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

Don’t Fix Facebook, Replace It

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 281 posts

Re: Don’t Fix Facebook, Replace It

#211

Post by 908087 »

egfx wrote: post #71
sidcool wrote: post #39

I tried explaining my 20 year old cousin about FB. Her constant argument was "I don't share anything private on FB". She checks in on FB everywhere she goes. Posts her pics all the time. I could not instill any sense of concern for privacy. What I could conclude is that the appeal of social is too great to have any caution. Call me a pessimist, but I don't think FB is going anywhere. People will keep using it inspite…

People will use it but only for the necessary stuff, like birthdays and condolences. Facebook as a time wasting medium is dying. And dying spectacularly. In fact the same network effect that made Facebook what it is will work it's way in reverse order.

Sending birthday wishes and condolences via Facebook seems more like an insult to me than "necessary stuff". If you give a fuck about someone, you'll make some kind of actual effort for such events.

Doesn't Facebook "remind" people to wish their "friends" a happy birthday? That kind of changes the meaning of those birthday wishes from "these people were thinking about me" to "these people clicked a button because an advertising corporation told them to".

As for condolences, the idea of deaths and other bad events increasing "engagement" (and therefore ad exposure and profit) for Facebook should make all involved feel dirty.

Re: Don’t Fix Facebook, Replace It

#212

Post by Joeboy »

verylittlemeat wrote: post #73
vinniejames wrote: post #46

We did replace it, almost 10 years ago. It was called Diaspora[1], no one cared about privacy then. No one really cares about privacy now, at least not enough to do anything about it. 1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diaspora_(social_network)

Man I remember the enthusiasm behind Diaspora like it was yesterday. I can still see in my minds eye that NYTimes article photo of the creators sitting around like they just invented cold fusion or something.

I think the hype was really thrust upon them by the breathless NYT article and the unexpectedly massive donations to their Kickstarter. They did their best to run with it, and were met with limited success and widespread vitriol that was not really deserved.

Re: Don’t Fix Facebook, Replace It

#213

Post by 908087 »

bachmeier wrote: post #164
jcadam wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've had the same thought. Charge a small monthly fee in lieu of running ads or selling user data. Might cut down on fake/spam accounts as well. But I don't think it would work (and I'd totally work on something like this if I thought it would). People say they care about privacy, but when you present them with the option of paying $5/mo for a service that respects their privacy or using a "free" service that tracks…

$60/year to post about taking the kids to visit Grandma is pretty steep for most users.

Maybe we should take that as a sign that announcing every trip to visit grandma to the world just isn't a thing we need to be doing.

Re: Don’t Fix Facebook, Replace It

#214

Post by 908087 »

I find Zuckerberg's argument that Facebook needs to be the way it is so that "people who can't afford it can have access" pretty repulsive and incredibly sleazy.

If people can't afford a few dollars a month, why in the fuck would it be acceptable to expose them to manipulative ads that encourage them to hand over money that Zuckerberg claims they don't have? He tries to paint himself and his company as altruistic, while simultaneously exploiting the hell out of the people he claims to be "helping".

Re: Don’t Fix Facebook, Replace It

#215

Post by quadyeast »

criley2 wrote: post #194
quanticle wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If she's happy with this level of privacy though, what's the problem? The problem is that it's not just her privacy she's violating, but the privacy of everyone else, including OP, whose photos get shared by said cousin. When I got back from a trip I took abroad with my family earlier this year, my friends mentioned that they'd seen the photos that "I" had posted to Facebook. Except... I hadn't posted any photos to…

"When I got back from a trip I took abroad with my family earlier this year, my friends mentioned that they'd seen the photos that "I" had posted to Facebook. Except... I hadn't posted any photos to Facebook. I have a Facebook account, but I deliberately have a very minimal presence on it. What my friends were seeing was the photos that my mother had posted, and which I had been tagged in. My privacy was violated by…

No, this is FB's fault. This should be opt-in.

Re: Don’t Fix Facebook, Replace It

#216

Post by Joeboy »

bamboozled wrote: post #97
vinniejames wrote: post #46

We did replace it, almost 10 years ago. It was called Diaspora[1], no one cared about privacy then. No one really cares about privacy now, at least not enough to do anything about it. 1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diaspora_(social_network)

Really? I don't think so, it would be good if someone did a study on this though. Most people I know think privacy is important. I do think people are communicating via other mediums more than before though. It's anecdotal but most of my family and friends just gravitate towards iMessage , Facetime and Telegram to communicate by default now. Could it be that people don't care about this issue because they care about…

> Most people I know think privacy is important.

Of course they do. What sort of person is going to tick the "I don't care about privacy" box? I guess the same kind of person that ticks the "I'm OK with mass extinction" box. Those opinions are not very relevant in the real world.

Re: Don’t Fix Facebook, Replace It

#217

Post by egfx »

908087 wrote: post #211
egfx wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People will use it but only for the necessary stuff, like birthdays and condolences. Facebook as a time wasting medium is dying. And dying spectacularly. In fact the same network effect that made Facebook what it is will work it's way in reverse order.

Sending birthday wishes and condolences via Facebook seems more like an insult to me than "necessary stuff". If you give a fuck about someone, you'll make some kind of actual effort for such events. Doesn't Facebook "remind" people to wish their "friends" a happy birthday? That kind of changes the meaning of those birthday wishes from "these people were thinking about me" to "these people clicked a button because an…

Death is big business. Legacy.com is totally dedicated to the idea. Why should anyone feel dirty about giving condolences? Actually, the general tone of your comment feels off and vindictive so I'll just stop here.

Re: Don’t Fix Facebook, Replace It

#218

Post by awat »

quanticle wrote: post #78
seanwilson wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I tried explaining my 20 year old cousin about FB. Her constant argument was "I don't share anything private on FB". She checks in on FB everywhere she goes. Posts her pics all the time. I could not instill any sense of concern for privacy. If she's happy with this level of privacy though, what's the problem? Maybe she does fully understand the implications but has a different value system to you? I feel that when…

>If she's happy with this level of privacy though, what's the problem? The problem is that it's not just her privacy she's violating, but the privacy of everyone else, including OP, whose photos get shared by said cousin. When I got back from a trip I took abroad with my family earlier this year, my friends mentioned that they'd seen the photos that "I" had posted to Facebook. Except... I hadn't posted any photos to…

I think your point is under represented in the digital privacy conversation. It doesnt do me a lot of good to stay off of Facebook if Facebook is still mapping me and scraping my contact info from other peoples phones.

Re: Don’t Fix Facebook, Replace It

#219

Post by vijaybritto »

jcadam wrote: post #157
vijaybritto wrote: post #155

"Another “alt-Facebook” could be a nonprofit that uses that status to signal its dedication to better practices, much as nonprofit hospitals and universities do" -> Honestly, I don't think this would be sustainable to function as a social network. At least I don't think it would work in a capitalist society.

I've had the same thought. Charge a small monthly fee in lieu of running ads or selling user data. Might cut down on fake/spam accounts as well. But I don't think it would work (and I'd totally work on something like this if I thought it would). People say they care about privacy, but when you present them with the option of paying $5/mo for a service that respects their privacy or using a "free" service that tracks…

Yes, exactly! Also developers still thinking in dollars need to understand the rest of the world seriously! The income levels all around the world are very less in the developing countries. This is a significant factor. If I'm earning only 100$/month I would definitely not pay a cent for a service that promises 'privacy'. I need to survive first and if I'm able to do stuff for free I'm definitely using it. Those people are least bothered about privacy.

An anecdote from a recent experience: I'm in India and there is the Aadhar project which assigns unique id to every citizen. There is a big privacy debate about it in the cities regarding privacy issues as the govt is forcing everyone to link our assets and tax numbers to it. People in the villages have no idea about it and there were pamphlets of Aadhar numbers being used as tissue papers in a local snack shops. But they all have a Facebook account for sure.

People don't understand understand privacy when they just want to survive.

Re: Don’t Fix Facebook, Replace It

#220

Post by fenwick67 »

soapdog wrote: post #209
Jean-Philipe wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Diaspora is actually worse for privacy, because of its distributed nature. Diaspora is about distributed ownership. If you value privacy in a social network, check out https://github.com/ssbc/patchwork

Hey I Love Scuttlebutt, I am actually writing a client for it. But I don't think the objective here is privacy. If I follow you on ssb, I will start replicating your feed (unless you block me), and all you post publicly will be in my own HD which I could use to generate some "intelligence". There are no incentives in ssb for those marketing type actions we see on FB and Twitter but we can still mine it. Of course you…

SSB does support encrypted private messaging, notably.

You could send a private message to a group of (7 or fewer) friends and then only they could open it.

Post reply on HN