Live data from Hacker News

Facebook the Devourer

awardwinningfjords.com

51–60 of 101 posts

Re: Facebook the Devourer

#51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google has a search algorithm that outperforms any other. Their value proposition is that they can help you find what you are looking for better than their competitors can. Amazon has a vast network of suppliers and infrastructure. Their value proposition is that they can provide better selection and delivery than their competition. In both cases, the value is provided by the company. Facebook is a website that lets…

Google has almost no lock-in at all for their main economic engine, search. If a notably better competitor comes along tomorrow, within a year the whole money empire could crumble. People would just go to the new place, one at a time. Facebook has TREMENDOUS lock-in. For any new place to have value, it's got to have the majority of the people Facebook has change over in a very short timeframe. The problem with techni…

> Facebook has TREMENDOUS lock-in. For any new place to have value, it's got to have the majority of the people Facebook has change over in a very short timeframe.

Eh. I quit it a few years ago and honestly, no one cared. I kept up with the people I kept up with, they did the same.

it completely vanished with nary a ripple.

Re: Facebook the Devourer

#52
post #24

Of course we can replace facebook. If you think about it, we don't really need a "social network" - all these things can be done via e-mail, xmmp and irc (all of which are standard open protocols). Use mail groups instead of "pages" and "communities", set up your mail client to neatly arrange incoming messages in folders and voila. Use xmmp for private conversations. Use irc for group conversations. It's easy. The th…

In other words, Facebook provides more usable and discoverable interfaces for the tasks you list. But you omitted a few tasks that are not practical at all using the tools e-mail, XMPP and IRC provide:

Passive broadcasting / timeline: Share a status update with your friends, without putting it in an inbox or otherwise forcing them to actively dismiss it. People read your update if they happen to see it, but are not obligated to.

Events: Invite people to an event and let everyone see a convenient headcount and list of all the Yes/Maybe RSVPs.

Friends of friends: Discover new connections among the people you already know—for example, that Bob and Sally are acquainted even though you've never seen them together.

Photo tagging: Label each person in a group photo in a listable, searchable way. By viewing photos others have tagged, refresh your memory of who someone is.

At current there is no integrated, open protocol that would solve the above use-cases in an even remotely adequate manner, even if everyone on earth used it. We're left with two options. Surrender control to centralized social networks like Facebook, who have solved the above problems, but only within their walled gardens. Or simply go without these benefits and opportunities.

Both choices are unacceptable to me, and long-term, I suspect most hackers will feel the same way. That's why I strongly hope for the Tent protocol, or something like it, to succeed. https://tent.io/blog/tent-basics

Re: Facebook the Devourer

#53
Why on earth does this have upvotes.

1. Thomas Reynold's post comes across as a pathetic childish rant.

2. If you don't think connecting with your friends is valuable then don't write a blog post about it, keep it to yourself, because I don't give a shit what you think.

Re: Facebook the Devourer

#54
post #12

I have 340 Facebook friends (I feel like this is on the middle-lower end of typical). I scrolled down several "pages" on my timeline and saw zero evidence of any those people --- who are predominantly friends and family, or people I went to high school with --- were playing anything like Farmville. Most updates on my timeline are people sharing pictures of the city they're visiting, or of their kids. All of these peo…

I'm guessing you long ago hid messages from Farmville and similar games and forgot about it. There's no way you know 340 people who don't play Facebook games.

Yet I can use Facebook today to find out about meat specials at my butcher, or someone selling artisanal pickles, or a new theater company, or someone making custom knives as their hobby hoping to try to make a living doing it. And because of the stupid blue "like" button this article rails against, these hopeful businesses can do that without paying for pointless terribly-performing ads in major newspapers or on radio stations, and can have actual conversations with their customers.

I used to "like" local businesses. But... every day I get ads in my news stream reminding me that my friends "like" Wal-Mart. And Amazon.com. Mostly Amazon.com, actually. Sometimes I think that if I just clicked "like" I'd get fewer ads from Amazon than I currently get for Amazon. Because on Facebook, even the ads have ads.

Now I hesitate to "like" anything because I feel complicit in helping Facebook spam my friends. I think it's cool when a single item goes into my friends' feeds saying that I "like" a local restaurant, but I DON'T want them to see recurring ads in their news feed with my name attached. I have one friend who posts very infrequently, and she is apparently one of the only Facebook friends I have who has "liked" Wal-Mart, so most of her appearances in my feed are promotions for Wal-Mart. If I only knew her from my feed, I'd know her as that girl who shills for Wal-Mart.

I admit it's irrational to avoid the "like" button when it comes to local businesses, because I've never seen Facebook promote a cool local business to me; it's too busy telling me about this awesome new thing called Wal-Mart that I might not have heard of. When I "like" the coffee shop down the street, I suppose Facebook applies powerful machine-learning algorithms to that information to determine that they should lace my friends' news feeds with slightly more ads for Amazon.com and slightly fewer ads for Wal-Mart. No real harm done, then, since my name won't be used, but it isn't something I'm thrilled to be part of.

Re: Facebook the Devourer

#55

Oh look. Another blog post decrying the evils of facebook that is in reality saying "I don't like facebook, therefor it offers no value whatsoever to anyone else," like it's some universal truth. A lot of hacker/geek types seem 1. to hate facebook and 2. to be unable to empathize with anyone who doesn't share their dogmatic technological beliefs. Can we stop this already? Most people on facebook enjoy using it. Most…

Can we stop this already? No we can't. Imagine yourself going back to the 80s and explaining the Web to someone. It's as close to utopia as you can get. Most people probably wouldn't believe it. But it's real, it's here and it's amazing. I'd argue that Facebook undermines a lot of what makes the Web great. And since it's being confused with the Web itself, by being so popular and pervasively devouring, it could be a…

While I generally agree with you, I think people like us are somewhat to blame for not providing an alternative to FB that is as easy to use. I also blame my friends, relatives and acquaintances that have been so easily seduced, but I'm not sure that's fair.

Thankfully, my parents are too old to have any interest in FB, and my siblings are equally as cynical (aka "weird").

Re: Facebook the Devourer

#56
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of those are good for passive communication. No one said they "can't live without it." But it certainly adds value to a lot of people's lives.

Disagree. I feel e-mail can serve the same purpose but then some would argue the usefulness or value in 'passive' communication.

I feel like this has been hashed out a million times on HN. Yes, e-mail works. I could e-mail a photo album to people. But what if they want to comment on it? Either everyone gets spammed with hundreds of e-mails, or there's no group conversation. Add to that, being tagged in other people's albums. Facebook provides value to people. Not all people, but that's the way the world works.

And of course there is a value in passive communication. I want to see the photos my friend posted of his holiday. I don't want to have to look at them right now, though- I'm busy. So I'll look later. Ta-da: passive communication.

Re: Facebook the Devourer

#57
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can we stop this already? No we can't. Imagine yourself going back to the 80s and explaining the Web to someone. It's as close to utopia as you can get. Most people probably wouldn't believe it. But it's real, it's here and it's amazing. I'd argue that Facebook undermines a lot of what makes the Web great. And since it's being confused with the Web itself, by being so popular and pervasively devouring, it could be a…

While I generally agree with you, I think people like us are somewhat to blame for not providing an alternative to FB that is as easy to use. I also blame my friends, relatives and acquaintances that have been so easily seduced, but I'm not sure that's fair. Thankfully, my parents are too old to have any interest in FB, and my siblings are equally as cynical (aka "weird").

> I also blame my friends, relatives and acquaintances that have been so easily seduced, but I'm not sure that's fair.

It's really not. That's like blaming people for driving cars before autonomous cars came out.

Re: Facebook the Devourer

#58

The thing I find myself hating about all of these anti-Facebook rants is that they all seem to operate under the assumption that Facebook has "subsumed" all of this functionality from the internet at large, which seems spectacularly false. The number of people who "switched" from doing all of these things (blogging, IM, photo-posting, online gaming) on other sites to using Facebook for them is a tiny tiny minority co…

> Sure, someday there'll be a "new Facebook", and then people can complain about that walled garden.

I'm of the opinion that Facebook isn't going to get trumped by anything but an NGO. :(

Re: Facebook the Devourer

#59

I don't see what's bad about Facebook. 99 percent of the content is gossip, siloed, tucked neatly in a corner of the Internet, covered with ads. Would you rather have any idiot's rants and raves about their boy/girlfriend all over you search engine results? Long live chit chat, but keep it where it belongs. Incidentally, ill thought features like the timeline or apps like the Washington post that try to turn the site…

> Incidentally, ill thought features like the timeline or apps like the Washington post that try to turn the site to a news site or a personal mausoleum will fail and be retracted few months later

The Washington Post app has been around longer than a few months.

Re: Facebook the Devourer

#60

I don't see what's bad about Facebook. 99 percent of the content is gossip, siloed, tucked neatly in a corner of the Internet, covered with ads. Would you rather have any idiot's rants and raves about their boy/girlfriend all over you search engine results? Long live chit chat, but keep it where it belongs. Incidentally, ill thought features like the timeline or apps like the Washington post that try to turn the site…

> Incidentally, ill thought features like the timeline or apps like the Washington post that try to turn the site to a news site or a personal mausoleum will fail and be retracted few months later The Washington Post app has been around longer than a few months.

yeah usually it takes about 12 months for facebook to overhaul any previous design.
Post reply on HN