Any alternatives for those of us that choose not to use FB? A mailing list, forum, wiki?

I'm up for taking action but wouldn't want to touch commercial networking sites with a bargepole; they are businesses just like any other and are only motivated by their own profits. FB for instance are planning to use all your FB details and connections for the benefit of their advertisers.
 http://www.commercialalert.org/news/archive/2007/08/facebook-gets-personal-with-ad-targeting-plan

On a more sinister note, what happens when authoritarian governments get access to that sort of information? Call me paranoid but I prefer forms of communications that tend to safeguard privacy and anonymity rather than undermine it.

The above poster has a point. You can be sure that the police and intelligence agencies (not just ours) monitor sites like Facebook (and Indymedia) with a fine tooth comb. Why else do you think Menwith Hill exists? Fine if you've got nothing to hide.

 http://albumoftheday.com/facebook/

Who funded the start-up of Facebook? What use could government agencies have for a web site where people chronicle every aspect of their lives real-time, who they are friends with, what books they have read, their address, date of birth, current employer, political outlook....?

Facebook using its user data for targeted advertising is merely the monetarisation of that data. The real issue is why people want to publish their entire life history on a commercial web site which promises to share that data with any government agency which asks for it.

All social networking sites (including bebo, facebook, friends reunited etc) are not there for your happiness, security or privacy.

See "Big Brothers, Big Facebook: Your Orwellian Community",
 http://www.wombles.org.uk/article2007061004.php

There is no need to wrap your head in tin foil. Just don't post your life history on the web for all pigs to see.

++++

Who funded the facebook launch?

Further funding came in the form of $12.7 million from venture capital firm Accel Partners. Accel's manager James Breyer was former chair of the National Venture Capital Association (NVAC). [1] Breyer served on NVAC's board with Gilman Louie, CEO of In-Q-Tel, [5] a venture capital firm established by the Central Intelligence Agency in 1999. [6] This firm works in various aspects of information technology and intelligence, including most notably "nurturing data mining technologies."

Breyer has also served on the board of BBN Technologies, a research and development firm known for spearheading the ARPANET, or what we know today as the Internet. [7] In October of 2004, Dr. Anita Jones climbed on board, becoming a part of a firm packed with leaders from other areas of Silicon Valley's venture capital community, including none other than Gilman Louie...

Jones herself served on the Board of Directors for In-Q-Tel, and was previously the Director of Defense Research and Engineering for the U.S. Department of Defense. Her responsibilities included serving as an advisor to the Secretary of Defense and overseeing the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).

While the nearly $13 million that came from Accel to fund The facebook certainly looks suspicious and unfortunately disturbing after reviewing all of this information, the only problem on the surface seems to be the appearance of some incestuous relationships between the Pentagon, the CIA, and these venture capital firms. But this goes further than just the initial appearances.

DARPA shot to national fame in 2002 when John Markoff of the New York Times announced the existence of the "Information Awareness Office" (IAO). [8] According to Wikipedia, "the IAO has the stated mission to gather as much information as possible about everyone, in a centralized location, for easy perusal by the United States government, including (though not limited to) Internet activity, credit card purchase histories, airline ticket purchases, car rentals, medical records, educational transcripts, driver's licenses, utility bills, tax returns, and any other available data."

See "Big Brothers, Big Facebook: Your Orwellian Community",
 http://www.wombles.org.uk/article2007061004.php

there are many, many problems with using facebook for any kind of organising. the first is the inherent insecurity - unless massive security precautions are taken it is easy to figure out who is behind a given action, and who they know. why bother refusing to answer a stop and search if a laptop and half an hour can give the cops all the info they want and more?

that's before you even get to facebook's probable compliance in the event of a police request for data.

the other problem is the one that has come up here already. I'm quite interested in this project; however, since I don't use facebook, basically I'm getting a massive fuck you from the people involved. organising online is exclusionary as it is without restricting things even further to the users of one particular site.

oh, and:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_social_network_websites_in_investigations

I have slightly less of a problem with the use of facebook as a means of augmenting existing publicity (e.g. an event is called publicly and facebook happens to be one means of advertising it) for legal events. however, since this by necessity will involve at least discussion of illegal activity, and is exclusively for people who have chosen to use one particular site...

yeah. fuck that.