4 ms·

My little brother and sister had it from 11 and 12 respectively. Yes, it's quite interesting to think about. Anyway, what's your point? By the way, you're disc

My little brother and sister had it from 11 and 12 respectively. Yes, it's quite interesting to think about. Anyway, what's your point? By the way, you're discussing this with someone who believes that in the future we will record and utilise orders of magnitude more amount of data about our lives and our planet than we do now, enough to make your eyes water, and furthermore, that we are inexorably fated to do so, and furthermore, that it's a really, really good trend, one which is going to play out in highly unpredictable and surprising ways.

psbp 14y ago
Data doesn't need to be implicitly tied with self-expression.
- corporalagumbo 14y ago
  ... Dude, what does that even mean?
  - psbp 14y ago
    Think it through silly. What do you think your little brother and sister are doing at 11/12? Their "data" doesn't mean anything. The way in which they're forging their identity, their opinions, their sense of community and relationships is what's important. It's necessary for these types of environments not to disparage diversity or authentic forms of expression. The way facebook monetizes and encourages users to use its service very much does that as exhibited in the images above. A multifaceted sense of self can not be easily created using facebook because that's antithetical to facebook's model. Facebook would rather you offer clarity and conformity to your identity which is easily digestible by the your peer groups or the public at large.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
exodust 14y ago
So you're a fan of data, that's fair enough. Who isn't a fan of data? The issue is, who owns and controls that data? You, the true owner and source of the data, or some big advertising-driven tech giant with it's own crappy hollywood movie? Not only that, but in order to make money from advertising, they link all this wonderful data (your data) with advertiser interests. Much of this linking is done under the radar, via rules you are not allowed to see. It's very important to distinguish the benefits of shared data with ownership and control of the data, and the rules by which it is mined and accessed. BTW, a lot of Facebook data is "self-expression" and if given the choice in real-time, many people would elect for NOT for their contribution to go into the tech-giants mainstream database. Going into "settings" and messing around with broader privacy options for content types and particular people is an absolute joke in terms of UX and human experience in relation to expressing personal views or communicating with friends. "Privacy settings" does not come naturally in communication. Facebook knows this, and knows people will not bother or become lazy with privacy. Bottom line is, Facebook is an inappropriate platform for the collected data that is your life.
- corporalagumbo 14y ago
  What, in your opinion, would be an appropriate platform?
  - zxcdw 14y ago
    A platform which is transparent, open and shared by it's nature. A platform for which the first and foremost priority is to be trustworthy with no conflict of interest between being all the above and economically feasible. This would probably become a government-funded international push rather than a single corporation with commercial interests. The big problem in the future will be the fact that as the line between "real" and "online" life diminishes, the party which holds the data will become an authority akin to governments we have today. When or why should we trust an authority? How can we be sure that the authority is trustworthy? Politics is hard enough and we all know that we can't trust politicians, how on earth are we going to trust a party with commercial interests to somehow manage our social lifes? You seem very optimistic about things like Facebook collecting data and interlinking people's social life via their platform by using the collected data. I for one find this very scary, to such extent that I'll rather cripple my social life and not use Facebook than trust an commercial authority over the data collected about me which I have no control over. I provide the data. I see the data. I own the data. I control the data. What is so hard about it? Honestly.

psbp 14y ago

Data doesn't need to be implicitly tied with self-expression.

corporalagumbo 14y ago
... Dude, what does that even mean?
- psbp 14y ago
  Think it through silly. What do you think your little brother and sister are doing at 11/12? Their "data" doesn't mean anything. The way in which they're forging their identity, their opinions, their sense of community and relationships is what's important. It's necessary for these types of environments not to disparage diversity or authentic forms of expression. The way facebook monetizes and encourages users to use its service very much does that as exhibited in the images above. A multifaceted sense of self can not be easily created using facebook because that's antithetical to facebook's model. Facebook would rather you offer clarity and conformity to your identity which is easily digestible by the your peer groups or the public at large.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]

exodust 14y ago

So you're a fan of data, that's fair enough. Who isn't a fan of data? The issue is, who owns and controls that data? You, the true owner and source of the data, or some big advertising-driven tech giant with it's own crappy hollywood movie? Not only that, but in order to make money from advertising, they link all this wonderful data (your data) with advertiser interests. Much of this linking is done under the radar, via rules you are not allowed to see. It's very important to distinguish the benefits of shared data with ownership and control of the data, and the rules by which it is mined and accessed. BTW, a lot of Facebook data is "self-expression" and if given the choice in real-time, many people would elect for NOT for their contribution to go into the tech-giants mainstream database. Going into "settings" and messing around with broader privacy options for content types and particular people is an absolute joke in terms of UX and human experience in relation to expressing personal views or communicating with friends. "Privacy settings" does not come naturally in communication. Facebook knows this, and knows people will not bother or become lazy with privacy. Bottom line is, Facebook is an inappropriate platform for the collected data that is your life.

corporalagumbo 14y ago
What, in your opinion, would be an appropriate platform?
- zxcdw 14y ago
  A platform which is transparent, open and shared by it's nature. A platform for which the first and foremost priority is to be trustworthy with no conflict of interest between being all the above and economically feasible. This would probably become a government-funded international push rather than a single corporation with commercial interests. The big problem in the future will be the fact that as the line between "real" and "online" life diminishes, the party which holds the data will become an authority akin to governments we have today. When or why should we trust an authority? How can we be sure that the authority is trustworthy? Politics is hard enough and we all know that we can't trust politicians, how on earth are we going to trust a party with commercial interests to somehow manage our social lifes? You seem very optimistic about things like Facebook collecting data and interlinking people's social life via their platform by using the collected data. I for one find this very scary, to such extent that I'll rather cripple my social life and not use Facebook than trust an commercial authority over the data collected about me which I have no control over. I provide the data. I see the data. I own the data. I control the data. What is so hard about it? Honestly.