4 ms·

Right, exactly. You can choose a different email provider if you hate the ads or what your current one is doing with your data. You can't pick a different Faceb

Right, exactly. You can choose a different email provider if you hate the ads or what your current one is doing with your data. You can't pick a different Facebook and still communicate with your friends there.

pmoriarty 8y ago
You can pick a different one, but if they're all spying on you, tracking you, and advertising to you, it's not really going to make a difference. Also, splitting up Facebook alone isn't going to stop data sharing between its various parts, nor is it going to address tracking or advertising at all.
- nilskidoo 8y ago
  But we can count the moments til a sacrificial lamb pops up, as with Bernie Madoff, or the epipen guy for pharma. Token examples without stopping the potential for their crimes to be repeated by everyone else in practice in the slightest. We need to uninvent the wheel.
  - Nasrudith 8y ago
    That will be a problem as you can't unring a bell - it is far easier to unscramble an egg.
- bhl 8y ago
  With an open standard, I don't see why you can't host your own social network similar to how people host their own email servers or websites right now.
  - dmitriid 8y ago
    What's an "open standard for a social network"?
    - ddingus 8y ago
      This is the question! I look at what people do with reddit, Facebook, twitter, various forums, and it looks like a more spiffy USENET. We have a piece of that standard. More needed
      - dmitriid 8y ago
        Much. Much more: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19368649 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19368649
    - icebraining 8y ago
      Currently, it seems to be ActivityPub, which projects like Mastodon use.
      - dmitriid 8y ago
        It's a protocol. People don't use social networks because of protocols. Coming back to this statement: > With an open standard, I don't see why you can't host your own social network You also need: - photo hosting - video hosting - comments - timelines - feeds - search - social graphs - (etc.) for a social network to have any relevance.
        bhl 8y ago
        > People don't use social networks because of protocols. I agree with this point: usability is often not affected by what happens in the back. However, with open standards, it would be possible that people create other social networks because of protocols. You mention all these technical problems that have to be solved to create a social network. I can see someone building an open source framework for all of these. For example with personal websites, everything except social graphs and feeds already exist.
        dmitriid 8y ago
        There are quite a few open source framework for all/many of these. Mastodon, Scuttlebutt to name a few. They are somewhat popular, but they are bad at many of the things I described.
- speedplane 8y ago
  > You can pick a different one, but if they're all spying on you, tracking you, and advertising to you, it's not really going to make a difference. If you can easily switch, then you can pretty easily find the one that isn't tracking you. The problem is that it's hard to switch.

pmoriarty 8y ago

You can pick a different one, but if they're all spying on you, tracking you, and advertising to you, it's not really going to make a difference. Also, splitting up Facebook alone isn't going to stop data sharing between its various parts, nor is it going to address tracking or advertising at all.

nilskidoo 8y ago
But we can count the moments til a sacrificial lamb pops up, as with Bernie Madoff, or the epipen guy for pharma. Token examples without stopping the potential for their crimes to be repeated by everyone else in practice in the slightest. We need to uninvent the wheel.
- Nasrudith 8y ago
  That will be a problem as you can't unring a bell - it is far easier to unscramble an egg.
bhl 8y ago
With an open standard, I don't see why you can't host your own social network similar to how people host their own email servers or websites right now.
- dmitriid 8y ago
  What's an "open standard for a social network"?
  - ddingus 8y ago
    This is the question! I look at what people do with reddit, Facebook, twitter, various forums, and it looks like a more spiffy USENET. We have a piece of that standard. More needed
    - dmitriid 8y ago
      Much. Much more: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19368649 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19368649
  - icebraining 8y ago
    Currently, it seems to be ActivityPub, which projects like Mastodon use.
    - dmitriid 8y ago
      It's a protocol. People don't use social networks because of protocols. Coming back to this statement: > With an open standard, I don't see why you can't host your own social network You also need: - photo hosting - video hosting - comments - timelines - feeds - search - social graphs - (etc.) for a social network to have any relevance.
      - bhl 8y ago
        > People don't use social networks because of protocols. I agree with this point: usability is often not affected by what happens in the back. However, with open standards, it would be possible that people create other social networks because of protocols. You mention all these technical problems that have to be solved to create a social network. I can see someone building an open source framework for all of these. For example with personal websites, everything except social graphs and feeds already exist.
        dmitriid 8y ago
        There are quite a few open source framework for all/many of these. Mastodon, Scuttlebutt to name a few. They are somewhat popular, but they are bad at many of the things I described.
speedplane 8y ago
> You can pick a different one, but if they're all spying on you, tracking you, and advertising to you, it's not really going to make a difference. If you can easily switch, then you can pretty easily find the one that isn't tracking you. The problem is that it's hard to switch.