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

Metabook

metabook.fyi

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 114 posts

Re: Metabook

#21

Post by saddlerustle »

jarcane wrote: post #8

> Start a site on Neocities, share photos on Pixelfed, or write your thoughts on Write.as — to name a few. This would be a more convincing pitch if it didn't end with "now just use different centralized services that nobody uses". We need protocols, not platform capitalism. We need easy self-hosting, not reliance on third-party middle men and rent-seekers. I should be able to click an app on my computer and have my o…

> I should be able to click an app on my computer

The majority of internet users don't have a computer

Re: Metabook

#22

Post by abacadaba »

cunidev wrote: post #6
ampgt wrote: post #2

I’m doubling down on FB stock. See all you haters in 10 years :)

Since when does stock value reflect the ethical concerns about a company? In any case, best wishes.

My current investment plan is to pour money into whatever I see getting hated on the most.

Re: Metabook

#24

Post by ethanbond »

arketyp wrote: post #3

>We don't need to keep living inside screens — especially ones controlled by Mark. We don't need to accept Facebook's domination of the digital world. Right! No body is forcing you. Ironically, these kinds of anxious reactions are symptoms of the very same pathological gregariousness that is the problem with social media in the first place.

Ah the ol’ network effects are a real high value target for businesses but have no real impact on consumers argument.

Nice.

“Pathological gregariousness…” with the scale and degree of consumption of social media, don’t you think there’s a possibility that actually there’s a universal human desire to connect with one another and it’s the tools themselves that are exploiting it to a pathological degree?

Re: Metabook

#26

Post by yodsanklai »

nabla9 wrote: post #20

Of all big tech companies Fb is - the least innovative, - has the worst corporate governance, - purest advertising company, - The CEO is not good but has dominant share of votes. Facebook is relevant only because they spend their way out of trouble and buy competition. The US and EU regulators are going to remove that tactics. Good luck getting EU approval for any new Whatsapp, Instagram acquisition. There is no clea…

> The CEO is not good

According to what? FB has had a tremendous growth.

Re: Metabook

#27

Post by ethanbond »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #9
arketyp wrote: post #3

>We don't need to keep living inside screens — especially ones controlled by Mark. We don't need to accept Facebook's domination of the digital world. Right! No body is forcing you. Ironically, these kinds of anxious reactions are symptoms of the very same pathological gregariousness that is the problem with social media in the first place.

I and many others over the years have just stopped going to Facebook, not because of Principles or whatever, but just because it's the same shit every day. I don't know anyone anymore that obsessively uses Facebook or Instagram (I know, anecdotal). "The youth" is on more entertainment-focused things like tiktok, and people that want to keep in the loop (and argue about it) go to twitter. But I don't feel like people…

I don’t think many critics of FB draw a bright line between FB and TikTok/Twitter. These are questions of degrees and specific variations, but from what I’ve seen much of the criticism is at the fundamental mechanics which are more or less shared across the services.

Re: Metabook

#28

Post by throwaway744678 »

nabla9 wrote: post #20

Of all big tech companies Fb is - the least innovative, - has the worst corporate governance, - purest advertising company, - The CEO is not good but has dominant share of votes. Facebook is relevant only because they spend their way out of trouble and buy competition. The US and EU regulators are going to remove that tactics. Good luck getting EU approval for any new Whatsapp, Instagram acquisition. There is no clea…

Is the EU allowed to have a say when a US company buys another US company?

Re: Metabook

#29

Post by throwaway744678 »

saddlerustle wrote: post #21
jarcane wrote: post #8

> Start a site on Neocities, share photos on Pixelfed, or write your thoughts on Write.as — to name a few. This would be a more convincing pitch if it didn't end with "now just use different centralized services that nobody uses". We need protocols, not platform capitalism. We need easy self-hosting, not reliance on third-party middle men and rent-seekers. I should be able to click an app on my computer and have my o…

> I should be able to click an app on my computer The majority of internet users don't have a computer

I believe the argument stays true if you replace "computer" by "device".

Re: Metabook

#30

Post by einpoklum »

imglorp wrote: post #16
ushakov wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

god, i hope you’re kidding

Serious question about socially ethical investing. Is one truly making a statement and helping Evilcorp by buying stock? Or is it more of a zero sum game where it's going to the market price with or without you; might as well make more money there and use the winnings somewhere more socially responsible?

> Is one truly making a statement and helping Evilcorp by buying stock?

That's not the point. The point is that when you buy EvilCorp stock, you:

1. Are part of the owners of EvilCorp, i.e. participate in decision-making in EvilCorp (at least in theory), so you are taking partial responsibility for its actions.

2. More importantly, you are providing EvilCorp with more funds to do its evil work.

The above is completely irrespective of stock prices.

Post reply on HN