3 ms·

But you can only do that with so many people. Facebook is more convenient. And it has the random factor. Sometimes there's a friend d who you weren't super clos

by jsharf 9y ago

But you can only do that with so many people. Facebook is more convenient. And it has the random factor. Sometimes there's a friend d who you weren't super close with but always thought well of. With Facebook you can see when they're visiting your city (if they make a post about it). It gives you the opportunity to know that that friend is around and reach out to them. I think there are a lot of positives to Facebook, but a lot of potential negatives for certain kinds of personalities (people who are negative or addictive). With the right attitude though, it's certainly helpful

5ilv3r 9y ago
That's not random, that's the algorithm. It might not show you anything if it decides you won't find that friend interesting.
- AstralStorm 9y ago
  Not that this is "what you decide is interesting". Which makes it much less useful, prone to social signalling and what is worse, actually less meaningful than more direct contact. Remember, it is mostly text, not even time of voice is carried in it. Even a picture is static. Contrast with realtime voice and video. (Facebook has those features but they're nowhere near as utilized. And they definitely do boot show up in feeds.)
bamboozled 9y ago
This kind of sounds like hoarding. I look back on my Facebook usage as a cost / benefit tradeoff and in the end the benefits just weren't paying off. I know exactly what you mean in theory however, no matter how much one views "status updates" inevitably you're drifting apart from those people and caring less about what they're doing, that's natural. I had less time for my closer friends. It felt artificial to have to stay connected, exhausting, though I didn't realise till I left. One could check updates less, often, but then what's the point ? If someone really wants to hangout they just contact me via other channels.
bamboozled 9y ago
This kind of sounds like hoarding. I look back on my Facebook usage as a cost / benefit tradeoff and in the end the benefits just weren't paying off. I know exactly what you mean in theory however, no matter how much one views "status updates" inevitably you're drifting apart from those people and caring less about what they're doing. I had less time for my closer friends and family. It's just natural to drift apart, it felt artificial to have to stay connected, exhausting, though I didn't realise till I left. One could check updates less, often, but then what's the point ? If someone really wants to hangout they just contact me via other channels.
ams6110 9y ago
What is the point of reaching out to a "friend" only when it's convenient to you? The only motivations I can think of are quite selfish.
- aninhumer 9y ago
  Is it so horrible to have people you're willing to walk to your local pub for, but not willing to travel to their city for? Just because you're not willing to make time for someone doesn't mean you can't enjoy an evening of chatting and catching up when your lives happen to intersect.
duncan_bayne 9y ago
> But you can only do that with so many people. That's a feature, not a bug.

by jsharf 9y ago

5ilv3r 9y ago

That's not random, that's the algorithm. It might not show you anything if it decides you won't find that friend interesting.

AstralStorm 9y ago
Not that this is "what you decide is interesting". Which makes it much less useful, prone to social signalling and what is worse, actually less meaningful than more direct contact. Remember, it is mostly text, not even time of voice is carried in it. Even a picture is static. Contrast with realtime voice and video. (Facebook has those features but they're nowhere near as utilized. And they definitely do boot show up in feeds.)

bamboozled 9y ago

This kind of sounds like hoarding. I look back on my Facebook usage as a cost / benefit tradeoff and in the end the benefits just weren't paying off. I know exactly what you mean in theory however, no matter how much one views "status updates" inevitably you're drifting apart from those people and caring less about what they're doing, that's natural. I had less time for my closer friends. It felt artificial to have to stay connected, exhausting, though I didn't realise till I left. One could check updates less, often, but then what's the point ? If someone really wants to hangout they just contact me via other channels.

bamboozled 9y ago

This kind of sounds like hoarding. I look back on my Facebook usage as a cost / benefit tradeoff and in the end the benefits just weren't paying off. I know exactly what you mean in theory however, no matter how much one views "status updates" inevitably you're drifting apart from those people and caring less about what they're doing. I had less time for my closer friends and family. It's just natural to drift apart, it felt artificial to have to stay connected, exhausting, though I didn't realise till I left. One could check updates less, often, but then what's the point ? If someone really wants to hangout they just contact me via other channels.

ams6110 9y ago

What is the point of reaching out to a "friend" only when it's convenient to you? The only motivations I can think of are quite selfish.

aninhumer 9y ago
Is it so horrible to have people you're willing to walk to your local pub for, but not willing to travel to their city for? Just because you're not willing to make time for someone doesn't mean you can't enjoy an evening of chatting and catching up when your lives happen to intersect.

duncan_bayne 9y ago

> But you can only do that with so many people. That's a feature, not a bug.