111–119 of 119 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't the only logical endpoint for Facebook to become a VR world where we all spend 100% of our time? That's what a forever-continuing revenue increase would create, right? And that's exactly how the incentive structures exist right now. I don't really like that society places such high emphasis on structures that create dystopias.
>VR world where we all spend 100% of our time Farmville !! I can't wait !!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At the end of the day society has to decide, are we going to let people make there own decisions or are we going to decide for them? It might very from topic to topic (ex: tobacco vs. unhealthy foods), but it's one definitive answer per topic.
Right, but as I stated above that debate is out of scope. I'm just disputing the notion that fostering addiction amounts to "creating value."
Kill your Facebook. Seriously. You'll feel so liberated. And showing people pictures of your recent life when you meet them or email them is so fun and you get so much more attention and conversation out of it. Best decision of my life!
Is it that they become othered once they pass a certain size, or go public?
What gives?
I mean, I get it that people don't like the influence of VC and finance, but that's part of the game with scaled companies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe you can handle your social life fine but some of us who are more incompetent at it like the assistance of some automation. I'm only partly joking.
I don't know about that. I'm just honestly confused what Facebook offers for those purposes that "traditional" tools don't.
Facebook also serves as an auto-updated contact list. If I update my email or phone number, many of my contacts won't have the new information. FB doesn't have that problem. In fact I can put my phone number and email on my FB profile and my contacts can optionally auto-sync that info right to their phones so it is always up-to-date. It's possible to be "friends" with someone but not "follow" them so you don't see their posts in your normal timeline but you still get their contact info. You can also make closed or open groups which are helpful for event planning and multicast messages, and "friend lists" which let you customize the reach of each post. I guess you could do that last one with email too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think Philip Morris would not be wrong here. The problem here is the difference in values that individuals have. A lot of us might think of wasting time of Facebook or Casino is a bad idea but for many people it would not be the case. Facebook is essentially competing with Snapchat, Youtube, TV for time and if Facebook wins it means they are offering more value than others. People aren't going to read more books or…
Yes, there are lots of satisfying addictions competing for our time. That doesn't absolve any of them for the harm they cause. Anyone selling ads is trying to addict you to get you to see more ads. It's immoral.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That so many exceptions and alternative interpretations are possible makes "value" a meaningless term. Perhaps some day reporters won't go MEGO[1] when hearing it. 1. https://www.mattcutts.com/blog/mego/
Value is just like a variable, it is a place holder for what matters. And the value of the value can vary depending on the person or the situation. It could be a positive or a negative value, a value of high importance or minimal importance. Assigning something a value just basically means you're not entirely disinterested in it.
All i think of when I see the word facebook is who would use that data mining, censoring, manipulative product. To each their own but I think many dont see whats going on with it.
> many dont see whats going on with it I think we need some realistic examples of what could go wrong. To many, online privacy issues are a bit too hypothetical and abstract.
http://www.cnet.com/news/facebooks-newest-privacy-problem-fa...