I have tried almost all of these arguments and simply put, the benefit that facebook gives most people is a much higher value than their perceived cost of privacy (or so they think).
Until the house is burning down across the street, it is often difficult to sell fire insurance, and they dont see the massive data mart that fb is.
That's pretty much it. Since so many of my friends are on it, the benefit to being on it is high. (And after a transcontinental and trans-oceanic move, it's much easier than staying in contact in person.)
But I do limit my Likes - I don't Like any ads or commercial entities, with 1 exception - I endorse musicians. Since I am a musician and many of my friends are as well, I Like their music pages.
I don't Like Books/Movies/Games, whatever else. My profile info is relatively sparse and I ignore FB's attempts to make me fill it out further - everything on my profile is already publicly accessible info.
Ultimately I'm useless for marketing data anyway. I've participated in voluntary consumer surveys a few times, and none of the questions were about activities or products I've ever used. I'm so far removed from mainstream/popular culture that there are no advertisers marketing anything of interest to me.
It doesn't actually matter if you limit your likes.
From the article:
Like shadow profiles of people, Facebook can "infer a like" based on
other information it has about you, like what you read all over the
internet or what you do in apps where you log in with Facebook.
Yeah, I don't use FB login for anything else. I don't click FB Like buttons on other web sites. FB can't tell what you're reading on other web sites without your explicit action.
Even the Snowden affair didn't make much people "buy fire insurance". I believe good, free and easy to use doxxing tools could help people change their opinion on the value of their privacy.
Until the house is burning down across the street, it is often difficult to sell fire insurance, and they dont see the massive data mart that fb is.