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

Economists study what happens when people stop using Facebook

calnewport.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 167 posts

Re: Economists study what happens when people stop using Facebook

#41

Post by DyslexicAtheist »

AQuantized wrote: post #34
DyslexicAtheist wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

time spent in a way that made you feel good isn't wasted. maybe it had no economic output but that isn't a waste. But the long term benefit of TV/Video isn't a diet that's good for you. Consider all the things you could do (not "achieve") if you'd use it for reading books, travel, learning a language or art. What this medium robs you of is boredom, which maybe feels great in the short run, but is hugely damaging to y…

If you have no problems with your current levels of creativity, focus, etc. is doing those things ("reading books, travel, learning a language or art") still superior to TV?

I wouldn't say superior. That would be snobby and ignorant, but I think it depends on "does it make you happy"? If you have to stop and think then maybe it doesn't. If not then great! Why change something that fulfills you. Doesn't matter what other say, or does it?

Re: Economists study what happens when people stop using Facebook

#42

Post by stiray »

Calvin02 wrote: post #7

HN's Facebook obsession is so unproductive. Let it go already. Focus on building your own thing. Yes, people use Facebook. No, you don't have to. Edit: yes, please downvote this comment. Let the HN naval gazing continue.

Or some of us have obsession about unhealthy distopia that is at the end of facebook road.

May I recomend you a book? https://www.amazon.com/Age-Surveillance-Capitalism-Future-Fr...

Or, if books are not your thing, maybe watch Black Mirror - Nosedive (S03E01).

You need to understand that some people are older than facebook and have seen the tranformation of human society since the Facebook came.

Re: Economists study what happens when people stop using Facebook

#43

Post by prox »

watwut wrote: post #37
prox wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not go do social hobbies? Photography or creative clubs, walking groups, dance classes, book reading clubs, volunteer work. There is lots to choose from.

I have job and kids. And I am already using my allocated "for me" time for sport. It gives some social contact, but not enough. Social hobbies require significant time spent hanging out, but are not child friendly so they are out. Besides that, walking groups or book reading clubs don't exist here. Photography or creative clubs exist only in form of structured classes, where you pay for two lessons a week. Adults/old…

That makes sense, tbf you do have a family, for a moment there I thought you were alone, alone.

Another suggestion (last one ;) if you have a family is board games. You have adult / kid games,lots of banter to be had and can be played with other families for a good time.

Also everyone sux at art in the beginning :)

Re: Economists study what happens when people stop using Facebook

#44

Post by sbmthakur »

_8j50 wrote: post #10
Calvin02 wrote: post #7

HN's Facebook obsession is so unproductive. Let it go already. Focus on building your own thing. Yes, people use Facebook. No, you don't have to. Edit: yes, please downvote this comment. Let the HN naval gazing continue.

FB is so detrimental to society, people that never use it need to be concerned much like with gambling and alcoholism. HN is hardly alone on this, plenty of other sites including redit and a few others that I know of hate on facebook regularly.

> FB is so detrimental to society, people that never use it need to be concerned much like with gambling and alcoholism.

I don't get how Facebook is detrimental to society. Probably I am missing something.

The majority of people do have an option to delete their account or simply not to log in. Apart from Facebook's involvement in scandals like Cambridge Analytica, I don't see what's wrong with the site or company. It's true that it can be used for causing harm, but that's true for almost every other tech out there.

Re: Economists study what happens when people stop using Facebook

#45

Post by numpad0 »

yakshaving_jgt wrote: post #24
jsmonkey wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same here. At least in Facebook you mostly communicate with people you've chosen to accept as friends, and know who they really are. Reddit and Twitter on the other hand show all the bad sides of anonymity to the fullest. Way too much blind tribalism and conflict seeking, few adults actually capable of real discussion. So it's not only a waste of time, but one that gives you a bad mood as well.

The echo chamber is real. I went cold turkey on Twitter after using it for 10 years and gaining about 6k followers. Twitter was the #1 source of left-wing extremist noise in my life. I'm sure there were/are right-wing extremists on that platform too, but one seemed to appear in my algorithmic feed more than the other. Or perhaps it was confirmation bias. Who knows! Good riddance.

Both side's on it. In fact there's no sides. Just that Twitter is competent at removing constructive elements and distilling hatred/rage/anger for profit and it's working against you.

There are few ways to strip out some of their 10-year "improvement" and oh how deserted it looks under there...

Re: Economists study what happens when people stop using Facebook

#46

Post by HlessClaudesman »

xivzgrev wrote: post #38
mlang23 wrote: post #27

I totally quit television about a year ago, and it had a very noticeable positive impact on me. I also mostly quit Facebook with the end of last year. I say mostly, because I still use its event calendar, and occasionally check my stream. But I significantly reduced the amount of comments I leave on that platform. I feel like, while the criticism of FaceBook, Twitter, Reddit and co is pretty much warranted, we manage…

I personally don’t find TV a time waster. If you enjoy it, as I do, then do it, guilt-free. However if you find yourself addicted ie you want to do other things but you keep getting “sucked in” then by all means stop - it will have a noticeably positive impact.

I take ~1 hour of TV most evenings as a sedative.

Re: Economists study what happens when people stop using Facebook

#49

Post by mlang23 »

xivzgrev wrote: post #38
mlang23 wrote: post #27

I totally quit television about a year ago, and it had a very noticeable positive impact on me. I also mostly quit Facebook with the end of last year. I say mostly, because I still use its event calendar, and occasionally check my stream. But I significantly reduced the amount of comments I leave on that platform. I feel like, while the criticism of FaceBook, Twitter, Reddit and co is pretty much warranted, we manage…

I personally don’t find TV a time waster. If you enjoy it, as I do, then do it, guilt-free. However if you find yourself addicted ie you want to do other things but you keep getting “sucked in” then by all means stop - it will have a noticeably positive impact.

I wasn't feeling like TV directly prevented me from doing anything else, but it still felt like a big relief when I finally sold my TV. It didn't feel like it was stealing any of my time, still, my daily activities at home changed to something that feels much more productive and healthy. I read more, and spend more time with my personal projects. TV is sneaky, you don't realize how much time of your life it consumes.

Re: Economists study what happens when people stop using Facebook

#50

Post by yakshaving_jgt »

numpad0 wrote: post #45
yakshaving_jgt wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The echo chamber is real. I went cold turkey on Twitter after using it for 10 years and gaining about 6k followers. Twitter was the #1 source of left-wing extremist noise in my life. I'm sure there were/are right-wing extremists on that platform too, but one seemed to appear in my algorithmic feed more than the other. Or perhaps it was confirmation bias. Who knows! Good riddance.

Both side's on it. In fact there's no sides. Just that Twitter is competent at removing constructive elements and distilling hatred/rage/anger for profit and it's working against you. There are few ways to strip out some of their 10-year "improvement" and oh how deserted it looks under there...

I don't have any numbers to back this up, but I'm quite convinced certain subcultures are overrepresented on Twitter, and that while Twitter is open to all, that doesn't mean it's a representative cross-section of the general population.

I think this is true of most social networks, and is more obvious in certain cases, e.g., Tumblr.

Post reply on HN