Facebook is probably the last place I go looking for quality blog-type content. Also, the title and tone of this piece both seem intensely hyperbolic to me.
Facebook is an attack on the open web
211–220 of 440 posts
Re: Facebook is an attack on the open web
#212I'm baffled by some of the comments here... Is it so difficult for you guys to just have a facebook account that you don't check in on? You can still sign into random sites that require it that way, arrange meetups, etc but without 'scrolling your life away' I expect people like me who spend most of their day on the computer to have at least as much digital self discipline as I have, but perhaps that's a poor assumpt…
So do Facebook a favor and create your own shadow profile for them ? What if you were against shadow profiles in the first place ?
If you create your own shadow profile, you can sort of "Graffiti" your own shadow profile, right? Like a bunch of weird, random nonsense. Become friends with every single bot and every single bots' friends. Hell, you could help make shadows that aren't there.
Re: Facebook is an attack on the open web
#213Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh god, the shit where incredibly overweight pages make you click the slow "load more" buttons just to load a few more kb of text that could've been immediately shown to you for basically no extra cost drives me crazy. And as much as facebook sucks, most web sites suck. It's amazing to me how many sites I read on my phone are basically unusable until I fall back on Safari's reader mode. Javascript handlers that fuck…
Design for Time Well Spent http://www.timewellspent.io/
Pretty inaccurate copy, claiming Google doesn't make money off your attention when they mainly subsist off ad revenue.
Re: Facebook is an attack on the open web
#214All this open-web bitching sounds oddly familiar from back when AOL was a tech monstrosity with nearly everything inside its walled-garden. Facebook is basically just a worldwide version of AOL, and plenty of people are tiring of it, just as they tired of AOL's dialup shenanigans and obnoxious floppy disk marketing. And Facebook, too, will eventually crust away when the underlying tech improves (universal 5G? who kno…
Facebook has wider reach than AOL. Maybe walled garden builders are getting better at their tricks ?
Re: Facebook is an attack on the open web
#215Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
Perhaps then EFF can develop a way of giving companies that might use these libraries a reason to care that this language is present. "The following is not part of the license" is just a long-winded way of saying "Feel free to ignore what follows this clause even harder than you feel free to ignore what precedes it."
I mean, full marks for cooperative nature, but being real here, the licenses in your Github repositories mean exactly as much as you're willing to pay a lawyer to enforce them, assuming you even find out they're being violated in the first place. It would be nice if the world were otherwise, but pretending that is so doesn't seem to me likely to help much of anything. Perhaps I am wrong in so thinking.
Re: Facebook is an attack on the open web
#216I really, really hate the "log in to Facebook" popover.
I haven't had a Facebook account for over a year and I'm incredibly happy about it. The only downside is now I don't hear about local events.
Re: Facebook is an attack on the open web
#217Facebook would be good if they didn't keep shoving more and more services into it. I don't want to order food from Facebook and don't want to sell anything. Ad blocker takes care of ad spam.
Re: Facebook is an attack on the open web
#218I deactivated my Facebook account several months ago, and it's been about 90% great, 10% frustrating. It's great for all the obvious reasons (less timesuck, less compulsion to endlessly scroll your life away, no notification interruptions). The frustrations are real, though. Primarily it's around events and photos. There are some communities I participate in that regularly organize events through Facebook, and now I…
About the fact that you miss events, I found the following website really useful: http://carpediem.cd/ (no https access) They scrape Facebook events, allowing you to browse them without a Facebook account. It's not perfect but it's better than nothing.
Virtually all of the Facebook events I care about are private events among friends. Don't see how this site is useful for those.
Re: Facebook is an attack on the open web
#219Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If someone made a new social network like that, I'd sign up today. Make your own. Here's what I did for my local network of friends (who also all hate Facebook). Install Wordpress, add the free Buddypress plugin, purchase $50 BuddyPress theme. Throw on a server. There you go, your own private social network in under a week.
How active is it with your friends?
High activity when planning events or gaming sessions, low otherwise. We already did all of our talking and planning in a Facebook group, so this allow us to expand on that without the privacy issues. The Facebook group itself was similar in activity.
Re: Facebook is an attack on the open web
#220Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh god, the shit where incredibly overweight pages make you click the slow "load more" buttons just to load a few more kb of text that could've been immediately shown to you for basically no extra cost drives me crazy. And as much as facebook sucks, most web sites suck. It's amazing to me how many sites I read on my phone are basically unusable until I fall back on Safari's reader mode. Javascript handlers that fuck…
Those "show more" buttons aren't about not loading text--they bring the ads below the content into your viewport sooner. The content is there the whole time.
Just tested with facebook comments and this seems to not be true. I cut the internet and tapped the "show more" and it failed to display.
It didn't even make sense from a layout perspective. It was a comment with one reply, and in place of the reply, was text that said, "show one reply".
Maybe they're doing it to drive analytics.