3 ms·
> They say they do but they really don't, Probably depends on your usage pattern. I think most would prefer it, but "engagement" measurements will make it seem
by mrweasel 2y ago
> They say they do but they really don't,
Probably depends on your usage pattern. I think most would prefer it, but "engagement" measurements will make it seem like they hate it, because they spend less time on the page. If companies like Facebook actually wanted to know, they'd make the setting "sticky" rather than constantly reset to algorithmic, then measure over 3 - 12 months how many switches to either one and stays there. The fact that you can set your feed to permanently be chronological tells me that Facebook REALLY doesn't want you do use this feature.
"Power users" may prefer the algorithm, due to the volume of posts they'd see, while many casual users prefer reverse chronological and then just check in every other week. Seriously the last year I was on Facebook, that was my usage. Block everything not posted directly by a "friend", sort by date, read the five posts from the past two week and logoff. Took me just a few minutes a week to catch up. I just don't think that usage aligns with Facebooks business model.
- nradov 2y agoNah. It's mostly just the HN bubble that claims to want a chronological feed. The casual users are actually the ones who most prefer the algorithm so that they see posts about major life events at the top even when they haven't logged in for a while.
- alex1138 2y agoIn practice though that's not how it works People regularly miss posts