We could start by calling it what it is -- antisocial. Spending time on media content aggregators is an antisocial activity. Not that spending some time on an antisocial activity is inherently bad... studying and research are also antisocial activities. But let's not call something "social" when it is the antithesis of anything that could be considered as such. I think this could be a decent start!
It has made my life worse. And I know of people who agree.. Maybe you don't use it? It's highly political, divisiveness is obvious. Maybe you simply don't use or analyze it, so obvious things about it aren't obvious to you
> Letting people contect with family and long lost friends is good.
Maybe it's overall good, maybe it's over the top and not super. Even if it is good, the existence of Facebook presents a block for better and healthier ways developing for them to connect.
Totally agree. It's not intrusive, gives lots of options organized well, it's fast... great browser. I assume it's still safer than Chrome as well, seems like the best option for now
But reviews about missing feature, or reviews in general... that might not give you a good idea of why people are using it, if they don't leave a review at all
Actually I'd have to say a good marketing department. I think it was part of a long-term plan to be relevant to broad audiences, and come out through the woodwork already strong.
They don't give a reason. I don't believe the author. I think it will not only technically work fine, but it's a good idea and better than using what the author suggests.