Live data from Hacker News

Facebook is the worst thing that's ever happened to the internet

twitter.com

61–70 of 202 posts

Re: Facebook is the worst thing that's ever happened to the internet

#61

Before Facebook, if I lost someone's contact information, and drifted outside of their social circle for a long enough time, chances were I would never ever see or speak to that person again. Before Facebook, if people wanted to organize conversation and cooperation on an information technology platform, the options were to pay $X00-$X000 for a proprietary system, get lucky enough to know about mailing lists, have so…

> Before Facebook, if people wanted to organize conversation and cooperation on an information technology platform, the options were to pay $X00-$X000 for a proprietary system, get lucky enough to know about mailing lists, have someone who knew sysadmin do it basically for free, or have everyone learn how to use something like IRC.

There were like 20 years in between what you describe and Facebook's dominance.

Before Facebook there were thousands of thriving independent forums on wide varieties of topics. I spent large portions of my teenage years on them and got way more value out of them than I have out of any Facebook group.

Re: Facebook is the worst thing that's ever happened to the internet

#62

Before Facebook, if I lost someone's contact information, and drifted outside of their social circle for a long enough time, chances were I would never ever see or speak to that person again. Before Facebook, if people wanted to organize conversation and cooperation on an information technology platform, the options were to pay $X00-$X000 for a proprietary system, get lucky enough to know about mailing lists, have so…

From my perspective, it's only gotten worse over time with FB. How do you explain the numerous privacy/data breaches, FB data being used to undermine democracy and spread disinformation, and its monopolistic practices preventing other "partners" from competing with the marriage.

To use your marriage analogy, this is a MESSED UP marriage. FB is like a spouse preventing you from even socializing with other people of their own gender if they even are a minor threat (i.e. Insta and Whats App getting bought up). FB is a partner who snoops on all your apps without permission. FB is a partner who manipulates your behavior with ads. What kind of marriage is this? Would you marry someone who has been the subject of numerous scandals?

In my view, FB's small upsides of meeting up with distant friends who I honestly don't care for, that's not even 50% recompense for its downsides for me.

Re: Facebook is the worst thing that's ever happened to the internet

#63
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook is harmful because it's reckless with your personal data, but Google is invaluable because of its utility and amazing results? It's able to provide those results because it steals your data, which it also abuses and sells. And as an alternative to YouTube, there are free public libraries with similar DIY books complete with pictures and drawings, but without stealing and selling your data.

>, but Google is invaluable because of its utility and amazing results? It's able to provide those results because it steals your data What data from me does Google steal? I don't have a Google account. I can be anonymous at a Starbucks coffee shop and search google for "Paul Graham" and get back useful results. If they coalesce search queries on my home ip address, that's unavoidable and a tradeoff I knowingly make.…

> I can be anonymous at Starbucks coffee shop and search google

The "Google WiFi"?

> I assume they are developing more unethical uses of personal data

Why not make the same assumption about Google? They could jot down the MAC address of your device, and track you all over the place (not that they need to, since you already use Google maps).

Re: Facebook is the worst thing that's ever happened to the internet

#64

Before Facebook, if I lost someone's contact information, and drifted outside of their social circle for a long enough time, chances were I would never ever see or speak to that person again. Before Facebook, if people wanted to organize conversation and cooperation on an information technology platform, the options were to pay $X00-$X000 for a proprietary system, get lucky enough to know about mailing lists, have so…

Facebook innovation was not to connect with friends (many other sites / services was doing it). Facebook innovation was the news feed: all friends news in a single time ordered infinite scrollable page. The value of facebook is how good it is to keep the newsfeed interesting.

Re: Facebook is the worst thing that's ever happened to the internet

#65

Before Facebook, if I lost someone's contact information, and drifted outside of their social circle for a long enough time, chances were I would never ever see or speak to that person again. Before Facebook, if people wanted to organize conversation and cooperation on an information technology platform, the options were to pay $X00-$X000 for a proprietary system, get lucky enough to know about mailing lists, have so…

>Social networking was an enormous pain in the ass. Facebook was the first platform that actually worked for people. Every subsequent social network took their cues from Facebook, it was a veritable sea change in the state of the Internet.

Even today, Facebook and Linkedin are the only social networks where you have a decent chance of finding someone by searching their real name. It's very powerful.

Re: Facebook is the worst thing that's ever happened to the internet

#66

I know, and cars are the worst thing to ever happen to the planet, synthesizers are the worst thing to ever happen to music, etc. Worst thing to happen to pundits? The inability to recognize the value of something to the common person beyond the negatives they focus upon.

Unfortunately, humans are susceptible to the desire for short term gains that produce long term problems (ex. from your comment: cars).

Products can have both utility and be a danger. It's possible to criticise something and still understand it's utility but simply feel that the danger is worse.

When the internal combustion engine was criticised as the worst invention of all time, it wasn't because people thought it wasn't useful, it was because it was insanely useful and incredibly bad for the environment.

In fact, there's little need to criticise things that aren't useful as very few people use them.

Re: Facebook is the worst thing that's ever happened to the internet

#67

Before Facebook, if I lost someone's contact information, and drifted outside of their social circle for a long enough time, chances were I would never ever see or speak to that person again. Before Facebook, if people wanted to organize conversation and cooperation on an information technology platform, the options were to pay $X00-$X000 for a proprietary system, get lucky enough to know about mailing lists, have so…

> Before Facebook, if people wanted to organize conversation and cooperation on an information technology platform, the options were to pay $X00-$X000 for a proprietary system, get lucky enough to know about mailing lists, have someone who knew sysadmin do it basically for free, or have everyone learn how to use something like IRC.

Did you just drop off the planet between 1995 - 2005? Poor Myspace... everybody just forgot it ever existed. And AIM... ICQ... MSN... Yahoo... not to mention the endless forums on every single conceivable subject. Nobody I knew in the late 90s and early 2000s wasn't using AIM or some other comparable program. It wasn't hard to keep in touch with people.

Facebook didn't invent social networking. All it did was give people a platform to vomit out their every thought for all their friends to see at once.

Re: Facebook is the worst thing that's ever happened to the internet

#68
post #66

I know, and cars are the worst thing to ever happen to the planet, synthesizers are the worst thing to ever happen to music, etc. Worst thing to happen to pundits? The inability to recognize the value of something to the common person beyond the negatives they focus upon.

Unfortunately, humans are susceptible to the desire for short term gains that produce long term problems (ex. from your comment: cars). Products can have both utility and be a danger. It's possible to criticise something and still understand it's utility but simply feel that the danger is worse. When the internal combustion engine was criticised as the worst invention of all time, it wasn't because people thought it…

> It's possible to criticise something and still understand it's utility but simply feel that the danger is worse.

Sure so long as it's OK to come to a different conclusion. Since utility of these things are basically unquantifiable, an objectively correct answer cannot happen. All I ask is that those closest to the tech and the current anti-big-web-tech narrative recognize that the benefits differ by user group. Too often, it's presented as an obvious fact sans rebuttal that FB is overall a negative.

Re: Facebook is the worst thing that's ever happened to the internet

#69
post #8

I'd be curious to hear what people think are the top 3, because I feel like Twitter and Instagram are strong contenders. Or if indeed Twitter belongs in the top spot.

I would place Twitter at number one.

I can very easily remove Facebook from my life. Even though I still have an account, I can easily restrict it to only using Messenger for group chats and maybe checking the feed for less than 1 minute every few days (my usage statistics can confirm this).

With Twitter, I am constantly bombarded with people soapboxing their opinions, trying to start arguments, virtue-signalling, trying to force group outrage, witch-hunting... all manner of things. Even news articles have started using Twitter as sources. Its ridiculous.

I can't get away from it, despite not even having a Twitter account.

Re: Facebook is the worst thing that's ever happened to the internet

#70
Where exactly is the substance of this argument? I don't disagree or agree, but this is just bare invective hurled into a world looking to agree. I don't see anything justified or rigorously argued and most of the follow up basically asks for exactly that.

I'm not quite sure why, but DHH has chosen "antagonizing and negative" as his calling card. It seems to be working out, as he's the go-to guy that has enough street cred to be negative about high-growth VC fueled startups.

Post reply on HN