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

DeleteFacebook: Perspective from Mastodon

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 173 posts

Re: DeleteFacebook: Perspective from Mastodon

#151

Post by gaius »

kerng wrote: post #136
nopreserveroot wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They can collect all they like, but if you never see any advertisements, it has little influence over you. I was not commenting on the violation of privacy these bad actors commit through the collection.

I think the implications are way beyond what you see in your browser and perceive as ads. Imagine a billboard, you drive and the content changes because your GPS is close to that billboard and stuff like that - real world changes like that will happen, if not already. There is also the product placement and as Cambridge Analytica describes entire personas and website being made just to target individuals and change t…

Imagine a billboard, you drive and the content changes because your GPS is close to that billboard

Or your Google self-driving car just happens to pick a route past certain billboards and retailers...

Re: DeleteFacebook: Perspective from Mastodon

#152

Post by gaius »

egypturnash wrote: post #109
pound wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Democracy is not in danger, this is exactly what democracy is. Like it or not but he is quite a telling representative of a big part of the population. And democracy means majority rules. As simple as that. Consider it in light of 80-20 %% rule.

> And democracy means majority rules. As simple as that. Popular vote totals: 62,984,825: Trump 65,853,516: Clinton Vote weights, per state, due to the electoral college: https://theconversation.com/whose-votes-count-the-least-in-t... Also of course there are things like gerrymandering and voter suppression to consider. Democracy is a pretty complicated mess.

Oh please give it a rest with the “popular vote” crap. Everyone knew the rules, and the very good reasons behind them. And we all know perfectly well that all this CA outrage would be a complete non-story if the other side had used them.

Re: DeleteFacebook: Perspective from Mastodon

#153

Post by Zelphyr »

nothrabannosir wrote: post #82

For the life of me I can't remember where I originally read this quote, but it forever changed my perspective of FB. Paraphrased: "Facebook is 3 things: the wall, the messaging, and an automatically updating rolodex." Many apps fill 1 and/or 2, but nothing satisfies #3. There is no alternative. For better or for worse: I want to stay in touch with people I've met in the oddest places. In the middle of bumsquash Urugu…

I'm sorry but I just don't buy that as anything more than an excuse because Facebook is so good inducing an addictive response. People have been staying in touch without the likes of Facebook for far longer than Facebook has existed. My wife's grandmother, for example, has reconnected with people she hasn't seen in 70 years. All without Facebook. Sometimes they call. Sometimes they write. If one is going to be in town where the other lives, they plan ahead to meet up.

It is clearly possible to do without Facebook and the fact that people use the "but how will I stay connected to my friends/how will I know about events" lines so much proves just how good Facebook has gotten at keeping people addicted.

I would encourage you to disable your account and stay off of it for six weeks. I think you'll be surprised at the results.

Re: DeleteFacebook: Perspective from Mastodon

#154

Post by gaius »

bitumen wrote: post #15
cornholio wrote: post #12

> Mastodon [...] No real name policies Lacking a very rarefied community capable of self-moderation, like this site has or some specialized reddits and forums, the no-real-name becomes a major drawback. A minority of douche-bags will generate a majority of noise and will come to shape that world in their image. This is quite visible when browsing Mastodon instances, many of which look like a crossbreed of 4chan with…

The real name policy doesn’t seem to stop duplicate accounts, bots, and spammers on FaceBook or Twitter, it just ensures they have vaguely human names.

The real name policy is barely enforced by FB, as long as a name is basically plausible they don’t even bother.

Re: DeleteFacebook: Perspective from Mastodon

#155

Post by rainbowmverse »

badminton1 wrote: post #146
prophesi wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main Mastodon instance probably can't do that. But then I think you're missing the point of a distributed social network.

Makes sense. But how can a user validate a mastodon instance is not malicious?

Reputation! And I don't mean some convoluted algorithmic scoring system.

Most people seem to find out about Mastodon from someone, and that someone suggests the instance they're on. That's why a lot of artists end up on Mastodon.art, for example. So far, the admin has a good reputation for being consistent about updates and keeping the community engaged.

People keep trying to find some technological heuristic to establish trust, like requiring legal names or some kind of scoring system. So far, it's even worse because people encode all their cognitive biases into it and none of the mental models or processes people develop for checking those biases.

Re: DeleteFacebook: Perspective from Mastodon

#156

Post by gooseus »

oldsklgdfth wrote: post #148
gooseus wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, technology is basically a lever that increasingly grants larger power multipliers to those with access. When high leverage technology is more accessible then it becomes a leveler for the playing field. When it's available only to those who already hold power, then it tips things drastically in whatever direction they wish and typically makes things drastically more uneven (though the Gates Foundation and others…

I like the lever analogy a lot. Mainly because it is scientifically accurate, the longer a lever the less force is required. Archimedes saw the value is this tool in his quote 'Give me a place to stand, and I shall move the Earth with it'. > though the Gates Foundation and others do apply their power/tech toward leveling sometimes can you elaborate on this some more? I like science and technology as much as the next…

The Gates Foundation has helped to eradicate polio and has worked on other projects to help alleviate the suffering of those in extreme poverty. Same with the Carter Foundation and guinea worms.

> I like science and technology as much as the next guy and I didn't think I'd say this, but IMO it's contributing to a continually decreasing quality of life.

I get the sentiment, my gut says the same, but in terms of actual progress we're still doing pretty well. I'm in the middle of Pinker's Enlightenment Now and it's hard to argue with his data... however, I do believe he is missing some other effects regarding fragility and complexity that he hasn't addressed (yet).

Every time my phone rings and it's a robot on the other end, pretending to be a human, my world darkens and I also have a brush with Kacynski level thoughts, though.

Australia and New Zealand are just a nice mix of being geographically positioned away from the big flash points of global conflict and having democratically elected governments. NZ also learned a lot about robustness and preparedness from their recent earthquakes.

Re: DeleteFacebook: Perspective from Mastodon

#157

Post by krapp »

nothrabannosir wrote: post #82

For the life of me I can't remember where I originally read this quote, but it forever changed my perspective of FB. Paraphrased: "Facebook is 3 things: the wall, the messaging, and an automatically updating rolodex." Many apps fill 1 and/or 2, but nothing satisfies #3. There is no alternative. For better or for worse: I want to stay in touch with people I've met in the oddest places. In the middle of bumsquash Urugu…

The problem is, the "automatically updating" part of that rolodex is what requires a vast, privacy breaching, centralized surveillance infrastructure.

Re: DeleteFacebook: Perspective from Mastodon

#158

Post by gehwartzen »

nothrabannosir wrote: post #82

For the life of me I can't remember where I originally read this quote, but it forever changed my perspective of FB. Paraphrased: "Facebook is 3 things: the wall, the messaging, and an automatically updating rolodex." Many apps fill 1 and/or 2, but nothing satisfies #3. There is no alternative. For better or for worse: I want to stay in touch with people I've met in the oddest places. In the middle of bumsquash Urugu…

Wouldn't this (Auto updating rolodex) be something trivial to add to any other platform? On almost every forum one can always click on the username and see post history and a bio. As long as the the fields of interest are included (phone/email/etc) it would serve the same purpose.

As usual its the critical mass problem but facebook has done nothing particularly technologically inovative.

Re: DeleteFacebook: Perspective from Mastodon

#159

Post by buvanshak »

y4mi wrote: post #129
buvanshak wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The crucial point here is that I can’t tell in advance which places, until I decide to go. You should have the foresight to write down their contact details. You meet a person, exchange contact details. Save it in your phone or cloud or what ever. Is that too hard? Will you run out of storage space if you save contact info for every person you meet? But hey, that requires a moments thought. Am I going to have to con…

But the other person probably changed emails, didnt keep his phone number and moved to a new City. What now? I personally dont use Facebook, but youre not actually painting a realistic picture

> But the other person probably changed emails, didnt keep his phone number and moved to a new City. What now?

What if the other person did all these and didn't update facebook? Tough luck. Move on. Right?

Same thing. If they changed email, and didn't keep phone number etc, then they probably don't want you to contact them anyway...

Re: DeleteFacebook: Perspective from Mastodon

#160

Post by vanderZwan »

nothrabannosir wrote: post #106
vanderZwan wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, I think this is more a problem of perception than anything else. For one thing, loss aversion makes us think we'll miss things way more than we'll do (see also: FOMO). Losing contact with people mostly involves not thinking about them. If you don't think about them, you don't miss them either. Friends come and go in life, it's natural. And if you did miss them, you'd put in work to keep in touch through oth…

> Losing contact with people mostly involves not thinking about them. If you don't think about them, you don't miss them either. This is so far removed from how I interact with the world around me that I have a hard time empathising. I’ll keep it scientific and factual: more than once, I’ve gone back to a place I visited over a decade ago. I went on Facebook, found the person that used to live there, got in touch, an…

> This is so far removed from how I interact with the world around me that I have a hard time empathising.

Maybe. Or maybe you completely misunderstood what I said:

> I… your suggestion for the future is to “not think about them”? Ehh.. no thank you?

I didn't suggest anything of the sort. I claimed that when I lose touch with people, it is because they're not on my mind, and am I not being reminded of them through external means (like Facebook). Per definition you cannot really miss something that is not on your mind, now can you? This isn't a conscious decision, it's just an acceptance of the fact that I cannot know everything, and that everything must pass. If they are on my mind, however, I choose to take action and stay in touch.

So the real reason you can't empathise with me is that you're not understanding me. I am not telling you to not think about friends. I am saying: would you have remembered and missed someone if Facebook hadn't reminded you of their existence? Are you even aware of how many people you have met that you don't remember? Do you miss them? Hint: you don't, again by definition.

Think of advertising and how much of it revolves around creating the feeling that you are missing something and that this void needs to be filled, or that you are missing out on something that really, you don't.

> more than once, I’ve gone back to a place I visited over a decade ago. I went on Facebook, found the person that used to live there, got in touch, and had varying types of “fun”, as humans call it.

Real classy implication that I am a robot there.

Look, I do this all the time myself. Tell me where I am stating anything that would suggest I don't. The only part where I disagree with you is the implication that Facebook is the only way to find old friends.

In fact, the opposite is true: putting in the effort to track someone down is immensely gratifying and builds connections in ways that "staying in touch" via seeing each others Facebook timeline isn't. I put effort into staying in touch with the people I love. Very robotic, clearly.

Meanwhile, Facebook creates this false sense of safety, of still being part of a community we don't actually put effort in, because our brains think that popping up on each others Facebook wall a good enough approximation of actual IRL contact to be nearly fooled by it.

> The crucial point here is that I can’t tell in advance which places, until I decide to go.*

I fail to see how this affects anything about your supposed need for Facebook? I know where most of my old friends live. Whenever know I'm going to visit their city, I send them an email, a text message, or even a hand-written letter on occasion.

Post reply on HN