Facebook's slogan, "Bringing the world closer together", reminds me of cigarette companies purporting health benefits.
Social networks are no longer social
81–90 of 200 posts
Re: Social networks are no longer social
#82This article brought to you by the Oath network, a faceless media conglomerate that slaps a hostile privacy policy in your face when you dare click on such links and asks you to agree to their dubious handling of personal information and preferences. The social aspect of the Internet used to be about people communicating with people. Today it's about large corporations deciding how you interact, who gets to know abou…
The EU should really swing its GDPR stick around. Can someone shed some light on why the e.g Oath Family has not been hit with a serious fine yet? The violation is clear as a day.
Could you elaborate? Aren't those ToS/Privacy Policy displays there in order to satisfy GDPR requirements? I thought the idea was that you could either agree to accept them and continue or decline. I don't claim to be that well-versed in GDPR law however but genuinely curious.
Re: Social networks are no longer social
#83Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can still be anonymous on Facebook if you use their onion service[1]. Although I think you can't register for an account under Tor, which is counter intuitive (I mean why would you offer a Tor hidden service if you can't register under it?). In that case I would register using a 3G/GSM IP which many people share (instead of a unique IP where few people share it); and then, once registered, proceed to browse Faceb…
> Just be careful, because if you are using Facebook with Tor, you run the risk of outing your real identity from things like your social graph, search queries, likes, and other metadata. You can’t be anonymous from Facebook or from Facebook users (with or without Tor) without violating its ToS and worrying about being blocked and asked to prove your real/authentic identity if you piss off some random person online o…
Use a fake name. 420/69 IQ play!
Re: Social networks are no longer social
#84The article mentions of days when you were anonymous, getting to know strangers through common interests and exchanging ideas. I do miss those early days. For me, social network stopped being social as soon as reasonable assurance of anonymity when out the window once companies started pressuring people use their real identity, and that became the norm.
I do miss those early days. I got my first modem in 1985. I racked up a $300 phone bill my first month calling bulletin boards exchanging messages and software with people all over the world. My parents took my modem from me until I paid off the debt. I’ve been on dozens of forums with topics I’m interested in over the last 3.5 decades. I’ve used every kind of internet communication including Usenet, irc, web, etc. T…
> Just look for them!
That's an issue in itself. Google used to have a "discussion" search feature you could use to find a search term in forum posts. Now, that feature is gone. Social media content is highly prioritized and incentivized.
Forum discoverability was better in the past. Now, if you search for a community, you'll find a half-dozen Facebook groups, its Twitter feed, a subreddit, its G+ counterpart and YouTube videos.
Re: Social networks are no longer social
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
The article mentions of days when you were anonymous, getting to know strangers through common interests and exchanging ideas. Heck, I wrote a Dutch online book about Slackware with a guy I didn't really know the name of until after a couple of years when he told me he just used a pseudonym. For me, social network stopped being social as soon as reasonable assurance of anonymity when out the window To me it is the in…
> tl;dr: to increase engagement, social networks have turned into popularity contests. As with other popularity contests, they are usually vain. The idea of "engagement" as a key metric for some of these services is bizarre. When Netflix changed from 5-star ratings to like/dislike to "increase engagement", the usefulness of ratings on the site plummeted. I will take a single, considered review over thousands of mindl…
>The idea of "engagement" as a key metric for some of these services is bizarre.
If they were a social network, I would agree. But they are an ad display network. therefore engagement is a key metric to their business and customers.
Re: Social networks are no longer social
#86Earlier quoted context omitted.
Imagine going to a bar and having your name, relationship status, political orientation, and a list of your big mistakes floating above your head. Good times. Good times.
To be fair, that's what it is like to go anywhere in a small town you've lived in for a long time. :D
So all of the downsides and none of the advantages of a closely-knit community?
Re: Social networks are no longer social
#87Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean there's still Reddit, the chans, forums, etc, with a lot of activity, if you want to live those days again.
Reddit is quickly heading down the same path as Facebook. Especially with the new design.
Yep, just waiting for the day I can no longer opt out. Feels like it’s coming soon.
Boy those ad designs on the new layout sure are starting to look like regular posts. I’m sure it won’t get any worse, right?
Re: Social networks are no longer social
#88The article mentions of days when you were anonymous, getting to know strangers through common interests and exchanging ideas. I do miss those early days. For me, social network stopped being social as soon as reasonable assurance of anonymity when out the window once companies started pressuring people use their real identity, and that became the norm.
You can still be anonymous on Facebook if you use their onion service[1]. Although I think you can't register for an account under Tor, which is counter intuitive (I mean why would you offer a Tor hidden service if you can't register under it?). In that case I would register using a 3G/GSM IP which many people share (instead of a unique IP where few people share it); and then, once registered, proceed to browse Faceb…
What is the utility of Facebook if you're anonymous? I thought it was used to communicate with, schedule activities with, and share pictures and videos with your friends. If Tom, Mary, Jane and AnonymousTorUser68292 are all tagged in a photo at Mary's house...that just doesn't seem to have much of a purpose.
Re: Social networks are no longer social
#89It's all about advertising. Social network is about advertising in the end. To CEOs: top using "social network" vocabulary for your business, when in the end, it's about advertising. Or you're liars.
Okay, lets say I am developing a "social network" for a specific group of people, its a pretty closed one so not for everyone. The main revenue is not coming from advertisement, because there is nothing we can advertise to the users. So am I a liar? Or what? I can use social network for marketing without implying that we use and/or sell user data
Re: Social networks are no longer social
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
> tl;dr: to increase engagement, social networks have turned into popularity contests. As with other popularity contests, they are usually vain. The idea of "engagement" as a key metric for some of these services is bizarre. When Netflix changed from 5-star ratings to like/dislike to "increase engagement", the usefulness of ratings on the site plummeted. I will take a single, considered review over thousands of mindl…
>The idea of "engagement" as a key metric for some of these services is bizarre. If they were a social network, I would agree. But they are an ad display network. therefore engagement is a key metric to their business and customers.
But what is weird is Netflix is not an ad network (yet?). Why would they be interested in "engagement" ie, people watching lots of stuff? That costs them extra money. Their best customer would be someone who pays the $10/month and watches just a few movies/shows.