Nothing parent says suggest he's clueless. He just made a rather common sense observation that investing in a very niche hardware company has a very poor ROI if your goal is getting accounts. But by doing this he BETRAYED THE CAUSE, so you must call him clueless to put him in his place. Bah.
No. Wrong. This is clueless. If I spend a few hundred dollars to buy a headset and a game, Facebook has no legal or moral basis to take it away from me just because I won't use their other services.
It isn't a "privacy" issue. It's a theft issue. Being pro-theft is clueless.
FB shouldn't require an FB account for Oculus, and Oculus is not a major source of ad data for them. I replied up thread, but given the ubiquity of web and app tracking for FB, Oculus is almost certainly not incremental to their understanding of almost any user.
The point touched was very very narrow: Facebook very likely doesn't invest in Oculus for the sake of getting facebook accounts. I'd probably argue that it's not even for the sake of getting more info about the users, though I haven't yet. But I definitely didn't say anything like "they can kill your hardware device if you give up your account".
I did criticise tribalism, polarisation and automatically assuming that a discussion has exactly two sides. Hint hint.