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

Mark Zuckerberg’s Delusion of Consumer Consent

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–37 of 37 posts

Re: Mark Zuckerberg’s Delusion of Consumer Consent

#31

Post by slededit »

explainplease wrote: post #6

Regardless of how one feels about Facebook, has anyone stopped to ask why Facebook and Zuckerberg are getting such an avalanche of negative coverage from the mainstream media? Why have they suddenly united against him?

Facebook has made a lot of enemies:

- Traditional online media has been looking for an online advertising giant to attack for a while, Facebook was the first to be involved in a national scandal (Google is bigger but they're "Not Evil"). They want to regain some control of their advertising income

- Democrats blame Facebook for electing Trump

- Republicans blame Facebook for moderating from the left (doesn't help Zuckerberg was courting the Clintons and actively assisting her during the election).

- Privacy advocates want a focal point for the issue of online privacy and data mining.

The real question is: who doesn't hate Facebook right now?

Re: Mark Zuckerberg’s Delusion of Consumer Consent

#32

Post by devoply »

djohnston wrote: post #4

I'm a little confused. When I looked at the study they linked, they don't pose an alternative question, like, "Or ads that aren't tailored to your interests." If you only ask if they want to see ads, wouldn't they obviously say no?

Why don't we just create a database with all of our interests and the let companies use that database to send offers directly to us and then have tools that we can use to sort through those offers...

Re: Mark Zuckerberg’s Delusion of Consumer Consent

#33

Post by inopinatus »

burtonator wrote: post #12

The research here is amazingly flawed. They ASKED users what they wanted. If you've every done anything with behavioral analysis online you'll quickly learn that users say they want one thing and then often behave the exact opposite. First. If you ask users if they would use a site that has ads, the percentage that say they don't want ads (which is probably a majority) are also the same ones that won't pay for the si…

This is only good news for sociopaths looking for ways to engineer more effective reinforcement disorders on a civilisational scale.

Key takeaway: don't be proud of hijacking consumer irrationality.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg’s Delusion of Consumer Consent

#34

Post by djohnston »

devoply wrote: post #32
djohnston wrote: post #4

I'm a little confused. When I looked at the study they linked, they don't pose an alternative question, like, "Or ads that aren't tailored to your interests." If you only ask if they want to see ads, wouldn't they obviously say no?

Why don't we just create a database with all of our interests and the let companies use that database to send offers directly to us and then have tools that we can use to sort through those offers...

i like the idea in principle, but who hosts the database?

Re: Mark Zuckerberg’s Delusion of Consumer Consent

#35

Post by devoply »

djohnston wrote: post #34
devoply wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why don't we just create a database with all of our interests and the let companies use that database to send offers directly to us and then have tools that we can use to sort through those offers...

i like the idea in principle, but who hosts the database?

a non-profit.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg’s Delusion of Consumer Consent

#36

Post by stuntkite »

chillacy wrote: post #30
stuntkite wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think "wouldn't make any money" isn't true. They could keep offering the current product but offer one for people who wanted to pay. Like I said, I think this would be less lucrative than their current platform, but it would demonstrate that they have an idea to "disrupt" their own business model with something that resembles morals or actual innovation. It won't happen and they'll keep shifting and never be able t…

In theory if you outbid all the advertisers you could more or less achieve this. But I’ve read some reports saying that users are worth on average something like 50 bucks a quarter, and have users would be worth way more, so it would be pricey.

Or make less money and produce a platform that isn't exploitative. Whatever. Seems reasonable. It'll all eat itself anyway, it'll be fun to watch.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg’s Delusion of Consumer Consent

#37

Post by CaptainZapp »

stuntkite wrote: post #28
burtonator wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is that a paid Facebook wouldn't make any money. This wouldn't even impact the bottom line. Services like Evernote have < 5% of the userbase paying.

I think "wouldn't make any money" isn't true. They could keep offering the current product but offer one for people who wanted to pay. Like I said, I think this would be less lucrative than their current platform, but it would demonstrate that they have an idea to "disrupt" their own business model with something that resembles morals or actual innovation. It won't happen and they'll keep shifting and never be able t…

I think "wouldn't make any money" isn't true. They could keep offering the current product but offer one for people who wanted to pay. Like I said, I think this would be less lucrative than their current platform, but it would demonstrate that they have an idea to "disrupt" their own business model with something that resembles morals or actual innovation.

The problem here is that Facebook squandered any possibly remaining trust in the company with their constant shenanigans.

My assumption nowadays is that when Facebook does anything it's hostile towards their users and only good towards their bottom line

A further assumption of mine is that whenever a Facebook spokes drone opens her or his mout they lie.

And whenever you think this foul and disgusting pustule of a company has reached the height of depravity they come up with an even worse surprise to prove you wrong and that they can behave in an even worse manner.

So Facebook claiming that they won't track me in exchange for money to me would be uttely untrustworthy.

Post reply on HN