Overheard on Facebook

[dandarc]

I have the kind of job that when push comes to shove, is completely unnecessary on any given day.

That about sums it up for me.

[ixtap]

There isn't much that can be done with the highway and rails washed out. I tried to get around traffic on 101 once. Ended up taking a long, scenic drive through the mountains. Google takes an enormous detour to get south, passing just shy of Bakersfield in the desert. Air is the only other alternative, and I doubt they are going to get that to cheaper than $32/trip.

The price is only very slightly less than a whale watching tour, but I bet they do the whole trip at gas guzzling speeds, without any tooling around looking for whale spouts and flippers. It looks like people might be finding arrangements on the other end, as the Friday evening ferry is already booked up.

[zolotiyeruki]

Heh, here's an idea:  Since the highway is closed anyway, just use a stretch on either side of the mudslide as a pair of temporary runways.  Get the FAA to grant a waiver so that anyone with a private plane can take passengers for hire, and let them puddle-jump from one side of the slide to the other.  It's only about a mile across the exclusion zone, so a plane could hop back and forth every 10 minutes.  Hire the same air traffic controllers they use for the EAA fly-in in Oshkosh, and let 'er rip.  Send planes every 20 seconds.  Let the pilots charge $10/passenger, charge them $1/passenger to cover ATC, and you're off to a good start.

I vote for a bunch of Twin Otters.  I got to ride on one once, and they're an amazing aircraft :)

[ixtap]

Heh, here's an idea:  Since the highway is closed anyway, just use a stretch on either side of the mudslide as a pair of temporary runways.  Get the FAA to grant a waiver so that anyone with a private plane can take passengers for hire, and let them puddle-jump from one side of the slide to the other.  It's only about a mile across the exclusion zone, so a plane could hop back and forth every 10 minutes.  Hire the same air traffic controllers they use for the EAA fly-in in Oshkosh, and let 'er rip.  Send planes every 20 seconds.  Let the pilots charge $10/passenger, charge them $1/passenger to cover ATC, and you're off to a good start.

I vote for a bunch of Twin Otters.  I got to ride on one once, and they're an amazing aircraft :)

At $10/passenger, who is paying the pilot? A quick google search suggests that 19 passengers at $10 would barely cover fuel, much less other costs. Even a non profit can't operate at a loss without a generous benefactor.

[frugalnacho]

It's where I learned that racoons can be trapped just by getting them stuck- they will close their fist on something and then not have the wherewithall to let go if they can't get their arm out of the hole they reached it in.  That's apparently true.

haha, they are as dumb as homer.

[Uturn]

Heh, here's an idea:  Since the highway is closed anyway, just use a stretch on either side of the mudslide as a pair of temporary runways.  Get the FAA to grant a waiver so that anyone with a private plane can take passengers for hire, and let them puddle-jump from one side of the slide to the other.  It's only about a mile across the exclusion zone, so a plane could hop back and forth every 10 minutes.  Hire the same air traffic controllers they use for the EAA fly-in in Oshkosh, and let 'er rip.  Send planes every 20 seconds.  Let the pilots charge $10/passenger, charge them $1/passenger to cover ATC, and you're off to a good start.

I vote for a bunch of Twin Otters.  I got to ride on one once, and they're an amazing aircraft :)

As someone who holds a private pilot license, I can say there is good reason that pilots and planes for hire have much more stringent requirements. 

[mm1970]

Back to overheard on FB.

Some of you may have heard of our recent wildfire, then our more recent rains and terrible mudslides.  They are still looking for missing people.

Due to the slides, the highway is closed to the south.  For many many days.  So, nobody who lives there can get to work.

Well I've read at least one complaint about the 2 boat companies (who usually do day trips or whale watching) who have set up ferries to get people to and from.  For approx $32 each way.  The complaint is "that is too expensive", "people cannot afford that", "they could build good will by offering the services for free".

I get why the boat companies are doing this, but $64/ day in minimum transport cost (not including cost to get to the ferries and then to get from the ferries to where ever they are working) really isn't possible for most people. I hope someone is working on an alternative way to get people in and out of the area.

There is quite literally no way to get 20,000 people to and from the town every day by boat anyway.  Or any way other than the freeway.

The $64 is probably close to being at cost, and is also a number that means they have fully booked days in advance.  What is means is the people who HAVE to be at work can get there.  There are people who can afford it.  There are companies who are willing to pay for their employees to take the boat.

One alternative is to drive "around" (through Central valley, skirting Bakersfield, coming in from the north).  Google says the the normally 30 mile drive would be 258 miles and 4 hours and 30 minutes.

Some people have chosen to do that and get a hotel.  Enough of our production employees are stuck, and so some of our areas are shut down.

A few people have been able to get flights, and the hospital has paid for flights for a few key employees.

Yesterday Amtrak reopened.  The schedule isn't great, but it's only $32 round trip.

[OneStep]

One week before Christmas:

Sisters Post: Look what my Mommy got for Christmas!!! (Insert picture of brand new 2018 Honda CR-V)

My Reply: Awesome! My car will need replacing in 5-7 years so I will buy this when I'm ready. (Current Car: 1997 Honda CR-V that my Mom purchased brand new in 1996. Bought that from her when she was ready for another new vehicle in 2001. I still drive it. Sitting at 246,000 miles and running strong. Might have to replace a timing belt again, but I've already done that myself twice. Why not a 3rd time.)

Mom's Reply: I will put it in my will that it will go to you! (Mom is 62 and in great health. I'm taking this as a positive that she is going to live a long and healthy life and change her ways and not purchase any new vehicles. Doubt it though...this is her 3rd brand new car since I bought her CR-V in 2001.)

Talked with my Mom yesterday asking why she got a new car. Says my Dad pressured her because her last car's warranty was up. I could tell she knew they was making dumb car decisions, but she said she didn't care enough not to do it. I guess it's good she is a least aware of it.

Got a text the other day saying that my Dad has been fired from his job. Luckily he has been expecting it and has something lined up. Apparently he had been causing a lot of issues with his supervisors because he didn't like they way they were running things. They had grounds, for unrelated reasons, to terminate and they did. On one hand I'm glad he stood up for what he thinks is right and on the other I think he is crazy for buying a new car for my Mom when he thought this could be a possibility.

[katscratch]

Coonhound as was said earlier is a group of breeds in the larger hound group of dogs - bred for game hunting, specifically raccoons. Nothing to do with the other phrase.

This is what I was confused about. I've never heard of racoons being called just coons, so when I saw a dog breed called coonhound (& you guys are from the US) I assumed it was a dog bred to hunt people back in the day. And I thought that was weird that you'd still call those dogs coonhounds.

Oh gosh, yes, that would be mortifying. To me, anyway.

OneStep that's unfortunate on the timing and purchase of the new car. I'm glad your dad has something lined up though.

[zolotiyeruki]

Heh, here's an idea:  Since the highway is closed anyway, just use a stretch on either side of the mudslide as a pair of temporary runways.  Get the FAA to grant a waiver so that anyone with a private plane can take passengers for hire, and let them puddle-jump from one side of the slide to the other.  It's only about a mile across the exclusion zone, so a plane could hop back and forth every 10 minutes.  Hire the same air traffic controllers they use for the EAA fly-in in Oshkosh, and let 'er rip.  Send planes every 20 seconds.  Let the pilots charge $10/passenger, charge them $1/passenger to cover ATC, and you're off to a good start.

I vote for a bunch of Twin Otters.  I got to ride on one once, and they're an amazing aircraft :)

At $10/passenger, who is paying the pilot? A quick google search suggests that 19 passengers at $10 would barely cover fuel, much less other costs. Even a non profit can't operate at a loss without a generous benefactor.

We're talking about a flight that covers a couple miles at most, so the cost of fuel and engine time gets amortized across a lot of passengers, leaving lots left for the pilot.

[JLee]

Heh, here's an idea:  Since the highway is closed anyway, just use a stretch on either side of the mudslide as a pair of temporary runways.  Get the FAA to grant a waiver so that anyone with a private plane can take passengers for hire, and let them puddle-jump from one side of the slide to the other.  It's only about a mile across the exclusion zone, so a plane could hop back and forth every 10 minutes.  Hire the same air traffic controllers they use for the EAA fly-in in Oshkosh, and let 'er rip.  Send planes every 20 seconds.  Let the pilots charge $10/passenger, charge them $1/passenger to cover ATC, and you're off to a good start.

I vote for a bunch of Twin Otters.  I got to ride on one once, and they're an amazing aircraft :)

At $10/passenger, who is paying the pilot? A quick google search suggests that 19 passengers at $10 would barely cover fuel, much less other costs. Even a non profit can't operate at a loss without a generous benefactor.

We're talking about a flight that covers a couple miles at most, so the cost of fuel and engine time gets amortized across a lot of passengers, leaving lots left for the pilot.

The most common private plane has four seats, including the pilot.

Asking a bunch of non-commercial pilots to make trips ferrying passengers between improvised runways is a recipe for disaster, IMO.

[PMG]

Not money related but ...

[dragoncar]

Not money related but ...

Hilarious, but did you really overhear that or is it a forward from grandma?

[PMG]

Not money related but ...

Hilarious, but did you really overhear that or is it a forward from grandma?

I overheard it as much as you can overhear anything on facebook.  A friend who lives in Oconee County shared it directly from the police department who posted it about 14 hours before I posted it here.   

ETA more from the sheriff’s department.  Not sure if this is new found fame, but someone there has some snark going on all day.

[katscratch]

Those are hilarious :)

[I'm a red panda]

I liked the Wisconsin comment.

[merula]

I liked the Wisconsin comment.

Ditto. To be fair, the comment is accurate, though we never seem to point out to those outside the Frozen North that we all forget how to drive in the snow and the first storm of the season is insane.

[I'm a red panda]

I liked the Wisconsin comment.

Ditto. To be fair, the comment is accurate, though we never seem to point out to those outside the Frozen North that we all forget how to drive in the snow and the first storm of the season is insane.

Well by now midwesterners have all remembered how to drive again.

[katscratch]

I liked the Wisconsin comment.

Ditto. To be fair, the comment is accurate, though we never seem to point out to those outside the Frozen North that we all forget how to drive in the snow and the first storm of the season is insane.

Well by now midwesterners have all remembered how to drive again.

Judging from my commute yesterday, not in the city they haven't :/

[merula]

Judging from my commute yesterday, not in the city they haven't :/

Which city? I almost never car commute, but had to go from downtown St. Paul to St. Louis Park and back at rush hour and I didn't have any problems.

[havregryn]

I joined a group on Facebook called "Minimalist mom". OK, by now I really get it that there are enormous differences in perceptions of space between the US and Europe but still I really can't help not chuckle reading all these discussions by MINIMALIST moms who think that living in less than 2000 square feet borders on impossible and requires extreme sacrifice.
Meanwhile only about 5% of all houses advertised for sale here where I am have more than that since 2000 sq feet and those all fairly rural, in the city this is unheard of.

I think it's a bit silly in the whole minimalist vibe, other than that I completely get it. I come from a place where 500 square feet is supposedly perfectly fine for a family of 4-5, and I could not do it now that I got used to a slightly better standard. It's funny (or sad) how primed humans get by what they know best.

But to insist you're a minimalist but require 3000 square feet of space for all your stuff, what!?

[Mississippi Mudstache]

I understand your confusion, but Google is your friend in situations like this.

Did you even read the original comment that started this conversation?

Yes. In you first comment, you said you googled it, but then you said this:

I've never heard of racoons being called just coons, so when I saw a dog breed called coonhound (& you guys are from the US) I assumed it was a dog bred to hunt people back in the day. And I thought that was weird that you'd still call those dogs coonhounds.

If you had actually read the Wikipedia articles on coonhounds or coon hunting, it should have been clear that there were no racial overtones implied. So maybe you used Google, but not very effectively.

[Mississippi Mudstache]

Not money related but ...

Hilarious, but did you really overhear that or is it a forward from grandma?

I overheard it as much as you can overhear anything on facebook.  A friend who lives in Oconee County shared it directly from the police department who posted it about 14 hours before I posted it here.   

ETA more from the sheriff’s department.  Not sure if this is new found fame, but someone there has some snark going on all day.

I work in Oconee County. The sheriff is a national treasure. He's been posting stuff like this on their Facebook page for years. He's only recently been noticed by the national media, and his page has been quoted on CNN on many occasions in the past year.

[katscratch]

Judging from my commute yesterday, not in the city they haven't :/

Which city? I almost never car commute, but had to go from downtown St. Paul to St. Louis Park and back at rush hour and I didn't have any problems.

I was biking the side streets (so, not fully plowed yet) mostly in south Minneapolis from St Paul and kept seeing cars sliding at intersections. The stop sign by my house was knocked down that day, too! I was genuinely surprised at how people kept driving as if they were on the plowed/salted roadways.

[partgypsy]

Oh my. That was me making the original coon comment, and I did not think of any racial overtone to that. If used in that context, I would think it is an old reference, not currently used (I've never heard anyone actually use that term, though I have heard in person the "n" word.

The actual breed referenced by the test was treeing walker coonhound, but apparently there are many kinds. One of the reasons I wanted to test him was that 2 different people asked me if he was plotthound or part plotthound. So I looked it up. He is brindled with a black saddle, but has long hair (not a characteristic of plotthounds) but I became curious enough to test him.
He has an incredible nose. One time I was walking him and he sniffed out a rat hidden over 50 feet away (and killed it).  Killed another rat hiding in our back porch. Have found a dead raccoon and a dead (enormous) possum in our yard. However is sweet (and smart enough) to be friends with our cat. Between our cat killing mice and voles, and our dog, our daughter calls our yard "the kill zone". 

[Just Joe]

Beautiful dog!

[partgypsy]

Beautiful dog!

thanks!

[coldestcat]

oops this shouldve been in the overheard at work..
the thing thats been annoying me lately on fb is a lot of the frugal groups ive been looking at have very anti-mustachian questions popping up. I feel like to get on these forums you would have read some amount of the articles and gotten the theme of the site. This is not the case for fb groups I guess, because people are asking how to fund many "necessary" things that I wouldnt call necessary.

[MBot]

I joined a group on Facebook called "Minimalist mom". OK, by now I really get it that there are enormous differences in perceptions of space between the US and Europe but still I really can't help not chuckle reading all these discussions by MINIMALIST moms who think that living in less than 2000 square feet borders on impossible and requires extreme sacrifice.
Meanwhile only about 5% of all houses advertised for sale here where I am have more than that since 2000 sq feet and those all fairly rural, in the city this is unheard of.

I think it's a bit silly in the whole minimalist vibe, other than that I completely get it. I come from a place where 500 square feet is supposedly perfectly fine for a family of 4-5, and I could not do it now that I got used to a slightly better standard. It's funny (or sad) how primed humans get by what they know best.

But to insist you're a minimalist but require 3000 square feet of space for all your stuff, what!?

I joined the same one recently and found the same. Another one called "minimalist mom advanced" is better, however.

[FireHiker]

I joined a group on Facebook called "Minimalist mom". OK, by now I really get it that there are enormous differences in perceptions of space between the US and Europe but still I really can't help not chuckle reading all these discussions by MINIMALIST moms who think that living in less than 2000 square feet borders on impossible and requires extreme sacrifice.
Meanwhile only about 5% of all houses advertised for sale here where I am have more than that since 2000 sq feet and those all fairly rural, in the city this is unheard of.

I think it's a bit silly in the whole minimalist vibe, other than that I completely get it. I come from a place where 500 square feet is supposedly perfectly fine for a family of 4-5, and I could not do it now that I got used to a slightly better standard. It's funny (or sad) how primed humans get by what they know best.

But to insist you're a minimalist but require 3000 square feet of space for all your stuff, what!?

I joined the same one recently and found the same. Another one called "minimalist mom advanced" is better, however.

I just came here to post about something I saw on the same group. Someone asked what people thought about 401ks, and there are people chiming in about it isn't worth it because the government will appropriate everyone's savings and it's better to just be a prepper (I'm paraphrasing). WTF? Perhaps I should consider the other group that MBot recommended. The "minimalism" in that group is such a joke; it's more people looking for interior decorating recommendations.

[Sibley]

oops this shouldve been in the overheard at work..
the thing thats been annoying me lately on fb is a lot of the frugal groups ive been looking at have very anti-mustachian questions popping up. I feel like to get on these forums you would have read some amount of the articles and gotten the theme of the site. This is not the case for fb groups I guess, because people are asking how to fund many "necessary" things that I wouldnt call necessary.

And that is 50% of why I don't follow any of the FB groups. The other 50% is because there was a string of questions asking how to do something that is actually illegal/generally considered unethical/actually going to cause harm to someone, and there were multiple people who were ok with it. And they got really mad at me when I pointed it out. So I ditched them. I won't be part of that.

[former player]

oops this shouldve been in the overheard at work..
the thing thats been annoying me lately on fb is a lot of the frugal groups ive been looking at have very anti-mustachian questions popping up. I feel like to get on these forums you would have read some amount of the articles and gotten the theme of the site. This is not the case for fb groups I guess, because people are asking how to fund many "necessary" things that I wouldnt call necessary.

And that is 50% of why I don't follow any of the FB groups. The other 50% is because there was a string of questions asking how to do something that is actually illegal/generally considered unethical/actually going to cause harm to someone, and there were multiple people who were ok with it. And they got really mad at me when I pointed it out. So I ditched them. I won't be part of that.

I've decided I won't be part of Facebook at all: any organisation so unrepentant about accepting payment in roubles for adverts that try to subvert democratic elections is not an organisation I'm prepared to put my name to in any way, shape or form.

[jinga nation]

oops this shouldve been in the overheard at work..
the thing thats been annoying me lately on fb is a lot of the frugal groups ive been looking at have very anti-mustachian questions popping up. I feel like to get on these forums you would have read some amount of the articles and gotten the theme of the site. This is not the case for fb groups I guess, because people are asking how to fund many "necessary" things that I wouldnt call necessary.

And that is 50% of why I don't follow any of the FB groups. The other 50% is because there was a string of questions asking how to do something that is actually illegal/generally considered unethical/actually going to cause harm to someone, and there were multiple people who were ok with it. And they got really mad at me when I pointed it out. So I ditched them. I won't be part of that.

I've decided I won't be part of Facebook at all: any organisation so unrepentant about accepting payment in roubles for adverts that try to subvert democratic elections is not an organisation I'm prepared to put my name to in any way, shape or form.

I quit FB ~4 years back, cold turkey. FB was using my photos in product/services ads. Multiple times. Many friends and family let me know, and then I saw my pics in ads targeted to me. I was tired of their constant dicking of privacy policies which would set my options to default aka share permissions enabled globally. That was the last straw, I refused to be the product being sold. Nothing's free; FB data mines like crazy.

What FB is: https://imgur.com/gallery/WiOMq

This is how I prefer my FaceBook (and now irrelevant MySpace): http://zitscomics.com/comics/july-10-2007/

[birdman2003]

Even though I'm no longer on Facebook due to several reasons, I enjoy reading this thread!

[Just Joe]

https://www.cbsnews.com/video/brain-hacking-chief-of-chobani-japans-babe-ruth/

Watched the brain hacking segment. No, won't let them tinker with my brain.

[shelivesthedream]

My husband quit Facebook recently and loves it. I stopped posting anything except the odd link ages ago, but I'm still on it because I don't have a checking addiction (unlike, um, this forum :P) and there are some groups that are really useful for work. Im sure I've mentioned this before, but it's been so good for me that I'll say it again: try unfollowing everyone on your news feed.

Top right of all the posts, just click the arrow and unfollow that person. After a week or so, you'll end up with a blank newsfeed. It's brilliant! Nothing to idly scroll through but if you want to go and look at any particular person or group you're still friends with them. If you really miss having anyone particular in your newsfeed you can re-follow them after a while but you don't have to be assaulted by the holiday photos or political opinions of people you're moderately acquainted with. Anyone still on Facebook should really try it! It maximises the benefits of the site (simple connections with people and useful groups) and minimises the downsides (timesuck temptations and inadequate distinguishing between close friends and distant acquaintances).

[jinga nation]

My husband quit Facebook recently and loves it.

... try unfollowing everyone on your news feed.

Top right of all the posts, just click the arrow and unfollow that person. After a week or so, you'll end up with a blank newsfeed. It's brilliant! Nothing to idly scroll through but if you want to go and look at any particular person or group you're still friends with them. If you really miss having anyone particular in your newsfeed you can re-follow them after a while but you don't have to be assaulted by the holiday photos or political opinions of people you're moderately acquainted with. Anyone still on Facebook should really try it! It maximises the benefits of the site (simple connections with people and useful groups) and minimises the downsides (timesuck temptations and inadequate distinguishing between close friends and distant acquaintances).

Good man!

If you unfollow everyone, what's the point of having a FB account? Unless you want to "peep and scan". Far easier to let it all go and delete account. There is no benefit of FB, you're the product, your data is sold or leveraged for advertising. Everything in FB is a downside.

Here's 98 data points collected about you by Facebook (this was in 2016, will be more in 2018): https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2016/08/19/98-personal-data-points-that-facebook-uses-to-target-ads-to-you/?utm_term=.6d514a897422

Here's a pretty good summary of how Facebook uses your data:

The funny thing is that Facebook doesn’t steal your information. Rather, you willingly share it with Facebook. You have told Facebook all about yourself, your location, your job, your friends, and also your relationship. You have also given away what your favorite movies are, which sports teams you support, and which school you went to.

You must’ve seen advertisements popping up on your profile based on something you are your friends have liked, or based on a Google search you recently performed. Ever wondered how Facebook does this?

It is actually simple. When you sign up for an account on Facebook, a tracking cookie is inserted into your web browser for collecting every data that you share online or offline. This data is sold to Facebook’s advertising partners so they could show ads more relevant to you. And that’s not all.

Facebook can also recognize you or your friends from the pictures that you upload, and it can also do so even with pictures that you upload elsewhere on the web. This is because of the ‘face recognition’ capabilities that Facebook uses.

Now when you think of it does this make you uncomfortable? If it does, you are not to blame. Facebook goes beyond merely analyzing your profile data to completely tracking you across the web. If you log onto Facebook and then log onto other websites, Facebook knows this.

Moreover, most people don’t know how these things work, so when they find out how Facebook exploits their private information, they are surprised and scared. Some of the most controversial ways Facebook has used its users private data over the years were documented by Time Magazine back in 2014.

Source: https://thevpn.guru/how-facebook-uses-private-data/

[marielle]

My husband quit Facebook recently and loves it.

... try unfollowing everyone on your news feed.

Top right of all the posts, just click the arrow and unfollow that person. After a week or so, you'll end up with a blank newsfeed. It's brilliant! Nothing to idly scroll through but if you want to go and look at any particular person or group you're still friends with them. If you really miss having anyone particular in your newsfeed you can re-follow them after a while but you don't have to be assaulted by the holiday photos or political opinions of people you're moderately acquainted with. Anyone still on Facebook should really try it! It maximises the benefits of the site (simple connections with people and useful groups) and minimises the downsides (timesuck temptations and inadequate distinguishing between close friends and distant acquaintances).

Good man!

If you unfollow everyone, what's the point of having a FB account? Unless you want to "peep and scan". Far easier to let it all go and delete account. There is no benefit of FB, you're the product, your data is sold or leveraged for advertising. Everything in FB is a downside.

I want to agree...but I've received a lot of benefits from groups. Facebook is the biggest source for local vegan events and other information on dining out and such. I've met a couple people through there. My fraternity also has events on their page and updates on new members. Also, apparently the D&D group at my local game shop has a page too, which I still need to join. Last week our usual day was canceled and I had no idea that they moved it to the day after because I wasn't on the page.

Also, it's the best way I currently have to talk to my grandma who is in Ukraine and speaks no English. I don't know if she would be able to figure out how to use something completely different. Same with a couple other friends, though I could reasonably contact them in another way--I just might not receive responses as promptly.

[Zikoris]

Good man!

If you unfollow everyone, what's the point of having a FB account? Unless you want to "peep and scan". Far easier to let it all go and delete account. There is no benefit of FB, you're the product, your data is sold or leveraged for advertising. Everything in FB is a downside.

Here's 98 data points collected about you by Facebook (this was in 2016, will be more in 2018): https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2016/08/19/98-personal-data-points-that-facebook-uses-to-target-ads-to-you/?utm_term=.6d514a897422

Some of those are pretty funny. "80. Users who buy groceries" - oh shit, they're on to me! That was my biggest secret!

[shelivesthedream]

My husband quit Facebook recently and loves it.

... try unfollowing everyone on your news feed.

Top right of all the posts, just click the arrow and unfollow that person. After a week or so, you'll end up with a blank newsfeed. It's brilliant! Nothing to idly scroll through but if you want to go and look at any particular person or group you're still friends with them. If you really miss having anyone particular in your newsfeed you can re-follow them after a while but you don't have to be assaulted by the holiday photos or political opinions of people you're moderately acquainted with. Anyone still on Facebook should really try it! It maximises the benefits of the site (simple connections with people and useful groups) and minimises the downsides (timesuck temptations and inadequate distinguishing between close friends and distant acquaintances).

Good man!

If you unfollow everyone, what's the point of having a FB account? Unless you want to "peep and scan". Far easier to let it all go and delete account. There is no benefit of FB, you're the product, your data is sold or leveraged for advertising. Everything in FB is a downside.

I want to agree...but I've received a lot of benefits from groups. Facebook is the biggest source for local vegan events and other information on dining out and such. I've met a couple people through there. My fraternity also has events on their page and updates on new members. Also, apparently the D&D group at my local game shop has a page too, which I still need to join. Last week our usual day was canceled and I had no idea that they moved it to the day after because I wasn't on the page.

Also, it's the best way I currently have to talk to my grandma who is in Ukraine and speaks no English. I don't know if she would be able to figure out how to use something completely different. Same with a couple other friends, though I could reasonably contact them in another way--I just might not receive responses as promptly.

Well, two reasons. First, it's a transitional step to quitting. My husband unfollowed everyone first because it's not as final as quitting so it's easier to do. I think it's a really helpful suggestion for people who quail at the idea of going cold turkey.

Second, as marielle said, there are lots of really great groups that are only on Facebook. I am in four very active groups related to my professional freelance work and one related to a hobby of mine. I've had excellent advice on there and even found work through those groups. I'm not concerned about Facebook mining my data any more because I don't put any personal stuff on there. I'm pregnant and Facebook has no idea we're having a baby, and probably never will. I have moderate concerns about all the stuff I've already posted on there but it's not like I believe they'll delete it if I delete my account, so what can I do.

[Rowellen]

I find I don't mind the advertising on Facebook. It's a company. It needs to make money. I can tell Facebook that I don't like certain ads and they listen. I can ignore most of what comes up now quite easily. I'd rather have targeted ads than a series of ads about stuff I find annoying or offensive. Most of what I get now is clickbait articles. I don't mind because it provides a bit of a laugh when I'm bored at work. Google does the same thing. I was looking for something at a store website and later that day the exact items I had looked at came up in an ad in the sidebar of another website. As far as I know, I don't have the option to tell Google I'm not actually interested in those items.  Maybe I can. I don't know. I find it highly amusing that a page I googled when looking for a Christmas present for my husband now comes up as an ad on a game I play on my phone.

[RidetheRain]

I find I don't mind the advertising on Facebook. It's a company. It needs to make money. I can tell Facebook that I don't like certain ads and they listen.

I'm a little biased since I work in the type of analytics that goes into these targetted ads, but I think they are just too cool. As facebook refines their algorithms and I provide them more information about my interests I get better and better ads that I actually want to click on. This is a win-win scenario so far as I am concerned. I know there are drawbacks in terms of security and the "creep" factor. The security is less dangerous than you would normally think because the data is already provided as you have given that information about yourself away for free anyway. The targeted ads are just looking at the data you've already provided in clever ways. The creep factor can't be helped. Either you marvel at the data scientists and technology or you find it weird and uncomfortable. I recommend taking a statistics class (or several) to get rid of the feeling (or shift the creepy feeling from technology to math).

[RFAAOATB]

Is there a way television could move into the targeted advertising business by switching to internet streaming, and having the same shows but different content for advertising breaks?  If I'm watching TV during the daytime, I don't want all these old people and trailer trash ads just because they are the demographics most likely to be watching daytime TV.

Plus you could sell a premium option which replaces ad breaks with background muzak, nature scenes, and a countdown clock.

[Rowellen]

I find I don't mind the advertising on Facebook. It's a company. It needs to make money. I can tell Facebook that I don't like certain ads and they listen.

I'm a little biased since I work in the type of analytics that goes into these targetted ads, but I think they are just too cool. As facebook refines their algorithms and I provide them more information about my interests I get better and better ads that I actually want to click on. This is a win-win scenario so far as I am concerned. I know there are drawbacks in terms of security and the "creep" factor. The security is less dangerous than you would normally think because the data is already provided as you have given that information about yourself away for free anyway. The targeted ads are just looking at the data you've already provided in clever ways. The creep factor can't be helped. Either you marvel at the data scientists and technology or you find it weird and uncomfortable. I recommend taking a statistics class (or several) to get rid of the feeling (or shift the creepy feeling from technology to math).

Agreed. I think its quite clever and win win win for all. While slightly disturbing when considering how big brother could use the technology, I don't see it as creepy. It's not like there's some sweaty overweight man sitting in a dark room and jerking off to our info. It's all computers. I assume (maybe stupidly) that the advertisers don't actually know who is seeing their ads. It's all about the numbers. I also assume that fb doesn't actually give a shit about me personally except as a money making number. From a small business point of view, I have considered advertising on Facebook. I haven't yet but if I do, it pleases me to know that I can choose only local area peeps to see it and that I won't be paying for random people all over the world to see it when it's no good to them or us.

[shelivesthedream]

Oh yeah, and I also have Adblock for Chrome so barely see any adverts on Facebook (or, indeed, anywhere else). I would really recommend it! Every time I go on another computer now I'm startled by all the huge, blaring adverts.

[Rowellen]

I left the location on on my phone while at the shop. Now my phone/google is asking me to rate the store I was at. I found it amusing.

[ohsnap]

I just came here to post about something I saw on the same group. Someone asked what people thought about 401ks, and there are people chiming in about it isn't worth it because the government will appropriate everyone's savings and it's better to just be a prepper (I'm paraphrasing). WTF? ...

I follow a FB group on the topic of food storage/home canning/prepping/etc.  The view you mentioned is pretty common in this group!  They believe food storage leads to financial security.  Folks tell stories like, "My husband lost his job for 6 months, and we would have starved if I hadn't stockpiled 87 cans of Del Monte green beans when they were on sale for $.40."  They talk about spending a certain amount, say $100/month, in additional grocery expense to add to their stockpile.  Me, I'd rather have $1000 cash in the case of a job loss than $1000 in canned goods in my pantry. 

[faithless]

Folks tell stories like, "My husband lost his job for 6 months, and we would have starved if I hadn't stockpiled 87 cans of Del Monte green beans when they were on sale for $.40." 
They talk about spending a certain amount, say $100/month, in additional grocery expense to add to their stockpile.  Me, I'd rather have $1000 cash in the case of a job loss than $1000 in canned goods in my pantry.

I suppose this makes sense to people who think money is for spending, and therefore would otherwise spend the £100 on crap they didn't need - they wouldn't have been able to buy food when he lost his job.

I guess they are saving for hard times, just in food rather than cash?

[AnnaGrowsAMustache]

Folks tell stories like, "My husband lost his job for 6 months, and we would have starved if I hadn't stockpiled 87 cans of Del Monte green beans when they were on sale for $.40." 
They talk about spending a certain amount, say $100/month, in additional grocery expense to add to their stockpile.  Me, I'd rather have $1000 cash in the case of a job loss than $1000 in canned goods in my pantry.

I suppose this makes sense to people who think money is for spending, and therefore would otherwise spend the £100 on crap they didn't need - they wouldn't have been able to buy food when he lost his job.

I guess they are saving for hard times, just in food rather than cash?

You've missed the point of stockpiling - that you're paying much less per unit than someone who does not stockpile. Because you're buying bulk on sale. Of course, this is only useful if you're buying basics that your family uses regularly AND you use them before any expiration AND you don't fall into the trap of have-more-use-more. But, done correctly, stockpiling means that you pay far, far less for grocery items than someone who buys as they require.

I probably allow an extra $20 a week to take advantage of any really good special I see. I don't always spend that. It tends to be on reduced for quick sale stuff that will be perfectly fine in the freezer until it is eaten.

[Imma]

Moderate stockpiling of things you're actually going to use is a very good way to save money. But all this prepper-style stockpiling is just a huge waste of money and space. And let's not even talk about coupon queen-style stockpiling. I have a few relatives that buy lots of stuff because it's free or nearly free. After a few months they donate all this weird food to me. I'm just now drinking cappucccino made with cappuccino milk powder from a sachet. I had no idea a thing like that even existed. Someone gave this box of sachets to me because they don't actually drink cappuccino.