6 ms·

I sympathize with this perspective. I too would be livid and mortified if my family shared embarrassing photos of me in exchange for the quick dopamine hit that

I sympathize with this perspective. I too would be livid and mortified if my family shared embarrassing photos of me in exchange for the quick dopamine hit that validation from acquaintances provides. I'm hopeful that in the next several years there is a pushback against social media and the idea that for an experience to be valid, it must be shared. There's something to be said for having an album of photos that you pull out a couple of times a year to show a select group of others. It makes the experience much more valuable than blasting out content for everyone to see. Makes me think that Gen Z is much wiser than the Millennials. People coming of age today are much more cautious than those who did 5-10 years ago (lots of drunken party photos on Facebook, etc). They understand the consequences of having information in the world that never goes away.

sacado2 8y ago
Yes. The last generation was taught from a very young age that what you put online is available for all, and learned from the mistakes of their older siblings / parents. I see way more "controversial" content on facebook / instagram from my older friends than from the younger ones.
- asdff 8y ago
  Lets not speak to soon until we see this gen at adult age. The self censor in the past was that college admissions will dig for your social media pages. I remember in high school people changed their names on Facebook until they were accepted to their colleges. One kid at another local school got an offer rescinded over a tweet even back then. Once these kids got their first jobs after college, then my feed was a deluge of psuedoscience, political bait, and multi level marketing, all of which these same people would have avoided posting during highschool out of fear of consequence, and now that they are employed adults there are seemingly no repercussions, to them at least.
jpfed 8y ago
>There's something to be said for having an album of photos that you pull out a couple of times a year to show a select group of others. My perhaps unreasonable hope for a Facebook killer is just a paid personal archive of your own photos, writings, etc. with the assumption of privacy by default.
- OatsAndHoney 8y ago
  Have you tried iCloud / iPhone? That's what I switched over to once I quit Facebook and Android. The iPhone is great, it's private by default, I can share photos / albums only with the people that I want, and I create different groups based off of different interests, trips, etc. All together with iMessage and Notes I get pretty much everything I had with a newsfeed / blog, all without the implications of Facebook and giving up all of my privacy.
  - virusduck 8y ago
    Same here. At first it seems a little clunky, but then I realized that was actually a feature.
- tomcam 8y ago
  I call that Gsuite and/or iCloud, both of which I pay for.
- james-skemp 8y ago
  If you have an Amazon Prime subscription you get unlimited photo storage and a certain amount of space for videos/documents for free. You can also create groups and post photos/videos to that for sharing with family. Only issue I've run into is the Amazon Photos app on Android doesn't always back up photos as timely as I'd like, and deleting photos on my phone (wanting them to stay in the cloud) results in some odd behavior with images not loading, even though pulling up a computer they're still there. I also have a quite large video that it keeps getting stuck on with the upload, which might be part of the issue. https://www.amazon.com/Amazon-Photos/b?ie=UTF8&node=13234696011 https://www.amazon.com/Amazon-Photos/b?ie=UTF8&node=13234696...
- sverige 8y ago
  The old school version is my aged mother finding birth announcements from the late 50s and early 60s handwritten by my aunt for each of her four children. My aunt passed away five years ago. She sent the originals to each of my cousins by snail mail. They were thrilled to receive such a thing written by their mother.
- 8y ago
Reedx 8y ago
It's interesting how that changed within one generation in many cases. Millennials started using the Internet when conventional wisdom was to not use your real name online. Don't reveal your age or location. Don't post your photo. Use an anonymous name. We went from that to the complete opposite.
- rhn_mk1 8y ago
  The internet from 10 years ago was also less likely to remember everything you do forever. Messaging between friends happened using services that didn't save conversation history server side, public chat rooms including IRC were rarely logged, blog posts had a minimal reach, and were largely pseudonymous anyway, making the connection with a real person more difficult. Perhaps this kind of lack of consequences drove people into complacency.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - gugagore 8y ago
    In fact, young me didn't think that websites, mostly forums and early microblogging sites, would ever go away. I wish I could see those posts today. It may be a fabricated memory, but I remember always being aware of the lack of privacy in those services. And never using your last name or sharing your location.
    - rhn_mk1 8y ago
      True. I meant to say that websites, while seeming permanent, didn't enforce a connection to more private parts of one's identity.
  - basch 8y ago
    are all your gmail and facebook messages from 10 years ago not still available? I think youd have to go back more than 15 years to get to services where communications are now faded.
kbenson 8y ago
> There's something to be said for having an album of photos that you pull out a couple of times a year to show a select group of others. It makes the experience much more valuable than blasting out content for everyone to see. While I wholeheartedly agree with the sentiment, and mostly agree with the idea, a part of me sees that only as a change in scale. As someone that doesn't really partake in social media sharing (I use FB for event notification) or take many pictures, I see parallels between sharing the album and posting online. I've had plenty of embarrassing childhood photos shown. Generally the only difference is time from the event. I mean, it's not like a couple hundred years ago we even had the option to do this (other than the obscenely rich getting portraits painted). I note all this because I find often when it appears it's just scale that makes a difference, that's just hiding the real things that are causing concern (or perhaps we should also be concerned to some degree about the small scale as well). So in this case, is sharing an album really all that much better? If so, is it because of temporal distance to the events, reduced group size per sharing instance (the overall size might be the same, over time), or sharing with people that aren't in some tighter group (or some combination thereof)?
- dangravell 8y ago
  Scale has a multiplicative (maybe even compounding in a viral network) effect. Therefore usability * scale means scale itself is part of the problem, if not the underlying one.
hopler 8y ago
The reason infants have ever survives is that their parents get dopamine fixes. I wouldn't knock it too hard.

sacado2 8y ago

Yes. The last generation was taught from a very young age that what you put online is available for all, and learned from the mistakes of their older siblings / parents. I see way more "controversial" content on facebook / instagram from my older friends than from the younger ones.

asdff 8y ago
Lets not speak to soon until we see this gen at adult age. The self censor in the past was that college admissions will dig for your social media pages. I remember in high school people changed their names on Facebook until they were accepted to their colleges. One kid at another local school got an offer rescinded over a tweet even back then. Once these kids got their first jobs after college, then my feed was a deluge of psuedoscience, political bait, and multi level marketing, all of which these same people would have avoided posting during highschool out of fear of consequence, and now that they are employed adults there are seemingly no repercussions, to them at least.

jpfed 8y ago

>There's something to be said for having an album of photos that you pull out a couple of times a year to show a select group of others. My perhaps unreasonable hope for a Facebook killer is just a paid personal archive of your own photos, writings, etc. with the assumption of privacy by default.

OatsAndHoney 8y ago
Have you tried iCloud / iPhone? That's what I switched over to once I quit Facebook and Android. The iPhone is great, it's private by default, I can share photos / albums only with the people that I want, and I create different groups based off of different interests, trips, etc. All together with iMessage and Notes I get pretty much everything I had with a newsfeed / blog, all without the implications of Facebook and giving up all of my privacy.
- virusduck 8y ago
  Same here. At first it seems a little clunky, but then I realized that was actually a feature.
tomcam 8y ago
I call that Gsuite and/or iCloud, both of which I pay for.
james-skemp 8y ago
If you have an Amazon Prime subscription you get unlimited photo storage and a certain amount of space for videos/documents for free. You can also create groups and post photos/videos to that for sharing with family. Only issue I've run into is the Amazon Photos app on Android doesn't always back up photos as timely as I'd like, and deleting photos on my phone (wanting them to stay in the cloud) results in some odd behavior with images not loading, even though pulling up a computer they're still there. I also have a quite large video that it keeps getting stuck on with the upload, which might be part of the issue. https://www.amazon.com/Amazon-Photos/b?ie=UTF8&node=13234696011 https://www.amazon.com/Amazon-Photos/b?ie=UTF8&node=13234696...
sverige 8y ago
The old school version is my aged mother finding birth announcements from the late 50s and early 60s handwritten by my aunt for each of her four children. My aunt passed away five years ago. She sent the originals to each of my cousins by snail mail. They were thrilled to receive such a thing written by their mother.
8y ago

Reedx 8y ago

It's interesting how that changed within one generation in many cases. Millennials started using the Internet when conventional wisdom was to not use your real name online. Don't reveal your age or location. Don't post your photo. Use an anonymous name. We went from that to the complete opposite.

rhn_mk1 8y ago
The internet from 10 years ago was also less likely to remember everything you do forever. Messaging between friends happened using services that didn't save conversation history server side, public chat rooms including IRC were rarely logged, blog posts had a minimal reach, and were largely pseudonymous anyway, making the connection with a real person more difficult. Perhaps this kind of lack of consequences drove people into complacency.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- gugagore 8y ago
  In fact, young me didn't think that websites, mostly forums and early microblogging sites, would ever go away. I wish I could see those posts today. It may be a fabricated memory, but I remember always being aware of the lack of privacy in those services. And never using your last name or sharing your location.
  - rhn_mk1 8y ago
    True. I meant to say that websites, while seeming permanent, didn't enforce a connection to more private parts of one's identity.
- basch 8y ago
  are all your gmail and facebook messages from 10 years ago not still available? I think youd have to go back more than 15 years to get to services where communications are now faded.

kbenson 8y ago

> There's something to be said for having an album of photos that you pull out a couple of times a year to show a select group of others. It makes the experience much more valuable than blasting out content for everyone to see. While I wholeheartedly agree with the sentiment, and mostly agree with the idea, a part of me sees that only as a change in scale. As someone that doesn't really partake in social media sharing (I use FB for event notification) or take many pictures, I see parallels between sharing the album and posting online. I've had plenty of embarrassing childhood photos shown. Generally the only difference is time from the event. I mean, it's not like a couple hundred years ago we even had the option to do this (other than the obscenely rich getting portraits painted). I note all this because I find often when it appears it's just scale that makes a difference, that's just hiding the real things that are causing concern (or perhaps we should also be concerned to some degree about the small scale as well). So in this case, is sharing an album really all that much better? If so, is it because of temporal distance to the events, reduced group size per sharing instance (the overall size might be the same, over time), or sharing with people that aren't in some tighter group (or some combination thereof)?

dangravell 8y ago
Scale has a multiplicative (maybe even compounding in a viral network) effect. Therefore usability * scale means scale itself is part of the problem, if not the underlying one.

hopler 8y ago

The reason infants have ever survives is that their parents get dopamine fixes. I wouldn't knock it too hard.