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

“Facebook has destroyed the open web”

ibtimes.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 90 posts

Re: “Facebook has destroyed the open web”

#51

Post by idrios »

chris_wot wrote: post #43
Razengan wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The internet (or more specifically, information) was going to get harder to find and navigate anyway, once you turn it loose on a few billion people. That sheds light on a much scarier issue: Google.com has effectively BECOME the internet. How do you find information that isn't indexed by Google? There has to be a better way than just word of mouth, but all other alternatives afforded by current tech will just shif…

It just requires a group of people to start a new bunch of niche indexing projects. My idea, which may be a bit off the wall, is really to go down a path whereby you only index a subject. So node.js guys just give a search engine that indexes node.js material, Python people index Python articles, short-haired cat people index only short-haired cats... They key is to make the subject you are indexing manageable in sco…

I really like your enthusiasm and I can tell you put a lot of thought into this.

In regards to the parent comment's concerns about Google, though, I don't think he is saying that their indexing algorithm needs to be improved upon, or even that we need an alternative to it. I read it as "Google, in its ability to select sites for indexing, can control people's access to information and can therefore manipulate thought".

The problem is that Google has so much power and inherent ulterior motives as a company that make it potentially threatening.

I think that's why you're pitching this project to democratize search, but I think what you just pitched is a Google/Reddit hybrid--or basically a search engine that only gives results from a selected subreddit. Which could be cool, and I don't know if that exists or not.

However, I think the solution to displacing Google from being the internet itself is to make an open source search engine that is equally good as a search tool, but can sell itself on the basis that it doesn't track you or record your information (or if it does, there is no way for a human person to access your information).

I think the solution is DuckDuckGo.

Re: “Facebook has destroyed the open web”

#53

Post by dosgonlogs »

FussyZeus wrote: post #14
vr3690 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't they have like 1.65B MAUs? How is that a fad?

If you don't have the younger markets, you don't have a future. Once their parents are on a service, the younger market isn't if they don't need to be. Facebook is delaying it by playing big in International markets and in developing countries but the social aspects can't be outrun and won't change, as I said, it's a BIG fad but it's a fad and it will die a fad's death in due time. Why do think Zuck is pushing the Fa…

I have read this comment so many times over the years, but if you look at the actual figures, this simply is not true. Young people all over the world continue to make Facebook accounts at record rates month over month, at higher rates than they do snapchat accounts or any other social media account. Younger people just make more accounts, and shape their identity in different ways across different accounts intentionally or not. 18-35 demographic is by far the largest on Facebook. If you look just at the U.K, 1.17 million 18 year olds have Facebook accounts vs. 920,000 Snapchat accounts (Experian is the source for these figures). Of course you could make the point that Facebook has a ridiculous amount of fake accounts, but I haven't seen any recent attempts at quantifying that, and they wouldn't be alone in that regard anyway. Facebook continues to aggressively update their products, and they aren't a stranger to what their users like or how they use their product, I think it is naive to declare it a fad, and it has already been around too long for it that term to describe it.

Re: “Facebook has destroyed the open web”

#54

Post by jrnichols »

Razengan wrote: post #34
drivingmenuts wrote: post #12

Facebook hasn't destroyed the web - it's still there and functioning fine. Hyperlinks still work. What FB has done is made it easier for the lazy to connect with and stay within their own interest groups. FB has made it easy for people to ignore negative information with tons of cat pictures (I am as guilty as anyone for that) and cheerful little meaningless quotes. It's made it easier to post misinformation and spre…

> The internet (or more specifically, information) was going to get harder to find and navigate anyway, once you turn it loose on a few billion people. That sheds light on a much scarier issue: Google.com has effectively BECOME the internet. How do you find information that isn't indexed by Google? There has to be a better way than just word of mouth, but all other alternatives afforded by current tech will just shif…

> That sheds light on a much scarier issue: Google.com has effectively BECOME the internet.

I've noticed this in schools where Google products are used. The kids are now equating Google with the entire internet. They don't know anything about email - they just know Gmail. That's what is kind of scary to me. It's frustrating at home as well because while I am doing my best to educate the kids about technology, they are afraid to do anything outside of the Googlesphere and think things are broken if it doesn't perform just like the Google product. that's what I'm worried about. They don't see anything outside of the Google walled garden.

Re: “Facebook has destroyed the open web”

#55

Post by toomuchtodo »

5ilv3r wrote: post #28
drivingmenuts wrote: post #12

Facebook hasn't destroyed the web - it's still there and functioning fine. Hyperlinks still work. What FB has done is made it easier for the lazy to connect with and stay within their own interest groups. FB has made it easy for people to ignore negative information with tons of cat pictures (I am as guilty as anyone for that) and cheerful little meaningless quotes. It's made it easier to post misinformation and spre…

"Hyperlinks still work." I observe that this is increasingly no longer true. Links no longer show you when you have visited them. Chains of 301s are common. Tracking links are now the norm. The link text almost never is where you are actually going. Pages automatically redirect you based on a ton of probed information (mobile, desktop, tablet, logged in to G+, logged into facebook, etc), and even normal browser short…

There any good Chrome extensions out there that'll strip all of the tracking data from URLs as you browse?

Re: “Facebook has destroyed the open web”

#56

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

raddad wrote: post #32
drivingmenuts wrote: post #12

Facebook hasn't destroyed the web - it's still there and functioning fine. Hyperlinks still work. What FB has done is made it easier for the lazy to connect with and stay within their own interest groups. FB has made it easy for people to ignore negative information with tons of cat pictures (I am as guilty as anyone for that) and cheerful little meaningless quotes. It's made it easier to post misinformation and spre…

>easier for the lazy to connect with and stay within their own interest groups Facebook reminds me of AOL. People who had AOL had no idea of anything outside of AOL. I had to show many how to get out of AOL and they were astonished there was so much more. If Facebook was an ISP it truly would be the new AOL.

There's always going to be a niche for a service that does what AOL and FB do.

FB will be killed by its successor soon - possibly within five years, certainly within 10.

Jury's out on whether it will be founded in the US, or whether it will even need a web browser.

(I strongly suspect the answer to both questions will be "no.')

Re: “Facebook has destroyed the open web”

#57

Post by mbreese »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #55
5ilv3r wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Hyperlinks still work." I observe that this is increasingly no longer true. Links no longer show you when you have visited them. Chains of 301s are common. Tracking links are now the norm. The link text almost never is where you are actually going. Pages automatically redirect you based on a ton of probed information (mobile, desktop, tablet, logged in to G+, logged into facebook, etc), and even normal browser short…

There any good Chrome extensions out there that'll strip all of the tracking data from URLs as you browse?

I think that they mean instead of going to "http://example.com", the link is instead to "http://t.co/asdf11", which redirects you to example.com. It's hard to strip the tracking data away from links like this because resolving the link (to get the redirect) is needed.

The only alternative that I could think of is if there was a third-party who resolved the redirects. Something akin to a Bitcoin tumbler.

But, not all links like this are trying to track individuals (like ads), rather "engagement" or marketing sources (A FB post might get one tracking link whereas a tweet might get another). These are legitimate questions that aren't necessarily nefarious. But at the same time, it does go against the spirit, if not the meaning, of "hyperlink".

Re: “Facebook has destroyed the open web”

#58

Post by mbreese »

5ilv3r wrote: post #38
bawana wrote: post #33

And I remember the net before the web. FTP, Gopher, and lynx. So why did a 'web browser' succeed? Because you could integrate bandwidth hogging graphics?? or was it to mimic the gui interfaces of mac OS, windows, BEos, etc? I still mourn the loss of the newsgroups and usenet. Well, Usenet is still around, but in name only. So what's next-VR interfaces? The web and FB has made us dumber- we point and click and no long…

I am very interested in seeing in the post-web internet.

I'm not sure you will be happy when we get there. I'm fairly certain that it's already here - phone apps are pretty much on their way to being post-web.

Re: “Facebook has destroyed the open web”

#59

Post by developer2 »

jrnichols wrote: post #54
Razengan wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The internet (or more specifically, information) was going to get harder to find and navigate anyway, once you turn it loose on a few billion people. That sheds light on a much scarier issue: Google.com has effectively BECOME the internet. How do you find information that isn't indexed by Google? There has to be a better way than just word of mouth, but all other alternatives afforded by current tech will just shif…

> That sheds light on a much scarier issue: Google.com has effectively BECOME the internet. I've noticed this in schools where Google products are used. The kids are now equating Google with the entire internet. They don't know anything about email - they just know Gmail. That's what is kind of scary to me. It's frustrating at home as well because while I am doing my best to educate the kids about technology, they ar…

I'd advocate a bit towards the opposite: why does it matter?

The future of technology is probably going to wind up being entirely based on walled ecosystems anyway. If you own a MacBook, it's already very enticing to tie that in with an iPhone, etc. It's all about tight integration. I'd also say there is not a single existing system that exists yet which provides the kind of tight integration I'm dreaming of. I'm talking about the kind of system where you buy a home and every single piece of technology in it is integrated. Truly and completely integrated, not the pseudo lame stuff we have today.

HN types love to rant against the Walled Garden™, as if it's by definition some terrible thing. The only reason negative aspects even exist today is because the walled gardens we have today are woefully incomprehensive. When the day comes that you can buy into an all-in-one ecosystem that actually takes care of everything you need, there will be no problem. I would happily "lock into a walled garden" if that garden contains every variety of plant known to mankind.

Back to responding more directly to the parent. It just doesn't matter if someone knows Google and only Google. People use what works for them, and why shouldn't they? When the day comes that Google vanishes or word spreads that you shouldn't use it anymore, your average citizen will easily migrate to whatever other service is the most popular replacement. The average person does not need to know what SMTP is; they need a system that lets them type in their message and hit "send". This is a good thing, not some terrible sadness.

Re: “Facebook has destroyed the open web”

#60

Post by fny »

developer2 wrote: post #59
jrnichols wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That sheds light on a much scarier issue: Google.com has effectively BECOME the internet. I've noticed this in schools where Google products are used. The kids are now equating Google with the entire internet. They don't know anything about email - they just know Gmail. That's what is kind of scary to me. It's frustrating at home as well because while I am doing my best to educate the kids about technology, they ar…

I'd advocate a bit towards the opposite: why does it matter? The future of technology is probably going to wind up being entirely based on walled ecosystems anyway. If you own a MacBook, it's already very enticing to tie that in with an iPhone, etc. It's all about tight integration. I'd also say there is not a single existing system that exists yet which provides the kind of tight integration I'm dreaming of. I'm tal…

Part of the reason for the rant against the walled garden is that it threatens a developers ability to innovate without being threatened/limited/taxed/replaced by the gatekeeper.

Whether that's better for consumers is debatable (plethora of choice isn't necessary a good thing), but devs definitely give up a lot of power and leverage to the landlord.

Post reply on HN