Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook at Work

work.fb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 304 posts

Re: Facebook at Work

#231

Post by TeMPOraL »

Shish2k wrote: post #203
droopybuns wrote: post #108

This is a product I would actively shun. For better of worse, my prejudice of facebook is that it is an outstanding source of the following types of content: Humblebrag b.s. instagram photos passive aggressive shitposting about politics I can use social networks at work- but if they actually brought facebook in and demanded that we used it, I might consider quitting. I'd probably write a python script to repost rando…

Those posts aren't coming from facebook - they're coming from the people you choose to add as friends. I choose my friends carefully, and my news feed has none of that :)

This. Quality of your feed reveals the a) quality of the people you associate with, and b) quality of your interest (what doesn't come from your friends comes from fanpages you liked).

Note that you can use various controls to mute the kind of posts you don't like and encourage ones you like. Facebook feed is kind of like a mirror of oneself ;).

Re: Facebook at Work

#232

Post by aprdm »

Swizec wrote: post #205
bambax wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Upvoted for the positioning part: brand extension is almost always a mistake. In this case maybe they want to leverage the fact that almost everyone has fb, but in the mind of users fb is not associated with "work". And it's likely to hurt their main brand because it will drain more "coolness" out of it.

Or, as is already the case with a lot of us millenials: We have fb. Everyone we know has fb. Everyone we get to know is added to fb. There is no distinction between private life and work life. Fb is where we keep track of who we know. Fb is where we ask around if anyone knows of a company looking for a person. Fb is where we ask around if any person is looking for a company. Fb is where we group text. Fb is where we…

I would never add someone from my work at facebook. Not before we become very good friends... In fact, I have only 2 or 3 people from my past 5 years working on my facebook.

Re: Facebook at Work

#233

Post by kmfrk »

What strikes me is how enterprise-y the design of theh website is. It's pretty much the antithesis of Slack.

A lot of people rely on Facebook for engaging audiences and social media campaigns, so it's very understandable that some companies might want to use this. I don't see this as a replace ment for Slack, though, but rather some of the dreadful social media platform integrations out there.

Re: Facebook at Work

#234

Post by tempodox »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #191
United857 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As opposed to them being on Google or Microsoft's?

Those companies undergo IT industry standard audits. https://www.microsoft.com/online/legal/v2/en-us/MOS_PTC_Secu... https://www.google.com/work/soc3.html Facebook, on the other hand, is an all-around shitshow.

Being an all-around shitshow hasn't ever stopped anyone from overselling themselves ad nauseam. And in case of FB, the overwhelming part of the audience is buying it.

Re: Facebook at Work

#235

Post by tempodox »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #191
United857 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As opposed to them being on Google or Microsoft's?

Those companies undergo IT industry standard audits. https://www.microsoft.com/online/legal/v2/en-us/MOS_PTC_Secu... https://www.google.com/work/soc3.html Facebook, on the other hand, is an all-around shitshow.

Being an all-around shitshow hasn't ever stopped anyone from overselling themselves ad nauseam. And in case of FB, the overwhelming part of the audience is buying it.

Re: Facebook at Work

#236

Post by brown9-2 »

Swizec wrote: post #205
bambax wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Upvoted for the positioning part: brand extension is almost always a mistake. In this case maybe they want to leverage the fact that almost everyone has fb, but in the mind of users fb is not associated with "work". And it's likely to hurt their main brand because it will drain more "coolness" out of it.

Or, as is already the case with a lot of us millenials: We have fb. Everyone we know has fb. Everyone we get to know is added to fb. There is no distinction between private life and work life. Fb is where we keep track of who we know. Fb is where we ask around if anyone knows of a company looking for a person. Fb is where we ask around if any person is looking for a company. Fb is where we group text. Fb is where we…

There is no distinction between private life and work life

This seems like an often repeated claim that has never really been proven in any meaningful way.

Re: Facebook at Work

#237

Post by quaffapint »

kriro wrote: post #165

I've seen a couple of the "let's bring social networks to the workplace" products and quite frankly none have impressed me so far. The real problem is not providing great technology but actually getting people in corporate environments to use it in a meaningful way. These projects usually end in the same manner...network is rolled out, used for a couple of weeks and fades into obscurity rarely used (and often leaving…

As mentioned in your first paragraph is exactly what has happened in our mega-corp. People are too afraid to post anything general to the entire corp public, and anything they need to talk to specific people about they use IM or Email.

Re: Facebook at Work

#238

Post by spinchange »

morgante wrote: post #157
melted wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's only asynchronous is you have willpower, which is finite and easily exhausted, and if there's no expectation of realtime response on the other end, which there nearly always is these days. Whoever comes out with a viable system that is explicitly async (like mailman, or a good secretary) will really benefit humanity.

It's like normal Facebook, which I don't think even the biggest of addicts treat as a synchronous system. The entire structure of the application is for you to post and consume updates at different times. You're going to have a hard time convincing me that Facebook is synchronous when the entire power of News Feed (and what makes Facebook so much more powerful than Facebook) is its ability to keep you updated without…

It does not require constant attention, but in fact it is addictng for users and people do sit and refresh their feeds for extended periods of time, watch the live activity stream on the side, or engage in chat, etc. Facebook wants you to spend a lot of time on Facebook and optimizes for this. They do not expect people to quickly check the site and leave and I would suggest most people don't do that. Or they they do, but they do it so repeatedly (continuous partial attention) it's even worse.

Edit: I would just add that in an environment where every site action has some kind of real time notification tied to it, the async nature/expectation is greatly diminished. Especially in a work context. And so now you have to add 'good job!' and water cooler type notifications to that cognitive overhead too.

Re: Facebook at Work

#239

Post by wyclif »

jnpatel wrote: post #162
encoderer wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook actually uses Facebook heavily internally. Groups, calendars, etc. It's certainly not a mandate, it's used because it works for them.

I'd argue that they consciously make it work for them internally, despite lots of pain points solved by other tools better suited for the job. For example, Zuck says he runs the company via Messenger - but a chat tool without selective muting/@mentions (or equivalent) is bound to be messy at the scale at which he's working. Similarly, Facebook's group chat isn't the best archival tool, nor does it support features li…

You're assuming that Facebook internal is the same, feature by feature, as commercial Facebook. I promise you it isn't.
Post reply on HN