5 ms·

People like to hate on Facebook, but how is any other social media different? They are all free services that profit from your personal information. Some just h

People like to hate on Facebook, but how is any other social media different? They are all free services that profit from your personal information. Some just have better PR than the other.

openknot 5y ago
Hacker News and other relatively smaller forums are different. They are free social media networks that aren't optimized to maximize engagement, promote outrage, or instill a fear of missing out.
- guerrilla 5y ago
  They don't have as much of a network effect either.
- sjtindell 5y ago
  That stuff matters too but I think the size is what matters. HN stays clean because it stays small. Lots of posts are boring for the average person’s interests. I’ve seen the same thing on Reddit. Once you go above a certain size, a subreddit completely degrades.
- spookthesunset 5y ago
  They are also anonymous. I could be flaming somebody I know in real life but it does matter. Don’t ask don’t tell.
- MikusR 5y ago
  I have seen all 3 things on Hacker News. In addition to large threads about conspiracy theories, antivax and misinformation.
  - openknot 5y ago
    They’re not completely absent, but design decisions by Hacker News make these three factors less visible. >maximize engagement It encourages engagement with upvotes and additional privileges when an account gets more points. However, the site’s design doesn’t maximize it. I don’t get push notifications to check the site, awards, or suggestions for other relevant articles in the comments. >promote outrage Outrage can be a factor that causes posts to rise, but deliberate policies avoid optimizing for it. Specifically, the avoidance of editing the submission title, unless the purpose is to make it less clickbait. >instill a fear of missing out. This is most subjective, but I get the sentiment that if someone posts an amazing project, there’s a good chance of constructive critique in the comments, or more information from the developer about how they made it. Other social media websites don’t have the depth of discussion (just photos of the best parts of their life, without talking about the challenges). This is relatively more of a cultural/user base observation versus an interface decision, however. For conspiracy theories, antivax, and misinformation, the alternative is heavier moderation. It looks like a judgement call by HN moderators to err on being less interventionist with user discussion. There are tradeoffs, but I think the benefits of free discussion outweigh exposure to misinformation, so long as one reads skeptically and critically.
- mFixman 5y ago
  All social networks with voting systems are optimised to maximise engagement and promote outrage. Just look at how every single country subreddit is a constant flamewar. HN _mostly_ prevents this by having strong and good moderation, but there's still a fair amount of negative metrics coming from it.
barbazoo 5y ago
Personally, I applaud decline in engagement with any of the social networks, not just Facebook.
- feupan 5y ago
  The decline is only one-sided. Facebook down, TikTok up. The mean amount of social network users is not declining at all.
  - spideymans 5y ago
    TikTok is essentially a mobile-first reincarnation of YouTube. I’ve yet to see any users use it to socialize with friends and family they know in real life. I’m hesitant to call it a “social network” when there’s little to no socializing there in the first place
    - nightgarden 5y ago
      It's still a social media network. People socialise there with the broader world. And socialising with friends and family may be passé for young people nowadays.
    - feupan 5y ago
      You have profile, you publish content, people leave comments, you can message anyone. It is a social network. Don’t confuse its format for YouTube because that’s now how the youth is using it
  - barbazoo 5y ago
    Fair point. I do agree with others though, the damage other apps like TikTok do is less for me to be happy about it overall. It's like Transitioning people from an alcohol addiction to a weed addiction, one is much more dangerous than the other, either might not be great for you.
- raxxorrax 5y ago
  I hope platforms that are focused on topics instead of people will prevail. There is still some exaggerated self-promotion, but it is far less pronounced. Oversharing is a really bad idea in the long run. Your opinions from 30 years ago are probably hated today. Imagine the trauma that is caused if you could read what your parents thought before you were born.
jacquesm 5y ago
Because it is rotten to the core? Because of its utterly unsympathetic upper management? (Ok, Bezos as runner up). Because of all of the deceptive things it has done over the years?
rvz 5y ago
Exactly. It is no different to the rest of them. This game is simply one tyrant (TikTok) dethroning another (Meta) and all of them make money out of our personal data. Facebook (the social network) was known to be in decline for years. The real attention is on Instagram and WhatsApp are still adding users. I wouldn't rush to rule them out yet over this.
- pjerem 5y ago
  At least I have the feeling that newcomers like TikTok don’t have this "embrace the web" thing that Facebook had during a decade with embedded tracking scripts everywhere on any website. I feel like TikTok is more closed and that I don’t have a shadow profile on it like Facebook did. But it’s also because the web (especially the browsers and mobile OS) learnt its lessons. OTOH, it also means that newcomers will have to make even more efforts to to "compete" with the historical open web which can create even more situations of information disappearing from the open web.
vegetablepotpie 5y ago
The problem is that there is social media. Facebook is the biggest success, which is why people focus on it. Facebook displaces other forms of communication I prefer to use. I used to use email heavily to communicate with friends. Email was the best format for me, now no one uses it. Everyone is on 12 messaging platforms, Facebook started that trend with messenger. I used to be able to go to business websites and get the information I needed, now everyone primarily uses Facebook pages to post information, which means I have to log in on many occasions to view the content. The Internet before Facebook was much more convenient for me. Facebook hasn’t resulted in any positive interactions for me. Something about the platform drives people to be confrontational. Years ago when I participated on the platform I would reply to friend’s posts. Sometimes I would get replies from their friends and they tried to argue with me. It boiled down to them believing I said something in my post that I did not write. That drove me to not write my thoughts about something, and when I did reply, it was with shallow positive comments. That is a very boring way to interact with people, so I stopped using the platform.
- spookthesunset 5y ago
  This has become me. Facebook encourages you to become confrontational with all your friends.
- _3u10 5y ago
  Pretty sure IRC/ICQ started the 18 messengers. It's too bad Adium/Pidgin can't exist for mobile.
jollybean 5y ago
TikTok is very different and will probably turn your view of what drives engagement upside down. Try it for a bit, it's an alternate universe.
- kajaktum 5y ago
  NO thanks, I am not planning on using yet another service that is trying to psychologically milk every ounce of my attention. Reddit and Hackernews is bad enough. I am also not interested in looking at lewd teenagers dancing to the latest tune or whatever the kids are doing these days.
  - jollybean 5y ago
    "I don't understand this 'Internet' thing the kids are using, have no intention of trying it, and I already don't like the newspapers!" "at lewd teenagers dancing to the latest tune or whatever the kids are doing these days." ... is a seriously dim view. TikTok is literally the #1 app in the world, and for someone curious enough to read HackerNews but unwilling to even try app to understand the nature of its impact is a bit odd. Personally, I despise Twitter, but I read it occasionally, and understand why it works, and what kind of content is on there. I would find it problematic to work in tech with someone who doesn't understand 'why people like Netflix' having never even bothered to stream a video before. In particular, the feed algorithm is unlike anything else in tech and the content is definitely a lot less toxic. You should definitely try it, that doesn't mean you have to like it.
    - oska 5y ago
      > kind of an essential for anyone working in tech Don't mean to be rude but you appear to have a quite limited concept of what 'working in tech' can entail.
      - jollybean 5y ago
        I don't mean to be rude but anyone unwilling to even 'try' something like 'Netflix' or 'Facebook' or 'TikTok' or 'Email' - ie the universally popular, generationally defining experiences, is woefully ignorant, and that goes beyond those just working in tech. It's fine to not want to use those services (I personally avoid most of them), but to ignore them, or worse, purposely avoid even understanding what they are is straight, self imposed ignorance. It's ridiculous.
max49 5y ago
>People like to hate on Facebook, but how is any other social media different? I think the main reason for it is that most of us are just old enough to remember what facebook was before they started filling the site with ads and recommended/paid/suggested/etc posts. It was really fucking great back when you would logging and there would be literally no content/ads other than what your friend manually took the time write/post. they gave us a taste of what a great minimalist social media platform could be and then turned monetisation/engagement to 9000. Imagine if HN was bought by reddit and they decided to use the reddit platform (new skin only, no "old.XX...") with all the ads and everything. That's kinda what happened to facebook.
makeitdouble 5y ago
The three critically different things to me: - they have/had a critical size. No other social media was that big, and size matters. - they required (still do?) real IDs. Forcing people to use their real name is a special kind of awful, especially when it's the main network - they push a unified account platform for everything they owned. Other companies tried too but most failed (I also hate Apple for that, if you were to ask).

People like to hate on Facebook, but how is any other social media different? They are all free services that profit from your personal information. Some just have better PR than the other.

openknot 5y ago

Hacker News and other relatively smaller forums are different. They are free social media networks that aren't optimized to maximize engagement, promote outrage, or instill a fear of missing out.

guerrilla 5y ago
They don't have as much of a network effect either.
sjtindell 5y ago
That stuff matters too but I think the size is what matters. HN stays clean because it stays small. Lots of posts are boring for the average person’s interests. I’ve seen the same thing on Reddit. Once you go above a certain size, a subreddit completely degrades.
spookthesunset 5y ago
They are also anonymous. I could be flaming somebody I know in real life but it does matter. Don’t ask don’t tell.
MikusR 5y ago
I have seen all 3 things on Hacker News. In addition to large threads about conspiracy theories, antivax and misinformation.
- openknot 5y ago
  They’re not completely absent, but design decisions by Hacker News make these three factors less visible. >maximize engagement It encourages engagement with upvotes and additional privileges when an account gets more points. However, the site’s design doesn’t maximize it. I don’t get push notifications to check the site, awards, or suggestions for other relevant articles in the comments. >promote outrage Outrage can be a factor that causes posts to rise, but deliberate policies avoid optimizing for it. Specifically, the avoidance of editing the submission title, unless the purpose is to make it less clickbait. >instill a fear of missing out. This is most subjective, but I get the sentiment that if someone posts an amazing project, there’s a good chance of constructive critique in the comments, or more information from the developer about how they made it. Other social media websites don’t have the depth of discussion (just photos of the best parts of their life, without talking about the challenges). This is relatively more of a cultural/user base observation versus an interface decision, however. For conspiracy theories, antivax, and misinformation, the alternative is heavier moderation. It looks like a judgement call by HN moderators to err on being less interventionist with user discussion. There are tradeoffs, but I think the benefits of free discussion outweigh exposure to misinformation, so long as one reads skeptically and critically.
mFixman 5y ago
All social networks with voting systems are optimised to maximise engagement and promote outrage. Just look at how every single country subreddit is a constant flamewar. HN _mostly_ prevents this by having strong and good moderation, but there's still a fair amount of negative metrics coming from it.

barbazoo 5y ago

Personally, I applaud decline in engagement with any of the social networks, not just Facebook.

feupan 5y ago
The decline is only one-sided. Facebook down, TikTok up. The mean amount of social network users is not declining at all.
- spideymans 5y ago
  TikTok is essentially a mobile-first reincarnation of YouTube. I’ve yet to see any users use it to socialize with friends and family they know in real life. I’m hesitant to call it a “social network” when there’s little to no socializing there in the first place
  - nightgarden 5y ago
    It's still a social media network. People socialise there with the broader world. And socialising with friends and family may be passé for young people nowadays.
  - feupan 5y ago
    You have profile, you publish content, people leave comments, you can message anyone. It is a social network. Don’t confuse its format for YouTube because that’s now how the youth is using it
- barbazoo 5y ago
  Fair point. I do agree with others though, the damage other apps like TikTok do is less for me to be happy about it overall. It's like Transitioning people from an alcohol addiction to a weed addiction, one is much more dangerous than the other, either might not be great for you.
raxxorrax 5y ago
I hope platforms that are focused on topics instead of people will prevail. There is still some exaggerated self-promotion, but it is far less pronounced. Oversharing is a really bad idea in the long run. Your opinions from 30 years ago are probably hated today. Imagine the trauma that is caused if you could read what your parents thought before you were born.

jacquesm 5y ago

Because it is rotten to the core? Because of its utterly unsympathetic upper management? (Ok, Bezos as runner up). Because of all of the deceptive things it has done over the years?

rvz 5y ago

Exactly. It is no different to the rest of them. This game is simply one tyrant (TikTok) dethroning another (Meta) and all of them make money out of our personal data. Facebook (the social network) was known to be in decline for years. The real attention is on Instagram and WhatsApp are still adding users. I wouldn't rush to rule them out yet over this.

pjerem 5y ago
At least I have the feeling that newcomers like TikTok don’t have this "embrace the web" thing that Facebook had during a decade with embedded tracking scripts everywhere on any website. I feel like TikTok is more closed and that I don’t have a shadow profile on it like Facebook did. But it’s also because the web (especially the browsers and mobile OS) learnt its lessons. OTOH, it also means that newcomers will have to make even more efforts to to "compete" with the historical open web which can create even more situations of information disappearing from the open web.

vegetablepotpie 5y ago

The problem is that there is social media. Facebook is the biggest success, which is why people focus on it. Facebook displaces other forms of communication I prefer to use. I used to use email heavily to communicate with friends. Email was the best format for me, now no one uses it. Everyone is on 12 messaging platforms, Facebook started that trend with messenger. I used to be able to go to business websites and get the information I needed, now everyone primarily uses Facebook pages to post information, which means I have to log in on many occasions to view the content. The Internet before Facebook was much more convenient for me. Facebook hasn’t resulted in any positive interactions for me. Something about the platform drives people to be confrontational. Years ago when I participated on the platform I would reply to friend’s posts. Sometimes I would get replies from their friends and they tried to argue with me. It boiled down to them believing I said something in my post that I did not write. That drove me to not write my thoughts about something, and when I did reply, it was with shallow positive comments. That is a very boring way to interact with people, so I stopped using the platform.

spookthesunset 5y ago
This has become me. Facebook encourages you to become confrontational with all your friends.
_3u10 5y ago
Pretty sure IRC/ICQ started the 18 messengers. It's too bad Adium/Pidgin can't exist for mobile.

jollybean 5y ago

TikTok is very different and will probably turn your view of what drives engagement upside down. Try it for a bit, it's an alternate universe.

kajaktum 5y ago
NO thanks, I am not planning on using yet another service that is trying to psychologically milk every ounce of my attention. Reddit and Hackernews is bad enough. I am also not interested in looking at lewd teenagers dancing to the latest tune or whatever the kids are doing these days.
- jollybean 5y ago
  "I don't understand this 'Internet' thing the kids are using, have no intention of trying it, and I already don't like the newspapers!" "at lewd teenagers dancing to the latest tune or whatever the kids are doing these days." ... is a seriously dim view. TikTok is literally the #1 app in the world, and for someone curious enough to read HackerNews but unwilling to even try app to understand the nature of its impact is a bit odd. Personally, I despise Twitter, but I read it occasionally, and understand why it works, and what kind of content is on there. I would find it problematic to work in tech with someone who doesn't understand 'why people like Netflix' having never even bothered to stream a video before. In particular, the feed algorithm is unlike anything else in tech and the content is definitely a lot less toxic. You should definitely try it, that doesn't mean you have to like it.
  - oska 5y ago
    > kind of an essential for anyone working in tech Don't mean to be rude but you appear to have a quite limited concept of what 'working in tech' can entail.
    - jollybean 5y ago
      I don't mean to be rude but anyone unwilling to even 'try' something like 'Netflix' or 'Facebook' or 'TikTok' or 'Email' - ie the universally popular, generationally defining experiences, is woefully ignorant, and that goes beyond those just working in tech. It's fine to not want to use those services (I personally avoid most of them), but to ignore them, or worse, purposely avoid even understanding what they are is straight, self imposed ignorance. It's ridiculous.

max49 5y ago

>People like to hate on Facebook, but how is any other social media different? I think the main reason for it is that most of us are just old enough to remember what facebook was before they started filling the site with ads and recommended/paid/suggested/etc posts. It was really fucking great back when you would logging and there would be literally no content/ads other than what your friend manually took the time write/post. they gave us a taste of what a great minimalist social media platform could be and then turned monetisation/engagement to 9000. Imagine if HN was bought by reddit and they decided to use the reddit platform (new skin only, no "old.XX...") with all the ads and everything. That's kinda what happened to facebook.

makeitdouble 5y ago

The three critically different things to me: - they have/had a critical size. No other social media was that big, and size matters. - they required (still do?) real IDs. Forcing people to use their real name is a special kind of awful, especially when it's the main network - they push a unified account platform for everything they owned. Other companies tried too but most failed (I also hate Apple for that, if you were to ask).