I'm an outlier, I admit it. I don't think I'm Zuck's ideal customer, either.
I use FB to communicate with friends & family. That's it. Most of them post very, very seldom, and the really chatty ones, I just mute. Most of these people, I'd never hear from and they'd never hear from me, except for FB.
Whenever I read about FB's treatment of news, politics, and vax (mis)information, I think "why are you going to FB for that? There are a zillion better places on the Web."
Twitter is better for getting the political Zeitgeist. RSS is not dead, contrary to what you might have heard, and Feedly is thus better for almost every kind of news. This site, Stack Exchange, and Quora are better for more intelligent commentary. Why would I even try to use FB for any of that?
My cousin Ray had been (I thought) permanently estranged from his family, and he finally reconciled with them. I wouldn't have found out about that without FB. That's what it's good for. It also would not make Zuckerjerk nearly as rich.
Can Quora still be described as locus for intelligence discussion? A few years ago it'd be the place to go for in-depth yet concise explanations from experts in all different kinds of fields, and for some very interesting perspectives on different subjects.
Lately I've visisted Quora only to find a series of inane replies and silly questions dominating the website.
> A few years ago it'd be the place to go for in-depth yet concise explanations from experts in all different kinds of fields, and for some very interesting perspectives on different subjects.
If by "a few years" you mean "a decade", then yes. Quora went down the drain between 2012-2013.
There's certainly a lot of that. However, there are still people who really know what they're talking about, who aren't just repeating what they read elsewhere on the Web.
Should 'everyone' incl. the cousin Ray be on one single platform?
Platform size matters here, Because when 40% of the population of a under-developed country are one social platform and use as a gateway for Internet it becomes a viable genocide aiding tool, Because when 70% of the population of a developed country use one platform it becomes a viable election interference tool.
When a private entity has accumulated such power, then it goes against the ethos of democracy.
People made noise about FB being used to commit genocide and it is now proactively blocking friend lists in countries where there could be targeted violence, Agencies investigated FB's role in election interference and now it's taking proactive approach to vet political ads.
Constant vigil over such powerful private entities and calling it out is the last option left to defend the well-being of the society at large.
I use FB to communicate with friends & family. That's it. Most of them post very, very seldom, and the really chatty ones, I just mute. Most of these people, I'd never hear from and they'd never hear from me, except for FB.
Whenever I read about FB's treatment of news, politics, and vax (mis)information, I think "why are you going to FB for that? There are a zillion better places on the Web."
Twitter is better for getting the political Zeitgeist. RSS is not dead, contrary to what you might have heard, and Feedly is thus better for almost every kind of news. This site, Stack Exchange, and Quora are better for more intelligent commentary. Why would I even try to use FB for any of that?
My cousin Ray had been (I thought) permanently estranged from his family, and he finally reconciled with them. I wouldn't have found out about that without FB. That's what it's good for. It also would not make Zuckerjerk nearly as rich.