Hacker News Reader

Comment by senordevnyc | Hacker News Reader

[flagged]

If you go out of your way to get people addicted to your site, you don't get to complain when they take your rug-pull a little too personally.

lol, I don’t think Zuckerberg gives two shits about people complaining.

If that one change requires every user to click on their friends profiles to see updates x 2.1 billion daily users and say 4 family friends checked and it takes 1 second to click that is 291,000 8 hour workdays lost per day to humanity. Around 100,000,000 work days per year humanity looses out on putting to productive use. And I am REALLY underestimating the time lost to this. Facebook is stealing low end 100 million days of productivity a year from humanity on this one thing.

Or another way, 850,000,000 hours. It took 5-15 billion human hours of work to go to the moon. They steal 1 moon program worth of human time from humanity every 6 or so years. At the scales they operate we need to judge them on that scale. Mark get's paid/rewarded at that scale. He needs to be judged on the same scale. Not on 'the impact per individual'.

Meta has stolen multiple moon programs from humanity (again I am way under measuring) for that one change in order to increase their billions of dollars.

https://www.quora.com/How-many-man-hours-went-into-the-Apoll...

How can you steal time from humanity when they freely chose to use your product? You don’t owe people a perfect product that doesn’t “waste” their time when compared to some arbitrary standard of how it should be.

Your argument is effectively saying "how can lowering the quality of my product affect customers when they freely use it?".

If you use Facebook regularly, you are locked into it because unless you manage to convince your entire friend network to move to some other social media with you, you will have to "leave them behind".

Or you could do what I, and many millions of others have, and just…stop using it.

> How can you steal time from humanity when they freely chose to use your product?

By employing psychologists who figure out how to make it addictive?

Ethics and morals are not "arbitrary".

It's worse than that, people have reported that even going to someone's page, FB determines the order posted. Also, psychological experiments FB has done; also, it's kind of the definition of addiction, because FB, in the beginning, when you first friend someone, shows posts. These then subsequently drop off. You can post something, assuming it's been read. It might show up for nobody.

It's been said before that it's interesting Zuckerberg for making a social site is pretty introverted. It's because he stole it and he's always been stealing things. He did it to Whatsapp. He copied Snapchat multiple times. He thinks people are "dumb fucks" rather than "look, people shouldn't give info away, but now that I have it I'll do everything I can to keep it secure" (I DON'T like Google but my understanding is they have far fewer data problems). That's the mark of a certain kind of person which I'll, I suppose, not name. It's insulting to the web, what he does

Reply on news.ycombinator.com