3 ms·

> Facebook and many others established themselves with a giant bait and switch. Get the users, then put the pinch on them by selling every bit of info and using

> Facebook and many others established themselves with a giant bait and switch. Get the users, then put the pinch on them by selling every bit of info and using dark patterns to a point just shy of them quitting. Can you elaborate on why you think Facebook was a bait and switch? "They trust me, the dumb fucks" was during Facebook's infancy, and came to public attention years and years ago. More concretely, Facebook has consistently been amoral and user-hostile, and anyone paying even a little bit of attention knew that by, say, 2012. Hell, there were complaints about its addictive (+stalkery) potential when the news feed launched, in 2006! I'm what way is this a bait and switch, instead of clearly signaling the company they were the entire time?

smolder 7y ago
Im referring to the early years specifically, when it had no ads and no obvious business model. They jump started their Network effect by being useful and unobtrusive and then the monetization set in. Still, it's only recently that those concerns you mentioned really became mainstream. The well-informed public is a small sliver of the public overall, because it takes effort to stay informed, and there is a lot of deceptive junk and sponsored opinions to sift through.
- wutbrodo 7y ago
  Most people still don't really care that much about privacy, and polls continue to bear this out. The bulk of complaints are based on its direct effects on user's mental well-being, as well as perceived damage to the health of civil society. The upshot is that people don't really see a problem with obtrusive monetization directly (FB ads aren't particularly egregious from a UI perspective), but rather attempts to increase engagement, which of course substantially predate their monetization efforts. The News Feed and related controversy are an easy, early example, as is the promotion of Farmville-style "games" (ca 2009/10), which also substantially predates Facebook's mainstreaming and the bulk of their user growth.

smolder 7y ago

Im referring to the early years specifically, when it had no ads and no obvious business model. They jump started their Network effect by being useful and unobtrusive and then the monetization set in. Still, it's only recently that those concerns you mentioned really became mainstream. The well-informed public is a small sliver of the public overall, because it takes effort to stay informed, and there is a lot of deceptive junk and sponsored opinions to sift through.

wutbrodo 7y ago
Most people still don't really care that much about privacy, and polls continue to bear this out. The bulk of complaints are based on its direct effects on user's mental well-being, as well as perceived damage to the health of civil society. The upshot is that people don't really see a problem with obtrusive monetization directly (FB ads aren't particularly egregious from a UI perspective), but rather attempts to increase engagement, which of course substantially predate their monetization efforts. The News Feed and related controversy are an easy, early example, as is the promotion of Farmville-style "games" (ca 2009/10), which also substantially predates Facebook's mainstreaming and the bulk of their user growth.