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

131–140 of 274 posts

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#131

Post by kbenson »

quadrangle wrote: post #125
kbenson wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When you press people (like in person, not on the internet) why they think he's the devil incarnate, you usually get some really wild ad hominem not rooted in reality or a realization that they don't really know why they hate him so much other than he's a benefactor of their political opposition and they were told to. Sure, but we could probably say the same of the Koch brothers. They both occupy similar positions…

The Kochs are widely misunderstood. They are typically seen as effectively a free-money-pit for generic Republican views that promote Capitalist exploitation, laying waste to the environment, and destroying any real grassroots movement to bring democratic power to the people. From my understanding, the reality is more like: The Kochs are typical dogmatic Libertarians who aren't anti-environment but have this simplist…

Sure. And similar, if in opposition, arguments could be made (and likely are), with regard to Soros. Some on the right probably view Soros as a socialist/capitalist that wants to control through party power or the manipulation of causes to his own end. The reality is likely much more similar to how you outlined the Koch motivations above.

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#132

Post by Brockenstein »

toastking wrote: post #12
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...

People have a problem discerning fake news in general. We just live in a society where so much noise is generated it's literally impossible for any individual human being to sort it out on a day to day basis. And that's only if you're consciously aware of the problem and flaws and weaknesses of human beings. If you're ignorant about either subject, or both, or don't accept that it applies to you somehow, forget it. You're relying on those flaws to guide your way and then it's just Garbage In, Garbage Out.

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#133

Post by aylmao »

Sir_Cmpwn wrote: post #45
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…

Was the alternative, TV as an homogenizing force that entertained and dumbed people down to what big-money publishers wanted them to believe a better alternative?

I'm from a country where the TV and state are highly colluded and social media has come as a welcome alternative. Moreover, are these "polarization issues" the USA currently experiencing a product of social media, or its own cultural problems, surfaced by social media? You're not the only country on Facebook, remember that.

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#134

Post by InternetUser »

_m8fo wrote: post #27
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…

Do you honestly think your examples are even in the same league as Facebook? Were TV ads ever as granular in its tracking as Facebook is today?

It's not about the content matter itself, it's about the activity: staring silently and passively at a screen for many hours every day, and the fundamental difference that Facebook makes people feel they are carrying on relationships, when actually the online relationship takes over the real-life relationship. You were watching your friends and relatives (their personal lives or otherwise) on TV.

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#135

Post by InternetUser »

aylmao wrote: post #133
Sir_Cmpwn wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Was the alternative, TV as an homogenizing force that entertained and dumbed people down to what big-money publishers wanted them to believe a better alternative? I'm from a country where the TV and state are highly colluded and social media has come as a welcome alternative. Moreover, are these "polarization issues" the USA currently experiencing a product of social media, or its own cultural problems, surfaced by s…

Excellent, excellent points. What country are you from, if I may ask?

Also, I'd rewrite your opening rhetorical question for clarity:

Was TV, as a homogenizing force that entertained and dumbed people down to what big-money publishers wanted them to believe, a better alternative?

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#136

Post by cryptonector »

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…

There is absolutely nothing wrong (and, really, lots good) with Soros' currency market trades of the 90s and elsewhen.

The problem with Soros (if you're not on the Left) is that he's become the principal funding source for a number of hard-left movements. If you are on the Left, then this is good, while if you're not then this is bad. I won't tell you how you should feel about Soros though -- you figure that out for yourself.

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#137

Post by bpchaps »

jnordwick wrote: post #34
_m8fo wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you honestly think your examples are even in the same league as Facebook? Were TV ads ever as granular in its tracking as Facebook is today?

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

Video game addiction is recognized in DSM-V.

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#138

Post by ryandrake »

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #122
ryandrake wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook addiction is not recognized by the pros as a mental disorder and gambling addiction is?

Sure, but there was contestation about adding it to the DSM. Actually in DSM-V it's recommended to pursue further study into internet addiction. What I'm really asking though is what lines you draw between something like 'social media addiction' and 'gambling addiction'? Or is the only difference in your mind the inclusion in the DSM?

I’m a frequent visitor to a few local card rooms and make regular trips to Vegas. I’ve seen and know addicted degenerate gamblers. It’s a totally different league from people wasting time on Facebook. I simply can’t imagine someone so self-destructively debilitated by their Facebook usage.

To me, Facebook use is a dirty bad habit like nail biting. It’s not a family-destroying addiction. Totally open to the medical establishment proving otherwise though.

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#139

Post by jstalin »

mkstowegnv wrote: post #116
jstalin wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe he's trying to atone for his Nazi collaboration past.

As Snopes documents [1] this is a vicious politically motivated lie. You should also read Wikipedia's description of his youth in occupied Hungary [2] and ask yourself what completely unprincipled extremist parties are you uncritically believing? Of course your choice of username suggests the possibility that principle is not one of your high priorities. 1 https://www.snopes.com/george-soros-ss-nazi-germany/ 2 https:…

Or you could watch the video where he talks about unapologetically helping to confiscate the property of fellow Jews who were sent to death camps. No moral qualms whatsoever.

https://youtu.be/0PUDmLCkgNc?t=7m24s

Re: Facebook's Desperate Smoke Screen

#140

Post by rwmj »

Quarrelsome wrote: post #105
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…

he helped destroy sterling in "black wednesday" by adopting a very short position against it from which he profited massively and families lost their homes due to spike in interest rates implemented by the government to try to reign in the crash.

I think you mean Norman Lamont's idiotic policies did that, backed up by the Bank of England who really should have known better.
Post reply on HN