Facebook hasn't destroyed the web - it's still there and functioning fine. Hyperlinks still work.
What FB has done is made it easier for the lazy to connect with and stay within their own interest groups. FB has made it easy for people to ignore negative information with tons of cat pictures (I am as guilty as anyone for that) and cheerful little meaningless quotes. It's made it easier to post misinformation and spread it quickly.
But none of that has destroyed the internet. The internet (or more specifically, information) was going to get harder to find and navigate anyway, once you turn it loose on a few billion people.
Sure, in the early days, you could encapsulate 75% of existing websites in one directory, but thanks to the efforts of spammers, link farmers, and other lowlife, in addition to the efforts of well-meaning people, and faulty and well-working search algorithms, it's a mess.
But it was going to happen and FB is not to blame for it. If they are to blame for it, we all equally share the guilt.
I observe that this is increasingly no longer true. Links no longer show you when you have visited them. Chains of 301s are common. Tracking links are now the norm. The link text almost never is where you are actually going. Pages automatically redirect you based on a ton of probed information (mobile, desktop, tablet, logged in to G+, logged into facebook, etc), and even normal browser shortcuts to interact with them are no longer working correctly with so many weird effing span and divs being recast into "links" that never work right, in css of all things.
No no. The modern hyperlink is totally busted. I blame the framework hockers and the halfass web"app" community.
>easier for the lazy to connect with and stay within their own interest groups
Facebook reminds me of AOL. People who had AOL had no idea of anything outside of AOL. I had to show many how to get out of AOL and they were astonished there was so much more.
If Facebook was an ISP it truly would be the new AOL.
> The internet (or more specifically, information) was going to get harder to find and navigate anyway, once you turn it loose on a few billion people.
That sheds light on a much scarier issue: Google.com has effectively BECOME the internet.
How do you find information that isn't indexed by Google? There has to be a better way than just word of mouth, but all other alternatives afforded by current tech will just shift the problem to some other megaportal.
well said. FB just makes it easy for lazy people to use the Internet. It turns out that most people don't want much more of a challenge beyond just reading their feeds.
Post anyone could write: "That's so unfair, because Google owns more than half of all searches. They get to decide what you find on the web!"
In fact, the argument of the bias bubble is the one that Duck Duck Go uses, and I don't disagree with it. Google's results are biased.
However, does the fact that Google can and does hide some (or even many) relevant pages on the web from you make them responsible for "closing the web"?
Of course not! Without Google, instead of random but relevant websites and blogs providing answers when you search, you'd probably go to a centralized sites for information or data, which could be biased and ignorant.
Without Google, think of all of the internet companies that never would have grown because they would never have been found.
Back to Facebook. Sure, many on Facebook just share photos, comments, have discussions, etc. But, there are a lot of links shared and pages you can like to get more links in your feed. As a Facebook user, I see much more new content and read information I would have been unaware of if I'd only been reading HN or a news website. I also share the best stories from HN, exposing a number of my friends to articles they would not have otherwise read.
In my opinion, Facebook hasn't closed the web. In fact, it seems that the web would have been more closed if Facebook and Google had never existed.
the same lazies who refuse to install linux i presume. The lazies who refuse to become experts and share your ideas of the world. This culture, too lazy to create a decent user experience- deserves to suffer.
Free/open markets create powerful incumbents that eventually become big enough to turn themselves into a monopoly. There's no reason that the web wouldn't work the same way.
And I remember the net before the web. FTP, Gopher, and lynx. So why did a 'web browser' succeed? Because you could integrate bandwidth hogging graphics?? or was it to mimic the gui interfaces of mac OS, windows, BEos, etc? I still mourn the loss of the newsgroups and usenet. Well, Usenet is still around, but in name only. So what's next-VR interfaces?
The web and FB has made us dumber- we point and click and no longer have to search and think.
I'm young enough that I've never had to use any of these, except for FTP. But the contemporary needlessly bloated and avertising-centered web does make me nostalgic for things I didn't experience. It even makes browsing through Html-only sites feels refreshing.
I've read the "blogs were great, FB is bad" article a few times in recent years and put it off as whining. I was a whiner myself when Usenet gave way to blogs but got over it.
However, it might be different in emerging markets where phones are the primary platform and FB may be dominating, not really sure if that's true but certainly different from the US.
I've heard a story from an acquaintance from Germany: their kids were ostracised in school by the others until they had a smartphone and started using WhatsApp.
Whenever WhatsApp is shut down in Brazil, a local chimes that it's used everywhere, even by emergency medical service personnel.
The article is as stupid as the website it's on is. Value-added sharing mechanisms that take the expertise out of creating useful Internet content does not de-democratize the Internet. You are still as free as before to make your own websites and share your content the way it was done before Facebook. Facebook is popular but that can't be held against it.
More generally, populism by itself does not threaten democracy. It's when the people that elect demagogues let those demagogues destroy public institutions that democracy is undermined. But it's the people that are at fault here, they are the ones that let themselves get hoodwinked.
Napoleon destroyed the French Republic. But the French were absolutely complicit and just let him do it because they were hungry for empire. All of Europe was like that back then and she wasn't cured of that disease until WW2 showed them how utterly stupid warmongering in the Industrial age was.
> You are still as free as before to make your own websites and share your content the way it was done before Facebook.
And nobody will read them if you don't integrate with Facebook and other social media--where you will be censored.
> But it's the people that are at fault here, they are the ones that let themselves get hoodwinked.
Did you really claim that scam victims are to blame when they get scammed, and not the scammers? I'm all for avoiding naiveté, but that doesn't excuse the actions of manipulative people and organizations.
I used to think that. Then my parents found Facebook and started using it. Their friends send them interesting content, which comes to their inbox where they consume it. Then, they do the natural thing and forward it to me if they think I'll find it interesting. Now, I have hundreds, if not thousands, of emails in my inbox with links that, if I click them, require me to login as my parents if I want to see the content.
The fact that Facebook doesn't send pure hyperlinks but, instead, links that funnel through Facebook to be authenticated and tracked, is extremely annoying and dangerous to a free and open web.
To echo what everyone else has said, my feed is utter garbage and a lot of friends post stuff that makes me cringe. I've unsubscribed from the majority of my friends so now all I see are ads and sponsored posts.
Here's the thing, I get to see what events my friends are going to, which usually end up being really fun and not something I would have found out about otherwise. So nowadays I only use facebook to find and management events to attend.
"Against this global community" "Going against progress"
Sorry Zuck, but shut the fuck up. All you want is more money and power. A great example is the free "internet" initiative he's pushing; all to lock people in Facebook.
This guy truly is, the world's biggest hypocrite.
</rant>
Please don't. If you have a substantive critique to make, you're more than welcome to, but "shut the fuck up, "all you want is money and power", and "world's biggest hypocrite" is the opposite of that, and predictably degraded the thread.
Facebook is a fad. A damn big one I'll grant you but it's already losing it's grip on the next generation of users. It's huge now but I feel it's already lost it's luster, I mean come on, I'm a huge user (keeping up with friends across states is damn hard otherwise) and I can't stand being on it, and I know a lot of friends who feel the same.
It will have it's time, in due time. Hyperlinks are not dead.
my feed is garbage - just stupid memes and mostly sponsored posts. That said, most people I know use it as a "rolodex." It's the easiest way to add a contact and then quickly message them in the future. also, a lot of people still use it for events. people are still checking their feeds compulsively just out of a need for stimulation and when they feel lonely though. But facebook is basically a cloud contacts solution at this point.
[+] [-] drivingmenuts|10 years ago|reply
What FB has done is made it easier for the lazy to connect with and stay within their own interest groups. FB has made it easy for people to ignore negative information with tons of cat pictures (I am as guilty as anyone for that) and cheerful little meaningless quotes. It's made it easier to post misinformation and spread it quickly.
But none of that has destroyed the internet. The internet (or more specifically, information) was going to get harder to find and navigate anyway, once you turn it loose on a few billion people.
Sure, in the early days, you could encapsulate 75% of existing websites in one directory, but thanks to the efforts of spammers, link farmers, and other lowlife, in addition to the efforts of well-meaning people, and faulty and well-working search algorithms, it's a mess.
But it was going to happen and FB is not to blame for it. If they are to blame for it, we all equally share the guilt.
[+] [-] 5ilv3r|10 years ago|reply
I observe that this is increasingly no longer true. Links no longer show you when you have visited them. Chains of 301s are common. Tracking links are now the norm. The link text almost never is where you are actually going. Pages automatically redirect you based on a ton of probed information (mobile, desktop, tablet, logged in to G+, logged into facebook, etc), and even normal browser shortcuts to interact with them are no longer working correctly with so many weird effing span and divs being recast into "links" that never work right, in css of all things.
No no. The modern hyperlink is totally busted. I blame the framework hockers and the halfass web"app" community.
[+] [-] raddad|10 years ago|reply
Facebook reminds me of AOL. People who had AOL had no idea of anything outside of AOL. I had to show many how to get out of AOL and they were astonished there was so much more.
If Facebook was an ISP it truly would be the new AOL.
[+] [-] Razengan|10 years ago|reply
That sheds light on a much scarier issue: Google.com has effectively BECOME the internet.
How do you find information that isn't indexed by Google? There has to be a better way than just word of mouth, but all other alternatives afforded by current tech will just shift the problem to some other megaportal.
[+] [-] codecamper|10 years ago|reply
plus. it's blue. people like blue.
[+] [-] kangar00|10 years ago|reply
Completely agree.
And let's choose something else similar, for the sake of argument.
Google dominates web search at 64% of searches: https://www.comscore.com/Insights/Market-Rankings/comScore-R...
Post anyone could write: "That's so unfair, because Google owns more than half of all searches. They get to decide what you find on the web!"
In fact, the argument of the bias bubble is the one that Duck Duck Go uses, and I don't disagree with it. Google's results are biased.
However, does the fact that Google can and does hide some (or even many) relevant pages on the web from you make them responsible for "closing the web"?
Of course not! Without Google, instead of random but relevant websites and blogs providing answers when you search, you'd probably go to a centralized sites for information or data, which could be biased and ignorant.
Without Google, think of all of the internet companies that never would have grown because they would never have been found.
Back to Facebook. Sure, many on Facebook just share photos, comments, have discussions, etc. But, there are a lot of links shared and pages you can like to get more links in your feed. As a Facebook user, I see much more new content and read information I would have been unaware of if I'd only been reading HN or a news website. I also share the best stories from HN, exposing a number of my friends to articles they would not have otherwise read.
In my opinion, Facebook hasn't closed the web. In fact, it seems that the web would have been more closed if Facebook and Google had never existed.
[+] [-] Pica_soO|9 years ago|reply
the same lazies who refuse to install linux i presume. The lazies who refuse to become experts and share your ideas of the world. This culture, too lazy to create a decent user experience- deserves to suffer.
[+] [-] smadge|10 years ago|reply
Not on Facebook, which is the whole point. You can paste URLs into Facebook, but they aren't hypertext.
[+] [-] vaishaksuresh|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mschenkel|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] smt88|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] meeper16|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bawana|10 years ago|reply
The web and FB has made us dumber- we point and click and no longer have to search and think.
[+] [-] tawpKek|10 years ago|reply
That is a bold and baseless statement.
[+] [-] tpeo|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 5ilv3r|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] zwieback|10 years ago|reply
However, it might be different in emerging markets where phones are the primary platform and FB may be dominating, not really sure if that's true but certainly different from the US.
[+] [-] blub|10 years ago|reply
Whenever WhatsApp is shut down in Brazil, a local chimes that it's used everywhere, even by emergency medical service personnel.
That should cause one some uneasy feelings...
[+] [-] vinceguidry|10 years ago|reply
More generally, populism by itself does not threaten democracy. It's when the people that elect demagogues let those demagogues destroy public institutions that democracy is undermined. But it's the people that are at fault here, they are the ones that let themselves get hoodwinked.
Napoleon destroyed the French Republic. But the French were absolutely complicit and just let him do it because they were hungry for empire. All of Europe was like that back then and she wasn't cured of that disease until WW2 showed them how utterly stupid warmongering in the Industrial age was.
[+] [-] devishard|10 years ago|reply
And nobody will read them if you don't integrate with Facebook and other social media--where you will be censored.
> But it's the people that are at fault here, they are the ones that let themselves get hoodwinked.
Did you really claim that scam victims are to blame when they get scammed, and not the scammers? I'm all for avoiding naiveté, but that doesn't excuse the actions of manipulative people and organizations.
[+] [-] HappyTypist|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] curun1r|10 years ago|reply
The fact that Facebook doesn't send pure hyperlinks but, instead, links that funnel through Facebook to be authenticated and tracked, is extremely annoying and dangerous to a free and open web.
[+] [-] unknown|10 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] Mendenhall|10 years ago|reply
Complacency and intolerance of other ideas is and always will be the issue.
[+] [-] halpme|10 years ago|reply
Here's the thing, I get to see what events my friends are going to, which usually end up being really fun and not something I would have found out about otherwise. So nowadays I only use facebook to find and management events to attend.
[+] [-] avindroth|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tn13|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] codecamper|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 5ilv3r|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] meeper16|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Ileca|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|10 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] fallenshell|10 years ago|reply
This guy truly is, the world's biggest hypocrite. </rant>
[+] [-] dang|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rhizome|10 years ago|reply
"Like anyone can even know that."
[+] [-] meeper16|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pinewurst|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] FussyZeus|10 years ago|reply
It will have it's time, in due time. Hyperlinks are not dead.
[+] [-] cylinder|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] TrevorJ|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] vr3690|10 years ago|reply