Of course, the Ministry of Antiquities should stop using the service the rest of the world finds perfectly acceptable but that 1% of vocal HN'ers are rabidly opposed too.

Not to knock IG, but any entity, especially a governmental branch, should be the canonical source for what they produce. It’s fine to use services like IG, but when it goes away or people stop using it (hello, MySpace) you’re left with link rot. By all means, get it out there, but don’t hand over the pink slip with the valet key.

That is ironic. I bet in next 1000 years these tombs with all their hieroglyphic story will stay as-is, but digital material about their discovery may be gone in 10.

Now we should all forgot about ethics and privacy because almost everyone find it acceptable, mostly because they doesn't care ?

Boycotts rarely work. We'd be better off raising awareness of Facebook's misdeeds and using that to awareness to build a grass roots campaign for policy change. In parallel with that, we should be having a discussion about what sort of legislation would be most effective at curtailing Facebook's (and everyone else's) bad behaviour.

Or maybe, people could choose not to use services that don't respect their privacy if they care about privacy? Surely, that's not expecting too much from people?

No, it's just mean almost everyone find it inline with their ethics but not yours.

Either the service is acceptable or the service is unacceptable (harmful). What percentage of HN'ers you think oppose/like it seems largely irrelevant.

>the rest of the world finds perfectly acceptable but that 1% of vocal HN'ers are rabidly opposed too.

Perfectly acceptable, but yet they screech about how Facebook steals their data and demands that the government do something about it. I think they do have problems with the service: they'd like to get the full advantages without having to bear any cost for them.