3 ms·
For one thing, facilitating spam is some distance further down on the benefits to harms scale than facilitating Facebook or Google. Google, especially, has cre
by tempestn 8y ago
For one thing, facilitating spam is some distance further down on the benefits to harms scale than facilitating Facebook or Google. Google, especially, has created a enormous amount of value, and continues to do so^; spam, not so much.
^Which isn't to say that it's perfect, of course. Or even necessarily a net good, although my personal belief in the case of Google is that it still is.
- danra 8y ago> facilitating spam is some distance further down on the benefits to harms scale than facilitating Facebook or Google So... Facilitating spam is worse than facilitating censorship in China?
- chii 8y agoIs an arms manufacturer at fault when there's war? China is always going to censor. Google facilitating it or not make no difference. Might as well make the money, and also hope to influence the system from a position of power rather than a position of weakness (i.e, not involved at all)
- danra 8y agoSpam is always going to exist. Might as well facilitate, make money, and try to influence the system from a position of power?
- StavrosK 8y agoAlthough this spamblaster is terrible, I consider Instagram to be a clear net negative for humanity. It has almost no redeeming traits, it just makes people insecure, envious and wastes their time.
- tempestn 8y agoI can tell you it's a net positive in my life. I rarely use facebook proper, but I quite enjoy instagram. I keep it to a small number of actual friends (I think I have about 20 contacts, or whatever they're called on Instagram.) And I enjoy opening it and seeing what they're up to once or twice a day.
- StavrosK 8y agoI think you and I are the very, VERY small minority. I muted everyone I didn't care about too, and it works for me, but young people especially are very affected by it.