Facebook "broken on purpose" to sell promoted services?

[Doozle]

Only spam I get on Facebook is invites to shitty events with Gaz from Geordie Shore whoever that is

If I like a page and it starts putting crap on the newsfeed I just unlike it

[E-F]

myspace was 5 years too late to not be defunct by growing technological dependence

if it was new now, with 4g wifi neo-hyper-media-node-net phones it'd probably have done alrite, as it is, facebook came after and just refined the best bits of it for more modern internet capabilities

cant see facebook going anywhere really, its the perfect mix of being able to be basically as anonymous and open as you like, you can skulk around the periphery or add shit loads of people who's face you've seen a few times IRL or even not at all

just the way it is

for those who are really anti-facebook, as a genuine consideration, what is it that it does that really affects your life?

promotes the worst aspects of 'celebrity culture' taking the idea - pushed by reality tv, taken further by constructed reality tv - that anyone can be a 'celebrity' to its logical conclusion. it makes people think that everything they say, or do, matters. it leads people to take a huge interest in other people (2D controlled representations thereof, like in OK or Hello) and events rather than ideas. this represents a cultural disintegration. we're fucked anyway but every time I see facebook I'm reminded just how fucked we are. especially when I see toilet detergent companies asking users to join them on facebook.

[Sexual_Chocolate]

i dont understand peoples dislike of spam on facebook

like wub said a few weeks ago, just change it to super-tnuc mode & block anything remotely spammy

[JBoy]

FB doesn't affect my life anymore because i choose not to use it, reckon it'll be replaced by twitter soon enough anyway.

[Sexual_Chocolate]

FB doesn't affect my life anymore because i choose not to use it, reckon it'll be replaced by twitter soon enough anyway.

people have been saying that since 08

[JBoy]

It's a slow process then maybe.

[wub]

Human narcissism will not allow for microblogging to replace profile driven social networking...some people are just too awesome for 140 characters

[JBoy]

What a jolly good future we have in store for us.

[noam]

myspace was 5 years too late to not be defunct by growing technological dependence

if it was new now, with 4g wifi neo-hyper-media-node-net phones it'd probably have done alrite, as it is, facebook came after and just refined the best bits of it for more modern internet capabilities

cant see facebook going anywhere really, its the perfect mix of being able to be basically as anonymous and open as you like, you can skulk around the periphery or add shit loads of people who's face you've seen a few times IRL or even not at all

just the way it is

for those who are really anti-facebook, as a genuine consideration, what is it that it does that really affects your life?

promotes the worst aspects of 'celebrity culture' taking the idea - pushed by reality tv, taken further by constructed reality tv - that anyone can be a 'celebrity' to its logical conclusion. it makes people think that everything they say, or do, matters. it leads people to take a huge interest in other people (2D controlled representations thereof, like in OK or Hello) and events rather than ideas. this represents a cultural disintegration. we're fucked anyway but every time I see facebook I'm reminded just how fucked we are. especially when I see toilet detergent companies asking users to join them on facebook.

you say this

posting

on a message board

[Genevieve]

myspace was 5 years too late to not be defunct by growing technological dependence

if it was new now, with 4g wifi neo-hyper-media-node-net phones it'd probably have done alrite, as it is, facebook came after and just refined the best bits of it for more modern internet capabilities

cant see facebook going anywhere really, its the perfect mix of being able to be basically as anonymous and open as you like, you can skulk around the periphery or add shit loads of people who's face you've seen a few times IRL or even not at all

just the way it is

for those who are really anti-facebook, as a genuine consideration, what is it that it does that really affects your life?

promotes the worst aspects of 'celebrity culture' taking the idea - pushed by reality tv, taken further by constructed reality tv - that anyone can be a 'celebrity' to its logical conclusion. it makes people think that everything they say, or do, matters. it leads people to take a huge interest in other people (2D controlled representations thereof, like in OK or Hello) and events rather than ideas. this represents a cultural disintegration. we're fucked anyway but every time I see facebook I'm reminded just how fucked we are. especially when I see toilet detergent companies asking users to join them on facebook.

you say this

posting

on a message board

This and it's nothing different than some cavemen making art in a cave detailing the animals they saw or hunted on. 'Wow dude, you.. SEE ANIMALS THAT LOOK LIKE THAT? HOW EXCITING, TELL ME MORE!' People have always been narcisistic and they've always looked for a way to express it. A thousand years from now, if there's still remnants of anything posted here, it'll be a goldmine to scientists (who probably have identical views of their generation that E-F has) while in our reality, it's just some mundane crap.

[E-F]

myspace was 5 years too late to not be defunct by growing technological dependence

if it was new now, with 4g wifi neo-hyper-media-node-net phones it'd probably have done alrite, as it is, facebook came after and just refined the best bits of it for more modern internet capabilities

cant see facebook going anywhere really, its the perfect mix of being able to be basically as anonymous and open as you like, you can skulk around the periphery or add shit loads of people who's face you've seen a few times IRL or even not at all

just the way it is

for those who are really anti-facebook, as a genuine consideration, what is it that it does that really affects your life?

promotes the worst aspects of 'celebrity culture' taking the idea - pushed by reality tv, taken further by constructed reality tv - that anyone can be a 'celebrity' to its logical conclusion. it makes people think that everything they say, or do, matters. it leads people to take a huge interest in other people (2D controlled representations thereof, like in OK or Hello) and events rather than ideas. this represents a cultural disintegration. we're fucked anyway but every time I see facebook I'm reminded just how fucked we are. especially when I see toilet detergent companies asking users to join them on facebook.

you say this

posting

on a message board

unlike most of you fucks I post next to no genuine personal information on here. ideas are discussed on here. this is definitely not the same as facebook, to me, anyway. I know some of you socialise with ppl you meet on here.

[ketamine]

DMT doesn't compile a psychosocial marketing profile on you and your relationship to other consumers though

No, but it does turn my front room into the set from Busta Rhymes' Gimme Some More video.

10/10 wub

[E-F]

myspace was 5 years too late to not be defunct by growing technological dependence

if it was new now, with 4g wifi neo-hyper-media-node-net phones it'd probably have done alrite, as it is, facebook came after and just refined the best bits of it for more modern internet capabilities

cant see facebook going anywhere really, its the perfect mix of being able to be basically as anonymous and open as you like, you can skulk around the periphery or add shit loads of people who's face you've seen a few times IRL or even not at all

just the way it is

for those who are really anti-facebook, as a genuine consideration, what is it that it does that really affects your life?

promotes the worst aspects of 'celebrity culture' taking the idea - pushed by reality tv, taken further by constructed reality tv - that anyone can be a 'celebrity' to its logical conclusion. it makes people think that everything they say, or do, matters. it leads people to take a huge interest in other people (2D controlled representations thereof, like in OK or Hello) and events rather than ideas. this represents a cultural disintegration. we're fucked anyway but every time I see facebook I'm reminded just how fucked we are. especially when I see toilet detergent companies asking users to join them on facebook.

you say this

posting

on a message board

This and it's nothing different than some cavemen making art in a cave detailing the animals they saw or hunted on. 'Wow dude, you.. SEE ANIMALS THAT LOOK LIKE THAT? HOW EXCITING, TELL ME MORE!' People have always been narcisistic and they've always looked for a way to express it. A thousand years from now, if there's still remnants of anything posted here, it'll be a goldmine to scientists (who probably have identical views of their generation that E-F has) while in our reality, it's just some mundane crap.

yes you're probably right which is why I'm specifically criticising the means of expression, not the expression itself.

the views people hold now impact upon the views held in the future. people haven't always thought the same, people think what they think now because of what has been thought. you're holding up two points in time for comparison as if they're not dependent.

[Genevieve]

myspace was 5 years too late to not be defunct by growing technological dependence

if it was new now, with 4g wifi neo-hyper-media-node-net phones it'd probably have done alrite, as it is, facebook came after and just refined the best bits of it for more modern internet capabilities

cant see facebook going anywhere really, its the perfect mix of being able to be basically as anonymous and open as you like, you can skulk around the periphery or add shit loads of people who's face you've seen a few times IRL or even not at all

just the way it is

for those who are really anti-facebook, as a genuine consideration, what is it that it does that really affects your life?

promotes the worst aspects of 'celebrity culture' taking the idea - pushed by reality tv, taken further by constructed reality tv - that anyone can be a 'celebrity' to its logical conclusion. it makes people think that everything they say, or do, matters. it leads people to take a huge interest in other people (2D controlled representations thereof, like in OK or Hello) and events rather than ideas. this represents a cultural disintegration. we're fucked anyway but every time I see facebook I'm reminded just how fucked we are. especially when I see toilet detergent companies asking users to join them on facebook.

you say this

posting

on a message board

This and it's nothing different than some cavemen making art in a cave detailing the animals they saw or hunted on. 'Wow dude, you.. SEE ANIMALS THAT LOOK LIKE THAT? HOW EXCITING, TELL ME MORE!' People have always been narcisistic and they've always looked for a way to express it. A thousand years from now, if there's still remnants of anything posted here, it'll be a goldmine to scientists (who probably have identical views of their generation that E-F has) while in our reality, it's just some mundane crap.

yes you're probably right which is why I'm specifically criticising the means of expression, not the expression itself.

the views people hold now impact upon the views held in the future. people haven't always thought the same, people think what they think now because of what has been thought. you're holding up two points in time for comparison as if they're not dependent.

Quite the contrary, I'm saying that what's happening now is the result of that urge we've had in the cave 60 thousand years ago too. If there wasn't a market for it, people wouldn't have done it. Social media complies to a human "need" or "want". Blame the individuals who fall for it, not the medium they use. And the way our modern views impact the future ones is unclear, future morals can be reactionary to ours or an extension or a reinvention. It's not something you can really worry about.

And there's nothing wrong with a bigger interest in people than ideas or things. That's simply extroversion. And extroversion and introversion have existed for the entire duration of human history as well.

[E-F]

promotes the worst aspects of 'celebrity culture' taking the idea - pushed by reality tv, taken further by constructed reality tv - that anyone can be a 'celebrity' to its logical conclusion. it makes people think that everything they say, or do, matters. it leads people to take a huge interest in other people (2D controlled representations thereof, like in OK or Hello) and events rather than ideas. this represents a cultural disintegration. we're fucked anyway but every time I see facebook I'm reminded just how fucked we are. especially when I see toilet detergent companies asking users to join them on facebook.

you say this

posting

on a message board

This and it's nothing different than some cavemen making art in a cave detailing the animals they saw or hunted on. 'Wow dude, you.. SEE ANIMALS THAT LOOK LIKE THAT? HOW EXCITING, TELL ME MORE!' People have always been narcisistic and they've always looked for a way to express it. A thousand years from now, if there's still remnants of anything posted here, it'll be a goldmine to scientists (who probably have identical views of their generation that E-F has) while in our reality, it's just some mundane crap.

yes you're probably right which is why I'm specifically criticising the means of expression, not the expression itself.

the views people hold now impact upon the views held in the future. people haven't always thought the same, people think what they think now because of what has been thought. you're holding up two points in time for comparison as if they're not dependent.

Quite the contrary, I'm saying that what's happening now is the result of that urge we've had in the cave 60 thousand years ago too. If there wasn't a market for it, people wouldn't have done it. Social media complies to a human "need" or "want". Blame the individuals who fall for it, not the medium they use. And the way our modern views impact the future ones is unclear, future morals can be reactionary to ours or an extension or a reinvention. It's not something you can really worry about.

And there's nothing wrong with a bigger interest in people than ideas or things. That's simply extroversion. And extroversion and introversion have existed for the entire duration of human history as well.

so how does this result in you telling me I shouldn't criticise things I feel deserve criticism. your attitude seems to be, nothing changes, everything that exists now is just a slight modification of things that have always existed so we can absolve ourselves of blame for the future. that's lazy. the modifications only come about through criticism + refinement.

lol completely unsubstantiated wild assumption. it most probably plays a part in creating that desire, if that desire even exists or can be universalised to the extent you'd like.

imo there is something wrong with it. especially when you're not actually taking a great interest in people either, as already stated.

[Genevieve]

I didn't say that you can't criticize anything. I said that if you're gonna criticize something, criticize the people who take part of social media. Not social media for giving them what they're asking for.

And if you think there's something wrong with extroversion then fine. I don't know. I think a balance of both introverts and extroverts is beneficial? I don't tend to criticize people for the way they choose to live their lives, for as long as they aren't hurting anybody. And most people, even extroverts, are only superficially interested in others. It sucks too, but again, it wasn't created by social media. If these people can get what they want through social media then more power to them.

[hifi]

i got informed about this from this page i liked that linked the article. very informational read

[dubfordessert]

I didn't say that you can't criticize anything. I said that if you're gonna criticize something, criticize the people who take part of social media. Not social media for giving them what they're asking for.

And if you think there's something wrong with extroversion then fine. I don't know. I think a balance of both introverts and extroverts is beneficial? I don't tend to criticize people for the way they choose to live their lives, for as long as they aren't hurting anybody. And most people, even extroverts, are only superficially interested in others. It sucks too, but again, it wasn't created by social media. If these people can get what they want through social media then more power to them.

I really don't think there is a clear distinction between the two. It's like saying "if you're gonna criticise a guy for murdering someone, criticise the guy who paid him to do it, not the one who did the murdering". More relevantly, it's like saying you can't criticise a newspaper for printing lies if lots of people buy the newspaper and believe the lies. Production, of anything, is not neutral. Those who produce and sell things with the ubiquity of facebook exert influence on consumers, and this goes for all hegemonic institutions (essentially capital itself, but whatever).

You speak as if people make choices which they are responsible for, and nothing influences them into those choices, and if it does, it's not the responsibility of the influencer (even if they choose to try and influence people in this way). That's clearly bollocks. Kids are influenced from early childhood into wanting all sorts of shit and behaving in all sorts of ways, and "social media" and the internet in general is a part and parcel of that now, in a way it wasn't at all for previous generations. I don't think you can be glib about that.

Second, I don't think you can just appeal to an evolutionary explanation for cultural behaviours, because there's very little means of gaining the evidence to suggest that your explanation is true, and you're in grave danger of drawing analogies and equivalences between behaviours that look similar but have radically different causes and contexts. Even if they involve similar motivations or adaptations on some level, the huge contextual differences mean they have could very different meanings, the effects or significance of a particular behaviour could be amplified or qualitatively altered, etc etc. So I'm really skeptical about the comparison you're drawing here

[alphacat]

I'm amazed at the amount of intelligent thought/discussion going on here without openly calling each other cünts or whatnot.

[noam]

facebook is a tool, how you use it and to what extent you use it is reliant on the person

talking in absolutes about this matter will ultimately end in being unable to find any common ground

it has negatives and positives to it

regarding posting on forums and facebook, the top sentence of my post is all that applies

facebook encourages posting about yourself, people on message boards do the same, but ultimately what you post and what you divulge is totally up to you, in both formats