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

Facebook is an attack on the open web

daringfireball.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 440 posts

Re: Facebook is an attack on the open web

#131

Post by criddell »

Jach wrote: post #111
criddell wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sign out of Facebook and delete the cookie. You should be fine after that.

I'm sure Facebook will still track you (this applies even if you don't have a Facebook account). You'd need to block their domain and any ad domains that may be related. (Edit: Also mentioned here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14463127 )

I guess I should have clarified that deleting the cookie and staying signed out is about the same as not having a Facebook account.

Even if you block them 100% online, as soon as you use a credit card or loyalty card, you are letting them track you again.

Re: Facebook is an attack on the open web

#132

Post by amelius »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #122
amelius wrote: post #45

Reminder to self that I should put in my LICENSE files: Copyright (c) Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person ... (the usual stuff, followed by ...) It is the express wish of the author that this software shall not be used in derived products or services to collect or spread information about users against their will for any purpose other than the main functionality of the product or service. User…

Probably not a good idea. If you include vaguely-worded restrictions like that in your license you're 1) using a non-standard license, and 2) breaking Freedom 0 of GNU's Free Software Definition. Personally I feel that it'd be better to put that sort of statement in the README; especially if you're not concerned with whether its legally-enforceable or not.

> Personally I feel that it'd be better to put that sort of statement in the README; especially if you're not concerned with whether its legally-enforceable or not.

You're probably right. And the README would be better, because the message would be visible on the main page in Github :)

Another option could be to have the text "The following is not part of the license, but expresses the wishes of the author regarding use of this software ..." in the LICENSE file.

I'm hoping we could have a standard phrasing for this kind of thing (just like we have standard licenses). Perhaps the EFF could develop one.

Re: Facebook is an attack on the open web

#133

Post by doughj3 »

> But Facebook pulling a Vader and altering the deal, blocking public access in the future to a post that today is publicly visible?

Or, maybe worse, altering visibility for something that is private today such that it is public tomorrow.

Re: Facebook is an attack on the open web

#134

Post by jbigelow76 »

MikusR wrote: post #98
jbigelow76 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

However, what I haven't figured out yet is if this is actually an evil-Facebook issue or just a user issue. I have a side rant that has been bubbling in me for a long time on this issue. My city's alternative weekly paper, The Dallas Observer, switched from Livefyre to Facebook's commenting system about two years ago. Livefyre was bad but the Facebook comment system is worse. With Facebook forcing "real" people accou…

Probably had nothing to do with them being liable for the content of comments, need for moderation, spam.

Livefyre and Disqus both have tools for moderation and spam control, probably better than Facebook since comments are the primary business of Livefyre and Disqus. Regarding contents of comments, I would think the Safe Harbor act and/or First Amendment protections would be sufficient for a news organization.

So I'm going to be generous and agree with your statement at face value, it probably did have nothing to do with any of the things you mentioned.

Re: Facebook is an attack on the open web

#135

Post by woodandsteel »

It's really very simple.

Facebook was able to become a huge success because it could compete freely on the open web.

Now that Facebook has become so powerful, it is trying to destroy the open web so no one can compete with it.

Speaking of which, what wonder what its position is on net neutrality.

Re: Facebook is an attack on the open web

#136

Post by noir_lord »

steventhedev wrote: post #127
noir_lord wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed with everything you said except > keeping in mind users don't care about data size, they care about latency. Users do care about data size since there are still a lot of people on data limited contracts even in the UK which has a fairly healthy mobile market. What people don't necessarily realise is the connection between the two, I'd quite like it if the mobile browsers had a running total of the total amount…

You are quite correct. Data caps do make users concerned with the amount of data transferred, but only post hoc, or as a proxy for latency. Thinking about it, there's got to be a plugin for firefox/chrome that show the data size of each page. For mobile, you can install firefox which allows you to install plugins (pretty much essential for blocking ads in mobile browsing).

I use Chroma Android variant and it has the option to show inbound/outbound traffic on the status bar updated a few times per second (and finally battery state as an actual percentage) that stupid little battery picture is bloody useless (hmm, it's just below halfway, so around 45% I guess..checks 27%..bad UX).

For me that is enough, if I load a page and see it sit at 200kb/s for more than a second or two I'll often nuke the page. I have 1Gb of data on my phone package (simply don't use mobile data much, I have unlimited fiber at home and the office).

Re: Facebook is an attack on the open web

#137

Post by claytoneast »

iamatworknow wrote: post #105
srge wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Deleted my account 2 years ago along with Twitter's and Instagram's. It's just a better life for me now. Less stress, less anger.

Facebook and Twitter I get, but you were being angered and stressed by Instagram? It's the only social media I actively use precisely because it's not stressful or rage inducing. I'm into photography so it gives me an outlet that way (even though taking a picture with a real camera, editing it on a computer, then sending it to my phone to post on Instagram is a bit of a pain), and the annoying content from other peop…

I feel that pretenses of the life you pretend to live are more evident on Instagram than anywhere else -- the site is all about portraying yourself in the best light possible, or at least, that is how many of the people I know seem to use it. Having not had it for a couple years, I can safely say that when I do want to be on it again, it's usually just a play on the part of my ego that wants some attention from the like notifications. I can't divorce my use of Instagram from my inner cravings of external validation. It can't just be about what I'm posting, it's always about something that's me me me. This may be true of all interactions, I don't know, but when it's systematically in front of me on my phone every waking hour, it becomes problematic.

In other words, most of what I saw on Instagram was people trying to get followers and likes, trying to be like some "adventure photographer", whatever the hell that means. The feeds became clogged with homogenous shots of feet over the same beaches, curving roads, VW vans, etc. It became about the aesthetic you show, rather than the person and events that you are.

Re: Facebook is an attack on the open web

#138

Post by skc »

Cozumel wrote: post #97

I think this is more an indictment that people don't actually know how to use FB. YOU control what you want to see and who you interact with, spending to much time there? Take charge of your own life and click off. Seeing something you don't want to see? Hide it. It's not rocket science. Personally I get a great deal of value from it. It's a tool like any other, but you have to know how to use it.

You nailed it, actually.

I don't actually find it too ironic that HN is missing the point that Facebook is a cultural phenomenon. The way people communicate has changed, culturally, and Facebook facilitates that.

I have an account that I only use to get notifications from long lost family members and friends etc.

Re: Facebook is an attack on the open web

#140

Post by irrational »

criddell wrote: post #99
irrational wrote: post #11

I have a feeling that Facebook will be on the decline. My teenagers and early-20 year-olds and their friends (not just local, but all over the US) think Facebook is for old people. I actually heard a 16 year old recently giving a speech where he mentioned Snapchat Stories, then, as an aside, said, "That's like Facebook or Pintrest for you old people."

Your 16 year old will eventually be old too. Facebook will still be there.

But who will move to it? It's not like the 16 year old will magically start using Facebook just because he is 26 or 36 when all of his friends still aren't using it. Facebook has such a negative connotation among young adults that I can't see them moving to it just because they are getting older. It's not like Facebook is required to get by as an adult. I'm in my mid-40s and I've yet to use Facebook and I haven't suffered any negative repercussions (though I will admit that I was glad that I had a sister who was keeping tabs and reporting to me on my kids Facebook usage back before they abandoned it).
Post reply on HN