# facebook messenger: creepy



## isvicthere? (May 29, 2014)

Sorry if there's already a thread on this, but I couldn't find one.

http://action.sumofus.org/a/Facebook-app-taps-phones/?sub=fb

This seems well creepy. 

Also, I "shared" this link on my laptop. When I tried to do it from my phone it was blocked.


----------



## killer b (May 29, 2014)

I can think of a really simple way of dealing with this.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 29, 2014)

does it involve fucking off of facebook?


----------



## Supine (May 29, 2014)

At some point even the Facebook sheep will decide to stop using it. I really do dislike everything about them as a company


----------



## killer b (May 29, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> does it involve fucking off of facebook?


no. well, that's another really simple way of dealing with it.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (May 29, 2014)

Is it safe to click that link or will google turn my brain into a transmitter to allow the CIA to monitor my thoughts?


----------



## Citizen66 (May 29, 2014)

It's trying to force me to install it by refusing to let me see my messages on my phone until I do.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (May 29, 2014)

How about don't use that app?


----------



## isvicthere? (May 29, 2014)

Citizen66 said:


> It's trying to force me to install it by refusing to let me see my messages on my phone until I do.



Yeah, I had that this morning, too.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (May 29, 2014)

Citizen66 said:


> It's trying to force me to install it by refusing to let me see my messages on my phone until I do.



Oh.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (May 29, 2014)

It's fortunate I don't have any friends, I guess.


----------



## killer b (May 29, 2014)

just use your browser.


----------



## dolly's gal (May 29, 2014)

it has forced me to download the app  i hate the app  and using it via a browser is crap on mobile. fortunately (very VERY fortunately), i smashed my phone yesterday so not a problem for me right now, no-sireee


----------



## killer b (May 29, 2014)

the browser version is fine on my mobile. It is a new phone though - maybe you'll find the same with the replacement.


----------



## gosub (May 29, 2014)

read the op article yesterday. no probs as only use web, which today asked for my mobile number


----------



## Citizen66 (May 29, 2014)

killer b said:
			
		

> just use your browser.



Well I can when I'm at home.

e2a oh you mean on my phone. it still means faffing around two different places when one worked perfectly fine.


----------



## killer b (May 29, 2014)

the browser on your phone. It's what i use, and it's fine for most purposes (and means you don't get constant push notifications every time someone likes your shit on there)


----------



## dolly's gal (May 29, 2014)

killer b said:


> the browser version is fine on my mobile. It is a new phone though - maybe you'll find the same with the replacement.



the phone i use is new thank you very much. it's an iphone 5s i'll have you know


----------



## moochedit (May 29, 2014)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Is it safe to click that link or will google turn my brain into a transmitter to allow the CIA to monitor my thoughts?



google and facebook already know everything* you do and share it with their illuminati masters.

*yes, including THAT

I just wrap myself in tin foil so they can't read my thoughts.


----------



## Jon-of-arc (May 29, 2014)

I've just purposely downgraded to an oldstyle phone, with numbers only, no touchscreen etc.  Its got whatsapp and gmail, and can text and phone.  There is a facebook app, which doesnt seem to work.  I'm gonna try this for a month, and see how it goes.  Just found myself staring too much at a 5 inch screen, often at the expense of either real social interaction, or at the expense of doing some form of solo entertainment (reading, watching TV etc) which wasn't designed for someone with a 2 minute attention span.  

This, incredibly mawkish, video which appeared in my newsfeed on Tuesday, the intrusiveness of the new facebook messenger, and an ever increasing tendency toward constantly checking my phone, all led me to make this decision.


----------



## girasol (May 29, 2014)

I think that's a bit melodramatic and makes me think of Wall-e...  And maybe a fair point, but don't think young people will take any notice...  Not sure the trend is reversible.


----------



## Jon-of-arc (May 29, 2014)

It is all of those things.  It's a bit patronising, as well.  Lots of people like using facebook, and don't do so in a way that completely excludes other forms of social contact.  And so what if they do, if that's what they want?  It's certainly not going to change the world.  But it was quite pertinent to me.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 29, 2014)

Do I have to be the one who posts that picture of all the people reading newspapers on the train?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 29, 2014)

I mean, I write in a pocket notebook (with a pencil) on the train, or read a paperback, but I ignore people just as well that way as if I was on my phone. More so quite often as they never run out of battery.


----------



## Sirena (May 29, 2014)

Here's a bit of oldskool political cartoonery


----------



## isvicthere? (May 29, 2014)

Jon-of-arc said:


> It is all of those things.  It's a bit patronising, as well.  Lots of people like using facebook, and don't do so in a way that completely excludes other forms of social contact.  And so what if they do, if that's what they want?  It's certainly not going to change the world.  But it was quite pertinent to me.



Not sure I understand what you're saying.


----------



## isvicthere? (May 29, 2014)

FridgeMagnet said:


> I mean, I write in a pocket notebook (with a pencil) on the train, or read a paperback, but I ignore people just as well that way as if I was on my phone. More so quite often as they never run out of battery.



But do paperbacks and notebooks record what is within your earshot with a possible view to marketing something similar back at you?


----------



## isvicthere? (May 29, 2014)

girasol said:


> maybe a fair point, but don't think young people will take any notice...  Not sure the trend is reversible.



So that's OK then?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 29, 2014)

isvicthere? said:


> But do paperbacks and notebooks record what is within your earshot with a possible view to marketing something similar back at you?


Yes, but then I have Flintstones-style gadgets. The notebook is some sort of cuttlefish that makes sarcastic remarks, and the novel is on the belly of a baby walrus. Wearing a hat.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 29, 2014)

I'm talking about this "look up" nonsense here really.


----------



## Jon-of-arc (May 29, 2014)

isvicthere? said:


> Not sure I understand what you're saying.



I was just saying that the "look up" video was genuinely quite pertinent to my life, because I spent far too much time on my smart phone (not such a bad thing on public transport though - randoms who talk to you on buses are freaks...), but that I think the guy makes some sweeping generalisations which are probably not that relevant to most people.


----------



## jeff_leigh (May 30, 2014)

I've done a quick search and can't find no other sources for this app, Are you sure it's not just a way of obtaining your name and email to send Spam/Advertising ?


----------



## joustmaster (May 30, 2014)

Do people even read into the detail of these sorts of things before running down the streets screaming about the end of the world and getting people to sign petitions?

The feature works in exactly the same way as the app uses your camera, currently.

If you want to add a photo, you can press a button it switches on your camera, you take a photo, and you can include that in your post. It doesn't mean that you are constantly videoing everything your phone sees an uploading it to Facebook.

Just like If you want, you can press a button, it will switch on the mic and listen to see if it can recognise the film/tv show/song - then you can tag it in your post.


----------



## pesh (May 30, 2014)

Jon-of-arc said:


> I was just saying that the "look up" video was genuinely quite pertinent to my life, because I spent far too much time on my smart phone (not such a bad thing on public transport though - randoms who talk to you on buses are freaks...), but that I think the guy makes some sweeping generalisations which are probably not that relevant to most people.


to me he just came across as a smug cunt who was far more interested in making something, anything, that would go viral, than in what he was actually preaching.


----------



## spanglechick (May 30, 2014)

that video is terrible.  dreadful poetry, mawkish sentiment and a ridiculous premise that stands no exploration.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 30, 2014)

joustmaster said:


> Do people even read into the detail of these sorts of things before running down the streets screaming about the end of the world and getting people to sign petitions?
> 
> The feature works in exactly the same way as the app uses your camera, currently.
> 
> ...


Well, not quite. If you have the feature activated, for the entire time you are composing any post, the mic will be on.


----------



## spanglechick (May 30, 2014)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Well, not quite. If you have the feature activated, for the entire time you are composing any post, the mic will be on.


not the same as it listening to all your phone calls though, is it?


----------



## joustmaster (May 30, 2014)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Well, not quite. If you have the feature activated, for the entire time you are composing any post, the mic will be on.


OK. Thats a fair correction.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 30, 2014)

spanglechick said:


> not the same as it listening to all your phone calls though, is it?


No, that's just internet balls (spread I imagine mostly over Facebook).

The FB app _could_ of course be listening in to you constantly, at least on Android, but they wouldn't exactly announce it.


----------



## joustmaster (May 30, 2014)

FridgeMagnet said:


> No, that's just internet balls (spread I imagine mostly over Facebook).
> 
> The FB app _could_ of course be listening in to you constantly, at least on Android, but they wouldn't exactly announce it.


It would fuck my data usage


----------



## editor (Aug 7, 2014)

So uninstalled it's untrue. Here's what their shitty app can do:


----------



## joustmaster (Aug 7, 2014)

editor said:


> So uninstalled it's untrue. Here's what their shitty app can do:




Those things mostly seem right for an app that aims to be a messanger app.


----------



## Jon-of-arc (Aug 7, 2014)

editor said:


> So uninstalled it's untrue. Here's what their shitty app can do:



Its a fucking horrible app, just by design and pointlessness. But I assumed it did all of that stuff anyway.


----------



## editor (Aug 7, 2014)

joustmaster said:


> Those things mostly seem right for an app that aims to be a messanger app.


Record audio without asking? Make calls without asking?


----------



## joustmaster (Aug 7, 2014)

editor said:


> Record audio without asking? Make calls without asking?


yes its the same as something like Skype, for instance.

You press a button in the app and it lets you record sound or take a picture. If you didn't have this permission, then android would have to get involved each time.


----------



## Jon-of-arc (Aug 7, 2014)

editor said:


> Record audio without asking? Make calls without asking?



Its a bit weird that it can do that. It probably won't, though. Does it not just need these permissions so that it doesn't have to specifically ask you if you use it to make a call or send a voice message?


----------



## joustmaster (Aug 7, 2014)

Jon-of-arc said:


> Its a bit weird that it can do that. It probably won't, though. Does it not just need these permissions so that it doesn't have to specifically ask you if you use it to make a call or send a voice message?


Yes. Thats the sort of thing.
Like when you do something with an application in Windows, and occasional Windows UAC pops up and asks if you want to give admin access to that app..
Or you can just give that app admin rights to start with.


----------



## editor (Aug 7, 2014)

The point you're missing though is that people don't want to install this app. It's been forced on them by Facebook.


----------



## joustmaster (Aug 7, 2014)

editor said:


> The point you're missing though is that people don't want to install this app. It's been forced on them by Facebook.


no it hasn't.
people have the choice to use facebook via a webpage, without the message part of the app, or not at all.


----------



## editor (Aug 7, 2014)

joustmaster said:


> no it hasn't.
> people have the choice to use facebook via a webpage, without the message part of the app, or not at all.


Yes it has. If users want to keep on getting the full Facebook service via an app a message comes up telling them they have to install messenger to access messages from now on. 

It's a new thing that's been foisted on users with features most don't want.

And if they choose to use the website version instead them they don't get any notifications.


----------



## joustmaster (Aug 7, 2014)

editor said:


> Yes it has. If users want to keep on getting the full Facebook service via an app a message comes up telling them they have to install messenger to access messages from now on.
> 
> It's a new thing that's been foisted on users with features most don't want.
> 
> And if they choose to use the website version instead them they don't get any notifications.


You're a fucking idiot.


----------



## editor (Aug 7, 2014)

joustmaster said:


> You're a fucking idiot.


It's not my fault that you haven't got a clue what you're talking about.


----------



## joustmaster (Aug 7, 2014)

editor said:


> It's not my fault that you haven't got a clue what you're talking about.


I have been working in network and application security for 15 years.

No one is being forced to do anything. People can still use Facebook without it. The permissions are run of the mill, for that sort of thing.


You're a fucking idiot.


----------



## isvicthere? (Aug 8, 2014)

editor said:


> So uninstalled it's untrue. Here's what their shitty app can do:



Thanks for that, Editor. Like you, I'm an "idiot" who thinks the foregoing is not OK.


----------



## Orang Utan (Aug 8, 2014)

The Facebook app is rubbish on phones anyway (and a power drain). The browser version is much better and easier to use anyway. Much like forum apps like Tapatalk, the Facebook app is an entirely unnecessary internet product.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 8, 2014)

editor said:


> Yes it has. If users want to keep on getting the full Facebook service via an app a message comes up telling them they have to install messenger to access messages from now on.
> 
> It's a new thing that's been foisted on users with features most don't want.
> 
> And if they choose to use the website version instead them they don't get any notifications.


Facebook is free. You don't have to use it. Nothing is forced on anybody.


----------



## ddraig (Aug 8, 2014)

did you miss this bit bees? "If users want to keep on getting the full Facebook service via an app"


----------



## Orang Utan (Aug 8, 2014)

ddraig said:


> did you miss this bit bees? "If users want to keep on getting the full Facebook service via an app"


Then don't use the app!


----------



## ddraig (Aug 8, 2014)

i don't!!


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 8, 2014)

ddraig said:


> did you miss this bit bees? "If users want to keep on getting the full Facebook service via an app"


Then it's just tough shit. It's free, it's their rules. People have nothing to complain about.


----------



## Orang Utan (Aug 8, 2014)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Then it's just tough shit. It's free, it's their rules. People have nothing to complain about.


There's plenty to complain about


----------



## isvicthere? (Aug 8, 2014)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Then it's just tough shit. It's free, it's their rules. People have nothing to complain about.



Yeah, bloody people! Expecting large corporations to behave with integrity? Fuck that!


----------



## mauvais (Aug 8, 2014)

Previously on _Waa, The Internet's Changed_:

"I liked the bit where the internet appeared out of nothing really quickly, but I don't like it now, not now that it's very slightly different"

"I wish things would go back to an arbitrary point where I felt more comfortable with them for no discernible reason"

"In the future I will never wish we were back how we are today, until the point at which I accidentally do"


----------



## isvicthere? (Aug 8, 2014)

mauvais said:


> Previously on _Waa, The Internet's Changed_:
> 
> "I liked the bit where the internet appeared out of nothing really quickly, but I don't like it now, not now that it's very slightly different"
> 
> ...



Who on this thread has said anything _remotely_ resembling what you are trying to suggest here?


----------



## mauvais (Aug 8, 2014)

isvicthere? said:


> Who on this thread has said anything _remotely_ resembling what you are trying to suggest here?


What do you think the premise of all the moaning is, exactly?

The Facebook app continues to do what it used to do, except now it's split into two apps. 

Oh, and it has microphone permission because it does VoIP calls, and all the other permissions can be explained, but let's not trouble ourselves with fact.


----------



## isvicthere? (Aug 8, 2014)

mauvais said:


> What do you think the premise of all the moaning is, exactly?
> 
> The Facebook app continues to do what it used to do, except now it's split into two apps.
> 
> Oh, and it has microphone permission because it does VoIP calls, and all the other permissions can be explained, but let's not trouble ourselves with fact.



All _what_ moaning?


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 8, 2014)

isvicthere? said:


> Yeah, bloody people! Expecting large corporations to behave with integrity? Fuck that!


They have a product. It comes with a set of rules. It is free. You don't have to use it if you don't want to.

Where in any of that is there a problem


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 8, 2014)

editor said:


> Record audio without asking? Make calls without asking?



Turn your internet connection on without asking, the better I suppose to send all the stuff it has secretly recorded and photographed back to CIA, sorry, Facebook HQ?

I've stopped using my smartphone. There was no way in hell I was gonna install this app and the icon constantly telling me I had facebook messages I wasn't allowed to read was really annoying so I've just gone back to my old flip phone that doesn't have any facebook anything on it.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 8, 2014)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> They have a product. It comes with a set of rules. It is free. You don't have to use it if you don't want to.
> 
> Where in any of that is there a problem



It's clearly part of their grand plan to reach a point of saturation whereby lots of people have no choice but to use facebook it if they want to communicate with others, particularly if they ever do anything that needs online promotion, and only then to introduce some mandatory new thing that is allowed more access to your private life than you'd allow your own mother. My partner isn't allowed to go through my texts, check my call logs, record stuff that I do without telling me about it, why should I let Zuckerberg and pals do those things? I'm lucky enough not to need facebook that badly, plenty of other people are not.

And facebook is not free, oh no sir. You pay for it by giving away information, information that is sold for cash money.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 8, 2014)

And yes I'm sure all this is a very clever strategy and until facebook starts putting guns to people's heads and forcing them to accept the t&c's it's all perfectly legal. Doesn't make it right. 

Zuckerberg is basically a real-life Milo Minderbinder.


----------



## Jon-of-arc (Aug 8, 2014)

SpookyFrank said:


> Turn your internet connection on without asking, the better I suppose to send all the stuff it has secretly recorded and photographed back to CIA, sorry, Facebook HQ?
> 
> I've stopped using my smartphone. There was no way in hell I was gonna install this app and the icon constantly telling me I had facebook messages I wasn't allowed to read was really annoying so I've just gone back to my old flip phone that doesn't have any facebook anything on it.



The CIA could not give a single fuck about you, me or anyone else on this board.


----------



## Citizen66 (Aug 8, 2014)

I've taken myself off facebook as can't be arsed with it but I did enjoy chatting with a fake profile on the messenger that called itself 'loyal english'. See If the cunt is still on there and give him shit. He seems to believe c18 'are back' *yawn*


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 8, 2014)




----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 8, 2014)

Jon-of-arc said:


> The CIA could not give a single fuck about you, me or anyone else on this board.



No, I'm sure the biggest market for the data facebook is hoovering up is marketing people and private industry. Its value comes from sheer scale, rather than its pertinance to any particular individual. But facebook have shown that they're equally happy to hand stuff on specific individuals and groups to state agencies as they are to sell big slabs of metadata. And myself and plenty of other people on this board know only too well the lengths the state will go to get information about them and the groups they work with.

Don't get me wrong, I know I'm not really worth four seconds of the government or the security services' time. The trouble is that they _don't_ know that.


----------



## hipipol (Aug 9, 2014)

"Keep not your treasures on Facebook"
- Got that from a well old book -


----------



## pinkmonkey (Aug 9, 2014)

Deleted both apps from ipad, not to do with secrecy but burning through my data allowance lightening fast!


----------



## isvicthere? (Aug 9, 2014)

Jon-of-arc said:


> The CIA could not give a single fuck about you, me or anyone else on this board.



If "the point" was a cow's arse, your comment here is a banjo failing to hit it.


----------



## Jon-of-arc (Aug 9, 2014)

isvicthere? said:


> If "the point" was a cow's arse, your comment here is a banjo failing to hit it.



Well, not really.  If someone refers to Facebook privacy concerns and specifically FB's relationship with intelligence agencies, then its not too unreasonable to question why they think the old 3 letter brigade would take any interest in them whatsoever. SF highlighted a number of other concerns, which I don't share but would concede are valid, but why mention the CIA at all?  It's pretty common knowledge that any and every large website, especially those based in the US, will comply with virtually any and all law enforcement and intelligence requests for info on users, anyway.


----------



## moon (Aug 9, 2014)

I read somewhere that some apps have the capability of 'listening in' surreptitiously already and security peeps are aware of it.
You just cant trust that little fella in your bag/pocket...


----------



## goldenecitrone (Aug 9, 2014)

I'm looking forward to the Facebook riots.


----------



## isvicthere? (Aug 9, 2014)

Jon-of-arc said:


> Well, not really.  If someone refers to Facebook privacy concerns and specifically FB's relationship with intelligence agencies, then its not too unreasonable to question why they think the old 3 letter brigade would take any interest in them whatsoever. SF highlighted a number of other concerns, which I don't share but would concede are valid, but why mention the CIA at all?  It's pretty common knowledge that any and every large website, especially those based in the US, will comply with virtually any and all law enforcement and intelligence requests for info on users, anyway.



Factual point: whoever mentioned the CIA, it wasn't me. But the point remains. You seem to be saying, that because the internet gives "The Man" increased powers to spy on you, you might as well accept it without demur. That's like saying, "Genocide of Jews, don't you know it's the _30s_, man?"


----------



## spanglechick (Aug 9, 2014)

isvicthere? said:


> Factual point: whoever mentioned the CIA, it wasn't me. But the point remains. You seem to be saying, that because the internet gives "The Man" increased powers to spy on you, you might as well accept it without demur. That's like saying, "Genocide of Jews, don't you know it's the _30s_, man?"


did you really just compare privacy on facebook to the fucking Nazi holocaust?  Have some fucking respect.


----------



## ddraig (Aug 9, 2014)

ai vic, not like it in any way shape or form


----------



## isvicthere? (Aug 9, 2014)

spanglechick said:


> did you really just compare privacy on facebook to the fucking Nazi holocaust?  Have some fucking respect.



Clearly not. I was juxtaposing j-o-a's imo casual acceptance of facebook's intrusion into its users' lives with the popular image of the post-war (and widely acknowledged) casual abnegation of personal responsibility in Nazi atrocities under the "excuse" of "following orders". 

It was a deliberately extreme rhetorical example. Too extreme for you, obviously. For which I apologise.


----------



## spanglechick (Aug 9, 2014)

isvicthere? said:


> Clearly not. I was juxtaposing j-o-a's imo casual acceptance of facebook's intrusion into its users' lives with the popular image of the post-war (and widely acknowledged) casual abnegation of personal responsibility in Nazi atrocities under the "excuse" of "following orders".
> 
> It was a deliberately extreme rhetorical example. Too extreme for you, obviously. For which I apologise.


to compare something with another as an effective rhetorical device, they need to be broadly similar.  otherwise i could say "you denying me of my lunchbreak is like slavery" and thereby lose any credibility I had in the argument through my hyperbole.


----------



## spanglechick (Aug 9, 2014)

amyway - Godwin's law means you lose the argument.


----------



## Jon-of-arc (Aug 9, 2014)

isvicthere? said:


> Factual point: whoever mentioned the CIA, it wasn't me. But the point remains. You seem to be saying, that because the internet gives "The Man" increased powers to spy on you, you might as well accept it without demur. That's like saying, "Genocide of Jews, don't you know it's the _30s_, man?"



Spanglechick is right, the two statements just dont stand up to comparison. And the CIA thing was quoted by me in my post you initially responded to. 

Anyway, let's not argue. Not worth getting worked up about.


----------



## isvicthere? (Aug 10, 2014)

I think the lesson is: don't post on Saturday night when you've been on the sauce.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 10, 2014)

pinkmonkey said:


> Deleted both apps from ipad, not to do with secrecy but burning through my data allowance lightening fast!



Well I guess if it can access the internet without asking you then that's not gonna help you control your data usage.


----------



## jeff_leigh (Aug 11, 2014)

It's really creepy how this thread won't let me unsubscribe


----------



## isvicthere? (Aug 12, 2014)

Another thing: when you uninstall it, you get a message to sign up to it every time you access facebook on your phone.


----------



## Orang Utan (Aug 12, 2014)

isvicthere? said:


> Another thing: when you uninstall it, you get a message to sign up to it every time you access facebook on your phone.


Not on mine


----------



## stuff_it (Aug 12, 2014)

Jon-of-arc said:


> Well, not really.  If someone refers to Facebook privacy concerns and specifically FB's relationship with intelligence agencies, then its not too unreasonable to question why they think the old 3 letter brigade would take any interest in them whatsoever. SF highlighted a number of other concerns, which I don't share but would concede are valid, but why mention the CIA at all?  It's pretty common knowledge that any and every large website, especially those based in the US, will comply with virtually any and all law enforcement and intelligence requests for info on users, anyway.


Someone the other day was telling me that Windows was evil and I should value my privacy more... they're actually currently far better on privacy than Google are. The irony is that they were telling me this on Facebook. 

Personally I just always assumed that nothing on the internet is truly private, but at the same time you can easily bait yourself up by trying to be secretive online.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Aug 13, 2014)

What's all this chat head bollocks and the annoying picture of users etc?   It was annoying me, so I've decided to uninstall Faceache app.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Aug 13, 2014)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> What's all this chat head bollocks and the annoying picture of users etc?   It was annoying me, so I've decided to uninstall Faceache app.



Very annoying, but it can be disabled, without removing the app.


----------



## editor (Aug 13, 2014)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> What's all this chat head bollocks and the annoying picture of users etc?   It was annoying me, so I've decided to uninstall Faceache app.


That's particularly annoying and intrusive.


----------



## StoneRoad (Aug 13, 2014)

From this ^^^^^ (thread) I have drawn the conclusion that my decision to stay way from facebook is correct (for me, at least!)


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Aug 13, 2014)

I'd actually like nothing better then to ditch it and use whatsapp or even telegram instead, not because of privacy concerns, but because they work better, particularly if you are struggling with signal. Whatsapp for instance can send a message with a tiny amount of bandwidth and keeps trying for ages until it can, whereas Facebook gives up very quickly. Problem is far more people use Facebook and even if they have another installed, don't seem to always notice messages as quickly.


----------



## pinkmonkey (Aug 13, 2014)

SpookyFrank said:


> Well I guess if it can access the internet without asking you then that's not gonna help you control your data usage.


The browser method is better than the cut-down app anyway as I admin three groups. Banning someone from a group in the app means scrolling through the entire member list A-Z. Slow and annoying if they're called Zach and your group has 2000 members.


----------



## pinkmonkey (Aug 13, 2014)

Global Stoner said:


> I'd actually like nothing better then to ditch it and use whatsapp or even telegram instead, not because of privacy concerns, but because they work better, particularly if you are struggling with signal. Whatsapp for instance can send a message with a tiny amount of bandwidth and keeps trying for ages until it can, whereas Facebook gives up very quickly. Problem is far more people use Facebook and even if they have another installed, don't seem to always notice messages as quickly.


I agree, I work off grid and can't read Facebook messages if my phone is only picking up gprs


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Aug 13, 2014)

editor said:


> That's particularly annoying and intrusive.



and their face picture gets in the way of certain buttons

Have told people if they need me urgently they can use Viber instead.

Whole idea of getting a fancy phone was too make it cheaper for me to keep in contact with Ireland, not feel like I'm being hounded or having stupid icons get in the way of the functionality of the thing


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Aug 13, 2014)

editor said:


> That's particularly annoying and intrusive.



Yeah, couldn't figure out how to stop the user face icon thingies so figured it was easier to uninstall Faceache completely


----------



## editor (Aug 13, 2014)

pinkmonkey said:


> I agree, I work off grid and can't read Facebook messages if my phone is only picking up gprs


I'm using Telegram for most things, but a few friends won't budge off WhatsApp and of course there's loads on Facebook. What's really frustrating is that Google+ is about a million times better in almost every regard but no fucker uses it.


----------



## Orang Utan (Aug 13, 2014)

Global Stoner said:


> I'd actually like nothing better then to ditch it and use whatsapp or even telegram instead, not because of privacy concerns, but because they work better, particularly if you are struggling with signal. Whatsapp for instance can send a message with a tiny amount of bandwidth and keeps trying for ages until it can, whereas Facebook gives up very quickly. Problem is far more people use Facebook and even if they have another installed, don't seem to always notice messages as quickly.


I downloaded Whatsapp but didn't use it cos I got the techfear. I don't know if anyone I know uses it or not and was scared to find out.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 13, 2014)

I find myself just using texts again these days. It's like going back a decade. At least you know everyone can receive texts no matter if they have a dumb or smart phone, they get an instant alert, and most people have either lots of them free or unlimited ones. If you both have an iPhone it goes via iMessage anyway.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Aug 13, 2014)

FridgeMagnet said:


> I find myself just using texts again these days. It's like going back a decade. At least you know everyone can receive texts no matter if they have a dumb or smart phone, they get an instant alert, and most people have either lots of them free or unlimited ones. If you both have an iPhone it goes via iMessage anyway.



There is something for the humble text it must be said. I always use them if communicating with work mates, even if I get on well enough with them to have them as other contacts. What I don't get though is that although I have unlimted texts and modern phones can link them together, it seems that conversations are shorter and more jilted and there is no reason this needs to be the case (this might be a bonus for some people)


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 13, 2014)

Global Stoner said:


> There is something for the humble text it must be said. I always use them if communicating with work mates, even if I get on well enough with them to have them as other contacts. What I don't get though is that although I have unlimted texts and modern phones can link them together, it seems that conversations are shorter and more jilted and there is no reason this needs to be the case (this might be a bonus for some people)


I'm still used to terse messages from twitter anyway.


----------



## pinkmonkey (Aug 13, 2014)

editor said:


> I'm using Telegram for most things, but a few friends won't budge off WhatsApp and of course there's loads on Facebook. What's really frustrating is that Google+ is about a million times better in almost every regard but no fucker uses it.


My client broke her laptop and I had to use whatsapp as the only method of communication with her, had to upload documents to it, photos, it did work but it drove me nuts. I still don't think shes got dropbox again yet.


----------



## aqua (Aug 13, 2014)

FridgeMagnet said:


> I find myself just using texts again these days. It's like going back a decade. At least you know everyone can receive texts no matter if they have a dumb or smart phone, they get an instant alert, and most people have either lots of them free or unlimited ones. If you both have an iPhone it goes via iMessage anyway.


HA! Yes I've found myself sending way more texts again - I think I didn't send any one year at all, but I'm back into it again. Text and email. Though me and a couple of friends use messenger a lot. I rarely use conversations on here which is weird too.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Aug 13, 2014)

Almost exclusively Whatsapp, Viber, and Facetime these days.

Facebook Messenger seems alright to me but I only use it once in a while if doing mass communications. Sharing texts/photos/video between friends seems easiest on Whatsapp.


----------



## editor (Nov 17, 2014)

Now this looks mighty bloody fine. 



> Hello guys. As most of you know, chat in Facebook app doesn't work anymore and now you need to install Messenger app. At the moment is not the same for all the countries, as far as I know they are slowly migrating chat from app to Messenger only.
> 
> I made this simple app to enable chat again in main Facebook app without installing Messenger.
> 
> ...


Downloading now.


----------



## editor (Nov 17, 2014)

And it works. Fantastic!


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 17, 2014)

Will have a look at that as uninstalled Facebook, and it's a pain keep going into it.  I use Viber now, as normal text messages cost me


----------



## Geri (Dec 11, 2014)

Just received this rather charming message on Facebook.



> Fuck you, you piece of shit for supporting muslims and their stinky religion. I hope they behead you so you learn your lesson you fucking piece of shit!


----------



## Orang Utan (Dec 11, 2014)

Change your settings!


----------



## Geri (Dec 12, 2014)

I blocked him after he said he would track me down, and asked me for my address.


----------



## Orang Utan (Dec 12, 2014)

I block anyone who I don't know from messaging me


----------



## sim667 (Dec 15, 2014)

Does anyone use wickr at all?

Its an encrypted chat program


----------



## JTG (Dec 15, 2014)

Geri said:


> Just received this rather charming message on Facebook.


I had a fascinating exchange of views with some bloke in Dublin who messaged me some abuse after I said something mildly disparaging about Lance Armstrong on fb. Fundamentalists of all stripes are barking


----------



## editor (Mar 4, 2015)

I see that the latest Android update of Facebook has broken the in-app messenger hack. 

This looks a decent workaround for now: 
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.danvelazco.fbwrapper


----------



## mango5 (Mar 5, 2015)

Not just me experiencing that then pinkmonkey


----------



## editor (Mar 6, 2015)

mango5 said:


> Not just me experiencing that then pinkmonkey


Good news! There is a fix!
Uninstall the new version, download the older Facebook V27.0.0.0.7 http://www.apkmirror.com/apk/faceboo...-apk-download/ and all will be well again (and be sure to untick auto-update for the app in the Play Store).




(From: http://forum.xda-developers.com/android/apps-games/app-facebook-chat-enabler-t2934179/page660


----------



## editor (Mar 6, 2015)

The amount of joy this fix has given me is quite disproportionate!


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Mar 7, 2015)

I really don't like messenger at all, not least the dodgy privacy stuff it does I just don't use FB like WhatsApp so don't need it to be a messaging service...


----------



## Barking_Mad (Mar 8, 2015)

Apparently FB used to store any message you typed in but didn't actually post or send. Keylogging basically.


----------



## Fez909 (Mar 8, 2015)

Kid_Eternity said:


> I really don't like messenger at all, not least the dodgy privacy stuff it does I just don't use FB like WhatsApp so don't need it to be a messaging service...


Do you not find WhatsApp really dodgy? It uploads your entire contacts to their servers automatically and doesn't properly secure this data. I've never used WhatsApp but my contact details are on their servers, presumably, and I don't know exactly what that means. Is it just my name and phone number? Does it take any additional information that my friends/family stored against my contact, too, like DOB, address, etc? I have no idea.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 8, 2015)

I don't get what What's App is for.


----------



## twentythreedom (Mar 8, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> I don't get what What's App is for.


Kids


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 8, 2015)

twentythreedom said:


> Kids


What's wrong with texting?


----------



## twentythreedom (Mar 8, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> What's wrong with texting?


Handwritten letters ftw


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 8, 2015)

I don't get why there are apps for things that work well enough in the first place. Things like Tapatalk and Instagram.


----------



## editor (Mar 8, 2015)

Fez909 said:


> Do you not find WhatsApp really dodgy? It uploads your entire contacts to their servers automatically and doesn't properly secure this data. I've never used WhatsApp but my contact details are on their servers, presumably, and I don't know exactly what that means. Is it just my name and phone number? Does it take any additional information that my friends/family stored against my contact, too, like DOB, address, etc? I have no idea.


I prefer Telegram.


----------



## Fez909 (Mar 8, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> I don't get why there are apps for things that work well enough in the first place. Things like Tapatalk and Instagram.


Tapatalk actually makes the boards much easier to use on a mobile, and also faster.

With stuff like WhatsApp, I think it was initially that Americans didn't get texts included in their mobile phone contracts. They still pay a lot for them now, I think. So if you can get a data-allowance, then you can send "texts" free using WhatsApp etc.

Instagram - not sure what you think it replaced/supplements.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 8, 2015)

Fez909 said:


> Tapatalk actually makes the boards much easier to use on a mobile, and also faster.


No it doesn't. It works perfectly well on chrome. So many features don't work on tapatalk too. It's so not worth the bother.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 8, 2015)

Fez909 said:


> Instagram - not sure what you think it replaced/supplements.


People post links to instagram on Twitter and Facebook when there is no need, cos you can cut out the middle man and post the pic directly.


----------



## Fez909 (Mar 8, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> No it doesn't. It works perfectly well on chrome. So many features don't work on tapatalk too. It's so not worth the bother.


Load a page full of YouTube videos on Chrome then load the same page on Tapatalk and tell me which one is faster. 


Orang Utan said:


> People post links to instagram on Twitter and Facebook when there is no need, cos you can cut out the middle man and post the pic directly.


I don't use any of those sites, but why should they have to upload it three times?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Mar 8, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> People post links to instagram on Twitter and Facebook when there is no need, cos you can cut out the middle man and post the pic directly.


Lots of people just follow Instagram, grandad. It's specialised for posting images.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 8, 2015)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Lots of people just follow Instagram, grandad. It's specialised for posting images.


Well it's a right pain on the twitters and facebooks


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 8, 2015)

Fez909 said:


> Load a page full of YouTube videos on Chrome then load the same page on Tapatalk and tell me which one is faster.


Still not worth the aggro


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Mar 15, 2015)

editor said:


> I prefer Telegram.



Me too just a damn shame I've not been able to convince too many people to leave WhatsApp etc for it...


----------



## purenarcotic (Mar 15, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> What's wrong with texting?



It costs though, dunnit.  Whatsapp, skype, snapchat etc are all free.  Granted you need internet but given how many free wifi hotspots there are and stuff, you need hardly any credit to maintain a busy social life.


----------



## 8den (Mar 15, 2015)

It followed me across fucking Ireland the other week. It was like enemy of the state.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 15, 2015)

purenarcotic said:


> It costs though, dunnit.  Whatsapp, skype, snapchat etc are all free.  Granted you need internet but given how many free wifi hotspots there are and stuff, you need hardly any credit to maintain a busy social life.


Most phone deals have free texts. I don't think I've ever paid for them


----------



## ohmyliver (Mar 15, 2015)

Fez909 said:


> Do you not find WhatsApp really dodgy? It uploads your entire contacts to their servers automatically and doesn't properly secure this data. I've never used WhatsApp but my contact details are on their servers, presumably, and I don't know exactly what that means. Is it just my name and phone number? Does it take any additional information that my friends/family stored against my contact, too, like DOB, address, etc? I have no idea.



It's also now owned by Facebook. 
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/feb/19/facebook-buys-whatsapp-16bn-deal


----------



## wiskey (Mar 15, 2015)

Kid_Eternity said:


> Me too just a damn shame I've not been able to convince too many people to leave WhatsApp etc for it...



I've done ok at persuading people ... and by refusing to give WA any money that seemed to remove me from it, until about 6mo later they said 'oh you've gone here have a free year'  so now I have both again.


----------



## editor (Jun 6, 2016)

The evil cunts at Facebook and trying to force Android users to download their shit app.



> The Facebook Messenger app (actually, any Facebook app, to be honest) is one of the most data-hungry and battery-eating apps out there. That is why when Facebook stopped allowing people to use the messenger function on the main app, some still opted to use the browser version of the social network if they wanted to use the messaging app. But now, it looks like Facebook is pushing Android users to download the stand-alone app if they want to keep using Messenger.
> 
> 
> There is no official announcement yet from Facebook saying that you won’t be able to access your messages on the browser version. But some have already been receiving notifications saying, "Soon you'll only be able to view your messages from Messenger.” Plus, several Android users are already reporting that when they do try to access their messages, they are being redirected to the Messenger on the Google Play Store.
> ...



Facebook seemingly forcing Android users to download Messenger app


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jun 6, 2016)

Are people still banging on about that "it needs access to the microphone OMG Facebook are listening in to your conversations" bullshit? 

The messenger app is great. Free phone calls to everyone that has it ie. Everyone.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jun 6, 2016)

Oh no! I don't have it. Heaven knows how I'm going to make and receive phone calls on my phone now!


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jun 6, 2016)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Oh no! I don't have it. Heaven knows how I'm going to make and receive phone calls on my phone now!


It's the free international calls bit thats useful for me. I know there's dozens of alternative voip apps but FB messenger is the one that everyone I know has and is thus the default option.


----------



## Dan U (Jun 6, 2016)

Facebook advertised a festival in my feed that I was talking about in a conversation on messenger. 

Their bots definitely read what you say for advertising purposes


----------



## Jon-of-arc (Jun 6, 2016)

Dan U said:


> Facebook advertised a festival in my feed that I was talking about in a conversation on messenger.
> 
> Their bots definitely read what you say for advertising purposes



Yeah, that stuff defo happens.  Something similar with my youtube viewing and then the results google predicts as you type.

So say I had been watching a video about Stephen Farelly, and then go and google "stephen f", Mr Farelly, who ever he happens to be, will suddenly appear as the top suggestion above Stephen Fry.  It's probably almost as if we agreed to let them do stuff like this when we ticked the "yes" to the 50 page Ts&Cs doc that none of us has ever read.


----------



## Dan U (Jun 6, 2016)

Yeah am sure I agreed to it but still, found it a bit much. 

Over to whatsapp...


----------



## Jon-of-arc (Jun 6, 2016)

Dan U said:


> Yeah am sure I agreed to it but still, found it a bit much.
> 
> Over to whatsapp...



Different Ts&Cs (I think they've promised to remain ad free), but still FB owned.  They'll find a way to monetise you.  You don't pay £20billion odd for a messaging app (that has slightly less functionality than your own existing one) just to bring in the competition.  The venture capitalists who funded it will have had an "exit strategy" (the switch after the bait to make the bucks) from day 1.  It will become obvious some time soon.


----------



## Dan U (Jun 6, 2016)

Yeah that is true. It's the end to end encryption that appeals as well.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jun 6, 2016)

We are in the worst period for messaging on the internet that I can remember. Dozens of different standards, none of them interoperable (okay, iPhone messages work with SMS too but that's a bit of an edge case). All proprietorial and run by companies who just want to keep you using their services. It is literally worse than AOL.


----------



## Throbbing Angel (Jun 6, 2016)

I don't understand the appeal tbh if you're using your phone.
If you need to have a deal with enough data so you can leave the data on in order to receive messages, you normally get plentymuchSMStexts thrown in, so why not use them, if you're just messaging.


----------



## joustmaster (Jun 6, 2016)

Throbbing Angel said:


> I don't understand the appeal tbh if you're using your phone.
> If you need to have a deal with enough data so you can leave the data on in order to receive messages, you normally get plentymuchSMStexts thrown in, so why not use them, if you're just messaging.


I have completely stopped using SMS in favour of Whatsapp and FB.
Scrolling back it seems the last one I sent was in March


----------



## 2hats (Jun 6, 2016)

Throbbing Angel said:


> I don't understand the appeal tbh if you're using your phone.
> If you need to have a deal with enough data so you can leave the data on in order to receive messages, you normally get plentymuchSMStexts thrown in, so why not use them, if you're just messaging.


Because data based instant messaging works transparently over GSM, wifi and across (almost all) geopolitical boundaries (and consequently in the absence of GSM signal) without the potential for acquiring additional surprise costs? (Outside of your home country or those included for roaming within some sort of plan it's straightforward to confine communication to wifi only and control further incoming/outgoing comms charges which you can't do to the same degree with SMS - incoming/outgoing and SMS to MMS conversion charges). It also easily facilitates sharing of various multimedia/documents.

As regards the subject of the thread - FB trawl your data (which includes your communications) to monetise it. Not a surprise really. Don't use the dedicated FB messenger app (it'll help itself to a lot of your phone data anyway eg contacts in your addressbook, SMS log and contents, phone call log, location, other account details, media metadata, wifi network details, and access to your microphone, to name a few). Use a separate, end to end encrypted, messaging app. Access FB messages using a separate dedicated, web browser (one with incognito type features, limiting tracking and phone resource/data access, would be best).


----------



## Dan U (Jun 6, 2016)

Yeah re messaging abroad, my Mrs is in Australia for a month with our kids. I'd be bankrupt sending an receiving videos by text.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jun 6, 2016)

2hats said:


> Don't use the dedicated FB messenger app (it'll help itself to a lot of your phone data anyway eg contacts in your addressbook, SMS log and contents, phone call log, location, other account details, media metadata, wifi network details, and access to your microphone, to name a few)


I'm sure I should care about all that, but... Well, I don't really. As far as I can tell all they ultimately want that data for is to chuck ads my way.


----------



## salem (Jun 7, 2016)

FB have refused me access to my messages via my phone browser for a while now. It's a joke as the browser worked perfectly well - it just doesn't allow them all the juicy access to your phone. I did install it in the end as I missed a couple of messages. I let it have only restricted privileges (no camera, mic etc). I can see it's already taking up quarter of a gig of space on my phone though  think it might go again

The other two work arounds I found were mbasic.facebook.com (a really simple version of the site made for shitty mobiles but actually works OK) or visiting www.messenger.com with 'request desktop mode' enabled.


----------



## Guineveretoo (Jun 7, 2016)

A friend of mine had this the other day, and I just thought he was being drunk and had pressed the wrong button, but the next day, when I was out and about and relying on a phone number someone had sent to me in a Facebook message, I also got an announcement telling me that all my messages had been transferred to Messenger and that I could only access them via that route.

Not only has it become a principle for me that I will not be forced to download an app I don't want, I needed that phone number and was not able to download an app at the time even if I had wanted to. I was so pissed off that I found a way round it, and it hasn't asked me again.

Fingers crossed.

Not sure exactly what I did, if I'm honest...


----------



## sim667 (Jun 7, 2016)

Dan U said:


> Facebook advertised a festival in my feed that I was talking about in a conversation on messenger.
> 
> Their bots definitely read what you say for advertising purposes


I cracked a joke about cocaine and prostitues in one, and then started getting adverts for escorts.


----------



## Dan U (Jun 7, 2016)

sim667 said:


> I cracked a joke about cocaine and prostitues in one, and then started getting adverts for escorts.



could be awkward that!


----------



## Throbbing Angel (Jun 7, 2016)

'Here's what your friends are looking at...'


----------



## editor (Jun 7, 2016)

"We care about your memories"... so we're going to randomly dredge up an old post and slap it on your profile in an attempt to generate more page views and more money for us.


----------



## Guineveretoo (Jun 7, 2016)

editor said:


> "We care about your memories"... so we're going to randomly dredge up an old post and slap it on your profile in an attempt to generate more page views and more money for us.


I know, but I have fallen for those a few times, even though I know I shouldn't, and lots of other people have as well. 

They're canny bastards, the folks at Facebook!


----------



## Sea Star (Jun 7, 2016)

As someone who has struggled to make contacts in the "real" world social media has been a godsend to me. I've met many other aspies/ auties now only thanks to social media (including my boyfriend) and I'd say that without social media and the support I received through that I may never have transitioned. So, its not all bad.


----------



## editor (Jun 7, 2016)

AuntiStella said:


> As someone who has struggled to make contacts in the "real" world social media has been a godsend to me. I've met many other aspies/ auties now only thanks to social media (including my boyfriend) and I'd say that without social media and the support I received through that I may never have transitioned. So, its not all bad.


Of course not, but Facebook's endless mission to make as much money for themselves whilst overriding their users' needs sure fucking rankles. And it doesn't have to be that way - this site is effectively a social network but without all the data grabbing, privacy encroaching, cash in bollocks.


----------



## Sea Star (Jun 7, 2016)

editor said:


> Of course not, but Facebook's endless mission to make as much money for themselves whilst overriding their users' needs sure fucking rankles. And it doesn't have to be that way - this site is effectively a social network but without all the data grabbing, privacy encroaching, cash in bollocks.


I'm not a big fan of Facebook. I pretty much only use it because the people I want to connect to it use it. If they were all on here Facebook wouldn't see the light of day in my life! 

But as great as great as this site is, if I had been relying on it for support when I transitioned I would have been sorely disappointed. Twitter, however, met my needs then. 

This site is great for some things and not so good for others which is why I'm on several different social networking sites I guess. 

And I only said this originally because I saw a general rubbishing of social media taking hold in this thread.


----------



## krtek a houby (Oct 19, 2017)

Bumping because a friend of mine has told me not to use the new facebook messenger. She's sent on a link to a Fox news story about it. So I replied "fake news". She says it's not. They will go to jail, it's illegal. 

I've asked here whether she means Fox or Facebook.
Anyway, I assume this is old news at this stage or is it bs?


----------



## Guineveretoo (Oct 19, 2017)

krtek a houby said:


> Bumping because a friend of mine has told me not to use the new facebook messenger. She's sent on a link to a Fox news story about it. So I replied "fake news". She says it's not. They will go to jail, it's illegal.
> 
> I've asked here whether she means Fox or Facebook.
> Anyway, I assume this is old news at this stage or is it bs?


What is illegal?


----------



## The Boy (Oct 19, 2017)

Guineveretoo said:


> What is illegal?



To use a legal name, or something.


----------



## Guineveretoo (Oct 19, 2017)

The Boy said:


> To use a legal name, or something.
> 
> View attachment 118167


Oh, that's been going for ages. But it doesn't have anything to do with facebook, does it?


----------



## The Boy (Oct 19, 2017)

Guineveretoo said:


> Oh, that's been going for ages. But it doesn't have anything to do with facebook, does it?



No, sorry.  I was just meaning that the idea of "they" going to jail because "it" is illegal* was sounding a bit Freeman on the land.

*(whoever they are, and wherever it is).


----------



## krtek a houby (Oct 19, 2017)

Guineveretoo said:


> What is illegal?



That's what I'm wondering!


----------



## Maggot (Oct 19, 2017)

I use Friendly now instead, much better than Messenger, gives you notifications and messages:  Friendly, Simple Apps for iOS and Android


----------



## stuff_it (Dec 20, 2017)

Sea Star said:


> As someone who has struggled to make contacts in the "real" world social media has been a godsend to me. I've met many other aspies/ auties now only thanks to social media (including my boyfriend) and I'd say that without social media and the support I received through that I may never have transitioned. So, its not all bad.


I have several friends who are on the autistic spectrum who only really communicate effectively online. People who can manage a lively and interesting discussion on messenger (and on many other social media channels), but are barely able to communicate at all face to face.


----------

