Just boycott Facebook already. 'but everyone uses it', yes but you have a choice. If you don't like the Facebook, then gtfo and make the effort to build something to replace it. But I guess that is too much work. People whine about Facebook, yet they do nothing to change the situation. You change the situation by making a choice. If your choice is to have Facebook account, then you are part of the problem, not the so…
Reminds me of a scene in "The Social Network" movie (2010): Lawyer: What are you doing? Mark Zuckerberg: Checking in to see how it's going in Bosnia. Lawyer: Bosnia? The don't have roads. But they do have Facebook. Mark Zuckerberg: [stops typing and looks up from his notebook] Youtube clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pI-r39_QkAs
Facebook's experiments with user behavior in Serbia
101–110 of 113 posts
Re: Facebook's experiments with user behavior in Serbia
#102Just boycott Facebook already. 'but everyone uses it', yes but you have a choice. If you don't like the Facebook, then gtfo and make the effort to build something to replace it. But I guess that is too much work. People whine about Facebook, yet they do nothing to change the situation. You change the situation by making a choice. If your choice is to have Facebook account, then you are part of the problem, not the so…
No. Small publishers have no choice. They have to be where their readers are. All they can do is try to diversify as much as possible, but it won't mean a whole lot if one of the world's oligopolists cuts them off overnight.
Exactly this. The benefit of small newspaper services is just too small for most of their readers to bother making sure to actually receive the news.
If they are gone, other content will fill the gap. That's pretty bad for those current content creators, sure. It also enables a local news revival as soon as people realise that there might be huge value in some forms of local publishing.
Re: Facebook's experiments with user behavior in Serbia
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because people rule their life on base of beliefs, maybe ? (beliefs=unproven concepts assumed to be true)
If life is a formal system, then it needs postulates. Obviously humans can’t agree on postulates. Do you have a useful scheme of postulates that you’re sure all humans will agree on? If so, please share. You’ll be able to clear up tens of thousands of years of misunderstandings if so.
In my view, religion is a cultural spine of a community that defines the rules for living together. It also comes with a set of assumptions (beliefs) that are used to justify the rules, make the whole hold together, and enforce their acceptance.
Calling back into question the assumptions lead to question the rules. This puts the community at risk. As a consequence religions establish protective measures. Some of them are swift and brutal. I hope you understand what I'm referring to.
Some religions are much less toxic, but there is still the problem of their assumptions that introduce a bias in the act and decision making. People who adhere to a religion tend to forget to put a weight of confidence in the assumptions with the rational to not put the community in danger. Anything that represent a threat to the religion is considered bad, and this includes calling back into question assumptions and rules.
Science did not work that way. And this is why it evolves so fast toward a better understanding of the world we are living in. I'm not saying science is a religion or an acceptable religion substitute. I'm just comparing the effectiveness and benefit of a faster evolution of knowledge.
I'm convinced by multiple personal experiences that any community (e.g. startups, forums) needs a cultural spine and community rules, but I don't think that religions is the appropriate answer to it. The rule and the knowledge must be able to evolve and this is only possible when they can be called back in question by anyone anytime, and an objective method is used to decide. Assumptions and beliefs should be considered as mere hypothesis. Religions tend to obstruct evolution for their survival and the survival of the community. And of course many humans use religions as leverage to manipulate people, not only for the good of the community.
The real problem of religions are their beliefs that we can't call back into question. People brain washed through all their childhood with these beliefs, that we are requested to respect, can't make the difference with was is true and not, can't call back into question the beliefs and are prone to integrate similar irrational beliefs. This put humanity at risk.
That is a summary of my current view of religions. Note that it may still evolve because it is only based on my current knowledge and past experience.
Re: Facebook's experiments with user behavior in Serbia
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
If Capitalism is your sole guiding philosophy, Facebook is doing nothing wrong. But if you believe that companies (of any size) should seek to "do no harm" in the world, Facebook is coming up woefully short.
I'm not familiar with the harm Facebook does to the world, because I don't generally use facebook or care to read news about it. With that being said, in this particular case, how is facebook to decide what is moral? Would you suggest that they put together an investigative team to decide which moral news organizations are negatively affected by the changes, and exclude said organizations? Surely the new "experiments…
Re: Facebook's experiments with user behavior in Serbia
#105Re: Facebook's experiments with user behavior in Serbia
#106Earlier quoted context omitted.
What a bullshit comment, Facebook needs to be more responsible with its massive power, it can ruin countries. Europe needs to do something about the Silicon Valley companies, we can't build Chinese firewall but in order to have a chance for competition we need to come up with a plan. One possible way to fuck off FB is because it's spy machine that is very much illegal on some aspects.
Europe doesn't need a plan . High level central planning has never succeeded in producing viable world-class competitors. That approach has already been tried and failed. European countries would achieve better results by setting up more favorable business climates and letting competition occur naturally. (There's nothing wrong with European countries protecting their citizens with data privacy and security laws. But…
Re: Facebook's experiments with user behavior in Serbia
#107Earlier quoted context omitted.
> then you are part of the problem, not the solution Are you going US vs THEM on 2 billion people? Good luck with that.
> then you are a part of the problem, not the solution ^ regrettable quote > Are you going US vs THEM on 2 billion people? Good luck with that. ^ another regrettable quote Something's popularity says nothing about its value. See, for example, religion. The most popular ones still suck a lot. Some more than others.
True. But thinking you can shame 2 Billion people to stop using certain service?
Re: Facebook's experiments with user behavior in Serbia
#108Much like the Serbia and other FB experiments a system will be set up, tested and then rolled out across the first world...
Re: Facebook's experiments with user behavior in Serbia
#109Earlier quoted context omitted.
What specific Buddhists beliefs suck, or are unproven?
reincarnation ?
Anything else?
Re: Facebook's experiments with user behavior in Serbia
#110We make all of this stuff up, we can do whatever we want, let's just get rid of it.