Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen • Hacker News Board

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#41

Post by jnordwick » Fri, Feb 09, 2018, 3:28 PM UTC

Slansitartop wrote: post #28

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…

> since when do we expect for-profit companies to act in societies best interest? We don't have for-profit companies because of some fundamental ideological commitment to capitalism uber alles. We have them because we judge their operation to be in society's best interest. When a particular one fails to do that, it raises a legitimate question about whether it should be allowed to continue with those actions or even…

Companies are just a realization that absent some outside force, multiple people will band together to work and sell the fruits of their labor.

Get rid of all laws and you will see companies naturally form except they would be held together by a myriad of individuals agreements.

Stopping companies or getting rid of them world requires stipping people from making agreements between themselves and be against human nature.

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#42

Post by devmunchies » Fri, Feb 09, 2018, 3:29 PM UTC

luckydata wrote: post #26

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…

Have you tried reading something about it? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Soros#1992_pound_short George Soros is an investor that has never been shy about using his wealth to support his political positions (that are generally very liberal). Now you know pretty much all there is to know, and why the al-right hates him. Oh, and that he survived Nazi-Germany occupated Hungary. The last thing especially hurts the…

>Now you know pretty much all there is to know

From a Wikipedia page? Don't be naive.

> although I prefer to call them Nazis.

I guess you just like to speak in hyperbole.

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#43

Post by jeremynixon » Fri, Feb 09, 2018, 3:30 PM UTC

The question is actually about the counterfactual impact of Facebook's addiction machine.

In the absence of social media, do people simply replace their wasted time there with leisure like video games, television, texting, and the like? If yes, the net impact of Facebook is small.

Or, have the addictivity wizards actually managed to increase the amount of time spent in leisure, taking away from familial connection and deep friendships?

With Facebook in particular, there's a generated sense of belonging that comes along with the quantified social proof which makes the hits of dopamine much more personal and meaningful. I see this as trading off against getting that sense of connection in reality.

But much of the other 'damage' from Facebook is fungible, and people would turn to other sources of leisure and addiction soon after losing it. Perhaps one day these addictive engines will be powerful enough to make this untrue, but we're not there quite yet.

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#44

Post by justherefortart » Fri, Feb 09, 2018, 3:31 PM UTC

Slansitartop wrote: post #20

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 onl…

The principals of finance are the same for everyone. Just because the UK (like Mexico, Argentina, and most of SE Asia) decided to ignore the rules, doesn't make him a bad person. It makes him an intelligent investor.

When you're screwing with monetary policy and most college kids (in finance and economics) know what you're doing will blow up in your face. To assume investors won't take advantage is not only naive but ignorant.

Play stupid games with your policy, win stupid prizes. This would be like turning over the Fed's duties to the US Congress. If this ever happens, diversify in other currencies, tangible assets, and precious metals. Because it's going to be a hell of a ride.

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#45

Post by Sir_Cmpwn » Fri, Feb 09, 2018, 3:31 PM UTC

vinceguidry wrote: post #17

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, the…

Facebook is unprecedented. Never before has any of these attention-monetizing things known you so personally and abused their position in ways that causes this degree of social harm. When has TV ever been so personallized that every single show and ad you see is curated to your exact interests and designed to push exactly which buttons make YOU, the individual, emotional - serving to polarize people on an incredibly personal level?

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#46

Post by Sir_Cmpwn » Fri, Feb 09, 2018, 3:34 PM UTC

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 think we need to have the self-awareness to acknowledge that humans are falliable, chemical creatures and that companies like Facebook are exploiting that in ways that are unethical and beyond most people's ability to adequately deal with. Let's not blame the victim here.

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#47

Post by twostoned » Fri, Feb 09, 2018, 3:36 PM UTC

vinceguidry wrote: post #17

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, the…

lol nice try, Facebook.

Seriously though good points. I understand the hate and fear (if you would call it that) of old FB, however, and am among the group who is definitely Social Media averse. I'm not convinced Facebook actually holds old friendships together (anecdotal: I don't have FB and have lots of old friends. The same can be said for my parents and grandparents...). I also don't expect 100% of my waking hours to be spent productively (whee MUGEN and IRC, or whatever your drug is.)

However, with all that being considered, there is something very weird about the asymmetry of Facebook. They collect and store all this data, know a lot of intimate details and personal information about people, control the medium in which many people use exclusively for digital communication, and aren't really answerable to anyone except their Executives, Board of Directors and Shareholders (Wealthy people? I don't know anyone who owns a significant share of this big corporation). So yeah, weird. "Hi, please use your free time to tell me a lot of intimate and personal detail about yourself so that I can do whatever I want with this information and you have no say in how its used. Kthx"

Yeah, um, no.

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#48

Post by luckydata » Fri, Feb 09, 2018, 3:36 PM UTC

devmunchies wrote: post #42

luckydata wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you tried reading something about it? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Soros#1992_pound_short George Soros is an investor that has never been shy about using his wealth to support his political positions (that are generally very liberal). Now you know pretty much all there is to know, and why the al-right hates him. Oh, and that he survived Nazi-Germany occupated Hungary. The last thing especially hurts the…

>Now you know pretty much all there is to know From a Wikipedia page? Don't be naive. > although I prefer to call them Nazis. I guess you just like to speak in hyperbole.

You're cute. This is a picture for the "alt-right" protest in Charlottesville in Virginia.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/dam/assets/170814010139-charl...

Either Nazis or a very bad case of post workout muscle soreness.

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#49

Post by harlanji » Fri, Feb 09, 2018, 3:38 PM UTC

losvedir wrote: post #19

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…

Too little too late on the Fam thing. My exit plan was well underway when they announced it. FB stopped being for emo in 2013ish last I cared, yet I'm still going through the emotionally taxing process of extracting my friendships from FB lately. Meanwhile new contacts see no mutual friends since I don't add new ones for the most part, so I am eager to be able to hit logical delete (aka deactivate, no full delete anymore).

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#50

Post by carlmcqueen » Fri, Feb 09, 2018, 3:38 PM UTC

_m8fo wrote: post #38

jnordwick wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

tv is exactly in the same league as Facebook. Video games is pretty close too. Neither one are recognized as addictions.

What? Does TV track what you're doing when you're not watching and change the ads when you return? You're being silly.

Marketing has had focus groups, and user use/studies for years.

They have always had ways of knowing exactly what their content does without having to track millions of clicks.

We have had sampling methods that makes the need to examine census pointless, it is just cool that today computing can handle the whole data set and scary that we are.

Still, today, some of the best ways to truly examine massive swaths of data is deducing to what is missing. Who turns their phones off from 10pm-2am and turns them back on at 2am? Who wasn't looking at facebook and watching netflix all night while everyone else was?