Slashdot Mirror
Sean Parker Unloads on Facebook 'Exploiting' Human Psychology (axios.com)
Sean Parker, the founding president of Facebook, spoke to news outlet Axios about the ways social networks have made hundreds of millions of users addicted to their platforms. He said, from the interview: When Facebook was getting going, I had these people who would come up to me and they would say, 'I'm not on social media.' And I would say, 'OK. You know, you will be.' And then they would say, 'No, no, no. I value my real-life interactions. I value the moment. I value presence. I value intimacy.' And I would say, ... 'We'll get you eventually. I don't know if I really understood the consequences of what I was saying, because [of] the unintended consequences of a network when it grows to a billion or 2 billion people and ... it literally changes your relationship with society, with each other ... It probably interferes with productivity in weird ways. God only knows what it's doing to our children's brains. The thought process that went into building these applications, Facebook being the first of them, ... was all about: 'How do we consume as much of your time and conscious attention as possible?' And that means that we need to sort of give you a little dopamine hit every once in a while, because someone liked or commented on a photo or a post or whatever. And that's going to get you to contribute more content, and that's going to get you ... more likes and comments. It's a social-validation feedback loop. He says people like him, and Mark Zuckerberg knew the potential consequences, but they did what they did anyway.
So it (maybe) changes children's brains. So does everything. So did letting them learn to read, or to use a telephone. Just because social dynamics are changing again, just as they did when cities were invented, and then suburbs were invented, and then TV was invented, doesn't mean this (Facebook / social media) is suddenly the Work Of The Devil.
Heck, we may be moving towards a society where interaction is primarily online rather than meatspace. So what? Who are we hurting?
https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
You dumb shit.. this is not 'social media', IT IS A NEWS AGGREGATOR SITE WITH COMMENTS. You're just projecting because you're a Failbook addict and can't leave. Try getting real friends in real life (yes, that means taking a shower and leaving the basement) and you won't need cancerous shit like Faecesbook.
This is a huge problem - advertising, marketing and shadier news outlets are systematically exploiting the innate cognitive biases we all have.
They have always done this, but instead of an artform, this has become scientific. And it seems to work quite well (for them)
It's similar to Casinos, which also exploit well-known human mental defects - which is why casinos are usually heavily regulated. But you obviously can't do the same for communication.
The only kind-of protection against these assaults on our mental defects is education, and a change in the mind-set. But noone really has a short-term incentive to change either of those.
Yeah, sure, let's totally hamstring the social development of an entire generation, so they're so afraid of interacting with real, live people in real world situations, that'll just be so wonderful for our civilization.
No, it's We The People's fault, for being drug addicts. Don't blame the dealer.
"Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
Cow Clicker! IMO this was a much better commentary: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Seriously though, what about WoW? What about EverCrack (as its own players referred to it half-jokingly)? What about the new e-Sports games like LoL, Dota2, or any multiplayer game that does its best to avoid falling into obscurity? What about TV shows that do their best to try to keep viewers hooked? What about Hollywood trying to keep people coming back in to see movies?
What company goes out of their way to make a product that no one likes very much (and that will fail as a result of it)? He'd be better off blaming people for being sheep than for blaming a company trying to provide the best possible service/product. It's what companies do. No one is forcing them to sign up, to spend all their time on it, to get hooked on "likes" (or people clicking their cows).
>I don't have an account there
OK.
> no one I know is allowed to reference me there
And just how do you enforce that???
>NO, you can't find anything about me on Facebook.
So, you haven't heard of shadow profiles, then. Maybe your average Internet user can't find anything on you, but odds are someone at Facebook could look up all sorts of things about you.
> I defy anyone who says different
Well... I guess I'm defied, then. Doesn't change much, though. Facebook's still evil, you still shouldn't be confident they don't know a lot about you.
I would be willing to bet a significant amount of money that if were you to sign up with Facebook right now that you would have at least a few dozen friend recommendations that were accurate and reflective not only of your current life, but also, of your associations of several years ago.
Check your premises.
Umm telephones and text messages still work last I checked. Nope not on FB.
How do your friends arrange meetings?
At the pub used to be answer, and for some is still the most relevant.
Meet in the bar for an afterwork beer, and while there discuss interesting new plans for a trip on the upcoming week-end.
And hook up with a nice girl while you're at it.
The whole internet or the mobile network could go down in flame, the above mentioned method can still work.
(And if you're a regular enough at the bar, even the banking, payment processing and ATM systems can go down, and it still works for a couple of beers "on the house" or "I know you well enough, you can pay me tomorrow when the system is back up").
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
I admit I"m starting to get a little older, but I"m quite social.
I have a large number of LONG term friends, measured in decades....I text, email and phone with them almost daily...and meet with them to do real things mostly on weekends, but some weekdays.
For those friends not in my immediate area...email, phone, text, FaceTime...etc.
I am lucky that I live in New Orleans...where something is going on all the time, I meet new people at all the music and food fests I go to here...meet folks at the gun range. There are still lots of neighborhood bars here, I know people there when I go for drinks.
And no, not a lick of this is done on social media.
Yes, I was alive before social media, maybe that gives me a leg up on doing all this without it....but seriously, it was done for most of mankind's history before social media...worked fine then, works fine now.
I don't need a ton of "friends" that aren't truly my friends...just clicking a fucking link doesn't make you my friend.
Hell, I have many friends that have keys to my house, I trust them. Those are real friends.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
I've never felt the need to join FB or other social media to date.
That fix that users get from "Likes" and "Replies" on FB is very similar to the fix you get from "Mods" and "Replies" on /. . A lot of my interaction on FB is discussion of news articles, similar to my interaction on /. . (Yes, some actual headlines make it to FB. On my feed it's CNN, BBC News, or whatever sources my friends post.) I see you post on here all the time - You've got the same bug as the FB users. You just feel superior because you're on a different platform (doing the same thing) and FB bashing is popular here.
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
And yet, nevertheless, you just posted that thought on social media.
Check back later to see if you got modded up! Maybe getting some karma points (or replies that agree with you -- they're just as good as upmods!) will get you to come back for more.
Slashdot's advertisers should be unhappy to read this, but considering where they're reading it, I suspect their frowns might be upside-down.
"Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
Zuck: Yeah so if you ever need info about anyone at Harvard
Zuck: Just ask.
Zuck: I have over 4,000 emails, pictures, addresses, SNS
[Redacted Friend's Name]: What? How'd you manage that one?
Zuck: People just submitted it.
Zuck: I don't know why.
Zuck: They "trust me"
Zuck: Dumb fucks
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
this is one of the dumbest things i have read here and clearly you have no idea about shadow profiles work.
Shadow profiles are based off of data provided through people who you interact in real life. that means while you may have never have used your real name online, if one of your real life contacts have then they know about you. this happens when someone with facebook uploads their email or phone contact list, has the app active on any network that you have a device active on. that is the point of facebook, to accumulate as much information as possible
"What makes you think the people who know me can't be trusted to keep their word?"
How do you know that those people can be trusted to understand everything about what they are doing online and how it affects you in real life. In order for you to not exist AT ALL on facebook you must make sure that you do not interact with anyone who is on facebook or hope that you are not on any 3rd party databases that facebook has access to (including the government ones!)
To make the argument that you do not have a shadow profile on facebook requires you to provide sufficient proof that none of your data has been ingested by their algorithms. Given that their revenue stream is based on how much information they collect and that we know they not only get their information from individuals but from third party databases that they pay to access, I would consider that such a claim to be grand enough that direct proof from facebook would be the only way to conclude such an argument. I'm pretty sure that unless you work for them you will not receive such proof and its been documented that in order to work for them you must have a profile, maybe it is you who should reevaluate your idea of privacy and how you have over-valued the amount that you have.
^^THIS^^
I resisted facebook for a long time, but ultimately I signed up and created a basic profile, with information about me that is already mostly public and things I would generally want the world to know about me. I keep it pretty impersonal and rarely post about being anywhere or doing anything that isn't documented elsewhere publicly, but at least I get to bring the attention to those things as opposed to attention being on everything else for lack anything else being there.
Its nice to ask your friends not to tag you in stuff but sooner or later someone forgets, making an honest mistake, after that facebook's photo recognition will start to suggest you everywhere you appear. Combine that will all their other data mining and yes they know a lot about you and publish a lot about you whether you like it or not.
At some point you have to make a decision do YOU want some control over the message about you that gets put out by facebook or do you want to continue you protested at the cost of not having that control? If you do you have to create an account, and play some of their game. You can ignore facebook all you like but others don't and you can't make them, because of the that facebook has you and I over a barrel.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
I disagree personally. From what i understand, facebook is what you say, for narcissists. People who want to see their opinions retweeted or acted upon, in short, people looking for attention. That is not me at all. Personally I don't even read replies on slashdot, because i really don't care to argue with people on the internet. I have what I have to say and that's the end of it. I am just commenting to add something to the discussion, or clarify some point, and primarily to pass time between tasks at work.
Plus I also think that writing every day is good practice to keep the mind sharp. Facebook to me, as a non user, is what you were always warned about. Posting your personal information on the internet, data collection by advertisers, and profiling by basically anyone (police, employers, co-workers, friends).
So to sum up, facebook = narcissists and spooks, Slashdot = engineers and technologists who have opinions on things that matter to my job and life.
A cat picture, that it is someones birthday, or someones IRL political leanings, absolutely do not interest me one bit. I also don't care about your holiday photos or childrens photos.
It's all just fluff, because people need something to do with their phones. And like TFA says, its designed to be addictive.
As a potential lottery winner, I totally support tax cuts for the wealthy