I saw this article this morning in the New York Times online:
Four Nerds and a Cry to Arms Against Facebook. 

There's been much buzz about Facebook's perceived (mostly true) lack of true privacy on its' site, some of which have come from the New York Times, interestingly enough. This buzz is enough to make people question the integrity of a social networking site like Facebook, along with their participation in a site like that or MySpace or any other social networking site. Because of this, programmers are rebelling against Facebook, creating their own site where users wouldn't have to surrended their personal data. 

And?

You're using the same technology that Facebook already uses, and claiming you're offering different controls for the protection of your privacy? Sorry, not buying it. Besides, once money comes into the picture, this new social networking site will do exactly what Facebook is virulently accused of doing. Once upon a time, Facebook was the new knight in shining armor, ready to rescue MySpacers from the evil intrusion of Britney Spears' videos and Tila Tequila's coke-fueled birthday bash and endless Transformers trailers. Same thing that we're bitching at Facebook, we'll be bitching about the new kid on the block, once they've sold out to the highest bidder.

Without sounding like Facebook's Johnny Cochrane (i.e., not trying to defend their practices), I think this is a case of a collective bark up the wrong tree.  If you're so concerned about your lack of privacy on Facebook - or on any other social networking site, for that matter - then social networking sites aren't for you. They're not the greatest of controls, but Facebook does offer enough controls to where you can lock down specific bits of personal data; I've got my Facebook profile - right here, by the way, and if you want to send me a friend request, hit me - on pretty tight lockdown, to where only friends can see my info, photos, wall, etc.

As for data sharing, there's a simple solution: if you don't want Facebook to share your personal info on other web sites, then you don't have to allow it. Period. 

There's this conception that somehow Facebook is in control of your data, and I can't help but think that's the Paranoia Brigade coming out from their basements and dishing out Big-Brother-is-Watching conspiracies for us to become frightened of. Remember: you as a user are in control of your data, not Facebook. You share as much data, or as little, as you want to share. And you have every right

Additionally, since Facebook is free, are we to expect that because we don't pay a monthly access fee, that we're now entitled to the most stringent of personal data safeguarding that not paying a fee can buy? 

Ah, but what about, say, Bank of America. Bank of America's banking site is free, but because I'm a paying customer, I absolutely expect that whatever fees I pay to the bank go towards ensuring that my personal and financial data is safeguarded against unauthorized views, or hacking.

That's a big difference between what "free" means on Facebook and what "free" means on Bank of America.  Facebook is free. And because it's free, we can be choosy. If we choose to share personal data, then that's our choice. If we don't want to make that choice, same thing. 

I won't lie: I like Facebook. And I don't mind sharing what data I've provided, because I'm in control of what data Facebook has of mine in their possession. And no one is forcing Facebook users to give up every shred of personal info. They never should, and they never will. 

So sleep easy, citizens of the World Wide Web. If people want your personal data online, there's other ways that data can be accessed besides bad ol' Facebook. Hell, Google yourselves once in a while; you'll shit yourself blind over how much of an online footprint you're leaving behind.