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

61–70 of 274 posts

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#61

Post by DenisM »

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…

Soros funded a great chunk of Russian science throug the rough nineties, and got nothing in return but the gratitude from the scientists and students. The government kicked him out afterwards. He will forever remain a philanthropist in my mind.

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#62

Post by badpun »

adamnemecek wrote: post #6
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 think that he thinks that his philanthropy gives him legitimacy.

I don't see how giving away money is related to being "a visionary, a thought leader" etc.

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#63

Post by sctb »

pensivemood wrote: post #40
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 real problem is self-discipline/control. Lol. What a stupid argument! I know this is HN and I am supposed to be civil and all, but still, What a stupid, stupid argument..

If you won't comment civilly and substantively we'll ban the account.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#64

Post by star-trek-fleet »

justherefortart wrote: post #44
Slansitartop wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

No one say bad, they just say these people invoke turmoil and crisis for their own profit. Is it good or bad or neutral, it’s your own judgement.

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#65

Post by Slansitartop »

jnordwick wrote: post #41
Slansitartop wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 natu…

What are you talking about? No one's advocating abolishing corporations as a concept.

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#66

Post by happyguy43 »

Facebook isn’t the problem. Phones are. I don’t use Facebook or any social media, yet I’m addicted to hacker news and checking my email.

But even phones are not the problem. People are responsible for their own “addiction.” It’s like blaming food companies for fat people.

Widespread informed Democracy is not something we’ve ever had, and likely will never have. Democracy has always been led by the intelligentsia and the rich.

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#67

Post by gaius »

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…

It's odd the post doesn't mention the recent changes to Facebook's algorithm to promote more friends and family content

Do you think, when they tweak it back to the old revenue-maximising version, they'll announce doing so? No, this is a trap.

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#69

Post by bluntfang »

jeremynixon wrote: post #43

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 an…

>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.

You're being naive if you think it's about where people spend their time if facebook didn't exist.

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#70

Post by [deleted] »

jnordwick wrote: post #31

Can we stop calling this addiction? The DSM V doesnt recognize process addictions, with the exception of Gambling Disorder, and many of the symptoms don't apply to social media use. Even Internet addiction wasn't included for lack of proof. Substance Use Disorder (the new category for chemical addictions) has specifics such as withdrawal and physical dependency that you don't get from turning off your Facebook accoun…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN