Kansas Crimson

Oh Dangit and now CoyIlly just edited after the fact trying to condescendingly lecture me about something he apparently knows more about but won’t contribute to the dialogue.

You gonna spill the beans or am I gonna have to ask NiceDC or someone else just here to help?

It shows you what you will engage with most. The point is to keep you there.

Well, the bigger point is ad revenue, which comes from the back door hoarding of your personal info, but keeping you there is a big part of it.

They won’t get more info about you without you engaging.

But, you could, you know, not be on Facebook.

It’s not like trains or oil or steel.

It’s not a force for good.
It’s sketchy and shitty.

If they stopped crushing competition and made it clear and easy to prevent any data collection - say with a cheap yearly subscription - I would still not like it but have much less interest in its demise.

I mean, I think Facebook is sketchy and shitty too, but I also think “not a force for good” can be weighed against its ability to connect communities and stuff.

But I don’t think ability to connect is unique to Facebook in itself, even if Zuck thinks he can monopolize that shit.

And yeah you could just not be on Facebook, unlike energy or transportation that’s more critical and stuff. (I suppose it is similar just in the sense a buncha guilded age capitalists tried to monopolize that shit too.)

But I think Facebook wasn’t always so sketchy and shitty. There was a time it was mostly about just sliding into the DMs of that chick from econ class. Hey baby are you the fed? Cuz interest rates are rising and I’d like you to manage my inflation.

I’d say FB went downhill once it became monetized as fuck. It became less a social network and more an invasive ad revenue machine. Zuck’s end game isn’t connecting communities, it’s buying himself estates in Hawaii and shit.

I’ll once again contrast Zuck with Craigslist. That dude’s still a billionaire somehow, and somehow without being complicit in the downfall of democracy.

I don’t think FB would even necessarily need a subscription model. Zuck could still become filty rich even with just a nominal fee for certain job postings and stuff, like Craig does.

But a net worth “only” in the ten figure range just wasn’t enough for Zuck. That dude’s greed is what ruined FB. That’s where motivation to “buy or bury” the competition and create a monopoly for himself comes from, and why he doesn’t take the sketchy shitty issues more seriously.

I don't think it's money.
I think it's pride and power.

Craigslist was used for illegal sex work advertising, sex trafficking, and pedophiles.

Yea.

I’d agree it is some biggest lust for power, but money is just economic power.

And either way Zuck just can’t get enough.

Are there any rich people you don't have issues with?

BasketballJayhawk wrote: ↑Sat Jan 15, 2022 9:52 am Craigslist was used for illegal sex work advertising, sex trafficking, and pedophiles.

It was, and when they realized it, Craigslist shut down their personal pages.

Contrast that to facebook’s response to the problems they’ve created…

BasketballJayhawk wrote: ↑Sat Jan 15, 2022 9:54 am Are there any rich people you don't have issues with?

As the majority shareholder of the kcrim…me?

For real though. That Craig dude seems pretty chill for a billionaire.

ousdahl wrote: ↑Sat Jan 15, 2022 9:54 am

BasketballJayhawk wrote: ↑Sat Jan 15, 2022 9:54 am Are there any rich people you don't have issues with?

As the majority shareholder of the kcrim…me?

Mjl, your nemesis when it comes to this sort of thing, has something to say about that.

pdub wrote: ↑Sat Jan 15, 2022 8:22 am It’s not a force for good.
It’s sketchy and shitty.

If they stopped crushing competition and made it clear and easy to prevent any data collection - say with a cheap yearly subscription - I would still not like it but have much less interest in its demise.

Wait - they don't do that already? It's California law that you have to.

Actually mjl’s one of my favorite posters lately.

Dude’s good about keeping Qusdahl in check.

I believe you can limit what information it shares but not the information it collects.

Top 3 posters:

1. BasketballJayhawk
2. MICHHAWK
3. PhD

pdub wrote: ↑Sat Jan 15, 2022 10:05 am I believe you can limit what information it shares but not the information it collects.

Ah, yeah, that

ousdahl wrote: ↑Sat Jan 15, 2022 9:59 am Actually mjl’s one of my favorite posters lately.

Dude’s good about keeping Qusdahl in check.

Thanks.

As you are about keeping evil capitalist me in check.

Or you're being sarcastic and it just went over my head.