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

Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

calnewport.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 274 posts

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#11

Post by daxorid »

monkmartinez wrote: post #5

I have read most of Cal's books and they are good. His fight against social media is... I don't know, extreme. The problem to me isn't social media per se. The real problem is self-discipline/control. Cal crusades against social media, but I don't see him crusade against video games, or watching TV for example. I think a good/better metric is total screen time. My children are given an allowance in the form of screen…

> The problem to me isn't social media per se. The real problem is self-discipline/control.

I'd agree with you if it was firmly established that all people have full, conscious agency. But the very existence of compulsive behavior personalities and addiction demonstrates that agency is unequally distributed.

While person A may easily be able to walk away from the dopamine bar by sheer force of will, person B may not. Person A's problem is surely with self-discipline, but person B's problem is with the dopamine bar.

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#12

Post by toastking »

jordigh wrote: post #8

I'm rather bothered that I know nothing about Soros except a bunch of vague, negative feelings about him that have pop-culturally osmosed to me through constant usage of his name in 4channish/the_donaldish media. He's some kind of evil mastermind destroying civilisation with his vast wealth. I know this is almost certainly not true, but I'm so bothered that this is my immediate thought. I feel like the alt-right has…

It's also been experimentally proven that people have issues discerning fake news online. Our news literacy is falling rapidly.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/11/23/503129818...

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#13

Post by bryanrasmussen »

cletus wrote: post #4

I honestly find myself scratching my head every time George Soros speaks. He almost comes across as someone desperate to be taken seriously, to be viewed as a visionary, a thought leader, a prognosticator. But what has he down to justify this? Nothing as far as I can tell. He made a bunch of money as a currency speculator, most famously breaking the British pound. Sure. Good for him. But if we're going to talk about…

I had the understanding his currency speculation and breaking of the British pound was based on some prognostication, visionary understandings of currency in the modern world? So a great level of insight was achieved leading to adding value to himself, but not to society.

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#14

Post by Pigo »

monkmartinez wrote: post #5

I have read most of Cal's books and they are good. His fight against social media is... I don't know, extreme. The problem to me isn't social media per se. The real problem is self-discipline/control. Cal crusades against social media, but I don't see him crusade against video games, or watching TV for example. I think a good/better metric is total screen time. My children are given an allowance in the form of screen…

I try to give my kids alternatives, or get them interested in other things. It bothers me when I've seen parents get angry because their kid is gaming constantly, especially when they are sitting there looking at their phone all night long. If that's all that they ever do, it's probably because they've watched you waste time every night.

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#15

Post by toastking »

monkmartinez wrote: post #5

I have read most of Cal's books and they are good. His fight against social media is... I don't know, extreme. The problem to me isn't social media per se. The real problem is self-discipline/control. Cal crusades against social media, but I don't see him crusade against video games, or watching TV for example. I think a good/better metric is total screen time. My children are given an allowance in the form of screen…

I think the difference is it's a little easier to control other forms of "screen time". That other stuff is pure entertainment and they don't have the addictive aspect of a feed.

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#16

Post by monkmartinez »

saul_pako wrote: post #10

Interesting article. The whole smoke screen idea is in a way interesting but at the same time; isn't it exactly what is to be expected from commercial providers of social media? I'm not sure if you catch my drift, but since when do we expect for-profit companies to act in societies best interest? To protect your brand does sometimes include admitting wrong doings or sketchy behavior - if we wish to browse through soc…

I agree and would like to add: What I find odd is that as a Professor of CS, Cal doesn't expect another, possibly "worse", social media company to replace Facebook if his crusade succeeds. He is trying to fix attention with brute force and it will not work.

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#17

Post by vinceguidry »

Sorry, I'm simply not convinced that monetizing and marketing people's attention is all that much of a social ill. There is nothing about Facebook that's in any way worse than the old ways companies used to do this.

Does nobody remember the 80s? TV was turning people into fricken' zombies. People would sit on the boob tube for days at a time, stopping only to go to work to mindlessly knock out chores for a shift, then get back to their vapid entertainment.

People would make a game out of who could play the longest in the arcade on one quarter. With $5, a savvy gamer could spend all day staring at lights and hearing beeps.

The world survived, thrived, and devised ever more devious and insidious ways to hook your mind. We weathered Everquest and the MMORPGs. Psychedelic drugs. Outrage didn't stop those from spreading long and wide.

My uncle lost years to Everquest. When he came up for air he found the world just as he left it. Now he manages his gaming habits just like everyone else.

Out of all the pseudo-addictive things people want to complain about, we're picking on Facebook? The thing that actually holds old friendships together and provides endless opportunities to interact with other people that you would have never done otherwise? Or is the argument that every time someone gets the urge to play Scrabble, they need to coordinate a face-to-face game instead of just loading up Words with Friends?

C'mon. I guess bombastic apocalyptic bullshit will never go out of style.

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#18

Post by GVIrish »

toastking wrote: post #15
monkmartinez wrote: post #5

I have read most of Cal's books and they are good. His fight against social media is... I don't know, extreme. The problem to me isn't social media per se. The real problem is self-discipline/control. Cal crusades against social media, but I don't see him crusade against video games, or watching TV for example. I think a good/better metric is total screen time. My children are given an allowance in the form of screen…

I think the difference is it's a little easier to control other forms of "screen time". That other stuff is pure entertainment and they don't have the addictive aspect of a feed.

I dunno man, some games are really fucking addictive these days. Especially with some of the abusive gambling mechanics.

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#19

Post by losvedir »

It's odd the post doesn't mention the recent changes to Facebook's algorithm to promote more friends and family content[0]. I don't use facebook so I'm not sure how meaningful the changes are from a UX perspective, but on Bloomberg radio which I listen to it's been a pretty major point. Engagement metrics are down, as expected, but analysts seem to think that's fine. This contradicts the post's point that it "would have a disastrous impact on the quarterly earnings".

[0] https://www.theverge.com/2018/1/11/16881102/facebook-news-fe...

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#20

Post by Slansitartop »

jordigh wrote: post #8

I'm rather bothered that I know nothing about Soros except a bunch of vague, negative feelings about him that have pop-culturally osmosed to me through constant usage of his name in 4channish/the_donaldish media. He's some kind of evil mastermind destroying civilisation with his vast wealth. I know this is almost certainly not true, but I'm so bothered that this is my immediate thought. I feel like the alt-right has…

> I'm rather bothered that I know nothing about Soros

> He's some kind of evil mastermind destroying civilisation with his vast wealth.

Those characterizations may have their origins in an element of truth, dating from the early 90s. Paul Krugman described his Soros's actions thusly:

> [N]obody who has read a business magazine in the last few years can be unaware that these days there really are investors who not only move money in anticipation of a currency crisis, but actually do their best to trigger that crisis for fun and profit. These new actors on the scene do not yet have a standard name; my proposed term is 'Soroi'.[65] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Soros#1992_pound_short)

Post reply on HN