Please get your parents off Facebook | Hacker News Reader

Please get your parents off Facebook

markosaric.com

41 pointsmarkosaric30 comments

College Humor had a bit that called Facebook "The Site That Commits Treason & Tells You What Your Parents Are Doing". They (and the author here) aren't wrong.

But what am I supposed to advise them to use?

The article doesn't make any suggestions on alternatives. It links another article he wrote, which also doesn't suggest anything.

* Instagram is picture focused, which doesn't fit with 90% of my parent's posts.

* Twitter is public by default, which is less privacy than the soft-wall provided by FB "Friends". Maybe everyone could use private twitter accounts.. But the article argues

> "It (FB) is a megaphone and an amplifier of extreme views, easily disproven conspiracy theories, pseudoscience, superstition, magic cures, disinformation, controversy and hyper-effective propaganda."

If that's true of Facebook, it's certainly in abundance in twitter!

* Maybe Mastodon? They don't want or need to understand federation. None of their friends use it, so they can't keep in touch with their old co-worker from 3 jobs back.

* Discord/Telegram/Signal/Wire - They're all intended for live/dynamic use, while FB excels at async. Sure, you can go back and reply to old things, but that's not the intent or way things are typically used.

* The best I can think of right now is regular old Email.. It's pushed-based, and sends to exactly who you want it to. It handles comments (replies) and it can embed pictures/links/etc.

Is it really the fault of the platform? I despise Facebook, and do not use it, but the root of the problem, IMO, is that people are dumb. We'll never change that - some people are always going to be dumb. Humans have been doing dumb things in large numbers for a long time - witch hunts, public stonings, The Crusades...Facebook just virtualizes their presence. Blaming Facebook for the 2016 election is my favorite form of misdirected ire. The real problems lied in people manipulating people. That could have been done with billboards, TV ads, newsletters, or phone calls just as easily. We're still learning how to deal with the ability to communicate with one another instantly over large distances, as a species. I do think we're in a valley right now, where stupidity reigns over all, but believe that will change eventually.

Sure it's their fault, Facebook moderation is lax at best and discriminatory at worst.

Somewhat agreed, but Facebook is also not doing anything to curb the stupidity. They could very well ban whoever posts obvious misinformation or scams and anyone who is repeatedly caught sharing such content, but they don't because behind the scenes these same stupid users are probably the most profitable for Facebook because they're more likely to click on ads.

> Older people are less likely ... to be able to understand the difference between legitimate news and lies

Why do you think older people are more foolish than younger people?

This is so patronising! I'm wouldn't dream of telling my parents what to read or not read.

They're not. Young people are just as prone to believing stupid things as older people are.

Facebook is bad for everyone.

> Why do you think older people are more foolish than younger people?

There is a documented age bias in the sharing of fake news [1][2].

"Foolish" is the wrong word. "Unaccustomed to modern social media" fits the bill better.

[1] https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/1/eaau4586

[2] https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/10/us/politics/facebook-fake...

I think they grew up in an era, as the post mentioned, where messages were moderated in some manner before reaching your senses. Facebook removed that filter, and they are overtrusting things because their "friend" vouched for it in the form of a post. They trust their friend, and they inherently trust the content of the message. Things will change.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3916958/

Because everything decays with age and its no more insulting to imply that mental capabilities have fallen than it is to imply physical capabilities have fallen especially in a rapid changing environment with tons of unfamiliar traps?

Mainstream media of facebook, news, or generic entertainment is mostly poop for everyone's mental health. I don't see any reason why that means we can't acknowledge people get slower as they get older.

The author's perspective is warranted, as it pertains to the issue of spreading misinformation. For example, older demographics have been shown to be more likely to share disinformation on Facebook. See, eg, [0]

[0] https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/1/eaau4586

Also, get yourself off Facebook.

Honestly, ripping that bandaid off was one of the best decisions I made for my own mental health, my time, and my ability to properly assess which relationships in my life were worth maintaining. (Turns out it wasn't the hundreds of people I was connected with on Facebook.)

But then how do you share pics of food, kids, and vacations?

I'm assuming that the above comment is not sarcastic.

Ask yourself:

First, do you have to share pics?

If so, do you have to share pics of food?

Do you really want to share pics of kids in an open forum such as FB?

Above for vacation pics?

Do you really want to share all the pics that you share currently, or just a small subset?

If so, here are some much safer options:

1) email

2) instant messaging application of choice

3) shared folder in the cloud storage of choice.

“Open forum”? How is it an open forum if you lock down all the privacy settings to only your most trusted friends and family? FB has those options.

I’ve always thought there should be a social network that is private by default. With no concept of public anything. And you pay for it, so there are no ads.

FB, it's behavior, it's data collection and sharing policies and violations of those said policies makes those settings irrelevant.

Agree with the second part of your comment.

You hit the nail on the head. The only problem is that it is all about the memes. I have never posted more than 10 photos in my entire 10 years of using FB. I only use it to tag my friends in memes and have a laugh or two. The rest of the stuff is mind numbingly useless.

I stopped using FB many years ago so no idea what is happening there.

Regarding memes, I get my daily dose via the groups in the instant messanger that I use.

Discord, text messages, links, email. Plenty of places. Or I share fewer.

> get yourself off Facebook

Re-posting an old comment of mine.

Going cold turkey is never easy. If you're having trouble withdrawing, consider what I did over the past few years:

1. Turn off notifications for the Facebook app on your phone; then

2. Turn off notifications for the Facebook Messenger, Instagram, et cetera apps on your phone; next

3. Delete the Facebook app from your phone; then

4. Delete the Facebook Messenger, Instagram, et cetera apps from your phone; and finally

5. Log out of Facebook on your desktop.

It took me 2 years to go through from step 1 to step 5. It has made me happier and more productive. I still have a Facebook account. But the friction of grabbing my laptop and logging in forces me to consider "is this what I want to do? Or am I thoughtlessly reaching for the crack pipe?" (It's been over a year since I've cared to log into Facebook. Feels more like trudging through spam in an old e-mail inbox, now, than anything compelling.)

Am I the only one never to use a Facebook app? Yikes.

For the few phones that I've owned that had Facebook apps among the non-removeable bloatware, first thing I do after updates is Disable and Force Stop them.

I'm sorry but this is not a compelling argument and the author is missing the point entirely.

My folks use FB to keep in contact with a large circle of family and friends and it works very well for that, moreover, this is the case for literally 100's of millions if not billions.

I don't use it, but there's no reason for people not to if they find it useful.

Anti-vaxers find not getting vaccinations useful, how does that work for the rest of society when they start getting other people sick, and bring back things that were once eradicated.

A lot of people find not living in reality useful, AND they are still allowed to vote; how is that working out for the rest of society.

Until we have a better system for running countries that doesn't allow crazy and uninformed people to vote, maybe getting rid of some the sources of crazy information can at least help.

But there are clear and compelling arguments that vaccines aren't safe, whatever one thinks of whether they're useful or not.

RFK Jr has been leading the vax pro-safety charge for some time (not anti-vax), and I think is making a difference.

(I know with all the closed minds on HN, this'll get downvoted to hell, but if you haven't done your own research into the dangers of vaccines, then you'll stay closed.)

"But there are clear and compelling arguments that vaccines aren't safe,"

No there are not.

Overall, they are exceptionally safe. When you combine the fact they are reducing potential disease as well and then compound that because of the externalization of the viral spread of such diseases (one infection creates multiple more) then they are exceedingly safe.

And where there are 'issues', they are not in the range of the ridiculous conspiracy theories thrown about.

The anti-vaxxers, especially celebrities, are a serious threat to public health.

"Older people are less likely to be tech-savvy, less likely to use ad-blockers, less likely to be able to understand the difference between legitimate news and lies, and they’re more likely to spend longer time on Facebook and share more information on Facebook."

While I would like to say I agree with this, it's due to confirmation bias and an availability heuristic. If you don't provide data to support these claims then you're assuming your readers are no better than the subject of your post.

...and your kids, and your friends, and yourself.

sure, you can get off facebook the site, but if you still want to keep in touch w/ family and friends, you'll most likely use "whatsapp" which is owned by fb. thoughts?

Two thoughts-

1 - Maybe it's big in your circle, but not everyone has the same experience.

I literally don't know anyone who uses the app at all. (And I've asked around)

That's not to suggest your experience is invalid, just to point out WhatsApp may be more popular in your social circle than ubiquitous.

2- Moving off of FB-the-app has advantages, even if you're using other FB-the-company products. It's not all or nothing.

WhatsApp might as well be SMS in many countries. Not so, in the US.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com