But what if it is so big that there are no competitors and thus everyone has to use Facebook for social networking. Then you are stuck. It's not like cigarette , alcohol, fast food, tv, or car companies, in which there are tons of brands or alternatives.
There being only one tobacco company wouldn’t meant that smoking is good for you. Social media requiring you to use Facebook may just mean that social media is a cancer.
The issue is that smoking is more or less an end in itself, as opposed to social media which is a... medium. You don't "social media", you use social media to communicate, which is the actual end. And that's where things can go wrong.
A while ago there was a thread here on HN about how WhatsApp had got quite big in Brazil. The particular thing I remember was that apparently, in some school districts, you'd have to be on WhatsApp to get information about your kids' school. If not mistaken, this was at the time when the new privacy policy was being rolled out, with threats of being cut off from the service if you didn't accept it.
The school can only communicate via so many platforms, and they're likely to choose the biggest ones in their area. So when you're banned, or for some other reason can't or won't go on them, then it's a problem.
Of course, the bigger point is that maybe this kind of services shouldn't transit only through social media but should be available in an open way, but I won't hold my breath, at least for the time being.
> All of human history before Y2K would suggest otherwise.
Prior to centralized social networks, there were _many_ tools that have been abandoned since. For instance, you would have smaller internet boards dedicated to a specific hobby or a geographic area (many of these died out). Before that, you had fanzines, local community congregation points like bars and such. But those either disappeared, or their use changed (e.g. bars as a point to meet existing friends rather than to make new acquaintances).
It is a common pattern for new technologies to displace existing tools, which means that people refusing the new technology usually end up in a worse situation than before the technology appeared.
Socializing isn't something that someone can do as an individual. If the people you want to socialize with communicate using FB then you need to do so as well if you wish to communicate with them.
In addition, socializing is often at least somewhat "competitive". If you are less able to network then you will be at a disadvantage when seeking a job. If you are more difficult to communicate with, then you are likely to be left out of group decisions; even if by accident. If you are advocating a political position, then not having access to the most popular communication platforms is a major handycap.
