You're right! Facebook should be banned for everybody under the age of 100.Quote:
Originally Posted by passel
Printable View
You're right! Facebook should be banned for everybody under the age of 100.Quote:
Originally Posted by passel
If you ignore FB you ignore being part of the new delivery of content.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
It is the same with Twitter - ignore that and you miss a huge part of how the future will share information.
I've watched my local CT paper being thinner and thinner. They are trying to increase their online presence at the same time. Problem is that they are just reporting news that I can usually get 15 second earlier by just looking at Twitter.
Periscope pops up a while ago - the big craze - and now looks like they are about to become irrelevant due to FB Livestream.
Back in the 1960's you would listen to local AM radio - talk radio - get to know the dirty details of whatever is going on.
With the advent of cable regulators tried to force local access stations - that's fallen to the wayside as cable went monopoly.
Cable is now irrelevant. Kids watch YouTube all day long - or any of the other half dozen content delivery houses.
I read magazines, listen to the radio, and use the web. These are different levels of detail with different time lags. The radio gives me the gloss of immediate news without great depth. It also provides context and a bit of depth, though only for certain stories. The web provides data. Lest anybody think that I'm talking about anything subjective, I'm actually talking about climate data, which I track with a bizarre attentiveness.
Magazines provide the greater depth, but aren't as frequent. The Economist is weekly, so it's not terribly out of date. The new electronic version becomes available late Thursday, and the leaders can include things that happened at least as recently as the day before. Other magazines are less frequent, but what I'm reading in those is scientific, so it's good to let it age a bit prior to consumption.
I get all my news from a bloke down the pub called Brian. Most reliable source available.
Facebook generally play the "we provide a platform, we're not responsible for what people do with it" card. Personally I think that's total tosh - they're absolutely responsible, particularly as they're making a profit - but there's pallets of cans of worms just waiting to be opened in that debate.Quote:
Why would FaceBook allow this?
Okay, which one of you tried to pull this off?
Fired IT employee offered to unlock data — for $200,000
I am very happy not being part of this new delivery of content. My Partner is on Facebook and most of the "content" is absolute crap.Quote:
If you ignore FB you ignore being part of the new delivery of content.
It is the same with Twitter - ignore that and you miss a huge part of how the future will share information.
Its fake none news dressed up as news, cures for cancer that doctors have been trying to hide from you, clean eating body consciousness bollocks, and yet more new ways to celebrate with your other facebook friends how long you have digitally interacted with each other.
Twitter is more about publicity and connecting with fans, but i dont want to connect and if i want to be advertised at i can turn the TV on an at least watch some crap telly in between the adverts.
From my brief interactions with both these platforms, i have concluded that i am not only missing nothing but they are generally terrible ways to get news in any depth.
I would agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedSomeAnswers
I think we make Facebook, groups, twitter or any other social media far more important than it really is. Just because people use it doesn't make it an information medium [re. difference between data and information].
Indeed, I'd say that it really demonstrates how much a self-centered and/or pathetic bunch of humans we really are. It doesn't mean that there isn't valuable information, but it is completely drowned out.
Totally incorrect assessments guys. Main stream media is fully invested in both Facebook and Twitter. EVERY channel that is on cable or broadcast TV has a huge presence in both FB and twitter. Sure there are fake news - we got hardcopy versions of grocery store exploitation newspapers - had them for years.
If there is an earthquake in Italy I get that on twitter before the local TV station pokes that out to my android phone.
I follow science feeds on twitter. Real news feeds. Local news feeds. I follow NASA - get instant notification of all kinds of cool stuff. You cater the twitter feed to what YOU want.
FB on the other hand is your friends and relatives - that pretty much tells you what you can think of that!
Twitter just told me the next Star Wars film has a title - "The Last Jedi"...
It was a painless transfer of information as well. And probably not fake...
I don't have a TV, so whether they are tied to TV news, or faster, or slower, or sideways....I wouldn't even know.
To be clear, my objection isn't to news feeds like that. My objection is to FaceBook. I've always wanted to start some anti-social media: ArseBook. Unfortunately, by its very nature, it's kind of self-defeating. Anti-social media shouldn't be online. That would be essential hypocrisy.
FB may be full of crap content but its a major base of potential customers and brand awareness. I get referrer id's upon purchases on my website and I can see where they come from so good to see what has the most impact. FB and IG are a respectable percentage with google being the majority winner. Social media does have some worth.
Would you go so far as to say Forums (also a social media) are the same as FB?
In your opinion maybe, but i dont feel like i am missing out on anything. I still engage with news and online content from elsewhere.Quote:
Totally incorrect assessments guys. Main stream media is fully invested in both Facebook and Twitter. EVERY channel that is on cable or broadcast TV has a huge presence in both FB and twitter. Sure there are fake news - we got hardcopy versions of grocery store exploitation newspapers - had them for years.
My biggest problem with Facebook is just how much crap information is on there, i have lost count of the number of conversations i have had were people have tried to tell me some amazing new fact, only to find out there source is facebook and its nonsense.
Oh as a sales & marketing platform i imagine that Facebook is great.Quote:
FB may be full of crap content but its a major base of potential customers and brand awareness
No!Quote:
Would you go so far as to say Forums (also a social media) are the same as FB?
Of course they are the same - the merging of all this content into more singular streams is a goal of all these platforms.Quote:
Originally Posted by RobDog888
SlickGrid has a google group that I follow. That's a really horrible way to communicate - imo, but what else are they going to do? Create another forum like this one? This is DOS format compared to other communication platforms.
Our forum struggles to get ad content to behave and fit around tech content. Constantly re-inventing the ad machine here - that is a waste of time.
As NSA has noted. I'm with him on this; FaceBook is a push medium only with an extremely primitive (almost non existent) mechanism for dialog. The current measure is 'clicks'; great for advertising and pushing a brand, regardless of suitability.Quote:
Originally Posted by RobDog888
Forums are very different (although they have some similar technologies) and are [should be] deliberately designed to enable a dialog of some kind.
What have I started?!
In post race?
Lots of sound and fury, signifying nothing....as always.
I'm already bored with that topic. All this digital overload...
Sounds like you need some analog overload lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by szlamany
Hey, I tried to change the subject two days ago...Quote:
Originally Posted by szlamany
Guys....I'm surprised nobody has clarified this.
Facebook's product is not the platform, nor is it the news and information, nor it their business about providing groups for interaction. Their product is people. They sell access to the people that are on their platform. More importantly, they are data mining and studying social engineering so as to be able to target the people who are on their platform. This targeting of people is what they sell. The people (you and everyone that goes onto Facebook) are their product. Facebook is learning more about individuals than most individuals know about themselves.
Google said "do no evil". You never heard Facebook say that.....
Why is FB a good sales platform? Because they know their product...
I wonder what we'd learn if we ran the posts from everyone in this thread through Facebook's algorithms for learning about people.....
BonkerGud would break that algorithm
Facebook: [working...working]Quote:
Originally Posted by brad jones
Facebook: "People Suck. would you like to try again?"
Quote:
Originally Posted by brad jones
Yeah, that's a key point, and one we often overlook. People use FB, FB uses people. The two aren't the same, nor are the objectives of the parties.
Finally a day of sun!! No rain for a week! :D
Wouldn't know.
A day without windows is a day where you don't whither the weather.
A day without Windows is a day when you need a Mac.
Linux.
Unix.
Beatnix
Trix?
Or is that just for kids?
Silly rabbit.
I am all your algorithms.
The answer is 42!
People...who spam people....are the post raciest people in the wooooorld!!
Does anyone else here own their business?
I do...Quote:
Originally Posted by dday9
I don't own their business, but I own my own.
Brad!
(to clarify, I have an LLC)
I do but mainly for tax reasons as I'm a contractor. It's worth being limited and I am definitely limited.