Q&A with Mark Zuckerberg • Hacker News Board

Re: Q&A with Mark Zuckerberg

#11

Post by sparkzilla » Fri, Oct 31, 2014, 12:16 AM UTC

onewaystreet wrote: post #9

minimaxir wrote: post #2

Of course, the most-Liked proposed questions such as "when u gonna introduce the dislike button ?" and "Why you forced us to install Facebook messenger ?" are the ones that would never be answered in a million years by Mark, therefore making the "vote on a question you want me to answer by liking it" community selection process somewhat pointless.

Both questions have been answered by Facebook employees on Quora: http://www.quora.com/Why-is-there-no-Dislike-button http://www.quora.com/Whats-the-point-of-Facebook-Messenger

I dislike the first answer. Other sites, like Buzzfeed and You.gov, an YouTube allow a wider range of emotional responses to their content.

Re: Q&A with Mark Zuckerberg

#12

Post by sparkzilla » Fri, Oct 31, 2014, 12:22 AM UTC

gordon_freeman wrote: post #3

minimaxir wrote: post #2

Of course, the most-Liked proposed questions such as "when u gonna introduce the dislike button ?" and "Why you forced us to install Facebook messenger ?" are the ones that would never be answered in a million years by Mark, therefore making the "vote on a question you want me to answer by liking it" community selection process somewhat pointless.

or "Why can't the news feed stay as 'most recent?"

Because: ads.

Re: Q&A with Mark Zuckerberg

#13

Post by gfosco » Fri, Oct 31, 2014, 12:48 AM UTC

gordon_freeman wrote: post #3

minimaxir wrote: post #2

Of course, the most-Liked proposed questions such as "when u gonna introduce the dislike button ?" and "Why you forced us to install Facebook messenger ?" are the ones that would never be answered in a million years by Mark, therefore making the "vote on a question you want me to answer by liking it" community selection process somewhat pointless.

or "Why can't the news feed stay as 'most recent?"

It has been answered so many times. The data has shown that it actually hurts engagement. The algorithm is better than a simple time-ordered sort.

Re: Q&A with Mark Zuckerberg

#14

Post by mdellabitta » Fri, Oct 31, 2014, 1:21 AM UTC

gfosco wrote: post #13

gordon_freeman wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

or "Why can't the news feed stay as 'most recent?"

It has been answered so many times. The data has shown that it actually hurts engagement. The algorithm is better than a simple time-ordered sort.

Overriding a user's stated preference by silently reverting it is what we're talking here, not changing the default.

If you change your view to "Most Recent," it should stay that way, regardless of what they think it does to "engagement."

Re: Q&A with Mark Zuckerberg

#15

Post by boyaka » Fri, Oct 31, 2014, 1:43 AM UTC

mdellabitta wrote: post #14

gfosco wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has been answered so many times. The data has shown that it actually hurts engagement. The algorithm is better than a simple time-ordered sort.

Overriding a user's stated preference by silently reverting it is what we're talking here, not changing the default. If you change your view to "Most Recent," it should stay that way, regardless of what they think it does to "engagement."

I'm one of the users that actively changes my feed to "Most Recent" any time it isn't. I've noticed that as long as I'm logging in from the same device (typically my desktop/laptop in desktop mode) that it tends to stay the same. I'm not sure exactly what triggers it to switch back to "Top Stories" but I've definitely had it happen when I log in on my Android phone through a browser (typically Chrome) after having to request the desktop version (I dislike the mobile version and uninstalled the app long ago due to battery consumption). Also, it does give the message "Viewing most recent stories · Back to top stories" if it is still on "Most Recent", so the lack of that message is one way to know to switch back.

That's not even what is frustrating for me. I'm pretty sure that it didn't used to work this way, but now whenever somebody likes or comments on a post it is moved to the top of "Most Recent". Just as a poster above has noted, the main reason Facebook wants you to use "Top Stories" is to increase usage, and I would guess that is exactly the reason they are doing this. When I log in I just want to see all the new posts, but now I have to scroll through a bunch that I have already seen just because more people have liked them, and I have to keep scrolling past several posts I've already seen unless I can remember how many likes/comments they had the last time I checked to make sure I've seen everything that's new. Ironically, I submitted feedback to Facebook about this last night.

Re: Q&A with Mark Zuckerberg

#16

Post by majormajor » Fri, Oct 31, 2014, 2:12 AM UTC

gfosco wrote: post #13

gordon_freeman wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

or "Why can't the news feed stay as 'most recent?"

It has been answered so many times. The data has shown that it actually hurts engagement. The algorithm is better than a simple time-ordered sort.

The algorithm shows me more stuff I've already seen, and less new stuff from my less-frequently-contacted friends.

Engagement doesn't work the same way for everyone. If I can't get away from seeing stuff I've already seen, I'm less likely to open the app as much...

Annoyingly, if I opened the app less, I'd be more likely to appreciate the algorithm...

Re: Q&A with Mark Zuckerberg

#17

Post by rwinn » Fri, Oct 31, 2014, 2:16 AM UTC

Top comment (for me):

    Hello Zuck, I would like to ask that when our facebook fanpage's reach will be come back? its too frustrating having 100k -likes with only 1k, 2k reach ,& 1m likes with only 10k, 20k reach .. sometimes too low
     
    Don't destroy our hard work and efforts, we want organic reach back !!! im not the only one who is unhappy with pages post reach . , Hope u are not ignoring my comment . thanks

    (i also wanted to know that is there any source to reach you ? if there is, i want to know..and if none..do establish one... a good idea can come from anywhere..from anyone.. )

I've also experienced this, you're only able to reach 5-10% of your fans without paying. Only way of getting a message out to all your fans is to "boost" your post, which will cost you around 0.015 EUR per like the page has. [1]

And on top of that if you ever used Facebook ads to get likes to your page, a majority of those are fake. [2]

[1] Based on my rough calculations on a couple of pages I run.

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVfHeWTKjag

Re: Q&A with Mark Zuckerberg

#18

Post by StudlyCaps » Fri, Oct 31, 2014, 2:19 AM UTC

I don't have a Facebook account so I can't post a question. Can someone post this question for me? Ask Zuck why he's invested so much money into making their own frankenstein PHP when they could have just used Java? I mean I like PHP and all. It's great for blogs or personal websites, but why would you invest all of that blood, sweat and beers into build something at that scale on PHP?

Re: Q&A with Mark Zuckerberg

#19

Post by Shad0w59 » Fri, Oct 31, 2014, 2:54 AM UTC

gordon_freeman wrote: post #3

minimaxir wrote: post #2

Of course, the most-Liked proposed questions such as "when u gonna introduce the dislike button ?" and "Why you forced us to install Facebook messenger ?" are the ones that would never be answered in a million years by Mark, therefore making the "vote on a question you want me to answer by liking it" community selection process somewhat pointless.

or "Why can't the news feed stay as 'most recent?"

FB Purity http://www.fbpurity.com/

Re: Q&A with Mark Zuckerberg

#20

Post by NoodleIncident » Fri, Oct 31, 2014, 3:22 AM UTC

StudlyCaps wrote: post #18

I don't have a Facebook account so I can't post a question. Can someone post this question for me? Ask Zuck why he's invested so much money into making their own frankenstein PHP when they could have just used Java? I mean I like PHP and all. It's great for blogs or personal websites, but why would you invest all of that blood, sweat and beers into build something at that scale on PHP?

By the time they got around to building "frankenstein PHP", it was way too late to switch languages. Before that, there was no time to switch.

The whole development process of Hack is interesting. It was very organic, if the stories I heard were true. Someone got it in their head to try compiling php to c++; they tested it and got a free 20% (ballpark) speedup of everything. Then they made a VM to make it faster and more efficient, and once they had that vm, it was easy to add small, useful features like 'await' and such.

Much of what people hate about PHP isn't in Hack, by the way. It has type hinting, lots of dumb conversions don't happen, and obviously it's not interpreted. Hack is really just a better language they made that, because it shares the same syntax as PHP, was very easy to switch over to while still developing features.