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

Facebook’s war on free will

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 284 posts

Re: Facebook’s war on free will

#251

Post by jsemrau »

52-6F-62 wrote: post #95
athenot wrote: post #65

> The problem is that when we outsource thinking to machines, we are really outsourcing thinking to the organisations that run the machines. This is the money quote of this article, and it's been on my mind quite a bit as of late. More than ever, we live in a world where there are many forces ready to take full advantage of our laziness. It takes a bit of introspection to really understand the tradeoffs that are appr…

I left Facebook about two years ago now. I nearly immediately lost contact with all of the people I'd spent my time with in the city (outside of work). I don't chase them down for other reasons, but it is striking how much it supplanted everything else. After returning an old work phone I'd made the mistake of not copying all of their numbers over. I moved elsewhere within the city, and so I don't run into them in th…

Lately, I am more and more going to free events in the "nearby events happening now" space. Somehow it's the ad-hoc nature of it that really fun.

Re: Facebook’s war on free will

#252

Post by KGIII »

majewsky wrote: post #250
KGIII wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't actually negate my point. I don't actually have a Facebook account, but their big data does provide some value to some people. The question of it being worth the overall harm is a different question altogether. Like it or not, it provides value to some. Which is, coincidentally, about the nicest thing I've ever said about them. Please don't make me defend them again, I feel dirty.

> Like it or not, it provides value to some. I don't think that ntsplnkv2 disputed that. He points out that benefits should not be considered in isolation, and instead argues for a cost-benefit analysis.

And my response was to the claim that their large data set created no value to users. Thus, it remains the point.

We can probably all agree that they are sinister bastards who don't have your interests in mind. That's not really up for debate.

Alas, they do create value. Seriously, stop making me defend Facebook! LOL

Re: Facebook’s war on free will

#253

Post by majewsky »

bridge_ro wrote: post #119
DougN7 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook being social 'fast food' (or junk food) is the best analogy I've seen. Great thought!

That's a good pull quote to keep up your sleeve: Facebook is the McDonald's of the internet. It's unhealthy and kinda crap but everybody consumes it, and the ones who don't seem stuck up for some reason.

So, in this thread, I already learned that Facebook is AOL 2.0, and also the McDonald's of the Internet. Does anyone have other good analogies for Facebook that they want to share? :)

Re: Facebook’s war on free will

#254

Post by KGIII »

ams6110 wrote: post #88
KGIII wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate to defend Facebook, but I'm not sure about their data having no value for the users. One such example would be that they've connected people who were otherwise unknowing of each other. People have found long lost relatives due to the big data that Facebook has. I'd say that's value.

Is there really value in an online connection to a distant person who you didn't know existed, at the expense of time you could be spending on face-to-face local relationships?

Potentially, yes. Happiness is a huge value, as is learning.

Re: Facebook’s war on free will

#255

Post by majewsky »

tyfon wrote: post #186
Chardok wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thats not entirely true. Facebook will build a profile on you through like buttons and information shared from family/friends/acquaintances whether you choose to or not.

I can't wait for GDPR. Then facebook/google/whatever can't process data from me without consent (which they do not have without an account).. "Under GDPR organizations in breach of GDPR can be fined up to 4% of annual global turnover or €20 Million (whichever is greater). This is the maximum fine that can be imposed for the most serious infringements e.g._not having sufficient customer consent to process data_ or vio…

> can be fined up to 4% of annual global turnover

I'm not overly familar with the English terms for all these economic stats, but I think "turnover" is "revenue", and that's $27.638E9 [1] according to Wikipedia. So the fine would be about $1.1E9. On the same Wikipedia page, I see that their net income is some $10.217E9. Is "net income" the same as "profit"? If so, does that mean that even this massive fine would only be 10% of their profit?

If so, I can easily see "annual GDPR fine" becoming a standard bulletpoint in their earnings report, as long as Facebook thinks that the data collected is worth more than the fine.

[1] 1E9 = 1 billion

Re: Facebook’s war on free will

#256

Post by majewsky »

ryandrake wrote: post #196
Chardok wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, just in the same sense that Google and Equifax are not just websites , Facebook is not something you can entirely ignore without consequence.

Sure, but so what? How can some "profile" Facebook has on me affect my life in any way? I'm not going to be denied a loan because Facebook might know who some of my friends are. I've been ignoring Facebook without consequence for a decade.

[citation needed]

How can you even know if it doesn't affect you (either positively or negatively)?

Re: Facebook’s war on free will

#257

Post by jessaustin »

reaperducer wrote: post #235
onewaystreet wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And before the press it was the church, the community and the family.

Back then it was the passed down wisdom and morals of the elders that guided society. Now it's a bunch of 20- and 30-somethings who haven't experienced enough to develop morals, let alone wisdom. But that's OK, because they've farmed it out to an algorithm. And when that fails, they shrug their shoulders and declare themselves blameless for the damage they've done. The public cries out because of the way its treated…

It's a mistake for FB users to consider themselves employers who have any effect on hiring. That's like a pig with an opinion about work habits at the slaughterhouse.

Re: Facebook’s war on free will

#258

Post by feelin_googley »

athenot wrote: post #65

> The problem is that when we outsource thinking to machines, we are really outsourcing thinking to the organisations that run the machines. This is the money quote of this article, and it's been on my mind quite a bit as of late. More than ever, we live in a world where there are many forces ready to take full advantage of our laziness. It takes a bit of introspection to really understand the tradeoffs that are appr…

"The Verge: There are people who love the idea of our humanity being augmented. They think it's a good thing. More intelligent, stronger, and so on.

Author: They're living in a science fiction fantasy world. The problem is that we're not just merging with machines, we're merging with the companies that make these machines.

It might be one thing if we were gaining intellectual powers that we had full control over, but we don't. Right now, four or five big companies control the machines we're using. "

Source: https://www.theverge.com/2017/9/10/16263366/franklin-foer-bo...

Perhaps he might say there's nothing wrong with man letting himself be augmented by a machine, e.g., a "smartphone". But when the user does not have full control over the machine and she lets some third party control the machine for her then that's not really the same thing as simply "man augmented by machine".

In the model promoted by SV man grants some control over himself to some third party, a corporation.

Apparently the author was working at New Republic when one of the Facebook founders took it over, said he hated having to sell ads and then proceeded to institute a system of generating mindless clickbait headlines.

Perhaps he believed such headlines are so effective they rob a person of "free will", such as the decision not to click.

It is certainly possible to use machines we control to access information and otherwise supplement our intellect. But I guess SV still believes one needs to be a computer nerd to do it. And everyone else still needs SV's help.

http://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2017/09/11/550...

Re: Facebook’s war on free will

#259

Post by jessaustin »

ams6110 wrote: post #199
mrec wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Zuck does end up making a Presidential run, I think that'd have a very good chance of triggering a sizeable decline in its US userbase.

I'd be stunned if he did. The man has the personality of a lizard. No way is he an appealing candidate for the general public.

Take a closer look the next time a State of the Union speech is broadcast. They're all reptiles.

Re: Facebook’s war on free will

#260

Post by rconti »

disease wrote: post #63

I feel like once someone figures out what the next big thing in social media is, facebook will go the way of myspace. Here's the next big thing: a federated, open source network that allows users to sell their own data.

Myspace was a blip on the radar compared to Facebook. It was founded a year before Facebook, and its star started fading within 6mo of Facebook starting to spread like wildfire across college campuses. It was inevitable that the Myspace audience, which trended slightly younger, would abandon the platform wholesale as soon as Facebook threw open the doors to the public.
Post reply on HN