![]() I won’t be paying to read my relatives bickering about stupid issues. On the latter, the issue is of course that the “content” (people’s post) isn’t and won’t be worth paying for in general. On the former, boosted spam has already been implemented, ultra targeted ads are another form of this, and stalking users to push private messages to them is already Linkedin’s bread and butter. Subscriptions work when either the user makes money from pushing the content, or actively wants the content they’re provided. On subscriptions…They tried some paying mechanism already, and I think Linkedin ate their lunch before they had a chance to try other low hanging fruits. It’s a shame, because I still completely believe in Facebook as a good product for the world. IMO it’s much more valuable to have a coherent vision being enforced for the product, otherwise you get this frankenstein-like collection of apps.įinally, the fact that HN is such a hater of facebook means that most fb engineers have deserted HN and they’re not reading the excellent ideas and feedback that this community sometimes provide. I think that recenters the incentives towards building something for the user.Īnother meta problem is that there seem to be no authoritative product person that can force his/her vision on the product so you get hundreds of visions colliding and fighting for changes. IMO facebook could really change by creating a subscription and ensuring that people who subscribe are happy enough with the product to keep paying. This and the newsfeed not being chronological, or the option to have it chronological being hidden from the user (that’s one of the most recurring question and feature request that internal employees ask, how crazy is that). They delight in our suffering and profit off it. Then a few days later you'll find they scrambled the page structure on purpose just so you could no longer interface with it, precisely so you could not defeat their little nagging dot. ![]() You need to submit to this abuse if you want or need to use their services. It's against their terms of service to not be bothered by notifications. If you try to disable the red dot, they'll ban you. They'll actually run human experiments on their users without their informed consent just to find out the exact level of annoyance they'll tolerate without deleting their accounts in disgust. They want it there 24 hours a day bothering you until you give in and watch those ads disguised as videos just to get rid of it and find some peace. They don't want you to disable the red dot. Contempt for other human beings is in their DNA. They make money by spamming users with noise. With some simple sleuthing and a little patience, people can find you based on even the smallest detail.> I'll never forget the open contempt Meta has shown for me as a user of their products. There are literally hundreds of ways to narrow people down. Search " friends of people who work at Thrillist." Search for " people who work at X company" or " people who went to X college." Combine the two for even more narrowed results. Maybe you met them through a friend who works at Thrillist. Let's say all you remember about this person is where they work or went to college (or both). The tool has been scaled back significantly since then and no longer exists in the way it once did, but it can still be used to reveal quite a bit of information about someone. rolled out in 2013, allows people to search content on the entire social network using natural language. Facebook's creepily powerful Graph Search, the semantic search engine Zuck & Co. Tracking you down, even if they don’t know your nameĬan't remember the name of the guy or gal you, uh, connected with at that random party? No problem.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |