maybe we not ready to be massively connected. maybe we need to step back and think about how we are connecting people and not who to connect next.
the current way is simply not working.
Growth of daily user count, growth of daily time on Facebook per user, growth of ad revenue, and ultimately growth of profits.
And indeed, these are where most of Facebook's evils come from.
If Facebook was ambivalent about eyeball time, they wouldn't need to juice user's feeds or create addictive engagement loops. If they were ambivalent about ad revenue, then their data collection could be massively curtailed.
Facebook as a not-for-profit would not need to act in evil ways, and Facebook as a for-profit cannot help but do so.
- In some way, had they not care about growth, they would not have become a useful public registry that you can use to connect with anyone.
- on the other hand, I do think that the app could be better if they cared less about engagement. I really wish you could customize your timeline and see things chronologically by default, like it used to be. It has become less and less of a place to find out what your friends are up to, and more about "news sharing" and "facebook groups".
Agreed. The uptake was predicated on their excellence and strive to growth.
But I think there's an argument towards making a base layer of shared services non-profit, and then allowing for-profit companies to build on top and capture most of the value (e.g. ICANN).
I think a present where we'd done that might have a healthier (for-profit) Facebook.
> app could be better if they cared less about engagement
The root of Facebook's evil is that their ad revenue model inherently means engagement = $. And so, whatever their ancillary preferences and morals, they will ultimately do whatever increases engagement (to the brink of public outcry).
In a lot of ways, this is like the resource curse of oil, diamonds, etc. Facebook (as a company), as powerful as it is, can't actually make strategic decisions that have a side effect of decreasing engagement.
But it boggles my mind that Facebook doesn't trade at a discount, specifically due to Zuckerberg's sole control. A singular leader at that scale seems... dubious.
I truly believe that shutting down facebook today would be a huge loss for all of us. We can complain but social networks have changed our lives for the good in a multitude of ways.
However, imagine Facebook offered an interoperable social graph API—and you’d have a cross-platform client app that lets you get in touch with anyone (including those who deleted their Facebook profiles), meet your significant other, meet friends while traveling, etc. all without being locked into exploitation by a behemoth for advertisement money.
That is not entirely open access, mind you, you still need legal entity approved by local financing regulator - but that proves there is a way when there is a will.