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

Chris Hughes Says It’s Time to Break Up Facebook

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 308 posts

Re: Chris Hughes Says It’s Time to Break Up Facebook

#281

Post by TAForObvReasons »

mindgam3 wrote: post #235

Chris Hughes noticeably pulled a few punches regarding his old friend Zuck’s character: 1. “I don’t blame Mark for his quest for domination. He has demonstrated nothing more nefarious than the virtuous hustle of a talented entrepreneur.” 2. “I don’t think these proposals [Zuck finally asking for regulation] were made in bad faith.” It’s pretty naïve at this point to say that Zuckerberg has done nothing more than a “v…

This is all posturing. Different people are putting different proposals to create the spectrum of possibilities. No one is talking about 100B fine because FB already pegged the fine at ~5B

Re: Chris Hughes Says It’s Time to Break Up Facebook

#282

Post by sushisushisushi »

decasteve wrote: post #28

I disagree. But I'm not on any, nor use any, of Facebook's services. "It's Time to Break Up with Facebook" is a better title. > We already have the tools we need to check the domination of Facebook. We just seem to have forgotten about them. That evokes different ideas with me and I'm sure it does for many users of this site. We have the tools and capability to employ them to make alternatives. We're so focused on th…

Did you even read the article, or did you just skim it? Seems like you skimmed it. The article directly addresses your vague, inchoate (but somehow not naive) impression that anti-trust enforcement (which has a documented history of being very effective) is not effective.

Re: Chris Hughes Says It’s Time to Break Up Facebook

#283

Post by mrep »

lefstathiou wrote: post #100
noarchy wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>To me it is becoming increasingly apparent that the issue here is that people aren’t voting for the issues the NYT and Chris want people to vote on. While you're getting downvoted, there is likely an element of truth to this. The "old" media has seen entities like Twitter and Facebook as a threat to their business model, as well as their ability to be influencers. There are legitimate gripes that we should all have…

I’ve spent 12 years on HN and have read countless threads from users I’ve followed for many years. This up/down voting mechanism is just another system of censorship and it has gotten worse on HN and you see the restraint exercised in comments. Anyone can spot articles that are “safe” to comment on and articles that are not (from the perspective of sharing views that do not jive with the HN majority and being downvot…

I couldn't have stated it better myself. It's especially ridiculous considering everyone claims they hate censorship so much and yet I see people abusing flags nowadays to auto-hide perfectly constructive comments just because they don't like what the other person said.

Re: Chris Hughes Says It’s Time to Break Up Facebook

#284

Post by Spooky23 »

kerkeslager wrote: post #278
joe_the_user wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that social networking protocols would inherently be much more complex than phone protocols (but it could be done). Moreover, some body would have to standardize those protocols as well as discovering some way of preventing spam. My hunch that I know get more spam on my phone number than either my email or my Facebook account because phones still have open points of entry.

I suspect there are two reasons we get more spam phone calls: 1. There's no effective signing on phone calls, so spoofing a phone number is easy. This makes it impossible to prosecute spammers. 2. There's no way to filter a phone call based on the content of the phone call before it arrives. It's possible to spoof senders on email and text messages as well, but it's also possible to filter these based on content befo…

The main reason is the telcos choose not to, because they make money on them.

You can eliminate ~95%+ of junk calls from the telco side.

Re: Chris Hughes Says It’s Time to Break Up Facebook

#285

Post by Spooky23 »

apecat wrote: post #267
loudmax wrote: post #108

Better than breaking up social networks would be to force them to interoperate on an open protocol. When I first signed up for Facebook I was disappointed that only other Facebook users could see my account. Then when Google+ came on the scene I thought they'd worked out a way to interoperate with Facebook, but instead Google just wanted their own silo. What we really need is for social networks to interoperate the w…

Moxie Marlinspike, of Open Whisper Systems, had some pretty pessimistic things to say about how stagnant federated protocols become, and why they avoided that approach with Signal. https://signal.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/ End result: Signal is a real, usable tool, the recommendation of which is fully actionable security and privacy advice you can share with anyone who is capable of using WhatsApp. Here's some…

The problem with that approach is that while did result in fast delivery of a good product for the 12 people using signal, it’s not going to grow.

The problem with all newer systems is that they are identity based, which doesn’t scale down to all of the device/station use cases that phones exist for.

Re: Chris Hughes Says It’s Time to Break Up Facebook

#286

Post by Calib3r »

Chris Hughes is right on a lot of things.

But to create a new Federal Agency that can write blank-check laws is not a good idea.

What ever happened to the Schoolhouse rock song "I'm just a bill?" What happened to laws being written through approval of house and congress?

We are pushing for laws to be written by people who do not have the citizen in mind (FCC killed Net Neutrality ring a bell?). Why is it so crazy to expect the House and Congress to do their diligence and vet all laws? Why must we create federal entities to do the heavy lifting for us at the cost of removing representation?

Re: Chris Hughes Says It’s Time to Break Up Facebook

#288

Post by stcredzero »

stickfigure wrote: post #275
stcredzero wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Facebook haters are driving social network data into a silo; how else are you going to "keep control of your data"? The implicit assumption here is that the only people who can control your data are big, centralized organizations. Instead of big companies making little people subject to DRM, what if we turned it on its head and gave control to the people? What if we made big companies subject to Digital Human Rig…

??? Let's say I put all of my friends' birthdays in my calendar. Now the data has left the silo and I can reshare it with whoever I want. Just how is anyone going to revoke that ability?

This particular use of Trusted Execution is meant to be used against Large Organizations, not individuals. No one is going to revoke that ability in your example in the context of what I propose.

Also, it's not meant to be a complete solution by itself. It's meant to be a tool supported by other legislation. So it would totally be possible for Facecorp to crawl the web and put together a non-revokable database of private individual's information, outside of Trusted Execution engines. But to do so, they have to go to that effort, instead of just sweeping user data.

Re: Chris Hughes Says It’s Time to Break Up Facebook

#289

Post by dondawest »

adventured wrote: post #147
dageshi wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twitter?

Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, LinkedIn, Instagram, YouTube, Pinterest, Snapchat Those are by far the dominant social networks in the US. They all compete in terms of fighting for limited user time. WhatsApp is kinda sorta in that group, however it's not particularly popular in the US. Tumblr used to be, it might as well be dead now, it's going the way of MySpace (sold off a few times, passed around, until it's hardly va…

I have never heard anyone say that Pinterest is the most interesting ANYTHING before.

What do you consider to be their obvious superior monetization potential? And is their anything else about Pinterest that makes you find it so interesting?

Re: Chris Hughes Says It’s Time to Break Up Facebook

#290

Post by HillaryBriss »

decasteve wrote: post #28

I disagree. But I'm not on any, nor use any, of Facebook's services. "It's Time to Break Up with Facebook" is a better title. > We already have the tools we need to check the domination of Facebook. We just seem to have forgotten about them. That evokes different ideas with me and I'm sure it does for many users of this site. We have the tools and capability to employ them to make alternatives. We're so focused on th…

> Mark Zuckerberg cannot fix Facebook, but our government can.

Mark Zuckerberg cannot fix Facebook, but our government can break it. Which would fix it.

Post reply on HN