5 ms·

one thing in particular resonated with me in the article. and, if i may paraphrase it, it's that these platforms in their quest to connect the last billions are

one thing in particular resonated with me in the article. and, if i may paraphrase it, it's that these platforms in their quest to connect the last billions are amplifying problems we already have in society. maybe we not ready to be massively connected. maybe we need to step back and think about how we are connecting people and not who to connect next. the current way is simply not working.

swiley 5y ago
If you're talking about the division in the US: that comes from being authoritarian not from being connected. Disagreement isn't a problem when you're not forcing your ideas on eachother.
baby 5y ago
Or maybe we are ready, and there will be some downside. I still believe that the upside of all being able to communicate and find each other so easily balances out the negative side. I truly believe that shutting down facebook today would be a huge loss for all of us. We can complain but social networks have changed our lives for the good in a multitude of ways.
- strogonoff 5y ago
  We shouldn’t shut Facebook down. That’d be an insane regulatory gesture. However, imagine Facebook offered an interoperable social graph API—and you’d have a cross-platform client app that lets you get in touch with anyone (including those who deleted their Facebook profiles), meet your significant other, meet friends while traveling, etc. all without being locked into exploitation by a behemoth for advertisement money.
  - baby 5y ago
    I think that'd be a great idea, but I'm skeptical that this would come any time soon because regulators are not good at pushing for open API regulations. Look at banks, this is only becoming a thing recently, and only in the UK.
    - margor 5y ago
      Banks is not that great of a example - it really depends on what country you look at. For example in Poland almost all major banks offer Open Banking API which allows access to bank account information through API and some bank's mobile apps allow you to add foreign bank accounts so you can see your balance in a single place. Even if they're competition their mobile apps were made compatible thanks to regulations. That is not entirely open access, mind you, you still need legal entity approved by local financing regulator - but that proves there is a way when there is a will. [0] https://developer.ing.com/openbanking/home https://developer.ing.com/openbanking/home
ethbr0 5y ago
Facebook isn't really in the business of connecting people, as the article notes briefly: they're in the business of growth. Growth of daily user count, growth of daily time on Facebook per user, growth of ad revenue, and ultimately growth of profits. And indeed, these are where most of Facebook's evils come from. If Facebook was ambivalent about eyeball time, they wouldn't need to juice user's feeds or create addictive engagement loops. If they were ambivalent about ad revenue, then their data collection could be massively curtailed. Facebook as a not-for-profit would not need to act in evil ways, and Facebook as a for-profit cannot help but do so.
- baby 5y ago
  Two things to counter balance your point of view: - In some way, had they not care about growth, they would not have become a useful public registry that you can use to connect with anyone. - on the other hand, I do think that the app could be better if they cared less about engagement. I really wish you could customize your timeline and see things chronologically by default, like it used to be. It has become less and less of a place to find out what your friends are up to, and more about "news sharing" and "facebook groups".
  - ethbr0 5y ago
    > had they not care about growth, they would not have become a useful public registry that you can use to connect with anyone Agreed. The uptake was predicated on their excellence and strive to growth. But I think there's an argument towards making a base layer of shared services non-profit, and then allowing for-profit companies to build on top and capture most of the value (e.g. ICANN). I think a present where we'd done that might have a healthier (for-profit) Facebook. > app could be better if they cared less about engagement The root of Facebook's evil is that their ad revenue model inherently means engagement = $. And so, whatever their ancillary preferences and morals, they will ultimately do whatever increases engagement (to the brink of public outcry). In a lot of ways, this is like the resource curse of oil, diamonds, etc. Facebook (as a company), as powerful as it is, can't actually make strategic decisions that have a side effect of decreasing engagement.

swiley 5y ago

If you're talking about the division in the US: that comes from being authoritarian not from being connected. Disagreement isn't a problem when you're not forcing your ideas on eachother.

baby 5y ago

Or maybe we are ready, and there will be some downside. I still believe that the upside of all being able to communicate and find each other so easily balances out the negative side. I truly believe that shutting down facebook today would be a huge loss for all of us. We can complain but social networks have changed our lives for the good in a multitude of ways.

strogonoff 5y ago
We shouldn’t shut Facebook down. That’d be an insane regulatory gesture. However, imagine Facebook offered an interoperable social graph API—and you’d have a cross-platform client app that lets you get in touch with anyone (including those who deleted their Facebook profiles), meet your significant other, meet friends while traveling, etc. all without being locked into exploitation by a behemoth for advertisement money.
- baby 5y ago
  I think that'd be a great idea, but I'm skeptical that this would come any time soon because regulators are not good at pushing for open API regulations. Look at banks, this is only becoming a thing recently, and only in the UK.
  - margor 5y ago
    Banks is not that great of a example - it really depends on what country you look at. For example in Poland almost all major banks offer Open Banking API which allows access to bank account information through API and some bank's mobile apps allow you to add foreign bank accounts so you can see your balance in a single place. Even if they're competition their mobile apps were made compatible thanks to regulations. That is not entirely open access, mind you, you still need legal entity approved by local financing regulator - but that proves there is a way when there is a will. [0] https://developer.ing.com/openbanking/home https://developer.ing.com/openbanking/home

ethbr0 5y ago

Facebook isn't really in the business of connecting people, as the article notes briefly: they're in the business of growth. Growth of daily user count, growth of daily time on Facebook per user, growth of ad revenue, and ultimately growth of profits. And indeed, these are where most of Facebook's evils come from. If Facebook was ambivalent about eyeball time, they wouldn't need to juice user's feeds or create addictive engagement loops. If they were ambivalent about ad revenue, then their data collection could be massively curtailed. Facebook as a not-for-profit would not need to act in evil ways, and Facebook as a for-profit cannot help but do so.

baby 5y ago
Two things to counter balance your point of view: - In some way, had they not care about growth, they would not have become a useful public registry that you can use to connect with anyone. - on the other hand, I do think that the app could be better if they cared less about engagement. I really wish you could customize your timeline and see things chronologically by default, like it used to be. It has become less and less of a place to find out what your friends are up to, and more about "news sharing" and "facebook groups".
- ethbr0 5y ago
  > had they not care about growth, they would not have become a useful public registry that you can use to connect with anyone Agreed. The uptake was predicated on their excellence and strive to growth. But I think there's an argument towards making a base layer of shared services non-profit, and then allowing for-profit companies to build on top and capture most of the value (e.g. ICANN). I think a present where we'd done that might have a healthier (for-profit) Facebook. > app could be better if they cared less about engagement The root of Facebook's evil is that their ad revenue model inherently means engagement = $. And so, whatever their ancillary preferences and morals, they will ultimately do whatever increases engagement (to the brink of public outcry). In a lot of ways, this is like the resource curse of oil, diamonds, etc. Facebook (as a company), as powerful as it is, can't actually make strategic decisions that have a side effect of decreasing engagement.