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

Social networks are no longer social

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 200 posts

Re: Social networks are no longer social

#91

Post by paulie_a »

newscracker wrote: post #60
octosphere wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can still be anonymous on Facebook if you use their onion service[1]. Although I think you can't register for an account under Tor, which is counter intuitive (I mean why would you offer a Tor hidden service if you can't register under it?). In that case I would register using a 3G/GSM IP which many people share (instead of a unique IP where few people share it); and then, once registered, proceed to browse Faceb…

> Just be careful, because if you are using Facebook with Tor, you run the risk of outing your real identity from things like your social graph, search queries, likes, and other metadata. You can’t be anonymous from Facebook or from Facebook users (with or without Tor) without violating its ToS and worrying about being blocked and asked to prove your real/authentic identity if you piss off some random person online o…

Who gives a crap about any tos? I have never read one in my life and will never. I'm simply going to do whatever the hell I want on any service.

In the case of Facebook you will probably not get flagged even when you are a complete jackass, anonymous or not. Twenty percent of the userbase would disappear

Re: Social networks are no longer social

#92

Post by krapp »

DenisM wrote: post #86
scarecrowbob wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, that's what it is like to go anywhere in a small town you've lived in for a long time. :D

So all of the downsides and none of the advantages of a closely-knit community?

The upside depends on your race, religion, sexual orientation and social class like anywhere else.

Re: Social networks are no longer social

#93

Post by sixstringtheory »

ricardobeat wrote: post #77
fgandiya wrote: post #50

I'm not sure how to feel about this. From social media I've been able to connect with old friends, enjoy good memes and keep up with current affairs. It's also been useful at times where I've found people willing to put in a good word for a job, mentor me and there are a few people who are really good at providing a fruitful environment for discussion (even controversial topics) that makes me sad to leave. Unfortunat…

Can you explain ‘extra’ in this context? #oldfart

Too much to handle; over the top; not worth the effort.

Synonyms: ratchet, trifling.

Re: Social networks are no longer social

#94

Post by a_imho »

bogomipz wrote: post #82
a_imho wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EU should really swing its GDPR stick around. Can someone shed some light on why the e.g Oath Family has not been hit with a serious fine yet? The violation is clear as a day.

Could you elaborate? Aren't those ToS/Privacy Policy displays there in order to satisfy GDPR requirements? I thought the idea was that you could either agree to accept them and continue or decline. I don't claim to be that well-versed in GDPR law however but genuinely curious.

Ianal but I don't think so. Without nitpicking all the finer details how Oath/Techcrunch fails (probably very much willingly) to comply, their wall of text is a bad excuse for informed consent.

Eg I still have no idea what data they collect and who they share it with or how can I opt-out (itself is non compliant btw, but I'm assuming industry best practices here)

I thought the idea was that you could either agree to accept them and continue or decline.

IIRC forced/umbrella consent like that is explicitly forbidden.

Re: Social networks are no longer social

#95

Post by krapp »

wybiral wrote: post #18

I vote we return to the age of late Geocities, forums, and early blogs. Less conformity in design, less "social" by modern definition, but more people who just liked one topic enough to build something about it and communities forming around them.

The thing is, there's plenty of room on the web for both, and always has been, but people seem to only want one or the other.

Re: Social networks are no longer social

#96

Post by kardos »

reaperducer wrote: post #51
pcurve wrote: post #4

The article mentions of days when you were anonymous, getting to know strangers through common interests and exchanging ideas. I do miss those early days. For me, social network stopped being social as soon as reasonable assurance of anonymity when out the window once companies started pressuring people use their real identity, and that became the norm.

The article mentions of days when you were anonymous It's funny how in the early days of the internet, everyone was so open and honest about who they are that it was very common for their e-mail messages, Usenet posts, finger plans, etc... to have their real names, home and/or work addresses, and home and/or work phone numbers. Then the scammers discovered the internet, and everyone had to dummy up about who they are…

> Maybe we should all go back to blatantly stating who we are to make the corporations' information gathering worthless.

Well yes, that would devalue your name/address details, so they'd shift to more invasive approaches like reading your emails and messages, bugging your person and/or home, tracking your financial transactions, etc.

Re: Social networks are no longer social

#97

Post by lukevdp »

njarboe wrote: post #90
PretzelFisch wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The idea of "engagement" as a key metric for some of these services is bizarre. If they were a social network, I would agree. But they are an ad display network. therefore engagement is a key metric to their business and customers.

But what is weird is Netflix is not an ad network (yet?). Why would they be interested in "engagement" ie, people watching lots of stuff? That costs them extra money. Their best customer would be someone who pays the $10/month and watches just a few movies/shows.

People that use the service a lot are less likely to cancel, and more likely to recommend it to others.

Re: Social networks are no longer social

#98

Post by revskill »

pyr0hu wrote: post #89
revskill wrote: post #36

It's all about advertising. Social network is about advertising in the end. To CEOs: top using "social network" vocabulary for your business, when in the end, it's about advertising. Or you're liars.

Okay, lets say I am developing a "social network" for a specific group of people, its a pretty closed one so not for everyone. The main revenue is not coming from advertisement, because there is nothing we can advertise to the users. So am I a liar? Or what? I can use social network for marketing without implying that we use and/or sell user data

If you build an app for advertisement purpose, call it an Advertising App, not Social Network.

Re: Social networks are no longer social

#99

Post by laumars »

kardos wrote: post #96
reaperducer wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article mentions of days when you were anonymous It's funny how in the early days of the internet, everyone was so open and honest about who they are that it was very common for their e-mail messages, Usenet posts, finger plans, etc... to have their real names, home and/or work addresses, and home and/or work phone numbers. Then the scammers discovered the internet, and everyone had to dummy up about who they are…

> Maybe we should all go back to blatantly stating who we are to make the corporations' information gathering worthless. Well yes, that would devalue your name/address details, so they'd shift to more invasive approaches like reading your emails and messages, bugging your person and/or home, tracking your financial transactions, etc.

Not sure if that’s intended to be taken sarcastically or not but some of those things do already happen like reading your emails/instant messages and tracking your financial transactions.

Re: Social networks are no longer social

#100

Post by Matumio »

pcurve wrote: post #4

The article mentions of days when you were anonymous, getting to know strangers through common interests and exchanging ideas. I do miss those early days. For me, social network stopped being social as soon as reasonable assurance of anonymity when out the window once companies started pressuring people use their real identity, and that became the norm.

This describes roughly my experience with small mastodon instances right now. It has been called "twitter like it was in the early days". Mostly pseudonyms, feeling of anonymity and being part of a small group. No algorithmic selection of content. Liking a post doesn't even affect its visibility. People are less afraid to post unpolished content, e.g. artists I follow report they feel less pressure when posting a rough sketch or personal stuff that doesn't fit into their portfolio. The flip side: there is no way to filter all the trivialities and show only the "best" posts.
Post reply on HN