Well, it’s easy. Don’t use Instagram.
Feedbacks important whether it's code or just experience.
Maybe the parts of the system (perhaps even the entire system) are so broken, yet also strangely voluntary (in particular ways... shadow profile aside) that we might owe it to ourselves to extract ourselves from it as best as can?
Or maybe it's just being lazy. Or both.
Almost everyone I know hates these kinds of ads and the way social media uses our information, but all they do to combat it is write blog posts and comments about how they wish it were different.
I think its pretty clear at this point that nothing is going to change if all we do is talk. Facebook knows that a bunch of blog posts are really no threat to its bottom line. So I think its not unreasonable to ask why people are unwilling to boycott services that they criticize so harshly.
Why would you suggest that she leave Instagram? That’s silly. Rather, hopefully this gets enough discussion so that Instagram makes a change that gives the user a bit more control.
And don’t bother with the “But you can email your friends photos!” - that’s equally silly and just makes people who suggest that look incredibly out of touch.
The author isn’t saying they don’t want ANY ads, they just don’t want these specific and unnecessarily sexualized ads to be a huge chunk of the ads they see.
That seems totally reasonable.
I mean if every other add in a normal woman’s magazine was in almost completely undressed woman do you think they WOULDN’T get complaints from their readers?
If huge percentage of the ads that men saw on Instagram were extremely tight speedo’s being worn by models do you think they wouldn’t hear complaints?
This seems entirely reasonable.
If you're not paying for it, you are the product. You are a faceless, nameless consumer #320981093, with preference code hash #AB7ZXJAL. We have determined that, when lumped into this preference code, you have a click-through advertising rate of XY% on said preference hash. We sell this, and you.
Your 'triggering' doesn't matter, neither does your mental health - we don't care about either because, again, you are the product.
If you get depressed about this enough for our algorithm to detect, you will be moved to preference hash #WNXI802N, which will include advertisements for antidepressants and churches into your mainly bra-based advertising stream. There is a delta of ZA% in your net worth to us, because your click-through rate is now BC% {higher or lower}.
This data is aggregated again and incorporated into our quarterly financial statements. Thank you for being a part of The Machine.
So you’re telling me that because I pay for Coca Cola - that somehow makes it a more noble and more pure product than Instagram?
Have you considered that perhaps I don’t mind “being the product” in exchange for a platform where I can share photos with the world that I’m proud of and follow some cool people relevant to my interests?
Have you considered that perhaps there are trade offs involved, and that just because you’re not OK with them doesn’t mean that somehow I’m not as “enlightened” as you are?
Look, social media is not all good and it’s not all bad. Like most things, it’s in large part what you make it (sure there’s nuance around this - but I’m gonna keep it short). You can definitely abuse it and it’s easy to do, but it’s also possible to use it in a way that is a net positive to your life. Social media is many things to many people so don’t project your unhappiness with the way you use the product onto other people.
Let's step through it: The original post lamented the ads, and mentioned their negative effects specifically. It also mentioned the positive aspects: being able to get photos from friends/family.
My post is clearly sarcasm - what would the point I'm trying to make be? We can ask ourselves about almost anything that is written, it's a good trick when trying to understand something (you might remember this from grade school).
That Instagram/Facebook don't care about the potentially deleterious effect of your usage of the platform. It's a statement about how the negative effects of the platform don't effect the platform.
I never talked about my own enlightenment with regards to social media, although I have considered the tradeoffs. It's amazing - apparently people were unable to share photos with their friends/family on the Internet before Instagram (...more sarcasm, which I feel the need to clearly highlight, now).
The product does make people unhappy, and it does have an effect on people's well-being - that's what the article is about, and a theme that has been more and more discussed about Silicon Valley/Tech in general. It is topical, relevant, and uses sarcasm to indicate an indifference in social media companies because they can 'sell you' no matter what the preferences are.
It was written with Orwellian language on purpose - although that's another cultural reference that might not transfer.
I will be clearer in the future and try to abstain from assumed background in cultural references, although I think this makes a language like English less beautiful, honestly.
It’s a weird mix of people here. Some people on HN genuinely suggest in some of these threads that I should talk to my mom over IRC rather than using a messenger.
When social connection is a primary motivator, solutions like "just don't use X if you are not 100% happy with it" basically throw the baby out with the bathwater.