Very cool Mike. It's kind of a rhetorical question, asking what's wrong with In-Your-Facebook, but it is well worth bringing up because it is such a massive manipulation of so many social and personal issues. Like more than a few here I saw the b.s. from the concept alone and have never visited the intel site. Not surprised with all of the disconnect some have created that has caused the insecurities, the loneliness, the superficial construct with an emotional pull to it, drawing some into the unbelievable nature of such shallow self-absorption .
What a boring life filled with the details of someone else's life, just as it would be creepy to have someone I do or don't know looking at the mundane details of my life, things I'm not even interested in. Those media creations are activities produced to draw awareness away from really knowing your own power, a process that often involves taking yourself out of the equation.
Just the words alone are annoying. I-Phone, looking at the Twit twitting, it's my face on face-book, it's my space-not yours. If i ask someone to look at me and not at the soul looking out from my eyes they won't be looking inside of themselves, and that's usually the only thing I find worthy of both of our attentions, our shared inner truths or our pains in need of healing. That form of data collection is not called Inner Truths or True Self-Ease (selfies) for just these reasons. It is meant not to look for value. It is only the false face of the temporal world cloaked in some false show of immediacy. Yes it has caught your "I", but can you truly see anything from inside of that electronic shell?
Maybe I should change my name here on this forum to some initials or a couple of numbers to insure that there is no 'me' in the sharing. I used the 'Hey it's me' as a form of one friend talking with another, like Hey, Friend, it's just me. A form of intimacy in a non-descript format......
Naah....no need to do that. Ya'll here are much more aware than me going off bein' all over thoughty and such.
On some meaningful level our exteriors are robotic in their precious time containment and not fully reflective of our creative, infinite loving selves, what with all of the social correctness directed on outward appearances and the whims of corporate fashion's greed for unending profitability.
Did anyone ever think they'd be conned into sharing such trivial details about their lives when they were young? When Bill Hicks said he wanted all in the advertising industry, the Bernaysian-spawned genetic progenitors of social media in forms like FB, to kill themselves, he was spot on in so many ways. No, seriously, kill yourselves. That's the only ghandian thing to do, even the buddha would let you sit on the thousand petal lotus for a moment, just to alleviate the world of the pain you've created, you more than useless f***s.
Saw a picture of a childhood schoolmate and neighbor years ago, on a high school yearbook site. He looked just like I thought he'd be when we were both young. I didn't spend much time with him then and I doubt that I'd be much more than a counselor to him now. He had let himself go and society didn't do him or his health any good at all. I realistically understand that there is good cause to not have had any contact with many from my past, even with the many genetic siblings out there. Without judging, and thinking of them in the only ways I could do in a positive manner, I see that is much better to have no contact than telling them I told you so. The divide, tho not in my thoughts now, would be even greater and would be of no good service to them.
I would have named the organization Superficial Book. It will hold you so close in it's embrace and look so far up your ass that it'll make you cringe, or smile, just thinking about it.