it IMHO, but that's irrelevant since the logs show they are playing the facebook games for half the day instead.

  80. Stalkerbook by dbIII · · Score: 1

    I DO think they have their uses, such as Facebook finding old friends you lost touch with years ago

    There's an IT crowd episode about the downside of that.

  81. Re:Unfortunately, not all of us have that choice.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It was so useful to you, that you made a dummy account, on the hope that someone else made a real account?

  82. Re:Duh. by aled · · Score: 1

    Outside world? what outside world?

    --

    "I think this line is mostly filler"
  83. ow by jgarry · · Score: 1
    --
    Oracle and unix guy.
  84. Re:Duh. by singingjim1 · · Score: 1

    LOL! Don't bust on Dr. Who (cares) on \. or you'll get modded into the hospital boiler room. My post was neither overrated nor troll-ish. I was just pointing out that the story is a non-story about someone who is obviously out of touch with what social media is to a lot of people that aren't him.

  85. Re:Unfortunately, not all of us have that choice.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    where he hosted the final of Microsoft's

    How convent he says this at a MS convention, a company that has nothing in the form of a social site, like facebook or twitter. And he knows no matter what he says or does because he is a celebrity they'll just eat it up.
    I do agree with what he says about people creating alter egos to impress people, but that is few and far between...

  86. Re:Unfortunately, not all of us have that choice.. by kannibal_klown · · Score: 1

    It was so useful to you, that you made a dummy account, on the hope that someone else made a real account?

    Honestly, yeh.

    It was an old friend of mine and we lost track after college, she was a pretty social person and FaceBook sounded like the thing she'd be into. I tried looking her up via the normal route such as white pages and stuff and asking a couple of people that knew her. When I didn't have any luck I tried FaceBook but still never managed to get in touch.

    That's as far as I took it though. I figured if she was off the grid enough to not be found via the normal non-stalker-ish methods she probably had her reasons.

  87. It's not about me by Mozai · · Score: 1

    I left Facebook months ago, but I'm seriously considering returning. Not because I have something to say or to prove (as Matt Smith warns against), but because I have too many people in my life who use Facebook as the sole means of communication.

    By leaving Facebook behind, I've left friends behind, and some are family. Should I ask them to double their efforts just for my sake? Would they double their efforts for the sake of one person that doesn't participate in a free service?

    Facebook disgusts me, but if I want to stay in touch with friends or family, it seems to be a necessary evil.

  88. Twitter and Facebook not that great by Mabhatter · · Score: 1

    I've had accounts on both for years, just to be sociable and not be a digital hermit, but never felt any particular need to update them for fans (or even family) Like ever.

    Because more adult people feel like him, they started tying everything to "online identity" to grab more data. I find the current practice of tying other services to the big 4 revolting especially when they start trying to cross populate your Slashdot posts on your twitter feed or Facebook... NOBODY CARES about my Slashdot posts on facebook, certainly not my family, and I certainly don't appreciate features enabled without proper notification.

  89. Save Us Doctor! by arctother · · Score: 1

    Score another point for the Doctor. So just what evil force is it that runs Facebook? The cybermen? The Daleks are out because we already know they are behind apple. Witness the iDaleks of the new series, and the fact that the late chairman of apple was obviously Davros himself: http://cheezburger.com/4659524352

  90. Re:Unfortunately, not all of us have that choice.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anonymous_Coward pokes kannibal_klown.