Hacker News Reader

Comment by hankman86 | Hacker News Reader

The inevitable, albeit cynic response: Imagine how much DRAM could be saved if Facebook was shut down!

Or put differently: I have only the greatest respect for the Facebook engineers who come up with innovations like this. This one seems to save cost, lowers power use and improves performance all at the same time. If only this engineering talent could be steered to better causes. Facebook is a net negative for society. Here is hoping that emerging “ethical” technology startups eventually have as great of success as surveillance juggernauts Facebook and Google enjoy today.

View on HN

>Facebook is a net negative for society

Bold claim, Cotton. I personally have a hard time imagining a world where if Facebook didn't exist, something like it wouldn't either. There were plenty of companies vying for the same idea. Or is the suggestion that all usage of the internet to allow people to connect with each other are bad.

You haven’t paid much attention in the last 10 years if you still think that Facebook is about connecting people.

You haven’t paid much attention to the internet if you still think that allowing people a worldwide platform doesn’t have inevitable downsides.

The internet is the same as the other mass media when it was newly invented. The printing press didn’t change how people were, it just allowed them to reach wider audiences. Without the printing press, Martin Luther is just a guy. Without Twitter, Trump is also just a guy.

Facebook does connect people. Billions of people log in every day to see what their friends and family are up to. You might find that far fetched because you don’t know anyone who does, but that’s just your bubble.

The issue with Facebook is that making communication free has consequences. Those consequences are what Facebook gets blamed for. But this would happen regardless because it’s a direct consequence of the internet making communication free.

“see what their friends and family are up to” isn’t actually connecting with people.

I can see what some people are up to by watching reality TV, but that’s not connecting with them.

How about you let people connect how they want to, and you connect how you want to? You don’t need to tell us if these billions of people are living up to your standards. They just need to live up to theirs.

Wanting doesn’t make it so.

The issue is Facebook is built on people wanting to connect with others and Facebook is actively preventing this. Lonely people simply make better customers.

> Or is the suggestion that all usage of the internet to allow people to connect with each other are bad.

False equivocation. Monopolizing the social graph and using it to manipulate people isn't the same as having links exist on the internet.

A sane world would have it legislated out of existence and replaced with protocols anyone could implement with no central control.

Sure there would be something else similiar to Facebook but that doesn't make the critisism against Facebook wrong or invalid.

The critisism would then go to Bookface.

Independent of it, look what Facebook left: Nothing of importance.

You need only imagine the year 2005.

Before newsfeeds and like buttons, the combo which enables Facebook's algorithmic hate machine (recommender to maximize engagement).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feed_(Facebook) [2006]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook_like_button [2009]

Apparently you don't use Tiktok. Facebook is bad but TikTok is next level bad. It damages a whole new generation's dopamine system and their mental health and who knows what. FB is a declining empire which is less relevant day by day . Time will take care of it. But TikTok is the real bad boy. If you put chinese communist government into equation , then it is even worse.

Oh absolutely. They copied what Facebook did and turned it up to 11. Their CCP ties give TikTok its own evil spin. The Chinese basically planted a mental health bomb among American teenagers.

That doesn’t make Facebook the good guy though. In fact, they made it ridiculously easy for TikTok to come up with an even more addictive product.

Are Chinese teens immune to it?

Funny. At first I laughed and the googled [0]. The response would suggest that either chinese teens are immune or china is blocking it in most of china. Or something else, but we know that the users are not in china.

0: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1299807/number-of-monthl...

I mean… why would they be on TikTok? China has its own clone (named Douyin) as they usually do. AFAIK it's very popular there.

Calling it a clone feels misleading to me. They're both made by ByteDance. It's more akin to two instances of a product (with some customizations on each).

Thats not the point. China controls it much more so that they have to make the algo addictive different.

Instead of promoting sex, they need to show helpfull videos (in theory)

Facebook, Tiktok, Twitter, et. al provide an ad-sponsored eugenic function throughout the modern world. As much as we may groan under the burden, future generations will benefit.

And if the concern is state surveillance / narrative control, social media is a lightweight compared to the print / broadcast monocultures it replaced.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com