5 ms·

For some people, because of their jobs or their need for social validation, this is just not an option. You cannot impose this decision on personal willpower or

For some people, because of their jobs or their need for social validation, this is just not an option. You cannot impose this decision on personal willpower or morality because it's more complicated than that.

gooseus 7y ago
> because of their jobs or their need for social validation, this is just not an option. I don't understand this... are jobs and the source of peoples social validation not options? I used to derive social validation from drinking and kicking ass in video games, but then I found out you could get it from other places that were more productive, and less physically deteriorating. If there are really people out there who are wholly dependent on Facebook for their social validation then that is a tragedy akin to finding out that there is an entire population of people who can't metabolize food without a special compound found only in White Castle burgers.
- seandougall 7y ago
  How about anybody who belongs to a marginalized minority group in their own (physical) community? For example, there are plenty of parts of the US where LGBTQ folks have to reach out beyond their physical location to find a community that will truly accept them (not to mention countries where their existence is criminalized). Facebook is a highly imperfect solution for them — but it exists, and there aren’t always better options. Just like how some parts of the country are food deserts where people actually don’t have access to anything much more nutritious than White Castle.
  - firethief 7y ago
    I don't think the scarcity of options is due to any shortage of potential communities on the internet--there's a perpetual scarcity of extant communities due to naturally-monopolizing network effects. If Facebook weren't the place, it would be somewhere else. Any old forum would do if it were where the people are.
  - gooseus 7y ago
    That is a good point, and an even greater tragedy. This actually reminds of the military, which is another service that provides a way for people to escape tragic home or community situations for a new situation where they might find a sense of shared purpose and unity. Pacifists and others opposed to US militarism would likely also say that anyone participating in the military is perpetuating evils and insist there must be a better way to escape these situations that also aligns with their sense of morality... Really all these exceptions exist and are absolutely valid (imo) but I'd be curious what percentages we're talking about here... what proportion of people would be dead or worse off (vs alive or better off) today if not for the existence of FB? For everyone in a who found their sense of community online, how many found contempt and ostracization from a mob 1000x the size of their physical community? How many physical communities (and families) are being divided along lines drawn up by online communities?

gooseus 7y ago

> because of their jobs or their need for social validation, this is just not an option. I don't understand this... are jobs and the source of peoples social validation not options? I used to derive social validation from drinking and kicking ass in video games, but then I found out you could get it from other places that were more productive, and less physically deteriorating. If there are really people out there who are wholly dependent on Facebook for their social validation then that is a tragedy akin to finding out that there is an entire population of people who can't metabolize food without a special compound found only in White Castle burgers.

seandougall 7y ago
How about anybody who belongs to a marginalized minority group in their own (physical) community? For example, there are plenty of parts of the US where LGBTQ folks have to reach out beyond their physical location to find a community that will truly accept them (not to mention countries where their existence is criminalized). Facebook is a highly imperfect solution for them — but it exists, and there aren’t always better options. Just like how some parts of the country are food deserts where people actually don’t have access to anything much more nutritious than White Castle.
- firethief 7y ago
  I don't think the scarcity of options is due to any shortage of potential communities on the internet--there's a perpetual scarcity of extant communities due to naturally-monopolizing network effects. If Facebook weren't the place, it would be somewhere else. Any old forum would do if it were where the people are.
- gooseus 7y ago
  That is a good point, and an even greater tragedy. This actually reminds of the military, which is another service that provides a way for people to escape tragic home or community situations for a new situation where they might find a sense of shared purpose and unity. Pacifists and others opposed to US militarism would likely also say that anyone participating in the military is perpetuating evils and insist there must be a better way to escape these situations that also aligns with their sense of morality... Really all these exceptions exist and are absolutely valid (imo) but I'd be curious what percentages we're talking about here... what proportion of people would be dead or worse off (vs alive or better off) today if not for the existence of FB? For everyone in a who found their sense of community online, how many found contempt and ostracization from a mob 1000x the size of their physical community? How many physical communities (and families) are being divided along lines drawn up by online communities?