gopher2

Haha, it is pretty awful, but they seem like they're getting a little traction at least. So, hopefully serves to make it catchy and memorable. It can happen. I remember plenty of people thought "Twitter" and "tweets" were dumb names too.

There's lots of existing studies demonstrating how suicide coverage in the media is contagious to suicide rates in the population https://jech.bmj.com/content/57/4/238.

It makes you think putting out a show like this and plopping it to the top of Netflix was irresponsible and actually pretty messed up.

WSJ article isn't long. This covers all the same stuff https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/29/alphabet-earnings-q1-2019.ht...

Ahh, gotcha. Thanks for clarifying! Makes sense then - I think I misinterpreted something in the article.

Isn't the mindset in medicine totally different from software engineering as far as being self-taught? I'm surprised that they don't think jobs want you to have a degree from an accredited school vs a bootcamp. Or that lambda school thinks they won't?

Not sure I buy that a key ratio is MAU/DAU, and even if it is ... the big problem for Facebook is that it's gone from 66.3 to 65.7 in two years while both numbers are growing?

The fact that they started grouping FB/Insta/WhatsApp together in quarterly numbers is to me a more telling sign about Facebook core app.

This is a more interesting suggestion/theory than the article. That would be a cool development.

I'm not sure what the Atlantic is talking about. The Instagram aesthetic is literally everywhere you look in restaurants, cafes, etc and certainly not "over." Or maybe I'm going to thr wrong cafes. But it seems massively popular and like many millions of people are posting curated photos to instagram in the spirit of the "instagram aesthetic."

Musk is a proven liar at this point. It's like when Trump says Mexico will pay for the wall. It's newsworthy sure... but basically zero informational value in it or basis in fact.

Most jobs don't disappear entirely, but they disappear in a horse & buggy sense.

See travel agents.

No, they shouldn't.

I agree, it is more fun to share in person. I do this with most trip pictures and family.

Who cares? Musk is so full of shit.

Rails is effective, boring, productive, and widely used.

What kinds of things are you interested in building?

If you're learning to code to get a web development job, I would lean towards starting with learning Javascript, then building small front-end games and tools (whatever you think would be fun to make), and then learning to use a library like React to make those even better.

At some point after that, sure, learn how to be productive with Ruby/Rails. It's not going anywhere. Or maybe at that point there will be some amazing Node framework with similar strengths to Rails that you can learn instead, but that would surprise me.

> Facebook exacerbates poisonous politics by creating filter bubbles of like-minded partisans, spreading hoaxes and inaccuracies, inducing anxiety and paranoia, rewarding clickbait and outrage, and so on

The irony is that the media is doing this now, with respect to anything related to Facebook. Facebook is a website with 99.9% benign user generated content. The news media has been spreading outrage and paranoia and trying to get 'engagement' since before Facebook was born.

Seem like as good a starting point for a discussion as anything, although you have to wonder what set of policies the Facebook-is-literally-cancer crowd would actually be happy with.

As summarized by the BBC, calling for the following things:

* Common rules that all social media sites need to adhere to, enforced by third-party bodies, to control the spread of harmful content

* All major tech companies to release a transparency report every three months, to put it on a par with financial reporting

* Stronger laws around the world to protect the integrity of elections, with common standards for all websites to identify political actors

* Laws that not only apply to candidates and elections, but also other "divisive political issues", and for laws to apply outside of official campaign periods

* New industry-wide standards to control how political campaigns use data to target voters online

* More countries to adopt privacy laws like the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which came into force last year

* A "common global framework" that means these laws are all standardised globally, rather than being substantially different from country to country

* Clear rules about who's responsible for protecting people's data when they move it from one service to another

It's so bad that they call this feature "Autopilot". Taking a page out of the AT&T 5G Evolution playbook I guess.

This article doesn't spell anything out very well.

The anti-facebook audience is very engaged .. so it's a profitable topic to publish content on, and media companies like NY Times directly compete with Facebook for advertising spend, so they kind of have an incentive to try to attack Facebook.

Facebook has plenty of legitimate things it can be criticized for, as well.

Is there a party that gives a shit about climate change?

This isn't a bad proposal, but I feel like a lot of stuff in politics right now is just so off-topic.

Tesla just reminds me so much of what I've read about the story of Enron.

Selling the dream of a bright, new energy & technology future. Finding creative ways to take money now while (maybe) delivering the tangible product later. Not delivering on the promises made by the marketing several years later.

No, but you should try to practice more security through obscurity by not telling the entire internet about it.

I like the article, in that they suggest some actual, direct actions Facebook could take.

More-so, though, it sounds like the protesters and activists should use the right tool for the job and Facebook is not it. Or if they are going to use Facebook, they should try to be a bit more savvy about it given the bad, authoritarian state of the local government.

The New York Times Technology section really wants me to delete my Facebook account.

https://imgur.com/a/fV6WKun

Is this content organization personalized? Or are they serving this to everyone?

That's true, it would be weird not to coordinate at some level for a single paper, and I could have said "Coordinated by the NYTimes" which is what I meant. I don't think it's irrelevant. The NYTimes is a competitor to Facebook for advertising dollars and eyeballs and influence.

It's true that coordination doesn't imply the news is false. But a lot of this Times coverage comes across as an attack.

For instance, they published an article "‘No Morals’: Advertisers React to Facebook Report", which is just a bunch of color commentary by some ad people they interviewed. It's pretty easy to see how you can go interview a bunch of advertisers and quote the ones who are most negative on Facebook to fit a narrative that you have planned to release together with other stories.

Which is obviously coordinated, because they released the same day.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/15/business/media/facebook-a...

They also published on how "New CompSci grads don't want to work at Facebook", for which it's similarly easy to find people with that opinion.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/15/technology/jobs-facebook-...

If they wanted to end the articles with "Full Disclosure: Facebook is our competitor" then go for it haha. Maybe I'm being naive, but I think it's worth pointing out that just like there's a behind-the-scenes at Facebook, there's a behind-the-scenes at the NYTimes too.

The NY Times published about 10 articles on Facebook between November 14-16th. It was a like a coordinated blitz recently.

* https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/14/technology/facebook-data-...

* https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/15/business/media/facebook-a...

* https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/15/technology/jobs-facebook-...

* https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/14/technology/facebook-crisi...

* https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/15/technology/facebook-defin...

* https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/15/technology/zuckerberg-fac...

* https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/15/opinion/facebook-data-con...

* https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/16/opinion/letters/facebook-...

* https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/16/opinion/facebook-zuckerbe...

* https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/16/business/dealbook/faceboo...

* https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/16/opinion/facebook-mark-zuc...

* https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/17/technology/facebook-democ...

Based on other's comments in the thread about having their advertisements not approved by FB, it sounds like Facebook does have an approval process that is greater than just "literally not Mark Zuckerberg".

However, Vice got around this by getting an ad approved and then editing (changing entirely?) the name and other properties of the ad. Maybe Facebook should re-approve ads when certain properties change? It's definitely impersonation... I'm not sure what officially constitutes stealing an identity.

I'd be curious how this experiment of impersonating a senator and buying advertising would go across print/billboards/reddit/other platforms. Maybe Vice will try some more experiments.

What percentage of ad revenue for Facebook is 'political' ads?

So a couple articles about Facebook security breach were caught in a Facebook automated spam detection system.

It seems better to ban EU citizens from your service than to shut down entirely.

Anyone have any good articles about design patterns that they've bookmarked or feel like sharing?

Sooo, what is "steering" actually? Like, what?