Live data from Hacker News

Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

nytimes.com

371–380 of 414 posts

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#371
post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Facebook has a lot of positives to go along with its negatives. For me, it's the only way I stay in touch with a lot of my friends from high school. Ask a reluctant smoker why they won't quit, beyond the addiction it's 1. Social. People talk during smoke breaks. They form bonds over smoke breaks. A 5 minute smoke break per hour means you spend 40 minutes around a friend, co worker, in relative private. It's even a…

Of all the people who smoke never once have I heard the social argument as you describe it. I'm not trying to comment on the subject of the analogy, but just on the fact that I trying to apply the analogy to this space is a bit of a stretch. I've heard the argument of "I don't care what it does to me", or "I'm gonna die anyway, what gives if I shed a few years at the end", but never "I won't be able to connect to oth…

I was a non habitual smoker for years and did it for the social connection. I also smoked habitually for a year and stopped. I'll likely continue to smoke with a friend or stranger under the right circumstances, but I don't want it to be every day or even once a week.

I'm not advocating others smoke, nor am I saying this is a reason most other smokers do. The GP's claim was simply familiar and valid, which is why I'm sharing.

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would be careful not to assume that your morality is the only morality. The world is a big place and there are diverse ideas and beliefs all around.

That's just nihilism, if there are "other moralities" that are just as valid and that I can freely choose, there might as well be none.

No moral relativism does not entail moral nihilism. People can have different morals (in fact they do), that doesn't imply that all morals are meaningless.

You can also choose (if you decide you are free to choose) the set of morals that makes you the most happy (hedonism) or give you the most utility. Or you can decide to be a nihilist.

So it's not the same.

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#374
post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In reality it's hard to get all of your friends and family to switch services, because all of their circles also have to change and most of them don't really care about the negatives of FB. In the end you end up with 10 different messengers. The big convenience about FB is that everyone is on it and you don't need their mobile phone number.

Not everyone is on FB and FB has been bleeding users to instagram, whatsapp and other internet services for a while now. I could say the same thing about WhatsApp really; everyone is on it so why switch to Facebook?

There is really no point in switching to Facebook from Instagram and WhatsApp since Facebook is going to do it for you.

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#375
post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook messaging has less support issues than email plus ...emojis.

Support issues with email? Everyone I know can handle email just fine. I consider the lack of emojis a bonus. Old school smileys are just fine by me. :-) (Actually, emojis work just fine with gmail, but I won't be embracing them any time soon)

> Everyone I know can handle email just fine.

Then you don't know "normal" people. Try managing a school mailing list for a while to learn all the different ways email fails for the average user.

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's just nihilism, if there are "other moralities" that are just as valid and that I can freely choose, there might as well be none.

No moral relativism does not entail moral nihilism. People can have different morals (in fact they do), that doesn't imply that all morals are meaningless. You can also choose (if you decide you are free to choose) the set of morals that makes you the most happy (hedonism) or give you the most utility. Or you can decide to be a nihilist. So it's not the same.

That might be true for whatever moral principals you personally choose for yourself, however if I can't hold anyone accountable for immoral behaviour, because they might have just chosen another set of morals for themselves, that's nihilism.

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#377
post #168

Facebook is big tobacco. Intelligent people generating profits that knowingly harms society (even if you do get some joy from a cigarette, that doesn't justify working for a tobacco company). I really hope the smart people at Facebook see the obvious parallel, and choose another career. History will judge you.

The same could be said for all the brains working in finance.

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#379
post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You say, "Facebook is really doing nothing technologically amazing to allow that communication," but you're kind of glossing over the immense complexity of building systems to support private and public communication (for free), and prevent an incredible variety and volume of abusive traffic. Can you name a single alternative at their scale with a business plan that is viable long term and not state run or state supp…

I am using e-mail since about 2000's. Passing throught MSN video calls; early Google Talk; then came Skype; even Whatsapp; finaly but not last Hangout. All "for free" +plus no-ads.

> e-mail since about 2000's

Provided by some company via a paid service or ads. Most commonly an ISP monopoly or oligopoly, or a large service monopoly, in nearly all nations. Even if you run your own email server, it's not free, you're paying for the network access to do it.

> MSN video calls

Subsidized by an operating system monopoly.

> Google Talk

Subsidized by a search monopoly.

> Skype

Which was never able stand on its own profitable two feet. It was subsidized first by investor money, then by an auction monopoly, then by an operating system monopoly.

> Whatsapp

Subsidized by a social monopoly.

> All "for free" +plus no-ads.

Nope. All paid for with monopolies and or ads.

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#380

I used to be a fan of Facebook, but I was never obsessed with it. I even used to work there. I'm over it. It's useful for groups, some of the ads really are useful, it's nice to sometimes keep up with people that are far away, but the news feed has had done way more harm than good for our society, including my own life. After the 2016 Election, Facebook posts lead to so much drama in my family that certain "branches"…

If you wouldn't discuss it with your family around a dinner table, why would you do it on a platform where you connect with them?
Post reply on HN