4 ms·
Which is exactly why Facebook and Twitter have "blurrified" your content by making it have no verifiable order by default ("top posts" meaning "totally arbitrar
by gboudrias 9y ago
Which is exactly why Facebook and Twitter have "blurrified" your content by making it have no verifiable order by default ("top posts" meaning "totally arbitrary order").
This, as you highlight, probably brings in the big bucks. This makes me think Google had something similar in mind when they "personalized" the search results (a wildly unpopular move), going to show that when you are the product, there may be no UX too unpleasant to sink to.
The upside of this is that these incremental UX sacrifices leave the market open for an alternative, either of the same ad-driven kind or, hopefully, of the more sustainable kind.
Hey, a man can dream.
- nasredin 9y agoI think the - actually usable UI as opposed to the dumbified abortion most of the big sites have - train is long gone. A usable UI (for non-niche sites) is one of those things you can get nostalgic about with "back in my day...". It's not coming back as long as advertisers pay for things.
- ShinTakuya 9y agoI fail to see how the ad driven model isn't sustainable. If anything a non ad driven model is less likely to be sustainable. I doubt what Facebook is doing is driving away that many users.
- username223 9y agoThe ad-driven model will show as many ads as possible, while making the user experience just barely tolerable. Usually, they forget about remaining tolerable -- see popups, animated GIFs, Flash ads, etc. -- and get slapped down by technology that actually serves the user. See also the VCR, which let people record TV shows and fast-forward through the ads. Ad-driven media will always cannibalize itself.