3 ms·

>It's still Facebook's fault partially for laying out the groundwork for Facebook to become total garbage. The moment I stopped using Facebook - hell, the mome

>It's still Facebook's fault partially for laying out the groundwork for Facebook to become total garbage. The moment I stopped using Facebook - hell, the moment I stopped enjoying Facebook - was when they published their findings that they could manipulate people's moods by what they show them. Ever since I've felt like a rat in a cage, being prodded and tested not as a human being, but as a user. And so if that is Facebook's way of looking at me, then as far as I am concerned, Facebook is just a website. A website I barely use.

turaw 11y ago
Don't you feel that way on most sites? I mean, conceivably, HN could be manipulating your feelings as well by fingerprinting your browser and using a different ranking algorithm.
- rm_-rf_slash 11y ago
  Precisely. It is unnerving how many websites and corporations try to "play God", so to speak. Any instance of manipulation makes me feel used, and that lack of trust never really goes away. I get that services want me to see stuff that is "most relevant" to me, but there is no room in relevance for serendipity, and it brings to mind the line from Equilibrium: "..The comfort of knowing your life has been lived before."
- falcolas 11y ago
  Personally, I try and trust most of these sites until they prove that they can not be trusted. Granted, it gets harder and harder to provide any level of trust, given how intrusive web sites become (with ads, trackers, dark patterns, etc).
  - voodootrucker 11y ago
    Why? Wouldn't a more informed view be to assume that the sites (and companies, politicians, etc) will behave in the way that economics favors them to behave? In this case, you're not paying, so you're not a customer and they don't really care about your needs as long as you stick around. They make their money from the companies that the article goes on about, and they will do whatever they can to make more. In short, wouldn't it be better to assume that if the NSA can listen to you, they will? And if a company can make money from your data, they will? And if a politician could be taking bribes, they are?

turaw 11y ago

Don't you feel that way on most sites? I mean, conceivably, HN could be manipulating your feelings as well by fingerprinting your browser and using a different ranking algorithm.

rm_-rf_slash 11y ago
Precisely. It is unnerving how many websites and corporations try to "play God", so to speak. Any instance of manipulation makes me feel used, and that lack of trust never really goes away. I get that services want me to see stuff that is "most relevant" to me, but there is no room in relevance for serendipity, and it brings to mind the line from Equilibrium: "..The comfort of knowing your life has been lived before."
falcolas 11y ago
Personally, I try and trust most of these sites until they prove that they can not be trusted. Granted, it gets harder and harder to provide any level of trust, given how intrusive web sites become (with ads, trackers, dark patterns, etc).
- voodootrucker 11y ago
  Why? Wouldn't a more informed view be to assume that the sites (and companies, politicians, etc) will behave in the way that economics favors them to behave? In this case, you're not paying, so you're not a customer and they don't really care about your needs as long as you stick around. They make their money from the companies that the article goes on about, and they will do whatever they can to make more. In short, wouldn't it be better to assume that if the NSA can listen to you, they will? And if a company can make money from your data, they will? And if a politician could be taking bribes, they are?