4 ms·

>The notice leans on users' vast enthusiasm for more personalized advertising Ha ha. I think a study should be commissioned to see whether FB has overall bette

>The notice leans on users' vast enthusiasm for more personalized advertising Ha ha. I think a study should be commissioned to see whether FB has overall bettered the lives of its users financially or the opposite. This would be the most effective way to judge how necessary FB really is. (I'm not including the social aspect, because i personally think it hasn't helped anybody socially in the long run (obviously, short term benefits are possible))

bertil 6y ago
A lot of on-line businesses created in the last ten years would not be profitable without the ability to grow their customer base. Anyone selling products specialised enough to only be relevant for 10% of a demographic group or less.
- LegitShady 6y ago
  those businesses could have operated through any other large platform. 'the ability to grow their customer base' is more dependent on their business than on which platform they advertise. Google and apple can target users for you too. Facebook just happens to not do anything but social media and ads.
- kodah 6y ago
  > Anyone selling products specialised enough to only be relevant for 10% of a demographic group or less. The question from here is, without Facebook could that have happened? Does Facebook's ecosystem contribute to this success? Does it also contribute to a lack of competitors in this space?
  - bertil 6y ago
    What space exactly? Individual niches are not as interesting because you might think that the market for your calligraphy kit is a forum for Japanese speakers (10% conversion rate, 10k people largest forum) but Manga-watchers have a much better potential (2%, 5M). It’s easy to assume who your niche is, but almost every campaign is a surprise. This is why Custom Audience powers most ads. Therefore your market is a service that knows about many people’s niche interest, but is itself quite generic: that’s Wordpress·com (freemium, not interested in ads), reddit (not good at monetisation for a long time), twitter (same delay), GMail to some extend and much later Slack, Discord, maybe SnapChat and TikTok. There is a duopoly in ads platforms because there’s a duopoly in effective ideas that scale to any support and any advertiser: keyword (Google) and personalisation. Many platforms have tried to base ads on the content of the page, but it’s hard to find ads that pair well with the war in Darfur. Many YouTube creators get away with promoted content, but it is murky more often than not. The most successful “editorial” attempt is OutBrain and Taboola that are essentially auto-generated articles with super-optimised clic-bait-y garbage. You can imagine hosting that information yourself, edit it, expose it to ad slots in your browser with a protocol. Dave Winner certainly dreams of it. But for me, the proof that this could work was Facebook letting anyone edit their ad preference and information: for years, you could just tell Facebook that you were _not_ into cars, baby clothes or stamp collection. No one used it. It was linked on every ad; you were linked to it if you right-clic to say an ad wasn’t relevant; it was easily findable on the website and the app… No one touched it. So much so that improving it was impossible without traffic. Privacy advocate who claimed this needed to exist ignored my comments when I told them it already did. There was major internal support for it, but even VPs can’t argue against data. You can look at the history: Facebook was created in 2004; they immediately had ads, but they only became a significant player on targeting from 2008 onwards. At that point, ads had been around since 1995 with Viaweb, so more than 15 years; Google had been around for since 1998, so 10 years and the acquisition that created AdWords five years earlier in 2003. If an alternative direction was easy, there was time to build something. I’m not saying another reality isn’t possible — I dream of a protocol emerging from Facebook opening its preference embeddings, after realising that there’s a worthwhile ecosystem of apps to let people optimise it the way they want. But not enough people wanted it, while billions of people seem comfortable with delegating decisions and targeting entirely.
- peterthehacker 6y ago
  This argument I’m very skeptical of. The pre-Facebook internet was niched. Lots of sites for all sorts of subcultures. Online businesses that were relevant to <=10% of the population would advertise on the sites that cater to their niche. Facebook ads as a distribution channel is all that we know in this day and age. Who knows whether online small businesses would be better or worse with a different paradigm.
- KittenInABox 6y ago
  I'm part of several specialized groups, so much so that Facebook ads are actually too broad for me. If you're a specialist you're definitely going on a specific board for it, with Facebook communities only good for general buy/sell hobbies. (I'm more likely to benefit from a reddit dedicated specific kinds of pens than I am to benefit from a facebook dedicated to the same.)
- dillondoyle 6y ago
  +1 this. HN always writes off, and even when they have no experience, claim FB & targeted ads aren't effective even in the face of proof and examples of individual HNers Politics is an example of this change too. The big obvious nefarious. But to your example gives big boost to small campaigns. I think also (i can't prove obviously) allowing more progressive candidates to raise and win by growing support nationwide to win in District.
hiralal 6y ago
Speak for yourself. Don't use words like "anybody" to force your point. Facebook has definitely benefitted me to stay in touch with my friends and loved ones over the years.
alphachloride 6y ago
As one sample, I think it has helped me socially in the long run. I wonder how such a study will take place? Does it take into account the cost of time spent productively browsing? Or the revenue streams that encouraged entrepreneurship and enriched FB marketplaces?
jcun4128 6y ago
Not an FB shill but it has helped me reconnect with family overseas that I haven't contacted in 10 years or so (left as a child). So I am grateful for that, but I have not actively participated in the platform in general since 2012 or so) mostly because I noticed how cringe I was. I use their video chat platform to talk with them once a week. Some more context, they're not native English speakers, live in a small dirt-village but somehow many people there have a mobile phone and FB so they found me/added me.
- move-on-by 6y ago
  I really enjoyed this aspect of Facebook when I had it. However, after a while, I found Facebook feeds where causing me to dislike a lot of people who I otherwise enjoyed spending time with. Furthermore, if I actively cleaned up my feed by un-following or muting people - taking that action just reinforced the notion that this was a person I did not like. Dropping Facebook has without a doubt reduced my contacts and limited my communication. For those I communicate with outside of Facebook, its generally a more rewarding experience, and for acquaintances who I no longer have such ease of access to - I still like them when I'm reminded of them or have an encounter with them, or at least don't dislike them.
  - nonameiguess 6y ago
    There is this, too. Old Army buddies spamming my timeline with 40 ridiculous hateful far-right memes a day. Band girl from middle school who was my first ever date praising the Proud Boys and showing up to the capitol protest. My aunt posting nonsense like the dog with a ham cold cut on its face saying it was burned trying to rescue people from a fire and betting no one would share it. These are people I love. Some of them I have literally been to war with. I'd have died for them and they'd have died for me. I don't want Facebook to convince me all humans are garbage. They're not. I know these people. This isn't really them.
    - zodiakzz 6y ago
      JFC. This is insane that you're making it out to be Facebook's fault for having terrible people in your life. HN comments have gotten worst than even Reddit.
Spooky23 6y ago
I hate Facebook with a passion and don’t have an account anymore. That said, my wife has sold a lot of stuff to local folks that would have been thrown out. (Baby stuff, sports gear, etc) Shipping is too expensive and you don’t get the creepy scams that you find on craiglist.
nonameiguess 6y ago
I loved Facebook early on. 2006-2008 it allowed me to reconnect with a ton of old high school friends just ahead of my ten-year reunion. I moved away right after graduating and had lost contact with basically everyone before that. But I've long since drifted away, ditched Facebook, and just kept people's phone numbers for the few I still care about. Trying to stay friends with people in faraway cities I never see in person in perpetuity by seeing their pictures pop up in a feed every now and then seems like a pointless fool's errand. I could also see the people I'd become friends with "online native" gathering into cliques and echo chambers and becoming increasingly radical and angry, and I am neither of those things and wanted no part of it. Hobbyist communities exclusively for me from now on.
fighterpilot 6y ago
> financially This is the wrong metric to study in isolation. If I buy a copy of the Harry Potter book, I am worse off financially but better off overall since I got lots of value from that book in excess of the amount that it cost me.

bertil 6y ago

A lot of on-line businesses created in the last ten years would not be profitable without the ability to grow their customer base. Anyone selling products specialised enough to only be relevant for 10% of a demographic group or less.

LegitShady 6y ago
those businesses could have operated through any other large platform. 'the ability to grow their customer base' is more dependent on their business than on which platform they advertise. Google and apple can target users for you too. Facebook just happens to not do anything but social media and ads.
kodah 6y ago
> Anyone selling products specialised enough to only be relevant for 10% of a demographic group or less. The question from here is, without Facebook could that have happened? Does Facebook's ecosystem contribute to this success? Does it also contribute to a lack of competitors in this space?
- bertil 6y ago
  What space exactly? Individual niches are not as interesting because you might think that the market for your calligraphy kit is a forum for Japanese speakers (10% conversion rate, 10k people largest forum) but Manga-watchers have a much better potential (2%, 5M). It’s easy to assume who your niche is, but almost every campaign is a surprise. This is why Custom Audience powers most ads. Therefore your market is a service that knows about many people’s niche interest, but is itself quite generic: that’s Wordpress·com (freemium, not interested in ads), reddit (not good at monetisation for a long time), twitter (same delay), GMail to some extend and much later Slack, Discord, maybe SnapChat and TikTok. There is a duopoly in ads platforms because there’s a duopoly in effective ideas that scale to any support and any advertiser: keyword (Google) and personalisation. Many platforms have tried to base ads on the content of the page, but it’s hard to find ads that pair well with the war in Darfur. Many YouTube creators get away with promoted content, but it is murky more often than not. The most successful “editorial” attempt is OutBrain and Taboola that are essentially auto-generated articles with super-optimised clic-bait-y garbage. You can imagine hosting that information yourself, edit it, expose it to ad slots in your browser with a protocol. Dave Winner certainly dreams of it. But for me, the proof that this could work was Facebook letting anyone edit their ad preference and information: for years, you could just tell Facebook that you were _not_ into cars, baby clothes or stamp collection. No one used it. It was linked on every ad; you were linked to it if you right-clic to say an ad wasn’t relevant; it was easily findable on the website and the app… No one touched it. So much so that improving it was impossible without traffic. Privacy advocate who claimed this needed to exist ignored my comments when I told them it already did. There was major internal support for it, but even VPs can’t argue against data. You can look at the history: Facebook was created in 2004; they immediately had ads, but they only became a significant player on targeting from 2008 onwards. At that point, ads had been around since 1995 with Viaweb, so more than 15 years; Google had been around for since 1998, so 10 years and the acquisition that created AdWords five years earlier in 2003. If an alternative direction was easy, there was time to build something. I’m not saying another reality isn’t possible — I dream of a protocol emerging from Facebook opening its preference embeddings, after realising that there’s a worthwhile ecosystem of apps to let people optimise it the way they want. But not enough people wanted it, while billions of people seem comfortable with delegating decisions and targeting entirely.
peterthehacker 6y ago
This argument I’m very skeptical of. The pre-Facebook internet was niched. Lots of sites for all sorts of subcultures. Online businesses that were relevant to <=10% of the population would advertise on the sites that cater to their niche. Facebook ads as a distribution channel is all that we know in this day and age. Who knows whether online small businesses would be better or worse with a different paradigm.
KittenInABox 6y ago
I'm part of several specialized groups, so much so that Facebook ads are actually too broad for me. If you're a specialist you're definitely going on a specific board for it, with Facebook communities only good for general buy/sell hobbies. (I'm more likely to benefit from a reddit dedicated specific kinds of pens than I am to benefit from a facebook dedicated to the same.)
dillondoyle 6y ago
+1 this. HN always writes off, and even when they have no experience, claim FB & targeted ads aren't effective even in the face of proof and examples of individual HNers Politics is an example of this change too. The big obvious nefarious. But to your example gives big boost to small campaigns. I think also (i can't prove obviously) allowing more progressive candidates to raise and win by growing support nationwide to win in District.

hiralal 6y ago

Speak for yourself. Don't use words like "anybody" to force your point. Facebook has definitely benefitted me to stay in touch with my friends and loved ones over the years.

alphachloride 6y ago

As one sample, I think it has helped me socially in the long run. I wonder how such a study will take place? Does it take into account the cost of time spent productively browsing? Or the revenue streams that encouraged entrepreneurship and enriched FB marketplaces?

jcun4128 6y ago

Not an FB shill but it has helped me reconnect with family overseas that I haven't contacted in 10 years or so (left as a child). So I am grateful for that, but I have not actively participated in the platform in general since 2012 or so) mostly because I noticed how cringe I was. I use their video chat platform to talk with them once a week. Some more context, they're not native English speakers, live in a small dirt-village but somehow many people there have a mobile phone and FB so they found me/added me.

move-on-by 6y ago
I really enjoyed this aspect of Facebook when I had it. However, after a while, I found Facebook feeds where causing me to dislike a lot of people who I otherwise enjoyed spending time with. Furthermore, if I actively cleaned up my feed by un-following or muting people - taking that action just reinforced the notion that this was a person I did not like. Dropping Facebook has without a doubt reduced my contacts and limited my communication. For those I communicate with outside of Facebook, its generally a more rewarding experience, and for acquaintances who I no longer have such ease of access to - I still like them when I'm reminded of them or have an encounter with them, or at least don't dislike them.
- nonameiguess 6y ago
  There is this, too. Old Army buddies spamming my timeline with 40 ridiculous hateful far-right memes a day. Band girl from middle school who was my first ever date praising the Proud Boys and showing up to the capitol protest. My aunt posting nonsense like the dog with a ham cold cut on its face saying it was burned trying to rescue people from a fire and betting no one would share it. These are people I love. Some of them I have literally been to war with. I'd have died for them and they'd have died for me. I don't want Facebook to convince me all humans are garbage. They're not. I know these people. This isn't really them.
  - zodiakzz 6y ago
    JFC. This is insane that you're making it out to be Facebook's fault for having terrible people in your life. HN comments have gotten worst than even Reddit.

Spooky23 6y ago

I hate Facebook with a passion and don’t have an account anymore. That said, my wife has sold a lot of stuff to local folks that would have been thrown out. (Baby stuff, sports gear, etc) Shipping is too expensive and you don’t get the creepy scams that you find on craiglist.

nonameiguess 6y ago

I loved Facebook early on. 2006-2008 it allowed me to reconnect with a ton of old high school friends just ahead of my ten-year reunion. I moved away right after graduating and had lost contact with basically everyone before that. But I've long since drifted away, ditched Facebook, and just kept people's phone numbers for the few I still care about. Trying to stay friends with people in faraway cities I never see in person in perpetuity by seeing their pictures pop up in a feed every now and then seems like a pointless fool's errand. I could also see the people I'd become friends with "online native" gathering into cliques and echo chambers and becoming increasingly radical and angry, and I am neither of those things and wanted no part of it. Hobbyist communities exclusively for me from now on.

fighterpilot 6y ago

> financially This is the wrong metric to study in isolation. If I buy a copy of the Harry Potter book, I am worse off financially but better off overall since I got lots of value from that book in excess of the amount that it cost me.