5 ms·

For me, Facebook is unquestionably a net positive value. I get to keep tabs on friends without actively having to reach out. So people don't become strangers ov

For me, Facebook is unquestionably a net positive value. I get to keep tabs on friends without actively having to reach out. So people don't become strangers over time. I can discover events around me and expand my social circle. I can be start a business with a free web presence and attract customers. The downsides that are mentioned are deteriorating discourse, misinformation, false expectations and social pressure etc. I like to think I have avoided these. That's 1 data point against. I'll have to see more thorough evidence to concede FB is a net negative.

doktorhladnjak 6y ago
Unquestionably? How many of those "friends" that you keep tabs on have you talked to recently? And I don't mean leaving a comment or reading about their lives. One of the most dangerous negative effects of Facebook is that it makes people _feel_ socially connected to someone when they really have no social interaction or connection at all.
- alphachloride 6y ago
  Yes, unquestionably it is a net positive for me. I have talked to a small minority of my friends that I keep tabs on. Without facebook, I would have talked to an even smaller number. I don't see how the number of chats I have is an exclusive measure of value of that platform. That is but one metric.
Lineup 6y ago
Right! And that's really a great point, it can be a positive for individuals. Except that for society it has negative value. This is like opening a mine, extracting all the resources, and leaving behind a poisonous scab on the earth. (Not coincidentally the way I picture MZ.)
- alphachloride 6y ago
  I have not seen evidence to quantify its value to society as a positive/negative. Would society have been worse off or better off without Facebook? I believe that is not an answerable question because it is alternate history.
potamic 6y ago
What you don't realize is that Facebook lets you keep tabs on friends only they like, let's you discover events only they approve and let's your business get presence only when it aligns with their ideologies. They are not content with enabling connections and are showing every intent to become the political and ideological filter for the world. The real money is when you control information. There is a lot of evidence coming out in India right now about how they influenced the elections in favour of the current ruling party. A party that has been involved in such shenanigans as demonetisation, Hindu nationalism, anti-Muslim rhetoric, weakening of the judiciary, complete media capture, and an absolutely abysmal management of the covid situation culminating in a 30% drop in GDP. If that is not evidence of net value, I don't know what is.
bvanderveen 6y ago
User 'potamic' made most of the point I would have made, so I'll address this: > I get to keep tabs on friends without actively having to reach out. So people don't become strangers over time. This is a fundamental perversion of the notion of social interaction. It proposes an argument whose form and frame substitutes people and relationships for a passive consumption of images of people and relationships. Instead of people becoming strangers over time (which is normal and healthy), everyone is transformed into simulacra of acquaintances or friends instantly; you are implicitly, automatically estranged from the beginning. Your Facebook-mediated relationships last longer than they would have without Facebook precisely because of its impersonal and inauthentic character which absolves you of the real effort otherwise required to have an authentic relationship. To use it is to delegate an always-increasing portion of your social existence to the black-box of the Zuckertron, with all of the political, ideological, and economic implications, caveats, and perturbances that come with it. To wit: you've already accepted the argument, and you're here defending it with evidence amounting to 'everyone else plugged into the Borg cube is plugged into the Borg cube, together we all cube the Borg cube'. Needless to say, I am skeptical that the niche Facebook has carved out for itself as the arbiter of who-and-what-I-see-and-how and who-and-what-sees-me-and-how is likely to work out in my favor. Recommended reading: The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction, Walter Benjamin https://web.mit.edu/allanmc/www/benjamin.pdf https://web.mit.edu/allanmc/www/benjamin.pdf
- alphachloride 6y ago
  What is the notion of social interaction? What do you mean by normal and healthy? I disagree that the scenario you laid out is necessarily true. It is possible though, yes. I curate my friends list and often prune connections I have drifted away from. The friends I keep on FB are people I want to continue to be friends with. Because people were on my friends list and I saw them online in my periphery, I was more comfortable reaching out to them when I visited their cities after many years. Granted, there are some people who were, and will remain casual acquaintances - but having or not having them in my feed has no effect on me that I can tell. So I do not think being able to keep tabs is an argument for passive consumption of people. Indeed, it has helped me actively reconnect. I do not agree that using FB is delegating an ever increasing portion of my social existence to the "black-box of the Zuckertron". I do not use FB as a substitute for people I can connect with in person. I also think you are mis-characterizing my argument under the influence of your feelings about FB.

doktorhladnjak 6y ago

Unquestionably? How many of those "friends" that you keep tabs on have you talked to recently? And I don't mean leaving a comment or reading about their lives. One of the most dangerous negative effects of Facebook is that it makes people _feel_ socially connected to someone when they really have no social interaction or connection at all.

alphachloride 6y ago
Yes, unquestionably it is a net positive for me. I have talked to a small minority of my friends that I keep tabs on. Without facebook, I would have talked to an even smaller number. I don't see how the number of chats I have is an exclusive measure of value of that platform. That is but one metric.

Lineup 6y ago

Right! And that's really a great point, it can be a positive for individuals. Except that for society it has negative value. This is like opening a mine, extracting all the resources, and leaving behind a poisonous scab on the earth. (Not coincidentally the way I picture MZ.)

alphachloride 6y ago
I have not seen evidence to quantify its value to society as a positive/negative. Would society have been worse off or better off without Facebook? I believe that is not an answerable question because it is alternate history.

potamic 6y ago

What you don't realize is that Facebook lets you keep tabs on friends only they like, let's you discover events only they approve and let's your business get presence only when it aligns with their ideologies. They are not content with enabling connections and are showing every intent to become the political and ideological filter for the world. The real money is when you control information. There is a lot of evidence coming out in India right now about how they influenced the elections in favour of the current ruling party. A party that has been involved in such shenanigans as demonetisation, Hindu nationalism, anti-Muslim rhetoric, weakening of the judiciary, complete media capture, and an absolutely abysmal management of the covid situation culminating in a 30% drop in GDP. If that is not evidence of net value, I don't know what is.

bvanderveen 6y ago

User 'potamic' made most of the point I would have made, so I'll address this: > I get to keep tabs on friends without actively having to reach out. So people don't become strangers over time. This is a fundamental perversion of the notion of social interaction. It proposes an argument whose form and frame substitutes people and relationships for a passive consumption of images of people and relationships. Instead of people becoming strangers over time (which is normal and healthy), everyone is transformed into simulacra of acquaintances or friends instantly; you are implicitly, automatically estranged from the beginning. Your Facebook-mediated relationships last longer than they would have without Facebook precisely because of its impersonal and inauthentic character which absolves you of the real effort otherwise required to have an authentic relationship. To use it is to delegate an always-increasing portion of your social existence to the black-box of the Zuckertron, with all of the political, ideological, and economic implications, caveats, and perturbances that come with it. To wit: you've already accepted the argument, and you're here defending it with evidence amounting to 'everyone else plugged into the Borg cube is plugged into the Borg cube, together we all cube the Borg cube'. Needless to say, I am skeptical that the niche Facebook has carved out for itself as the arbiter of who-and-what-I-see-and-how and who-and-what-sees-me-and-how is likely to work out in my favor. Recommended reading: The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction, Walter Benjamin https://web.mit.edu/allanmc/www/benjamin.pdf https://web.mit.edu/allanmc/www/benjamin.pdf

alphachloride 6y ago
What is the notion of social interaction? What do you mean by normal and healthy? I disagree that the scenario you laid out is necessarily true. It is possible though, yes. I curate my friends list and often prune connections I have drifted away from. The friends I keep on FB are people I want to continue to be friends with. Because people were on my friends list and I saw them online in my periphery, I was more comfortable reaching out to them when I visited their cities after many years. Granted, there are some people who were, and will remain casual acquaintances - but having or not having them in my feed has no effect on me that I can tell. So I do not think being able to keep tabs is an argument for passive consumption of people. Indeed, it has helped me actively reconnect. I do not agree that using FB is delegating an ever increasing portion of my social existence to the "black-box of the Zuckertron". I do not use FB as a substitute for people I can connect with in person. I also think you are mis-characterizing my argument under the influence of your feelings about FB.