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

Facebook is wrong, text is deathless

kottke.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 175 posts

Re: Facebook is wrong, text is deathless

#71

Post by jsloss »

gumby wrote: post #9

> Human brains process it absurdly well considering there's nothing really built-in for it. That's unclear. The sheer bitrate of reading suggests that it might tap into some deep structures -- hacking some parts of the visual and speech systems, if you prefer. I don't click on HN video links because I find video slow and frustrating way to learn almost anything. Text is so random access -- you can skip over boring bi…

Surprisingly, one app that is changing this paradigm for video is snapchat. Publishing content in a short series of clips that are skip-able with one tap is an enjoyable user experience.

Re: Facebook is wrong, text is deathless

#72

Post by PhasmaFelis »

> Mendelsohn went further, suggesting that stats showed the written word becoming all but obsolete, replaced by moving images and speech. "The best way to tell stories in this world, where so much information is coming at us, actually is video," Mendelsohn said.

This is going to go down in history alongside the mythical "640K ought to be enough for anybody" and the guy who thought the internet was just a fad.

Re: Facebook is wrong, text is deathless

#73

Post by kofejnik »

toomanythings2 wrote: post #4

Well ... uh ... I think ... I think ... uh ... everyone can hear me? ... I'll wait till the guys in the back ... oh and the girls, too, right hahahahahah ... OK ... let's get started... Sure. I know Facebook wouldn't put out videos like that but it seems 80% of all videos linked to do start out like that and that's the quality you're going to get from anyone worth listening to. Even the polished ones, though, blatter…

At first, I thought 'Yeah me too, text is so much more efficient', but then I realized something. Maybe it's only me, but for learning more complex things video lectures work wonders for me, probably because they force me to slow down and process information calmly and in order; while with text, I tend to hastily jump all over the place, skipping the more boring bits and missing important things.

Re: Facebook is wrong, text is deathless

#74

Post by spazzpp2 »

First, FB assimilated Wikipedia (just text, few images). FB also assimilated IMDB. Then, they discovered that most links aren't Wikipedia anymore but it's youtube. So they assimilate a video service so that they will be quoted when another hyped video comes up and not youtube again. Aaand facebook will continue to assimilate. Google's AI features should be at their next aim.

Facebook is Borg. Faceborg.

Re: Facebook is wrong, text is deathless

#75

Post by welanes »

"stats showed the written word becoming all but obsolete, replaced by moving images and speech."

Obsolete would be a stretch however for many the web is all about consumption. Mobile devices cement this point. And videos are a very efficient way to consume information:

- Read the book VS watch the TED talk.

- Go to the recipe site VS watch this Tastemade video.

- Read the Foreign Affairs article on the complexities of the Syrian war VS Watch this cool graphic filled Vox video.

And even with the written word, text is becoming more terse:

- Read this article vs Read this set of tweets

But people will never stop writing so perhaps all Facebook is saying is that the written word will become less relevant to their business model as they slowly turn into something resembling Snapchat

Re: Facebook is wrong, text is deathless

#76

Post by sandworm101 »

gumby wrote: post #9

> Human brains process it absurdly well considering there's nothing really built-in for it. That's unclear. The sheer bitrate of reading suggests that it might tap into some deep structures -- hacking some parts of the visual and speech systems, if you prefer. I don't click on HN video links because I find video slow and frustrating way to learn almost anything. Text is so random access -- you can skip over boring bi…

Those deep structure may be active, but reading was never in their design documentation. Our brains evolved to what they are today long before reading was a thing. The fact that we read so well is probably a hacked-together scheme tying together structures meant for pattern recognition and speech.

I see reading much like swimming. None of us can swim without practice, as none of us can read. The scary thing is that even the best of us can only swim about as well as the average dog. So pity us on the day we find a creature actually designed for reading.

Re: Facebook is wrong, text is deathless

#77

Post by kalleboo »

Illniyar wrote: post #69

Wasn't there a paper from facebook where it says 80% of videos are watched without sound? Doesn't it mean that most of these videos are watched with subtitles? How is that taken into aaoumt with the "death" of text?

> Doesn't it mean that most of these videos are watched with subtitles?

No, it means they're not actually watched at all. Facebook autoplays videos (without sound) when you scroll through your timeline. If you get distracted and stop scrolling and 10 seconds play, they count that as a "play".

Re: Facebook is wrong, text is deathless

#78

Post by mrob »

Theodores wrote: post #47
gumby wrote: post #9

> Human brains process it absurdly well considering there's nothing really built-in for it. That's unclear. The sheer bitrate of reading suggests that it might tap into some deep structures -- hacking some parts of the visual and speech systems, if you prefer. I don't click on HN video links because I find video slow and frustrating way to learn almost anything. Text is so random access -- you can skip over boring bi…

I worked in television for a number of years in a technical behind-the-scenes capacity where I would have to flick switches and hit buttons on audio/scripted cues. Sometimes this would take me from the script for what I felt was a long time and I would always struggle to get back to where we were in the script. 'Surely we must have gone through two pages of this double spaced script that only uses one half of the pag…

Television is always slow paced, because it has to be comprehensible to people with a wide variety of language skills. Youtube, and most other video player software, has a speed setting with pitch correction. I watch everything at 1.5x speed which brings standard TV slow pacing up to natural fast-paced conversation speed. The majority of people here should have no problems understanding 1.5x speed. I don't watch live TV because 1x speed is too annoyingly slow.

Re: Facebook is wrong, text is deathless

#79

Post by sametmax »

Text is an efficient medium to express something complex. But the average facebook user is not expressing something complex. He shares quick reactions, emotions, stuff that trigger anger or fun. Not things that requires deep analysis.

For that, video is perfect.

So in the context of Facebook, it makes sense. In the context of ads, it makes sense.

Yes, we don't want to believe it because it sounds like hell to people reading HN religiously, where text is kind, where people debate, where people don't use smileys, and where ideas get evaluated.

But that's not what Facebook is for. And that's not what the people on Facebook want.

Re: Facebook is wrong, text is deathless

#80

Post by kalleboo »

How much Facebook browsing is done discreetly in school, at work, in meetings, on public transport, when waiting for someone? Will video work in these situations? I doubt they'll be able to replace their current text with video.

It sounds more to me like they're looking at the bigger ad dollars YouTube is getting and want to absorb their market.

The only way for Facebook to grow now is to get out of the "friends and family" market and take over Twitter and YouTube's "celebrity/popular people" market. It seems like this could be a difficult pivot.

Post reply on HN