2 ms·
> 1) billions of users' behavior disagree Facebook is engineered to be addictive and to keep people engaged and present on the platform so they can be exploite
by ionised 7y ago
> 1) billions of users' behavior disagree
Facebook is engineered to be addictive and to keep people engaged and present on the platform so they can be exploited for data.
If you are going to say Facebook provides these people value then I'm going to say a heroin distributor and his chemist provides a similar value to his customers.
> 2) this is so vague and subjective that it's meaningless, what does it mean? Better off, how? By whose standards?
Of course it's subjective, it's an opinion. One shared by a growing number of people.
> 3) if the above were true, why would FB be obligated to explain it?
They're not. Neither are people obliged to use their platform or abide by their terms of service if the company doesn't want to be forthcoming with explanations for its conduct.
- edmundsauto 7y agoI strongly agree with point 3. I just wish people would accept that FB isn't for them, and move on. Instead, there is so much signaling going on that it's difficult to discuss real issues. I actually also agree with point 1, because I think that drug seekers are more rational actors than the average person. It seems indisputable that drug dealers provide value; the argument is that the long term harm outweights the immediate value, not that there is no value. With Facebook, I think it's much less clear that using FB causes harm, much less harm on the same level as an opiod addiction. (I'm aware of the research out there that correlates depressive symptoms with social media usage.)