All Facebook gets from me in all this is that I spend less and less time on Facebook, because all I do is look at the news feed, and if there's only five new items from yesterday, then I leave. I wish I could say I was sticking it to them for being jerks, but I know they don't really care about me or need me. And it's not like all my friends are going to go to Google+, or heaven forbid Diaspora. Excuse me while I go post this story on my wall.
How Facebook Gets Away With Being Broken On Purpose
61–70 of 80 posts
Re: How Facebook Gets Away With Being Broken On Purpose
#62This just in: Facebook is a business and wants to make a profit.
Seriously, how is this surprising? You want to use Facebook to increase your own business, you pay them. If anything, being able to reach a fraction of your followers for free is an evolution of freemium.
Re: How Facebook Gets Away With Being Broken On Purpose
#63If users wanted Twitter-like, see 100% of posts as the default, Facebook would have done it. They maximize for engagement 1st and then they monetize that engagement. For example, if people were most engaged seeing every post (which they wouldn't be, because of the nature of Facebook where you're mostly friends with people you don't care about), they could have far more Timeline "Suggested" of "Featured" posts than th…
I think most users do want Twitter-like 100% visibility. And, at least when they first signed up (for those who signed up more than a year ago), they thought they were getting that. I think that the typical user has just given up on trying to keep up with and compensate the every-changing features and have settled for what they get and/or moved on to something else.
Twitter-like 100% visibility
Re: How Facebook Gets Away With Being Broken On Purpose
#64Personally, I think Facebook would be broken if every message every person or group I'm connected to made it directly into my feed. The feed has been algorithmic for a very long time and paid placement is neither a surprising nor nefarious input to that algorithm. Paid posts are clearly labeled and, even if paid, don't guarantee distribution volume, but do provide analytics. If you don't like the results you're getti…
Sure, but I would like to be able to set if I want by default see New feeds or Most recent post.Currently if I change to "SORT BY: MOST RECENT", it goes back to TOP STORIES after a day or so.
Re: How Facebook Gets Away With Being Broken On Purpose
#65What is really broken with my feeds is that I click for more feed and it shows me the same feed I read in the same identical order.
Re: How Facebook Gets Away With Being Broken On Purpose
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That is not what users expect. It is called a timeline for a reason. Timeline and Newsfeed are two very different things. The feature in question is the newsfeed. If you go to somebody's timeline (previously "wall") you will see every post they've made in roughly chronological order.
I don't want to have to go to all my friends' walls to see what they're saying. I want it to be in my feed, unless I explicitly remove it, or give Facebook permission to choose. I'm not holding my breath, though.
My impression of Facebook's feed algorithm is that it takes your activity and the popularity of posts into account. If you look at the feed often, you'll see all the content. However, if you've been away for 5-10 hours, facebook will show you the most popular stuff of that time period. It may be that they stick the rest in "under the fold" of feed, but I'm not sure.
Re: How Facebook Gets Away With Being Broken On Purpose
#67Facebook is betting this will all blow over and everyone will accept it as the new status quo just like 80% of the previous evil changes they implemented. They are continually pushing the envelope to see what they can get away with, and I think in this case they will probably pull it off like they usually do. The article describes it as "as plain and malignant a case of conflict of interest can get", but I don't see…
You seem to have missed the entire point of the article. That point is there is a conflict of interest between Facebook and its advertisers. Something that's not true of most Internet advertising systems according to the author. That is the specific problem. Not that it used to be free and now is pay.
Google, the largest ad business on the planet, derives much of its revenue from a product that is directly antagonistic to advertisers: organic search.
Re: How Facebook Gets Away With Being Broken On Purpose
#68I ditched Facebook years ago, and I've never been happier.
Correlation does not equal causation:) But good for you! (on the happiness part)
Re: How Facebook Gets Away With Being Broken On Purpose
#69hmm, I think some different, unrelated issues are getting conflated here. - Your feed is determined by edgeRank, just like your google results are (let's say for the sake of simplicity) determined by pageRank - You can switch your feed to 'most recent' which ignores edgeRank, and simply displays posts in reverse chronological order, like FB used to, like tumblr does, twitter did (not sure about twitter right now), et…
> - You can switch your feed to 'most recent' which ignores edgeRank, and simply displays posts in reverse chronological order, like FB used to, like tumblr does, twitter did (not sure about twitter right now), etc. That's not true. I use most recent and while it's probably filtering less, it still filters.
It also resets itself to Top Stories say, every day or so. I would say I am surprised that with all the engineering talent Facebook has they can't manage to remember this one setting I have made about 20 times, but I am not that naive.
Re: How Facebook Gets Away With Being Broken On Purpose
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That is not what users expect. It is called a timeline for a reason. Timeline and Newsfeed are two very different things. The feature in question is the newsfeed. If you go to somebody's timeline (previously "wall") you will see every post they've made in roughly chronological order.
I don't want to have to go to all my friends' walls to see what they're saying. I want it to be in my feed, unless I explicitly remove it, or give Facebook permission to choose. I'm not holding my breath, though.
No, you really, really don't. Because then your feed would be totally worthless, dominated by whoever pumps out the most stuff.