5 ms·
The false premise that your argument relies on is that people aren't transformed by the technologies that they use. Regularly using Facebook transforms you from
by nanna 6y ago
The false premise that your argument relies on is that people aren't transformed by the technologies that they use. Regularly using Facebook transforms you from what you would have been without using Facebook; Using the open web transforms you into something different.
So the problem isn't 'the open web would not have attracted the kinds of people that Facebook has'. The problem is that 'Facebook has produced the kinds of people who have no interest in the open web'. And for the reason that, the open web to hell, this benefit's Facebook's bottom line.
- playpause 6y ago“The false premise that your argument relies on...” is best followed by pointing out a false premise, otherwise it’s a bit obnoxious.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- pdonis 6y ago> The problem is that 'Facebook has produced the kinds of people who have no interest in the open web'. I disagree. Those people have always been there and have always been the majority. America Online back in the 1990s was even more of a walled garden than Facebook is today. Most Facebook users today at least know that there is a "web" other than Facebook, if for no other reason than they see links to it in their feed. AOL users back in the day might never see anything that wasn't hosted by AOL. And there were the 10% or so of us who used the open web back then, just as there are today. For one of us to try to explain to an AOL user what "the open web" was and why it was a good idea back then was even more of a challenge than trying to explain that to a Facebook user today.