5 ms·

This is the part that I don't understand. Facebook, in the grand scheme of things, is still an incredibly new development for people. Most users (at least those

This is the part that I don't understand. Facebook, in the grand scheme of things, is still an incredibly new development for people. Most users (at least those who abide by the age limit) have spent most of their lives not being on Facebook. What grand utility does Facebook provide that makes it so difficult to stop using it? I cancelled my Facebook account a few years ago and the only time I ever even thought about it was when I'd try to sign in to services (like Spotify) that were linked to my account at one time and it got reactivated through that. I'd have to login and cancel the account again. What is it about Facebook that has suddenly and inexplicably turned it into a necessity for people when they lived for so long without it? It's not like a cell phone or other technology that has massive utility. Most people don't even communicate via Facebook (from what I hear). They just post divisive nonsense.

nostrademons 8y ago
Facebook (along with Google, Amazon, EBay, AirBnB, Stripe, etc.) get their strength from the long tail. I had deleted it off my phone and logged out on desktop, but then I heard (via email from my sister, who heard it on Facebook) that my aunt was in a coma and my cousin was posting updates on Facebook. That was enough to bring me back. And my cousin posts updates on FB because it's by far the easiest way to distribute news to everyone who cares without worrying if you're forgetting someone. I'd assume a lot of casual FB usage is similar. There's 90% outrage posts, political stuff, memes, ads, chain letters, people sharing glamor shots of their vacations - and 10% pics of the grandkids, reconnecting with long-lost friends, networking into chance opportunities, and birth/wedding/death announcements that you wouldn't otherwise see. Missing out on the good 10% is a sufficiently large incentive that people put up with the bad 90%.
- philote 8y ago
  I'd argue that communication via email can work just as well as FB. It's a little harder to "opt in" to updates, but with spam filters and other email features, it seems like it can be a lot less noise to have to filter through. But this is coming from someone who doesn't use FB.
  - nostrademons 8y ago
    It works on a small scale with a group of people who regularly communicate with each other. That's how I organize most of my social events - e-mail a bunch of friends and say "Hey, wanna get together on Saturday?" It fails when groups are larger or more loosely attached. In my cousin's case - my dad was one of 10 brothers and sisters (many with their own spouses), I have 16 cousins on that side (again with spouses), 3 half-cousins, 10 cousins-once-removed, 1 cousin-twice-removed, and there's a tendency for at least one person to feel offended if they don't get the news when everybody else gets the news. It's somewhat understandable that my cousin would want a broadcast medium rather than trying to remember all that. Or as another example - a friend of mine died recently, and I found out through FB. I hadn't been in touch with her for several years, since before she got married, I'd never met her husband, and he certainly didn't have my e-mail. Still, I appreciated knowing, and passed on that info to other mutual friends, who also appreciated knowing. That's the long-tail; in my parents' generation, they might've found out at some reunion 30 years in the future, long after the funeral has passed and people are done sharing memories & photos.
  - rifung 8y ago
    I mean it technically can be equivalent but the experience is significantly worse. One huge problem is that you can't add people's emails with just their name. Another problem is that there's no concept of accepting a friend request. Sure you can get around it but why bother?
  - istorical 8y ago
    The problem that Facebook solves is finding a way to contact someone when all you know is their name. If you don't have a phone number, address, or email but you know First and Last (or even First - if you have related friends), then Facebook still works to get in touch. Whereas phone books for personal numbers aren't really a thing. Facebook is that phone book.
bcheung 8y ago
It's not so much utility as it is addiction. A lot of the popular platforms are implemented to take advantage random reinforcement / variable reward schedules, social approval, ego validation, etc.
cabalamat 8y ago
> What grand utility does Facebook provide that makes it so difficult to stop using it? For example, all your friends might be on it, and organise events via it. Then, if you don't use FB, you don't find out about events you might have wanted to go to. This is the power of network effects, whiuch causes monopolies. The monopolies would be broken up if social networks had to use open protocols to allow interoperability. As Irina Bolychevsky and James Moulding put it ( https://newsocialist.org.uk/do-we-really-need-a-statebook/ https://newsocialist.org.uk/do-we-really-need-a-statebook/ ): > Can you imagine using WhatsApp to chat to your friends on Reddit or share photos from Flickr to Facebook and still see likes and comments? That’s the power of open protocols.
- Ibethewalrus 8y ago
  Can’t a Google calendar invite provide the same functionality?
  - ptx 8y ago
    It could, but if you rely on being sent a calendar invite you'll miss the event, because people aren't sending calendar invites, because everyone is on Facebook, because people aren't sending calendar invites, because everyone is on Facebook. This is the network effect, as the parent post was saying.
amanaplanacanal 8y ago
One thing that I have been discovering recently: Discussion groups. Back in the day it was Usenet, of course, and there are still websites that host niche forums. But it seems I am now running into weird new interests where the major discussion is happening on a facebook group. I go months without logging into facebook, but this seems to be what's drawing me back in.
eswat 8y ago
To most of my family in the Philippines, from children to elders, they only started using the internet heavily when Facebook was available (cell phones and decent data coverage were big enablers of that though). Facebook provides clear utility to a society that has had no decent online method of replicating their group/communal way of sharing experiences before. Do they _need_ to share their experiences or communicate through Facebook? No, but it’s an obvious extension of what they’ve already been doing. FWIW the issues I see with Facebook here in the west—fake news and divisive nonsense specifically—are exacerbated there, so definitely a double-edged sword.

nostrademons 8y ago

Facebook (along with Google, Amazon, EBay, AirBnB, Stripe, etc.) get their strength from the long tail. I had deleted it off my phone and logged out on desktop, but then I heard (via email from my sister, who heard it on Facebook) that my aunt was in a coma and my cousin was posting updates on Facebook. That was enough to bring me back. And my cousin posts updates on FB because it's by far the easiest way to distribute news to everyone who cares without worrying if you're forgetting someone. I'd assume a lot of casual FB usage is similar. There's 90% outrage posts, political stuff, memes, ads, chain letters, people sharing glamor shots of their vacations - and 10% pics of the grandkids, reconnecting with long-lost friends, networking into chance opportunities, and birth/wedding/death announcements that you wouldn't otherwise see. Missing out on the good 10% is a sufficiently large incentive that people put up with the bad 90%.

philote 8y ago
I'd argue that communication via email can work just as well as FB. It's a little harder to "opt in" to updates, but with spam filters and other email features, it seems like it can be a lot less noise to have to filter through. But this is coming from someone who doesn't use FB.
- nostrademons 8y ago
  It works on a small scale with a group of people who regularly communicate with each other. That's how I organize most of my social events - e-mail a bunch of friends and say "Hey, wanna get together on Saturday?" It fails when groups are larger or more loosely attached. In my cousin's case - my dad was one of 10 brothers and sisters (many with their own spouses), I have 16 cousins on that side (again with spouses), 3 half-cousins, 10 cousins-once-removed, 1 cousin-twice-removed, and there's a tendency for at least one person to feel offended if they don't get the news when everybody else gets the news. It's somewhat understandable that my cousin would want a broadcast medium rather than trying to remember all that. Or as another example - a friend of mine died recently, and I found out through FB. I hadn't been in touch with her for several years, since before she got married, I'd never met her husband, and he certainly didn't have my e-mail. Still, I appreciated knowing, and passed on that info to other mutual friends, who also appreciated knowing. That's the long-tail; in my parents' generation, they might've found out at some reunion 30 years in the future, long after the funeral has passed and people are done sharing memories & photos.
- rifung 8y ago
  I mean it technically can be equivalent but the experience is significantly worse. One huge problem is that you can't add people's emails with just their name. Another problem is that there's no concept of accepting a friend request. Sure you can get around it but why bother?
- istorical 8y ago
  The problem that Facebook solves is finding a way to contact someone when all you know is their name. If you don't have a phone number, address, or email but you know First and Last (or even First - if you have related friends), then Facebook still works to get in touch. Whereas phone books for personal numbers aren't really a thing. Facebook is that phone book.

bcheung 8y ago

It's not so much utility as it is addiction. A lot of the popular platforms are implemented to take advantage random reinforcement / variable reward schedules, social approval, ego validation, etc.

cabalamat 8y ago

> What grand utility does Facebook provide that makes it so difficult to stop using it? For example, all your friends might be on it, and organise events via it. Then, if you don't use FB, you don't find out about events you might have wanted to go to. This is the power of network effects, whiuch causes monopolies. The monopolies would be broken up if social networks had to use open protocols to allow interoperability. As Irina Bolychevsky and James Moulding put it ( https://newsocialist.org.uk/do-we-really-need-a-statebook/ https://newsocialist.org.uk/do-we-really-need-a-statebook/ ): > Can you imagine using WhatsApp to chat to your friends on Reddit or share photos from Flickr to Facebook and still see likes and comments? That’s the power of open protocols.

Ibethewalrus 8y ago
Can’t a Google calendar invite provide the same functionality?
- ptx 8y ago
  It could, but if you rely on being sent a calendar invite you'll miss the event, because people aren't sending calendar invites, because everyone is on Facebook, because people aren't sending calendar invites, because everyone is on Facebook. This is the network effect, as the parent post was saying.

amanaplanacanal 8y ago

One thing that I have been discovering recently: Discussion groups. Back in the day it was Usenet, of course, and there are still websites that host niche forums. But it seems I am now running into weird new interests where the major discussion is happening on a facebook group. I go months without logging into facebook, but this seems to be what's drawing me back in.

eswat 8y ago

To most of my family in the Philippines, from children to elders, they only started using the internet heavily when Facebook was available (cell phones and decent data coverage were big enablers of that though). Facebook provides clear utility to a society that has had no decent online method of replicating their group/communal way of sharing experiences before. Do they _need_ to share their experiences or communicate through Facebook? No, but it’s an obvious extension of what they’ve already been doing. FWIW the issues I see with Facebook here in the west—fake news and divisive nonsense specifically—are exacerbated there, so definitely a double-edged sword.