851–860 of 890 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We live in a society that only values money so why should anyone optimise for s.th. else?
This frames society as some exogenous entity that we have no influence over. It also assumes that the society is homogenous, in the sense that everyone cares about the same thing. I don't think that's true at all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My feed is like this too. I rarely use FB now, but I’ve aggressively pruned and blocked anything that becomes political or negative.
I unfollowed everyone except for a few family members. It really wants to give you the infinite scroll and started showing me some really bizarre stuff. So much AI slop, and random content. For about a week it kept showing me nursing mothers, no matter how many times I said "I don't want to see this" and blocking. I have no problem with women nursing, but these were done in a way to be sexually provocative. After tha…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a month-old account.
It’s HN. People create new accounts here all the time to protect their anonymity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The worst to me is the way people dehumanize other people who don't agree with them. The other side politically doesn't just have different views, they are barely human knuckle draggers. Basically neanderthals, so who cares if they go extinct.
"don't agree with them" is carrying a lot of weight here, isn't it?
One side: this group of people shouldn't even exist. The other side: no, let them exist actually.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reddit is so insufferably political now it's insane. Like why do 3d printing subreddits need to stand with (insert leftist outrage of Gaza / Israel / Ice / Canada / on and on)
Weren't you the one telling us X.com should replace legacy media? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46891442 As a reminder, a glimpse at X's front page a few weeks ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46504404 I think it's very telling how you went to Reddit first when complaining about politics on social media, one of the only big ones that still hasn't been completely invaded by MAGA sycophants. Just admit…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a middle aged (gen x) woman, my facebook feed is pretty good. It's filled with posts from friends and interest groups that I am a part of. The reason I no longer use FB has nothing to do with the feed, it's because Mark Zuckerberg is an awful person, and I refuse to use his product. The cognitive dissonance is great here, because I still use WhatsApp; it's the best way to stay in contact with my relatives in Europ…
I'm still a FB user even though most friends and relatives have disengaged due to toxicity. But what I've noticed consistently is that any group on FB that has more than 1000 members will end up surfacing so much toxic sentiment that I have to unsubstantiated. I'm talking about innocuous fields such as the local road conditions. That one became full of rants about out of state drivers, drivers who don't understand En…
It depends on the group and how well it is moderated.
I live in an area where everything depends on Facebook. There are multiple FB groups for the town, the largest of which has 80k members. Not perfect, but not toxic. The same in other similar groups.
I am an admin of another with 30k members. It has a tight focus (exams and qualifications for home ed kids in the UK - GCSEs/IGCSEs mostly, but other things too), membership is only for parents of such kids (there are membership questions), the group is private, posts require approval, irrelevant comments get deleted, repeat offenders get kicked out. We do not have a lot of problems (some attempts at spam by tutors, but they get kicked out).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm still a FB user even though most friends and relatives have disengaged due to toxicity. But what I've noticed consistently is that any group on FB that has more than 1000 members will end up surfacing so much toxic sentiment that I have to unsubstantiated. I'm talking about innocuous fields such as the local road conditions. That one became full of rants about out of state drivers, drivers who don't understand En…
> This has led me to a theory that humans just can't behave nicely beyond some threshold group size. I think you're generalizing far too broadly. The problem you're describing is more-or-less exclusively a problem with online, open-membership groups. Consider: if the groups you describe were in-person groups, these ranters would constantly be getting disengaged/off-put/disgusted reactions from the "silent majority" o…
One thing I think you are missing is that in person groups are usually far smaller. Anything with 1,000 people would be organised and there would be rules of behaviour, moderation of discussion etc. Most often if something is that big, its mostly an audience.
I think the other thing that happens in real life groups is that there is no community or real relationships. If you annoy people in real life it has consequences. In an FB group there are none.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm still a FB user even though most friends and relatives have disengaged due to toxicity. But what I've noticed consistently is that any group on FB that has more than 1000 members will end up surfacing so much toxic sentiment that I have to unsubstantiated. I'm talking about innocuous fields such as the local road conditions. That one became full of rants about out of state drivers, drivers who don't understand En…
> This has led me to a theory that humans just can't behave nicely beyond some threshold group size. I think what happens is that the risk of including a critical amount of "toxics" (lacking a better word) such that they can keep a conversation going, increases by FB group size. Without actice moderators it doesn't take much.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was about to point out two things: 1. This bit you just pointed out. Facebook suggesting Yoleendadong, that’s not weird, she’s wildly popular. Her inclusion in this piece discredits OP as someone who basically has no idea how social media works - which makes the article less insightful, like asking David Attenborough to work the play by play commentary of an NBA game. 2. I don’t think OP realizes how much he should…
> thirst slop like this. Buddy, I wish the thirst slop on Facebook was like this. I told my wife quite openly how I went through a 6 week period where I just couldn't get rid of AI generated booby photos of Salma Hayek. Why her? Who knows? I tried everything. Eventually it fixed itself. Occasionally, FB ads churn up straight up porn which is pretending to be something else. I'm not talking about OF girls - I actually…
If FB wants to have low standards for their advertisers, that’s on them. It’s not illegal or even inherently immoral to advertise porn, especially if FB already knows you’re over 18.
But, in general, the algorithmic content recommendations do follow what you want. Ads are different because advertisers pay for the users they want, not the other way around.
And more reminders for this discussion: Facebook isn’t a necessary utility, it has competitors, it is not a monopoly, you can delete your account without any downside to your life. This is very much unlike services like the Apple App Store or Google Play where it’s difficult to function in modern society without using them.
Of course, I’m not saying social media shouldn’t have more regulation and I’m not trying to defend them as a corporation. It’s just that at some point the best way to complain about products is to stop using them.