4 ms·
your argument is fallacious in that i never made the assertion that Facebook chose what photos got uploaded. my point is exactly the opposite of that. (but i re
by catshirt 14y ago
your argument is fallacious in that i never made the assertion that Facebook chose what photos got uploaded. my point is exactly the opposite of that. (but i reserve some responsibility here- see my other response which clarifies a fallacy in my own argument).
a. Facebook does not get to choose what photos get uploaded
b. Facebook knows the overwhelming majority of these photos are of poor quality
as such, it would be short sighted for Facebook to incorporate a design which relied so heavily on shitty user generated photos.
- acchow 14y agoI'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Most comments above your's point out that the linked design prototype looks attractive mostly due to the high quality images. If implemented as the actual Facebook design, much of the appeal would be lost. That is, the prototype did not take "shit user generated photos" into designs at all. Facebook on the other hand, does.
- TeMPOraL 14y ago> as such, it would be short sighted for Facebook to incorporate a design which relied so heavily on shitty user generated photos. The point is, the new layout discussed here relies in some way on the pictures being not shitty. The discussion here is about a layout for content that is not under Facebook's control.