Off-topic chat. May contain offensive language or images.
User avatar
By dimtimjim
#410440
Its in the news this morning that Facebook and other social networking sites are leaving people socially inept...... Gotta say I agree, in extreme cases (which I know will upset some who live their lives through the PC). These programmes/sites were not created by people with a packed diary!! Others tell me its a great way to stay in touch with people, I say if these poeple were such good friends, I'd see them more often.

Thoughts?
Last edited by dimtimjim on Tue May 25, 2010 7:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By DevilsDuck
#410441
How sad have you got to be to live your life through the net?
User avatar
By Yudster
#410448
Its one of those things that's so damn obvious, but for some reason we aren't allowed to say it - that there is a growing trend for people to regard the internet as an alternative to real social interaction, and that this is ultimately going to be harmful to individuals and society. Its completely obvious isn't it.
User avatar
By MK Chris
#410449
I am very bad at staying in touch and I use it to help me... but I certainly do not live my life through it.
User avatar
By DevilsDuck
#410454
I have friends and family who live all over the place who I can't socialise with in person thats what my facebook is for. I have dabbled in the occasional game, but soon get bored of them. I have been thinking about scrapping my facebook account, but it is my only means of contact with some of my old friends
User avatar
By dimtimjim
#410461
DevilsDuck wrote: but it is my only means of contact with some of my old friends


Organise yourself an anual dwinking session (or similar) with them, you'll reap so many more benefits from it.
User avatar
By DevilsDuck
#410463
I would love to but they all live up country(from my time in Derby). Some of them came to my wedding which was great. Hopefully we will get to see some of them soon
User avatar
By dimtimjim
#410464
Blimey, you never said it woudl involve Derby. Stick with the Facebook dude! :D
User avatar
By Latina
#410471
Facebook is good for lots of things, but many people use it way too much. I agree with Yuds - you don't need a medical foundation to work this out.

Facebook and the other socnets aren't themselves to blame though. The lonely people in question should learn to get off their bums and connect with people in a more human way, more often.
User avatar
By AndyJ
#410479
I really only use FB for photo sharing now. I don't bother with any of the apps. I will sometimes chat to friends if I haven't spoken to them recently but that's about all.
User avatar
By Johnny 1989
#410488
I very rarely use it these days, I use it mainly to communicate with my cousins in Hong Kong & friends abroad but got fed up with it after a while.
User avatar
By foot-loose
#410492
I have caught up with people of Facebook I haven't seen for years. Some people say it's a bad thing and is killing social interaction. Personally I say my social interaction is just as good as always and that these some people need to not be so Daily Mail about the world.
User avatar
By DevilsDuck
#410495
foot-loose wrote:I have caught up with people of Facebook I haven't seen for years. Some people say it's a bad thing and is killing social interaction. Personally I say my social interaction is just as good as always and that these some people need to not be so Daily Mail about the world.


*looks for like button*....*sigh*
User avatar
By Sidders
#410517
Essay time. There are good things and bad things about Facebook, but I'm recently starting to feel like there are more bad things about it than good.

I'll start with the good. You can get in touch with people you've not seen for donkey's who you have unintentionally lost contact with. It's also good for for sharing pictures with your friends. Groups and events are also very handy especially for organising things. My brother's stag do would probably never have got off the ground if it wasn't for facebook, it made it so much easier to organise.

It's also pretty handy for sending people messages, and I would go as far to say that if you want to get in touch with me, Facebook is probably the best way to do it. If you send me a message on Facebook, or write on my wall, not only does it appear on Facebook itself, but I get a text message and an email to inform me as such. It even pops up on my iPod. I can then reply to the email, or the text message, and it goes back Facebook, and if the person I'm replying to also has email and text alerts switched on, then they will also get alerted. That's pretty handy for a free service.

There is a middle ground here though. There are certain people I like to stalk; not in a creepy way, just in a compulsive, curious, "wonder what they're up to" kind of way. While this is not necessarily a bad thing, there's not really any good coming from it. I assume it is where the person that came up with the 'Facebook is harming our social lives' is coming from. I disagree with this sentiment by the way, as I socialise daily, always have done, almost certainly always will do. I will never just sit on facebook just because I can't be arsed to go out and see my mates.

Moving on to the bad. There are certain people who you don't want to know what you're up to. You don't really want work colleagues knowing you were out on the piss the previous night if you happen to come down unexpectedly with man flu. Especially not your boss. And talking of being on the piss, how many people have got home one night, half cut, decided to go on facebook, then made some completely inappropriate comment on someone's status, or photo. Come on, own up. Then you wake up in the morning, when it's a bit of a blur, and think 'did I actually do that?' Then the realisation sets in and you boot the computer up quickly, in the vain hope that nobody has seen it and you can delete it in time, only to find that the whole world has seen it and commented underneath.

Of course this leads on the the other issue of revenge attacks. You put some stupid comment on facebook without thinking and people hate you because of it. This has been known to go to the extreme of people getting murdered just through stupid arguments they've had on facebook.

There's also the other possibility of people actually stalking, or even using facebook to carry out identity theft. Unfortunately some people without fully thinking through the ramifications, put their home address, telephone number, place of work, mother's maiden name, photographs of their entire family, etc. etc.

The other interesting one I've come accross recently, is 'hate' pages. Some students at the school I work at, developed a dislike for a certain teacher and decided to make a group called 'omg if you hate mr x join this group lol :D xxx'. The teacher in question found out and was not best pleased. The school took the action of suspending the student that set the group up, and anyone who joined the group got a detention. The suspended students parents were not happy, and phoned the school to inform us that they were going to legally challenge the punishment dished out by the school as it was freedom of speech, it was allowed on facebook, and in any case, it is out of the school's jurisdiction to punish for anything that goes on out of school and indeed, on facebook. While I disagree with what the child did, I do kind of feel like that parent has got a point. If it is allowed on facebook, and it wasn't created in school or in school time, then how can the school punish for it?

In my opinion, facebook shouldn't allow such pages. They're quite clearly set up to cause upset and distress to the person they're aimed at. But facebook allows them due to 'freedom of speech'. The other thing I disagree with, there are photos on facebook of me that I don't like. Surely I should have a right to remove that photo. But no. Facebook's terms and conditions clearly say words to the effect of 'we do not remove photos of you just because you don't like your hair'. That's wrong in my opinion. There is a photograph of me, I don't want it there, I should be allowed to remove it. They only let you report the photo, but then do nothing about it. They don't even let you report a photo more than once.

But to bring my rambling to a close, I still think facebook is the dog's bollocks. It's a useful service that is head and shoulders above it's rivals, and while there are some things that could and should be improved, I wouldn't be without it.
User avatar
By Yudster
#410519
No one should have to put up with a picture of them put on the internet or published anywhere else without their permission. How can they bang on about freedom of speech and then say that they will allow that?
User avatar
By Sidders
#410522
Yudster wrote:No one should have to put up with a picture of them put on the internet or published anywhere else without their permission. How can they bang on about freedom of speech and then say that they will allow that?

I suppose it's really the same reason the tabloid newspapers can get away with publishing topless pictures of celebrities that were taken by paps without their knowledge or consent. I suppose the argument is that if you do something in public, then anyone would have been able to see it should they have been there at the time.
User avatar
By foot-loose
#410525
Yudster wrote:No one should have to put up with a picture of them put on the internet or published anywhere else without their permission. How can they bang on about freedom of speech and then say that they will allow that?

We've talked about this off the board and I know we will never agree on this topic, but I still don't understand what the problem is with having your photo online. That said, I think anyone should have the right to say "naw - get that tae feck" if they don't want it online. Dunno how you implement that though.
User avatar
By Yudster
#410527
If my son's picture is going to be in the local paper with his name attached to it they have to get my consent. My sister in law can put his picture and identify him on her Facebook without so much as a by your leave, and its there being looked at by * knows who. That's simply wrong.

And foots, i know it doesn't bother you but it does bother me - and you are right, if I don't want it there I should have the right to not have it there, however incomprehensible my reasons might seem to you or anyone else. Same goes for my little boy, while he is young enough to not be able to make that decision in an informed way for himself, its should be up to me where his picture goes and who gawps at it.
User avatar
By MK Chris
#410530
Sidders wrote:
Yudster wrote:No one should have to put up with a picture of them put on the internet or published anywhere else without their permission. How can they bang on about freedom of speech and then say that they will allow that?

I suppose it's really the same reason the tabloid newspapers can get away with publishing topless pictures of celebrities that were taken by paps without their knowledge or consent. I suppose the argument is that if you do something in public, then anyone would have been able to see it should they have been there at the time.

I think that's a different argument because they are people in the public eye. That's not necessarily my opinion by the way, that's just the way they look at it.
User avatar
By foot-loose
#410532
Yudster wrote:If my son's picture is going to be in the local paper with his name attached to it they have to get my consent. My sister in law can put his picture and identify him on her Facebook without so much as a by your leave, and its there being looked at by * knows who. That's simply wrong.

And foots, i know it doesn't bother you but it does bother me - and you are right, if I don't want it there I should have the right to not have it there, however incomprehensible my reasons might seem to you or anyone else. Same goes for my little boy, while he is young enough to not be able to make that decision in an informed way for himself, its should be up to me where his picture goes and who gawps at it.

I don't understand but I do appreciate your point. I'll also accept that I aint a parent and my viewpoint may change under those circumstances.
User avatar
By dimtimjim
#410541
foot-loose wrote: I'll also accept that I aint a parent and my viewpoint may change under those circumstances.


A lot changes once you become a parent. I agree with most of this about images on tinternet, should be some control over it....
User avatar
By Boboff
#410567
Facebook is ok, getting old now, great for keeping in touch with extended family.
Pictures I am not that bothered about as people not that interested in me and my kids are fat.(joke)
User avatar
By Latina
#410649
FYI, unless the rules have changed since I heard about this (and you never know the way Facebook keeps changing), hate groups are not allowed on Facebook if they are about anyone other than what is known as a "public figure".

Basically if it's someone not in the public eye - such as the aforementioned teacher - the group will be removed sooner or later. I don't know whether someone needs to report it to Facebook first.
User avatar
By Sidders
#410746
Latina wrote:FYI, unless the rules have changed since I heard about this (and you never know the way Facebook keeps changing), hate groups are not allowed on Facebook if they are about anyone other than what is known as a "public figure".

Basically if it's someone not in the public eye - such as the aforementioned teacher - the group will be removed sooner or later. I don't know whether someone needs to report it to Facebook first.

They may not be allowed, but it still doesn't stop people creating them. Maybe they should be moderated before they're allowed to go public.