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

Social networks are no longer social

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 200 posts

Re: Social networks are no longer social

#121

Post by naravara »

Paperweight wrote: post #116
pcurve wrote: post #4

The 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.

When everyone's anonymous, anyone can speak their mind without worrying about offending anyone. When everyone's identified, only the crazies and extremists truly speak their mind - they don't care about offending anyone. You might end up with a mix of crazies and extremist "thought leaders" with packs of quiet followers - a suppression of the moderates and deep thinkers.

Many years ago a lot site's comment sections give you a choice between using an anonymous account for the site or linking to your Facebook or Twitter accounts to post. I experimented with using my real name/ID on some of them under the assumption that I'd be more inclined to be polite, assume good faith, avoid unproductive engagements with people, etc. if I wasn't anonymous.

It didn't work. It just deterred me from commenting at all, and when I did comment I think I was more terse and condescending than usual. I'm not sure why, but I wonder if maybe in anonymous forums I kind of just assumed a lot of the stupid things being said were by edgy teenagers. I was inclined to be patient with them or write them off since I just sort of assumed they were too young to know better and would grow out of it. But once you see the profile pictures of the people posting, and they're grown ass men who really ought to know better, it's much harder to be nice because you know these peoples' horrible beliefs have consequences.

Re: Social networks are no longer social

#122

Post by naravara »

dkasper wrote: post #102
debaserab2 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

The ads say “PROMOTED” in capital blue letters and Adblockers still work. Is it really so bad?

>The ads say “PROMOTED” in capital blue letters and Adblockers still work. Is it really so bad?

That adage about boiling the frog by slowly upping the temperature so it doesn't notice probably applies here

Re: Social networks are no longer social

#123

Post by naravara »

Matumio wrote: post #100
pcurve wrote: post #4

The 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.

This describes roughly my experience with small mastodon instances right now. It has been called "twitter like it was in the early days". Mostly pseudonyms, feeling of anonymity and being part of a small group. No algorithmic selection of content. Liking a post doesn't even affect its visibility. People are less afraid to post unpolished content, e.g. artists I follow report they feel less pressure when posting a rou…

>The flip side: there is no way to filter all the trivialities and show only the "best" posts.

Trivialities are fine. I just wish there was a language (as in, spoken language not profanity) and NSFW filter.

Re: Social networks are no longer social

#124

Post by naravara »

lukevdp wrote: post #97
njarboe wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

People that use the service a lot are less likely to cancel, and more likely to recommend it to others.

>People that use the service a lot are less likely to cancel, and more likely to recommend it to others.

I'm not sure how true this is with cheap(ish) subscription services. In many cases, the Planet Fitness model might be more apt. They rely on inertia and apathy to keep the subscription payments coming, but they actually rely on people not using the service very much and actively discourage "power-user" usage patterns.

Re: Social networks are no longer social

#125

Post by shams93 »

reaperducer wrote: post #51
pcurve wrote: post #4

The 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.

The article mentions of days when you were anonymous It's funny how in the early days of the internet, everyone was so open and honest about who they are that it was very common for their e-mail messages, Usenet posts, finger plans, etc... to have their real names, home and/or work addresses, and home and/or work phone numbers. Then the scammers discovered the internet, and everyone had to dummy up about who they are…

The next move already happened which was the massive Equifax leak. The government has effectively sheltered them from liability, there was no penalty for their actions. So the next development is really having your life forcibly exposed to scammers and potentially having your identity stolen but you have no means to protect the data. In the past it was like if you were careless you could be violated. Now you're at the mercy of large careless corporations who collect all your most vital information without your permission and carelessly store it almost as if they want it stolen, but ultimately the government shields them from liability such that ultimately the government is using the web as a tool to expose you to scammers even if you don't use the web at all.

Re: Social networks are no longer social

#126

Post by cronix »

LeifCarrotson wrote: post #88
octosphere wrote: post #13

Earlier 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…

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.

There are many groups where people don't necessarily want their real info known. Domestic violence, rape and some cancer groups come to mind. Even HN allows throwaway accounts to protect sensitive info. There are more legitimate uses for FB than just the ones you laid out.

Re: Social networks are no longer social

#128

Post by barbs »

Has anyone else noticed that Facebook notifications seem intentionally broken? So many times I've noticed that the number of new notifications go out of sync between FB on my desktop browser, mobile browser and messenger app. Even viewing the notifications on the desktop and navigating somewhere else seems to make some notifications new again. Anything to make that red dot appear again to get you clicking and engaged.

Re: Social networks are no longer social

#129

Post by starchild_3001 »

The biggest benefit of social media over forums or email lists is ML-based ranking. You save a ton of time reading the most crucial, while skipping the rest.

The platforms are addictive not because they're designed to be, but because they pick out the best and most interesting content!

FB, YouTube etc represent a revolution about how content is created and consumed. You no longer need to browse through 10s of posts or emails (or videos) to find something you really like. Algorithms do the curation for you.

I learned so much by hanging out in FB forums (much more so than any other old-style forum). And my favorite pastime these days is YouTube Red.

Don't believe in the scare or the negative hype. Social media and AI curated content aren't going anywhere. They might evolve as required.

Re: Social networks are no longer social

#130

Post by taurath »

starchild_3001 wrote: post #129

The biggest benefit of social media over forums or email lists is ML-based ranking. You save a ton of time reading the most crucial, while skipping the rest. The platforms are addictive not because they're designed to be, but because they pick out the best and most interesting content! FB, YouTube etc represent a revolution about how content is created and consumed. You no longer need to browse through 10s of posts o…

> The platforms are addictive not because they're designed to be, but because they pick out the best and most interesting content!

The best by the users interests or the best for the advertisers? I think ignoring the personal and societal effects of social media is something you do at your own peril.

Post reply on HN