For one thing, we don't know what the future is. Hotmail did not start as a Microsoft outfit. MySpace did not originate as a FOX/Rupert Murdoch venture. That happened latter, ad they pruchased folks' info along with the companies involved.
Being concerned about what is happening at present is different than being concerned about future, unforeseeable uses. We don't know how the data is -- or more importantly, might or coud be -- used down the line.
Saying that the classic civil libertarian concern for privacy (in this instance) is a "fetish," as Doug did, is a patronizing way to short-sell the concern. How about also because -- it's no one damned business? I have a fetish for that, myself - complete with KY jelly and fur-lined restraints, if you like. Cal it what you will.
In any event, it's fairly innocuous to fuck with a Facebook questionnaire or similar orgs that want all this personal info, hardly worth a penetrating let's-get-to-the-root-of-this-way-of-thinking type of series of questioning about what the underlying philosophy is.
AND: Facebook HAS acted shittily, as well. Remember the "BlackadderOone" affair? A guy with the LabourStart site. This led, in part, to the labor-friendly creation of UnionBook, which I am on, here:
http://www.unionbook.org/pg/profile/Oliver
-B.
On Feb 2, 2009, at 10:31 PM, WD wrote:
"To the extent the data on Facebook is only mined by marketers, I'll second the comments from Bill, Doug, et al."