STILL WANT TO SUPPORT FACEBOOK???

Zuckerberg is so full of crap he should be named Compost.

Anybody notice how few "nice guys" become kajillionaires?

You have to be ruthless to compile that much money. Most of them are assholes. Even Richard Branson can be a jerk and he's one of the nice ones. Maybe Mark Cuban too.

“Social media should not fact check posts” says child molester Mark Zuckerberg

CanuckBob wrote:You have to be ruthless to compile that much money. Most of them are assholes. Even Richard Branson can be a jerk and he's one of the nice ones. Maybe Mark Cuban too.

Exactly! Can't think of any corporate America CEOs that are not ruthless assholes. It's a prerequisite for the position and it they aren't one already, negotiating the corporate world will certainly make them one! Richard Branson and Bill Gates may be exceptions - to some extent. You can't be a pussycat and found and operate a corporation in America. They'll eat you alive.

Or a lying, cheating, fraudulent, crook like the douchbag in office.......

I worked at HP when Carly ran the company. She was all the things that are bad about big corporate leaders. Her one skill is she could speak and excite.  She thought of us (when she ever did) as machines. What you get when you go from Engineer background to MBA background. Dave Packard drove an old oldsmobile and wore cheap suits off the rack. Complete with Pocket protector and calculator.  I was goofing off once playing during lunch at night with a radio control car and he came up and asked if he could play and did.  My kind of leader.  We would jump off the roof for Dave Packard or Bill Hewlett.

gringal wrote:i don't know why FB is needed to keep in touch with relatives and friends.  All mine have email addresses, and we're keeping in touch just fine.

For restaurant menus, I ask the restaurant to post their menus on websites like this one.  They are usually glad to comply.  I also rely on other posters to report their restaurant experiences. I've found that most reliable.

Because young people don't use email much anymore other than loading large files. One thing they use is Whatsapp  (not sure).  Kinda a rude discovery I made recently when I had trouble getting my younger relatives to email me. They made fun of me :-)

The early appeal ot What's App was that text messages were free. Did not eat into your talk, text, or email minutes

Zedinmexico wrote:

gringal wrote:i don't know why FB is needed to keep in touch with relatives and friends.  All mine have email addresses, and we're keeping in touch just fine.

For restaurant menus, I ask the restaurant to post their menus on websites like this one.  They are usually glad to comply.  I also rely on other posters to report their restaurant experiences. I've found that most reliable.

Because young people don't use email much anymore other than loading large files. One thing they use is Whatsapp  (not sure).  Kinda a rude discovery I made recently when I had trouble getting my younger relatives to email me. They made fun of me :-)

How about "I don't give a damn" what younger people like. My younger relatives have email addresses so they can communicate with us old folks. In addition, they have all the rest of the stuff they like.

[quote="BisbeeGal"

As I and others have said: you need not expose yourself at all on FB.[/quote]

Like many, you are missing the point of why I and others don't want to join Facebook- it isn't about exposing yourself, it isn't about how and for what purpose you use Facebook. It is about supporting, in any way, a business you have moral objections to. Even if all you are doing is adding another account to their number of members.

√. Well said!

I am only saying this because it is true, none of my nieces or nephews use Facebook. TikTok is it for them. Facebook is like email, old hat for old people. Don’t forget, I am as old as most on here!

CHILLIN wrote:The early appeal ot What's App was that text messages were free. Did not eat into your talk, text, or email minutes

And in fact with TelMex, still is at the 100 peso and up mark, along with every other kind of socializing: Messenger. FaceBook. Twitter. Snapchat. Instagram. Not to mention local, long distance, and text messaging at the 20 peso mark.

These things cost way more in many places in Canada.

PS How will Trump communicate without Twitter? How will his minions know what to do next?

Tik Tok is for making music videos, not for chat or conversations.

[/quote]Like It is about supporting, in any way, a business you have moral objections to. Even if all you are doing is adding another account to their number of members.[/quote]

And yet, here we are supporting Carlos Slim.

Good one. We are wilfully, blissfully unaware. Good thing, too. Or we'd all be in the looney bin. Come to think of it, maybe Earth is the looney bin and we just don't know it.

Ida Claire wrote:I am only saying this because it is true, none of my nieces or nephews use Facebook.  TikTok is it for them.  Facebook is like email, old hat for old people.  Don’t forget, I am as old as most on here!

I'm an ancient. My bluntly stated point was that it's not up to "old people" to accomodate the young by joining a thing they like. It's up to them to accomodate their elders....if, in fact, they WANT to communicate. Hey....guess what? Most of them really don't care enough to bother. They are at an age where most of them are preoccupied with their own lives.
Many people knock themselves (and their budget) out to go to the U.S. and spend time with their children and grandchildren. The fact is that the younger ones are in their earning years, so, if so inclined, they can take the time and money to visit YOU, here. Ours actually do. We spoil them rotten when they're here and it's an adventure for them. There's nothing in the U.S. we need to see again, and our offspring are spread over great distances from one another. We've lived here 16 years, and have taken one plane trip north for a family funeral ten years ago.

"And yet, here we are supporting Carlos Slim."

Yes, unfortunately, where some things are concerned, it's hard to avoid supporting the multinationals and billionaires. (Just how they like it) Is supporting Telmex and Telcel, and by extension, Carlos Slim, any better or worse than supporting ATT or any other communications giant? We could spend all day every day researching the politics, or ownership of any company we support with our membership or money.
Getting along without a phone or internet these days certainly can be done, and a few people do. You likely won't die because of it.
But when there are so many ways to communicate, something like Facebook seems to me much more non-essential than a phone.  
I don't fault others for using Facebook, I'm just not interested in doing so myself.

Since when is Carlos Slim a bad guy? A quick search relates his philanthropy as well as his rise from nada to super rich.

Since when is Carlos Slim a bad guy? A quick search relates his philanthropy as well as his rise from nada to super rich.

I have to differ with that. It's only due to pressure from many independent sources that Slim donated anything to anybody before the start of the last 10 years or so. Before that he was known as the one rich guy who never supported charities.

Facebook owns WhatsApp.
In a momentary lapse of judgment years ago, I created a FB account in my (gasp) actual name and took it down after hearing from too many twisted ex-boyfriends. NY Times article today about the percentage of right wing U.S. political dreck on FB that Suck-erberg refuses to remove or flag: 50%. And as our election heats up further, expect that sick percentage to rise.

Thank God we can’t tell the future, otherwise we would never get out of bed.

ComputerGuy wrote:I have to differ with that. It's only due to pressure from many independent sources that Slim donated anything to anybody before the start of the last 10 years or so. Before that he was known as the one rich guy who never supported charities.

And he was pretty much given telmex and telcel when they privatized many years ago. He got rich like the oligarchs in Russia.