4 ms·

Expensive doesn't mean "two extra clicks". It means convincing all of your friends and family to use a new platform. Facebook's network effects impose very high

by Veen 6y ago

Expensive doesn't mean "two extra clicks". It means convincing all of your friends and family to use a new platform. Facebook's network effects impose very high switching costs. That's one reason your "free choice" defense of Facebook is inadequate. Yes, people "choose" to use Facebook. Yes, they are techncially free to stop using it. But, when the cost is high, is the choice really free? If an individual's social and professional life depends on a platform because that's what everyone else uses, they cannot in practice switch to another platform even if that is their preference. You might as well argue that someone from a disfunctional family gets a new family. Or that someone living in a disfunctional state emigrates. They can do these things in theory, but in practice they are not completely free to do them.

inglor_cz 6y ago
This. Lack of interoperability is what keeps people from moving to another platform. A mandated API for interoperability would go a long way. Just like with e-mails. We expect people with Gmail addresses to be able to get in contact with someone who does not have Gmail.
- treeman79 6y ago
  Post grand kid photos else where. Grandmas will follow. Turned off my Facebook for awhile. Losing access to photos about caused a family riot.
ryandrake 6y ago
As someone who once used facebook, maybe a decade ago, but currently does not, I can confidently say I've seen little to no social expense to not using it. My real friends and family keep me abreast of the important things that are happening offline, and I get to skip the rest that happens on Facebook, which is essentially noise, baby pictures, and toxic politics. I think it's almost entirely FOMO that is keeping people on these horrible "social" platforms. Best decision of my life was to leave.
- Veen 6y ago
  You say FOMO as if it's a trivial thing, and not a deeply influential aspect of the human psyche.
  - Erlich_Bachman 6y ago
    And that's Zuckerberg's fault too, that people have it? Demonizing much?
    - kwk1 6y ago
      It seems like you're attacking a point you made for the person you're replying to instead of anything in their actual comment here.

by Veen 6y ago

inglor_cz 6y ago

This. Lack of interoperability is what keeps people from moving to another platform. A mandated API for interoperability would go a long way. Just like with e-mails. We expect people with Gmail addresses to be able to get in contact with someone who does not have Gmail.

treeman79 6y ago
Post grand kid photos else where. Grandmas will follow. Turned off my Facebook for awhile. Losing access to photos about caused a family riot.

ryandrake 6y ago

As someone who once used facebook, maybe a decade ago, but currently does not, I can confidently say I've seen little to no social expense to not using it. My real friends and family keep me abreast of the important things that are happening offline, and I get to skip the rest that happens on Facebook, which is essentially noise, baby pictures, and toxic politics. I think it's almost entirely FOMO that is keeping people on these horrible "social" platforms. Best decision of my life was to leave.

Veen 6y ago
You say FOMO as if it's a trivial thing, and not a deeply influential aspect of the human psyche.
- Erlich_Bachman 6y ago
  And that's Zuckerberg's fault too, that people have it? Demonizing much?
  - kwk1 6y ago
    It seems like you're attacking a point you made for the person you're replying to instead of anything in their actual comment here.