5 ms·

I disagree. FB has enriched my life at many ways, when my father was on deathbed I realized how much he used fb to just keep track of me every single time he re

I disagree. FB has enriched my life at many ways, when my father was on deathbed I realized how much he used fb to just keep track of me every single time he remembered me. We spoke daily but I did not know he used facebook to "be with me". I do understand your criticism but it is in the same line as how christian priests opposed education for peasants. They argued that if the ordinary massed could read it would mean they will read stuff they are not supposed to read. I am pretty sure similar criticism has be forced on TV, Cellphones, Comic books and what not. I would say relax, this too shall will pass and even bigger distraction would take over our lives.

stiray 7y ago
(Just to the guy bellow: yes it does. Fb kills our pristin human interaction and replaces it with their ads.)
- randallsquared 7y ago
  I'm not sure if you misunderstood GP's statement or you're just taking it in the most uncharitable way, but I don't think what was written supports your reading.
harikb 7y ago
> I am pretty sure similar criticism has be forced on TV, Cellphones, Comic books and what not. No, there is a shit load of difference. It is far more costly to spread misinformation through those other channels. Sure nation-states and tv/cable-companies with agenda will still exist, but ordinary citizen like me, with an agenda, won’t be able to anonymously spread conspiracy theories for $100 ~ $1000
- Nasrudith 7y ago
  So the problem is that it isn't restricted to special interests? That sounds like the same logical flaw as cash bail models. If they are going to be a flight risk or going to go out and murder someone them having money available doesn't change if they are going to be a bad actor or not.
- justapassenger 7y ago
  Sentiment on HN - you can spread any theory for $1000 and you’ll reach tons of people who engage and believe you. Also sentiment on HN - ads don’t work and companies spend billions of dollars for nothing.
- donatj 7y ago
  I’d place the argument that the type of person susceptible to conspiracy theories already had bad ideas in their head. Now they’re just allowed to share.
- vntok 7y ago
  If you're paying on these platforms, you're not anonymous at all are you?
- contravariant 7y ago
  Although oddly it seems that the most egregious violations were done by people with quite a bit of money. It's debatable whether it is a level playing field or a lack of it that's problematic.
  - KorematsuFred 7y ago
    > egregious violations We feel that way because rich people operate at scale and poor people steal candy from 7/11. Level playing field is a myth it will never exist anywhere ever.

stiray 7y ago

(Just to the guy bellow: yes it does. Fb kills our pristin human interaction and replaces it with their ads.)

randallsquared 7y ago
I'm not sure if you misunderstood GP's statement or you're just taking it in the most uncharitable way, but I don't think what was written supports your reading.

harikb 7y ago

> I am pretty sure similar criticism has be forced on TV, Cellphones, Comic books and what not. No, there is a shit load of difference. It is far more costly to spread misinformation through those other channels. Sure nation-states and tv/cable-companies with agenda will still exist, but ordinary citizen like me, with an agenda, won’t be able to anonymously spread conspiracy theories for $100 ~ $1000

Nasrudith 7y ago
So the problem is that it isn't restricted to special interests? That sounds like the same logical flaw as cash bail models. If they are going to be a flight risk or going to go out and murder someone them having money available doesn't change if they are going to be a bad actor or not.
justapassenger 7y ago
Sentiment on HN - you can spread any theory for $1000 and you’ll reach tons of people who engage and believe you. Also sentiment on HN - ads don’t work and companies spend billions of dollars for nothing.
donatj 7y ago
I’d place the argument that the type of person susceptible to conspiracy theories already had bad ideas in their head. Now they’re just allowed to share.
vntok 7y ago
If you're paying on these platforms, you're not anonymous at all are you?
contravariant 7y ago
Although oddly it seems that the most egregious violations were done by people with quite a bit of money. It's debatable whether it is a level playing field or a lack of it that's problematic.
- KorematsuFred 7y ago
  > egregious violations We feel that way because rich people operate at scale and poor people steal candy from 7/11. Level playing field is a myth it will never exist anywhere ever.