Hacker News Reader

Comment by mslate | Hacker News Reader

Why?

Facebook, especially with younger people, is a corrupted brand. Youth do not want to go to facebook just because of the connotations behind it.

I can't speak to other countries, but here in the UK, you basically have to be on Facebook to engage in anything at university. Societies, sports clubs, parties, they're all organised on Facebook. There's not even a comparable service for people to theoretically move to. So I would disagree, it's still a vital service for young people.

In American universities and with kids in high school and younger, Snapchat and Instagram rule. Also Musical.ly is an up-and-comer with the even younger crowd.

Kid's parents and relatives are on Facebook. They don't want their crazy liberal lives on display for their parents, aunts and uncles. As of now Facebook primarily serves as a messenger when one forgets or loses contact information.

In America, Facebook is uncool, Instagram is cool. Reminds me of the days Facebook was cool. Warning, my mom has an Instagram account.

You're missing my point though, Snapchat, Instagram and Musical.ly do not offer features for organising events.

As a user, the only wortwhile facebook videos are home-made ones that my friends post. It's a terrible medium for accessing information (Because you can't search, or easily link to it), and the overwhelming majority of the time, I don't want to see the shared CLICKBAIT shit THAT USES ALL CAPS to EMPHASISE how YOU SHOULD FEEL when watching this VIDEO.

YouTube's video recommendations are much better for me - and even then, they have a very low hit rate. The difference is that I see a dozen of them in the sidebar, instead of one at a time, they are unobtrusive, and they don't autoplay.

If Facebook made a YouTube clone, that would be great for users. They aren't, though - Facebook Video is delivering an objectively worse user experience.

It should stick to baby's first steps videos.

Because there are all sort of signs that Facebooks decline has begun. Read yesterdays top posts on HN.

Because a lot of people don't want all the other stuff that comes with having a facebook.

You're right, whenever I see embedded FB-video on forums or reddit I avoid it. If its really a must-see video, I open it in incognito mode.

Youtube gets this right and puts the content first, on all endpoints. I see a youtube video and click it, I get a video.

If I see a facebook link, there are many problems:

- I don't know if it's a video

- I don't know if I'll see a login page or if I'll get to the content

- I don't know if the content is viewable by me because of privacy settings

And then this works the other way - why should I share a video on facebook when I can't tell if my recipient will be able to see the video? I don't know if they'll get a login prompt. I don't know if they have the permissions to see the video.

All this friction doesn't exist with youtube, or at least is extremely minimal.

> Youtube gets this right and puts the content first, on all endpoints. I see a youtube video and click it, I get a video.

More like "I see a youtube video and click it, I get a 10s commercial"

Agreed. I'm always weary of clicking on a Facebook video because I don't want a history of that going on my wall or some other kind of trail. I don't want all the baggage that comes with Facebook.

And a small 10s commercial on a YouTube video is a small price to put up with in comparison to the rest of the shit that comes with being in the Facebook ecosystem.

Only reason I still have an account is to be in touch with some high school friends and that's something I barely do these days.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com