OT: The Facebook Papers

[Likes2ridefar]

Originally Posted by AngryScientist

I dont know anything about that and do not have a Facebook account, but do look at other people's bikes, dogs and food on instagram.

Perhaps I'm incorrect, but if Facebook and Instagram both shut down abruptly, completely and indefinitely in the next hour, I dont think it would have any effect on my life at all.

I’d celebrate good riddance but otherwise feel exactly the same. I don’t browse any of their sites though and have them all black listed on my raspberry pihole so I almost don’t know they exist.

[fiamme red]

Originally Posted by charliedid

OMG I totally clicked a link for wool socks on Facebook a d bought some. Do you guys think I should change my name and move?

HELP!

These?

[duff_duffy]

Well stated.

Originally Posted by verbs4us

A fallacy in the Facebook playbook, I think, is a trust that the truth will out and an open and non-mediated conversation will arrive at the truth. Instead, “open” conversations have driven people to their corners and reinforced echo chambers. It has dissolved trust in evidence-based decision making and marginalized expertise in favor of populism. A question I wonder about is whether FB is a product of a growing divisiveness or an agent of that divisiveness (or both?). My sense is that it’s not so much Facebook per se, that catalyzed divisions. It’s digital interactions, which often bypass any social contract. People will say things on line they would never say in person. Yes, Facebook has “connected the world” (part of its original mission) but in doing it digitally, it has disconnected people, made many of them hard of listening, and closed minds because it does not transmit a social contract that binds people.

[dolface]

Originally Posted by verbs4us

A fallacy in the Facebook playbook, I think, is a trust that the truth will out and an open and non-mediated conversation will arrive at the truth. Instead, “open” conversations have driven people to their corners and reinforced echo chambers. It has dissolved trust in evidence-based decision making and marginalized expertise in favor of populism. A question I wonder about is whether FB is a product of a growing divisiveness or an agent of that divisiveness (or both?). My sense is that it’s not so much Facebook per se, that catalyzed divisions. It’s digital interactions, which often bypass any social contract. People will say things on line they would never say in person. Yes, Facebook has “connected the world” (part of its original mission) but in doing it digitally, it has disconnected people, made many of them hard of listening, and closed minds because it does not transmit a social contract that binds people.

Lots of good points, however FB prioritizing angry reactions over likes seems to belie your first one: https://www.washingtonpost.com/techn...oji-algorithm/

[Mikej]

Facebook is collecting info on you even if you don’t have an account or visit Facebook pages. They upload contacts from users and track habits through those phone numbers and emails. They then collaborate with credit card companies and retail outlets, Amazon, etc online to build a profile on you. They then target the ads. And news stories. My neighbor bought a patio set, now I get patio furniture ads.

[charliedid]

Originally Posted by 72gmc

surveillance socks ...

You just made my day...

[charliedid]

Originally Posted by fiamme red

These?

How'd you guess?

Or did those show up in your news feed?

[Dude]

Originally Posted by verbs4us

A fallacy in the Facebook playbook, I think, is a trust that the truth will out and an open and non-mediated conversation will arrive at the truth. Instead, “open” conversations have driven people to their corners and reinforced echo chambers. It has dissolved trust in evidence-based decision making and marginalized expertise in favor of populism. A question I wonder about is whether FB is a product of a growing divisiveness or an agent of that divisiveness (or both?). My sense is that it’s not so much Facebook per se, that catalyzed divisions. It’s digital interactions, which often bypass any social contract. People will say things on line they would never say in person. Yes, Facebook has “connected the world” (part of its original mission) but in doing it digitally, it has disconnected people, made many of them hard of listening, and closed minds because it does not transmit a social contract that binds people.

They are absolutely the largest cause of the division. Yes propaganda newsletters and newspapers existed long before Fbook but the speed and scope at which you can create a network on FB is unprecedented. Then, amplify it with FB algorithms and you can say whatever you want loudly and immediately.

Prior to this was email. You can’t push messages to that many people via email. Or newspapers or meetings in halls.

Facebook doesnt give a f-ck about open discourse and open conversations. Echo chambers make you feel good. It’s literally what you want to hear. The most ****ed up thing is that they knew it would create mistrust. They knew it would split families and chip away at democracies (or dictatorships) and still did what they do.

They could just as easily manipulate Facebook so that it creates unity, and brings us closer and remove barriers and create a more inclusive, empathetic world and says that Covid is dangerous and climate change is happening right now and the earth is round and Elvis is dead.

But ****it, our stock price.

[Tony T]

Pearls before Swine

[Louis]

Doesn't this forum count as "Social Media?"

They can't all be bad.

[cloudguy]

Originally Posted by Louis

Doesn't this forum count as "Social Media?"

They can't all be bad.

This forum is highly moderated, i.e., no politics. Facebook is the opposite.

[duff_duffy]

I heard a rumor the moderators were going to change the name to The Pacebook…or was it Faceline? Some algorithm will decide. Heck, I bet AngryScientist is an algorithm deciding right now whether Campy will continue to allow SRAM and Shimano to exist.

Originally Posted by Louis

Doesn't this forum count as "Social Media?"

They can't all be bad.

[GregL]

Originally Posted by duff_duffy

I heard a rumor the moderators were going to change the name to The Pacebook…or was it Faceline? Some algorithm will decide. Heck, I bet AngryScientist is an algorithm deciding right now whether Campy will continue to allow SRAM and Shimano to exist.

POTD! I bow to your comedic genius!

Greg

[peanutgallery]

Prior to Facebook, the wierdos were restricted to Pat Buchanan's circus tent on the edge of town, now...not so much. FB gave a voice to a odd range of folks and found a way to monetize it. Suckers

Zuckerberg and Sandberg definitely deserve a special spot in the hot place for what they have wrought upon humanity. Hopefully, we'll see some justice in that department one day

[gasman]

Originally Posted by duff_duffy

I heard a rumor the moderators were going to change the name to The Pacebook…or was it Faceline? Some algorithm will decide. Heck, I bet AngryScientist is an algorithm deciding right now whether Campy will continue to allow SRAM and Shimano to exist.

Yes, you are correct and it will be called Facepalm. As in :
“Doh, I should have bought that frame in the classifieds.”