I deleted my social media accounts(asylumsquare.com)
asylumsquare.com
I deleted my social media accounts
https://asylumsquare.com/backstage/2025-01-12/why-i-deleted-my-social-media-accounts
499 comments
Yea it’s odd how so many people have become pro-censorship.
I talked about how social media terms and service have become a middle man between social etiquette and laws in shaping social behaviour off and online on agora. Using social media feels closer to thinking than speaking sometimes, and anything that infringes on thought is dangerous.
I don't think it's that strange. Most people are happy to have their views supported even if it's by means that they would call terrible if used against them.
There's "censorship" and (1) you can only read so much so you have to be selective and (2) there is a lot written by people who have an NMA (negative mental attitude) and it's a burden I can only take on for people I really care out.
If somebody is writing every day about how some class of people is responsible for their problems I just can't take it, and if I can't effectively block this crap with the tools they give me (20 or so rules on Mastodon, as opposed to Bluesky making me a decent feed out of the box, better with a little "less like this") I will move on.
If somebody is writing every day about how some class of people is responsible for their problems I just can't take it, and if I can't effectively block this crap with the tools they give me (20 or so rules on Mastodon, as opposed to Bluesky making me a decent feed out of the box, better with a little "less like this") I will move on.
It's odd that you think social media would be viable without it. There's a reason there are teams of Kenyan moderators getting PTSD from the sheer deluge of unimaginable horror which is regularly posted and filtered out.
It’s odd how so many people have developed the attitude of “censorship bad” without thinking about the consequences of removing it or whether “censorship” on private, profit-driven, opaque-algorithm-powered social media should even be considered bad.
I don't understand this. You think that social media is so bad that you want to give it as much power to censor speech as possible?
I do think social media is bad. And ideally, no, to the extent that any social media sites have feeds more complicated than a chronological feed of people I follow, I want the algorithms powering those feeds to be open for inspection by anyone (by law), and for regulations to be put in place so that dangerous content is never promoted on the platform just because it attracts eyeballs (and thus advertising dollars). Opaque social media algorithms are bad for society, the same way that fentanyl is bad for society, or violent crime is bad for society.
There is no precedent in human history that you can compare social-media black-box algorithms to. It's not the same as a "public square," or a newspaper, or books, or talking to friends in person. It's a new paradigm.
I would drastically prefer regulations to letting the companies police themselves, but, well, waves hands at the current environment, and what Meta did removing their content reviewers is a step in the wrong direction. The platform will get worse as a result.
In other words, the problem is free reach, not free speech. You might have heard of it -- it has recently been popularized, co-opted, and slightly twisted by Twitter to mean what is more akin to "shadowbanning" problematic accounts, but I'm saying that no one deserves free reach by default on social media.
There is no precedent in human history that you can compare social-media black-box algorithms to. It's not the same as a "public square," or a newspaper, or books, or talking to friends in person. It's a new paradigm.
I would drastically prefer regulations to letting the companies police themselves, but, well, waves hands at the current environment, and what Meta did removing their content reviewers is a step in the wrong direction. The platform will get worse as a result.
In other words, the problem is free reach, not free speech. You might have heard of it -- it has recently been popularized, co-opted, and slightly twisted by Twitter to mean what is more akin to "shadowbanning" problematic accounts, but I'm saying that no one deserves free reach by default on social media.
Because censorship isn't about censoring false information, its about silencing voices you disagree with. It's exactly why Trump got into power, because people feel like they are not being heard and the left is trampling all over them, despite the fact the left is the one spreading misinformation far more than the right.
[citation needed real bad]
Change of geopolitics, tovarishch. Turns out being radically anti-censorship just allows the criminals to flourish.
It’s the why, the how, and the context of how the replacement will be built, and the context of how he’s selling the change. Zuck told Trump’s team before he told his own content board. He’s building something aligned to the new administration more than the principle of relaxing a problematic fact checking solution.
He complained about undue influence from the Biden administration, as if he isn’t going to be subject to undue influence by the Trump administration.
And if all this is so he can buy TikTok, then…
He complained about undue influence from the Biden administration, as if he isn’t going to be subject to undue influence by the Trump administration.
And if all this is so he can buy TikTok, then…
That's not all FB is doing.
https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-media/meta-new-hate-spee...
"Meta will allow its billions of social media users to accuse people of being mentally ill based on their sexuality or gender identity, among broader changes it made to its moderation policies and practices Tuesday.
...
The long list of changes to the new hate speech guidelines include removing rules that forbid insults about a person’s appearance based on race, ethnicity, national origin, disability, religious affiliation, caste, sexual orientation, sex, gender identity and serious disease. Meta also scrapped policies that prohibited expressions of hate against a person or a group on the basis of their protected class and that banned users from referring to transgender or nonbinary people as “it.”"
https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-media/meta-new-hate-spee...
"Meta will allow its billions of social media users to accuse people of being mentally ill based on their sexuality or gender identity, among broader changes it made to its moderation policies and practices Tuesday.
...
The long list of changes to the new hate speech guidelines include removing rules that forbid insults about a person’s appearance based on race, ethnicity, national origin, disability, religious affiliation, caste, sexual orientation, sex, gender identity and serious disease. Meta also scrapped policies that prohibited expressions of hate against a person or a group on the basis of their protected class and that banned users from referring to transgender or nonbinary people as “it.”"
>accuse people of being mentally ill based on their sexuality or gender identity
But the question is, are trans people actually mentally ill objectively? It certainly doesn't help them reproduce (a form of survival) from a biological perspective, for example.
This Johns Hopkins professor thinks it's mental illness:
https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/scpsva/Board.nsf/files/B8UR4X...
But the question is, are trans people actually mentally ill objectively? It certainly doesn't help them reproduce (a form of survival) from a biological perspective, for example.
This Johns Hopkins professor thinks it's mental illness:
https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/scpsva/Board.nsf/files/B8UR4X...
The author's study is controversial. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_R._McHugh
It’s nuanced. Something that appears to have been lost during the last years of trans hate.
> Like all DSM illnesses, one key component of depression, anxiety, schizophrenia, all of that, is that you have to be functionally impaired by it, otherwise it doesn’t count as a diagnosis
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/07/19/health/is-gender-dysphori...
Many trans people fought to keep it in the DSM for the simple reason that health providers would have refused treatment if it was removed.
There are many trans people that have had treatment and live perfectly happy lives. What makes many trans people unhappy is society’s persistent persecution of them in politics and media.
> Like all DSM illnesses, one key component of depression, anxiety, schizophrenia, all of that, is that you have to be functionally impaired by it, otherwise it doesn’t count as a diagnosis
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/07/19/health/is-gender-dysphori...
Many trans people fought to keep it in the DSM for the simple reason that health providers would have refused treatment if it was removed.
There are many trans people that have had treatment and live perfectly happy lives. What makes many trans people unhappy is society’s persistent persecution of them in politics and media.
> What makes many trans people unhappy is society’s persistent persecution of them in politics and media.
Then maybe they should have thought of that before advocating for males to invade women's spaces and for children to be medically harmed.
This so-called "persecution" is happening because boundaries need to be asserted. They abused the kindness and tolerance of others, and are now seeing the effects of this.
Then maybe they should have thought of that before advocating for males to invade women's spaces and for children to be medically harmed.
This so-called "persecution" is happening because boundaries need to be asserted. They abused the kindness and tolerance of others, and are now seeing the effects of this.
My point though is that if a person renders themselves unable to have offspring, especially before they have any, then from a purely biological perspective it's a form of illness. The same view would apply to all animals. If every member of a group acted the same way then the group would also die out. The functional impairment you mention includes the inability to attract a mate and reproduce. Hormones and sex reassignment surgery also severely hamper fertility.
Also trans people tend to have many other correlated mental issues and for example have high suicide attempt rates.
Also trans people tend to have many other correlated mental issues and for example have high suicide attempt rates.
CuriouslyC(3)
I agree that community notes works well. But for breaking news, by the time it kicks in the damage is already done. I've seen malicious misinfo about the LA fires get millions of views and 20k retweets before the community note was finally approved.
Another major issue is that if enough people believe/support a lie, it doesn't get noted. So in practice, you end up having "official" lies that go un-noted, making them appear true.
I dont think this is remotely true. On any given subject there is an overwhelming horde of people desperate to disagree.
And anyway, even if true, how would this be different from the previous arrangement where "official" lies were rigidly enforced by biased fact-checkers?
No? Simply look at Elon's X account. And that's the point - if there's "controversy" then it doesn't get noted, falsely implying it's true.
[deleted]
Say what you will about fact-checkers, there are countless issues with the platform beyond that...
> Alex Schultz, [Meta]'s chief marketing officer and highest-ranking gay executive, suggested in an internal post that people seeing their queer friends and family members abused on Facebook and Instagram could lead to increased support for LGBTQ rights.
> Alex Schultz, [Meta]'s chief marketing officer and highest-ranking gay executive, suggested in an internal post that people seeing their queer friends and family members abused on Facebook and Instagram could lead to increased support for LGBTQ rights.
I wouldn't delete social media accounts because they might become available to register for malicious actors who can then impersonate you. Keep the accounts, just don't use them any more.
Some, like LinkedIn, allow you to place the account in "hibernation." Which removes the ability to login without reactivating it, but doesn't completely remove it.
Not as reliable as doing a small amount of gardening of yours.
I have a very common name, and monkey's paw wish managed to get the unnumbered version for my gmail address.
It has been a significant amount of work just dealing with all the derppelgängers out there who use an address they don't own for important things. Medical records. Divorce papers. Mortgages. The short of it is that it doesn't even require maliciousness on someone else's part to be affected by impersonation, accidental or otherwise. So yeah, keep what you've got, because there's no guarantee the next person to get it will not somehow affect you.
It has been a significant amount of work just dealing with all the derppelgängers out there who use an address they don't own for important things. Medical records. Divorce papers. Mortgages. The short of it is that it doesn't even require maliciousness on someone else's part to be affected by impersonation, accidental or otherwise. So yeah, keep what you've got, because there's no guarantee the next person to get it will not somehow affect you.
I registered a domain with my name, many moons ago.
Sometime later, a lawyer in Australia registered the .au version, but it was <MY NAME>.com.au, not <MY NAME>.au. <MY NAME>.com (no .au) was (and still is) my domain, and I get email, there.
I started getting really confidential stuff sent to my email, from the Australian courts. Stuff that could easily get people fired and sued.
I reported it for ages to both the courts and the lawyers. Eventually (after about 2 years), it stopped. I haven't gotten one of those for a long time.
Sometime later, a lawyer in Australia registered the .au version, but it was <MY NAME>.com.au, not <MY NAME>.au. <MY NAME>.com (no .au) was (and still is) my domain, and I get email, there.
I started getting really confidential stuff sent to my email, from the Australian courts. Stuff that could easily get people fired and sued.
I reported it for ages to both the courts and the lawyers. Eventually (after about 2 years), it stopped. I haven't gotten one of those for a long time.
There isn't anything unique about your account on most social media platforms. This isn't a "plant your flag" situation like when trying to prevent identity theft. You don't need to register your account before a bad actor does. Sure, I created an online account with the IRS, credit bureaus, etc. before somebody else could. That's important because they are tied to unique identifiers like your SSN, etc. But somebody could just create a social media account impersonating you even if you already have an account on that social network. There isn't anything enforcing the uniqueness.
I’m pretty sure GP is saying if you already had an account and you delete it, it’s trivially easy for someone to register with your old handle and impersonate you
Of course people can always impersonate you but the goal here is to prevent them from impersonating you with a social handle people knew you had.
Of course people can always impersonate you but the goal here is to prevent them from impersonating you with a social handle people knew you had.
If I recall correctly, the handle you deleted stays inactive and is unavailable to new registrants. This is present on Google at least, I assume it's the same elsewhere.
The concept of a handle goes beyond a username. If someone can construct a profile that looks like someone's profile on another site and contains approximately the words in the username, like _username or imusername instead of username, they might be able to impersonate it. In that case it would be good to have an active profile on that platform to counteract it.
That's an interesting point that I had not considered. In that case, your handle itself is the unique identifier. That said, if I recall correctly some sites do not recycle handles, but this is still an interesting point nonetheless.
My Twitter account has 140K+ followers and impersonators keep making copies that they use for cryptocurrency scams. So that's why I'm personally a little sensitive to deleting it, even if I've mostly committed to leaving that hellhole.
What does keeping the account actually do to prevent scamming? They’re going to scam regardless.
That's pretty much the only upside to that blue checkmark these days. Making anyone able to buy one was a huge mistake, but they will at least do the minium check to see if someone else with that name already has a checkmark.
Will they? I'd actually be surprised if there are many people that, upon receiving a suspicious message from someone who claims to be Joe Schmoe, will actually go and check to see if a different account from Joe Schmoe with a blue check. I think it's much more likely that they're either going to recognize it as a scam right away, or they won't and they'll fall for it. In either of those cases, it doesn't help for the blue-checkmark-holder to keep their account.
There will always be someone falling for scams. No amount of safeguards will protect them if they do zero due diligence and the scammer is persistent enough. The checkmark isn't an end-all-be-all, but it's another small step someone can use to verify without too much hassle.
also, I just noticed "they" is ambiguous here. I meant "the twitter staff giving checkmarks". At least I hope they do some basic check before handing out a checkmark to an obvious impersonator.
also, I just noticed "they" is ambiguous here. I meant "the twitter staff giving checkmarks". At least I hope they do some basic check before handing out a checkmark to an obvious impersonator.
I was given a blue checkmark by pre-Musk Twitter because of the cryptocurrency scams. It was taken away in the early days of Musk Twitter when verification meant “anyone with $8.” Ironically, it was forced back against my will and without my paying for it, because Musk was embarrassed that larger accounts didn’t have checks. Obviously it didn’t serve any useful anti-impersonation purposes at that point, but I got free “Grok” I guess?
Is this a thing? Why would it be? Look at my username - how many people with that name exist in the world?
Only one of us can have a blue check on Twitter? Which one?
Only one of us can have a blue check on Twitter? Which one?
Counter point - why is it an issue to wipe the account of its content and update the bio to simply say the owner is no longer on social media and any other accounts you come across are not them.
Removing your account completely from Twitter makes it immediately available for anyone else to take, and for larger accounts you can bet theres a whole host of automated monitoring going on, ready to nab it and use it for easy profit.
Keeping the account doesn't have to mean you're 'giving away' any info. Hell delete it and instantly recrate it if thats the worry.
Removing your account completely from Twitter makes it immediately available for anyone else to take, and for larger accounts you can bet theres a whole host of automated monitoring going on, ready to nab it and use it for easy profit.
Keeping the account doesn't have to mean you're 'giving away' any info. Hell delete it and instantly recrate it if thats the worry.
> Removing your account completely from Twitter makes it immediately available for anyone else to take,
Do you have a source for this? The only thing i can find is a random tweet from Elmo in 2023. I deleted my twitter account in the 2022-ish timeframe, and the handle I had (created in 2007) was my first initial + last name, which I would think would be claimed by now. It's not, so I'm thinking that deleted account handles can't be reused.
Do you have a source for this? The only thing i can find is a random tweet from Elmo in 2023. I deleted my twitter account in the 2022-ish timeframe, and the handle I had (created in 2007) was my first initial + last name, which I would think would be claimed by now. It's not, so I'm thinking that deleted account handles can't be reused.
They can be taken immediately. Source me, former Twitter employee pre 2021
It must have changed between when you worked there and now, because I just checked and I can't sign up with my old handle (despite it returning a "this account doesn't exist" error when attempting to view it).
[deleted]
As of 2023 the model was to allow taking a handle even if it already exists but did not post for a while: https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-x-twitter-inactive...
So it seems unlikely they would keep deleted handles forever. I bet they become part of this marketplace program a la "premium domains".
So it seems unlikely they would keep deleted handles forever. I bet they become part of this marketplace program a la "premium domains".
I can’t find any evidence that the plan outlined in that article was actually launched. The owner of Twitter says a lot of stuff, but most of it is made up.
Agreed. I’ve done this and I’d you have an existing fan base on those platforms, a final post that explains where you are and why you’re not active can help keep those folks engaged.
Plus I feel like I’m still costing the platform the fractions of fractions of a cent to keep my data stored, replicated and active somewhere
Plus I feel like I’m still costing the platform the fractions of fractions of a cent to keep my data stored, replicated and active somewhere
No worries, they more than paid for that storage with the data they sold off. At least before GDPR rulings shut that down.
Agree. Hold onto them, else someone can snatch them up and you may have to clean up the reputational mess later. See this happen to an acquaintance of mine.
They will do this either way. Fake profiles are created all the time that are copied exactly from a real person's profile. If you have an account, and don't log in and check it every now and then, this will probably happen to you too.
That is poor advice. There are now roughly a dozen people who have social media accounts in my name, because it’s their name too. This isn’t impersonation. It’s also not a problem.
Someone recently created a "duplicate" account for the dad of one of my friends. Same profile picture, username very similar. But one of his friends who received a friend request from the new account was already friends with the old account and wrote a message asking what that was about, which is how my friend discovered it. So at least in that one instance, having the account was helpful.
> and why you should too
This is not actually explained in the article.
It rightfully explains how X, meta and others have taken a turn for the worse to say the least, but it doesn't say why I should delete my Facebook or Twitter account.
Neither do the hundreds of calls to delete such accounts in the past few weeks or months have.
I get that the point is "You should stop using such social media", but I don't get what __deleting your account__ actually adds on top, especially when put in relation to the political reasons behind stopping to use them.
This is not actually explained in the article.
It rightfully explains how X, meta and others have taken a turn for the worse to say the least, but it doesn't say why I should delete my Facebook or Twitter account.
Neither do the hundreds of calls to delete such accounts in the past few weeks or months have.
I get that the point is "You should stop using such social media", but I don't get what __deleting your account__ actually adds on top, especially when put in relation to the political reasons behind stopping to use them.
It’s not clear, yes: I think they have way too much power in the wrong hands. Now, hypothetically speaking: If they were to lose most of their users, they would lose their power. So, in one way or another, everyone supporting those platforms (by using them) is part of the problem - and that would be the reason to stop using them (again, I know this is quite hypothetically).
Yes but again, this is about stopping to USE them. Deleting your account versus not using your account at all doesn't have any difference of outcome here.
Deleting your account makes somebody's numbers look bad. It also marks a more serious commitment. (I deleted my Facebook in 2016. I did make a new one recently when I got my Meta Quest 3. I was hoping to get into Instagram recently because (i) I think the content I post on Mastodon/Bluesky would do great there and (ii) was thinking about doing a marketing project where that was the right venue. Meta won't let me create an Instagram account, probably because I deleted my Facebook account, I sure as hell haven't done anything else offensive with a Meta property)
Suppose someone was attacking you on some social media site and the site's algorithm was promoting that attack greatly enhancing its damage, and you wanted to try to sue the site. There will almost certainly be something in their terms of service (TOS) that says you have to arbitrate (with an arbiter chosen by the site) instead of sue.
Even if the TOS doesn't require this so you can actually sue they would likely have a choice of venue provision that would make it inconvenient for you and/or a choice of law provision that would be favorable to them.
If you have an account at the site it will likely be very hard to get out from under the arbitration/venue/law provisions of the TOS.
If you no longer have an account you will probably have a better chance of escaping the TOS, especially if whatever you want to sue over took place entirely after you deleted your account.
Even if the TOS doesn't require this so you can actually sue they would likely have a choice of venue provision that would make it inconvenient for you and/or a choice of law provision that would be favorable to them.
If you have an account at the site it will likely be very hard to get out from under the arbitration/venue/law provisions of the TOS.
If you no longer have an account you will probably have a better chance of escaping the TOS, especially if whatever you want to sue over took place entirely after you deleted your account.
> It rightfully explains how X, meta and others have taken a turn for the worse to say the least, but it doesn't say why I should delete my Facebook or Twitter account.
Isn't it a tautology? If you continue using a product that sucks rather than abandon it, you're using a bad product and it also has license to keep getting worse. Deleting an account is the strongest signal of rejection.
Isn't it a tautology? If you continue using a product that sucks rather than abandon it, you're using a bad product and it also has license to keep getting worse. Deleting an account is the strongest signal of rejection.
I love this:
"Maybe I’ll go old-school and write more blog posts. Like back in the early 2000s, when you actually had to think before sharing your thoughts with the world. Sounds quaint, doesn’t it?"
"Maybe I’ll go old-school and write more blog posts. Like back in the early 2000s, when you actually had to think before sharing your thoughts with the world. Sounds quaint, doesn’t it?"
I use croissant to cross post on social media accounts but I never use the services themselves to read any content. I’m screaming into the void and I’m fine with it.
Interesting. Do SM companies have an API that allows croissant to do its work? Or do they use unofficial means?
Can we also get the other direction, i.e. scrape posts from SM platforms and implement our own (non-toxic) feed algorithms?
Can we also get the other direction, i.e. scrape posts from SM platforms and implement our own (non-toxic) feed algorithms?
It is quaint but if my friends and family each had their own blog that they wanted me to look at, I wouldn't. There's a reason these social media places caught on, because they act as aggregators.
I get it, it's different types of content, one requires more effort than the other, and the argument is that, if you don't have anything of substance to say, don't say it, but it still requires extra effort to read that I probably don't feel inclined to give.
I get it, it's different types of content, one requires more effort than the other, and the argument is that, if you don't have anything of substance to say, don't say it, but it still requires extra effort to read that I probably don't feel inclined to give.
That’s what RSS is for.
That solves the "there is a new post" aggregator problem, sure, but I still need to go there and read it.
>It is quaint but if my friends and family each had their own blog that they wanted me to look at, I wouldn't.
Great! What's the problem?
Genuinely curious, because I see this tossed around everywhere as I quit social media, too. Why is there this massive pressure that everything everyone does has to be seen and I have to see it all? Nobody needs to see every blog that everyone they know (does every person on your friends list actually qualify as a "friend", or are they acquaintances?) puts out.
I genuinely don't care about this friend's political opinion or that friend's gardening adventures. I also genuinely hope they enjoy their pursuits and that they keep after what makes them happy. IF I get curious about Jan's gardening exploits, the blog is there if I want to read it for some tips, but I certainly don't owe it routine visits.
Great! What's the problem?
Genuinely curious, because I see this tossed around everywhere as I quit social media, too. Why is there this massive pressure that everything everyone does has to be seen and I have to see it all? Nobody needs to see every blog that everyone they know (does every person on your friends list actually qualify as a "friend", or are they acquaintances?) puts out.
I genuinely don't care about this friend's political opinion or that friend's gardening adventures. I also genuinely hope they enjoy their pursuits and that they keep after what makes them happy. IF I get curious about Jan's gardening exploits, the blog is there if I want to read it for some tips, but I certainly don't owe it routine visits.
I guess my problem is for people like my grandmother. It's nice to see comments and interactions from her, but she's certainly not going to set up a blog. There's a whole gamut of toxic social media stuff, hustle culture and people trying to make a name for themselves as influencers, but before that, it was a way to passively keep in touch with people you may not normally get in touch with.
Speaking just for me, because I know everyone's different, I had the same thought. I hardly ever called her, if ever, and vice versa. I started calling her maybe every 2-3 weeks just to say hey.
Sometimes she chats, other times she says she's good, we tell each other to have a nice day and that's that, it only lasts seconds.
But for some reason, to me, those short calls have felt far better than a like or a comment on FB or whatever. They feel more meaningful and I definitely feel more connected to her these days than I had for years.
YMMV. /shrug
Sometimes she chats, other times she says she's good, we tell each other to have a nice day and that's that, it only lasts seconds.
But for some reason, to me, those short calls have felt far better than a like or a comment on FB or whatever. They feel more meaningful and I definitely feel more connected to her these days than I had for years.
YMMV. /shrug
> they act as aggregators
RSS, my friend
RSS, my friend
> Once the accounts were finally gone, I realized just how much of a grip these platforms had on me. The number of times I reflexively typed "t" or "f" into my browser bar (which autocompletes to twitter.com or facebook.com) was honestly terrifying. Waiting for assets to build? Hit Twitter. Software update running? Quick Facebook check
How many different accounts do you have to delete though? For many of those people "t" and "f" would be substituted by "y"toube, "r"eddit, etc. It doesn't have to be a social media site, might be news you're intrested in, tech sites, deals aggregator.
I get what you mean, but for someone with habit of looking for distraction whenever they have nothing to do it won't be a cure, bandaid at best.
How many different accounts do you have to delete though? For many of those people "t" and "f" would be substituted by "y"toube, "r"eddit, etc. It doesn't have to be a social media site, might be news you're intrested in, tech sites, deals aggregator.
I get what you mean, but for someone with habit of looking for distraction whenever they have nothing to do it won't be a cure, bandaid at best.
100% this.
While I deleted all of my social media, I will still end up spamming on reddit or reading HN or watching Youtube.
But I have to say I find them better alternatives, as those social medias are nothing but people screaming for attention.
During work time I have an extension that blocks them all.
While I deleted all of my social media, I will still end up spamming on reddit or reading HN or watching Youtube.
But I have to say I find them better alternatives, as those social medias are nothing but people screaming for attention.
During work time I have an extension that blocks them all.
Yes, that's right. But social media platforms always tend to have something new on it each time you check them, which creates a strong incentive to check them even more often. News sites, for example, on the other hand, don’t use algorithms that encourage doom scrolling and keep you engaged far longer than you intended.
It's a stepping stone. The mere act of noticing yourself typing "t" and remembering it's not there, and feeling the feelings and realizations that accompany that, can lead to real behavioral change.
If you care about yourself and want to have healthier and more mindful habits, you will hopefully start redirecting what were once mindless impulses of avoidance or boredom into more meaningful activities for yourself.
If you care about yourself and want to have healthier and more mindful habits, you will hopefully start redirecting what were once mindless impulses of avoidance or boredom into more meaningful activities for yourself.
The answer is completely subjective, whatever the individual feels is important for them to quit.
>I get what you mean, but for someone with habit of looking for distraction whenever they have nothing to do it won't be a cure, bandaid at best.
This is something society seems to have forgotten to do, and what I've focused on helping my kids remain capable of as they grow older - knowing how to be bored.
>I get what you mean, but for someone with habit of looking for distraction whenever they have nothing to do it won't be a cure, bandaid at best.
This is something society seems to have forgotten to do, and what I've focused on helping my kids remain capable of as they grow older - knowing how to be bored.
I've felt this too - in the end, especially if you're distraction or addiction prone (e.g. ADHD), you'll mostly find something else to fill that void.
But, some options are better than others. I used to be on Twitter a lot, and had that reflex for a time after deleting it. Now... it's just not there. I did replace it with a handful of communities and some other forms of content, but it still feels better than before.
But, some options are better than others. I used to be on Twitter a lot, and had that reflex for a time after deleting it. Now... it's just not there. I did replace it with a handful of communities and some other forms of content, but it still feels better than before.
Excelent call to action.
The distictions between made "deleting the accout" and "just stop using it" are really mute. The main point is to disengage from such platforms.
Of course, almost no will. In spite of the clear conection between these platforms and individual mental health, and even more importantly massive distribution of seriously mileading "fake news", most people quite frankly just don't give a shit.
Look at the near total indifference to the petro mafia's distruction of the natural world. Most people just can't be bothered.
So when you compare something like failing to respond to corporations eliminating the ecosystem services required for life on earth, to a call to action against the crimes of asocial media, do you really expect a significant number of people to care?
I'm doubting it...
The distictions between made "deleting the accout" and "just stop using it" are really mute. The main point is to disengage from such platforms.
Of course, almost no will. In spite of the clear conection between these platforms and individual mental health, and even more importantly massive distribution of seriously mileading "fake news", most people quite frankly just don't give a shit.
Look at the near total indifference to the petro mafia's distruction of the natural world. Most people just can't be bothered.
So when you compare something like failing to respond to corporations eliminating the ecosystem services required for life on earth, to a call to action against the crimes of asocial media, do you really expect a significant number of people to care?
I'm doubting it...
... this was me in 2016. (Facebook had Cambridge Analytica, LinkedIn had taken on a demonic element to me in that I'd spent years prospecting and it had brought so many grifters and bullshitters into my life I felt like I was becoming a bullshitter... It would have been one thing if I was making money but I wasn't.)
I got back into social media about 1.5 years ago when Mastodon seemed to be coming on strong. I've lately gotten into Bluesky and all I can say is: (1) come on in, the water is fine, and (2) sure it will go bad someday when the money gets tight but back in the day we expected platforms to decay and for the cool kids to move on to the next one.
I got back into social media about 1.5 years ago when Mastodon seemed to be coming on strong. I've lately gotten into Bluesky and all I can say is: (1) come on in, the water is fine, and (2) sure it will go bad someday when the money gets tight but back in the day we expected platforms to decay and for the cool kids to move on to the next one.
I don't think deleting social media accounts is a good idea. Used appropriately, social media can be very useful and open doors that would otherwise not be available.
The problem is when you are just looping[1], absentmindedly opening and closing news and social media sites for hours. This can eat a lot of time, and is generally pretty draining.
I've been adding separate user accounts based on what tasks I'm doing, and locking them down so they can only perform those tasks.
I have a social media account (which I'm on right now), I have a coding account which I can not access news or social media from, and I have a few other accounts. This creates friction when task switching, and makes it so I have to be a bit more deliberate with how I use the computer. (I have social media blocked on my phone, as I find that's just not compatible with a happy life)
I've also recently been setting up Site Specific Browsers[2], basically custom PWAs, a web browser with no URL bar and no tabs, to further add barriers between tasks (like checking CI) and just noodling on the web. (I use electron to do this, but you can also use chrome by starting it with --app=https://www.example.com/ . Sadly Firefox has removed the ability to do this. )
[1] https://xkcd.com/1411/
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Site-specific_browser
The problem is when you are just looping[1], absentmindedly opening and closing news and social media sites for hours. This can eat a lot of time, and is generally pretty draining.
I've been adding separate user accounts based on what tasks I'm doing, and locking them down so they can only perform those tasks.
I have a social media account (which I'm on right now), I have a coding account which I can not access news or social media from, and I have a few other accounts. This creates friction when task switching, and makes it so I have to be a bit more deliberate with how I use the computer. (I have social media blocked on my phone, as I find that's just not compatible with a happy life)
I've also recently been setting up Site Specific Browsers[2], basically custom PWAs, a web browser with no URL bar and no tabs, to further add barriers between tasks (like checking CI) and just noodling on the web. (I use electron to do this, but you can also use chrome by starting it with --app=https://www.example.com/ . Sadly Firefox has removed the ability to do this. )
[1] https://xkcd.com/1411/
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Site-specific_browser
(Corporate) social media is a casino or shopping mall. There are fun things to do there but it's not a place for serious things. It's designed by intelligent people to be addictive like a drug. They hide the clocks and outside world, comp you food and drinks, and dazzle you with lights and sounds to keep you there as long as possible. Every moment you spend there is profit for them and a loss for you. The only thing you gain is the rush of being there.
My social media presence directly affects my income, as the more I talk about the stuff I'm doing, the more visibility it gets, and the more money I make. Social media visibility (while doing something interesting) is also a good way of getting podcast invites and similar opportunities for even more visibility.
Social media isn't the only means of getting visibility, but it's a very important one.
Social media isn't the only means of getting visibility, but it's a very important one.
[deleted]
I get it. You go where the people are. That doesn't really negate anything I said except the rush part. Although being able to afford food is certainly a rush.
The part I'm raising an objection about is "[that it's] not a place for serious things". It's in many ways key to being able to do serious things, if used deliberately. It's the mindless consumption part that is bad, and the point of my original post is that you can largely engineer that away.
Let me clarify. I'm not saying serious things aren't happening there. I'm saying serious things don't belong there. You're doing serious things there despite the fact that it's an addiction machine engineered for mindless consumption. You're at the casino selling to the gamblers while they're gambling because it's the only place in a 50 mile radius where people can hang out.
I'm not talking about lowercase social media which is generally socializing online. I'm talking about the massive survelliance and engagement bait economy that props up these horrifying data behemoths that cynically run these networks for giant profits.
You're there because you have no choice. You have no choice because that's where everyone is. That's where everyone is because of inertia, addiction, and novelty.
I'm not talking about lowercase social media which is generally socializing online. I'm talking about the massive survelliance and engagement bait economy that props up these horrifying data behemoths that cynically run these networks for giant profits.
You're there because you have no choice. You have no choice because that's where everyone is. That's where everyone is because of inertia, addiction, and novelty.
Like everything else, community is key. I simply deleted some of my social media because I realized I'd come out more angry than social connected. Deletion is simply a nice hard cold turkey approach if you find yourself commenting for hours on end everyday. I'd prefer a hard freeze for X amount of time, but IIRC no one does it in a meaningful way. FB can freeze your account, but it's not hard to unfreeze.
But it's not like all my social media is gone. I'm still obviously here on HN. I have a tildes account for more general news. I have two discord for personal and semi-anonymous servers. And for future connections I semi-regret missing in the Twitter age, I have a Bluesky ready.
I'm simply being more mindful of what sites I use and and what communities I join to prevent the issues that arose with Reddit, Facebook, and Tumblr.
But it's not like all my social media is gone. I'm still obviously here on HN. I have a tildes account for more general news. I have two discord for personal and semi-anonymous servers. And for future connections I semi-regret missing in the Twitter age, I have a Bluesky ready.
I'm simply being more mindful of what sites I use and and what communities I join to prevent the issues that arose with Reddit, Facebook, and Tumblr.
I should whatever I feel like, thank you very much.
I'm just not reading any of it - not interested. SM addiction is so 2015. I have technical accounts to be able to search for something (e.g. while training loras) or to watch without annoying popups when someone links me to it.
This dramatic deletion is overreaction, solve the underlying problem instead.
Rather than scrolling instagram and tiktok, visit /news and /newest, and then /ask, /show. If nothing interesting there, refresh the /newest until there is. You can be first in upvoting or commenting on it, and can get a good bump to your score if you say something that sounds smart before it hits the frontpage. Then you can re-read the quality content you produced and count how much is left to the round number, like it's only 40 to 9700, only 340 to 10000, etc. Much healthier than just scrolling endlessly and sharing memes.
This dramatic deletion is overreaction, solve the underlying problem instead.
Rather than scrolling instagram and tiktok, visit /news and /newest, and then /ask, /show. If nothing interesting there, refresh the /newest until there is. You can be first in upvoting or commenting on it, and can get a good bump to your score if you say something that sounds smart before it hits the frontpage. Then you can re-read the quality content you produced and count how much is left to the round number, like it's only 40 to 9700, only 340 to 10000, etc. Much healthier than just scrolling endlessly and sharing memes.
> SM addiction is so 2015
it's more prevalent today than it was then, so no.
> solve the underlying problem instead
that would be to get rid of FB, X etc. altogether; but since we can't do that, we can do the things that we have control over, i.e., our own accounts
it's more prevalent today than it was then, so no.
> solve the underlying problem instead
that would be to get rid of FB, X etc. altogether; but since we can't do that, we can do the things that we have control over, i.e., our own accounts
We can move to Mastodon and attract some friends with good posts.
Very funny, glad I read to the end
Wait what do you mean? HN isn't social media, it's a breath of fresh air! I'm only here to talk to the folks in my life I care about like … uh oops.
While I agree that HN usually gathers much interesting content, I don't understand why getting more karma on HN matters anyway. Chasing points anywhere isn't healthy by the way. Say something interesting because it is interesting and sparks a conversation and not for the sake of saying something.
The OP is surely joking. Less than 10k karma since 2015 isn't a serious karma race ;)
In general I tend to balance my karma around 0 on most sites, treating it as a sort of a currency.
But some forums ask nicely to not do that, so I don't, cause I'm a relatively nice guy, and if they ask instead of commanding it, then why not.
As a result, the score keeps piling up for decades. Idk what to do with it, maybe I should start a quest after 10k.
But some forums ask nicely to not do that, so I don't, cause I'm a relatively nice guy, and if they ask instead of commanding it, then why not.
As a result, the score keeps piling up for decades. Idk what to do with it, maybe I should start a quest after 10k.
This is our nature. People who aren't affected by "KPI" are the minority. That's why forums must be very careful with choosing a set of published indicators, because people will "play" these, often unreflectively. HN is well-established so its score system is likely balanced by other means. Or maybe they'd like to change it, but changes like that may literally boil the forum and turn it upside down.
The desire for upvotes is largely what makes HN and Reddit approach groupthink so quickly. Folks with an opinion that they know will be popular will hyperbolize their opinion knowing that it will appeal to the dominant opinion of the community and get upvotes. People who feel really strongly about an issue then go into a thread and upvote everything they like and downvote the things they don't. They are often also the people with the most time on their hands. That's why heavily moderated subs (like AskHistorians and AskScience) that rely on a more formal moderation structure with credentialed moderators result in much higher quality discourse.
When you know your opinion is shared by the majority of the site, you'll be less careful about what you write and less charitable to folks with different viewpoints. You're more likely to sneer at the "opposition" and performatively signal about your superiority. That's how upvote social sites, like Reddit, end up getting so many highly upvoted "hivemind-like" uncharitable takes. Likewise, if you know your opinion is not shared by the community. You will hedge your writing, emphasize how it's simply your opinion, and water it down with caveats and complications that while true are a lot less emotionally evocative as the comments written by the majority. Eventually folks with minority opinions may just churn as the stepping around eggshells becomes exhausting. This creates further pressure to conform to the majority.
Some folks with majority opinions may not feel that strongly about their opinion but will post strongly anyway, knowing that they'll get upvotes. I've done this when I was younger as the dopamine boost makes you feel like a community hero, like you're "fighting the good fight." I've actually said some incorrect things due to this in the past but have nonetheless been highly upvoted.
HN has some safeguards here, like not being able to downvote someone who replied to you, hiding downvotes behind a karma threshold, and judicious moderation separate from upvotes/downvotes. But it's hard to change the fundamental nature of upvote based sites and the clique dynamics that form as a result.
When you know your opinion is shared by the majority of the site, you'll be less careful about what you write and less charitable to folks with different viewpoints. You're more likely to sneer at the "opposition" and performatively signal about your superiority. That's how upvote social sites, like Reddit, end up getting so many highly upvoted "hivemind-like" uncharitable takes. Likewise, if you know your opinion is not shared by the community. You will hedge your writing, emphasize how it's simply your opinion, and water it down with caveats and complications that while true are a lot less emotionally evocative as the comments written by the majority. Eventually folks with minority opinions may just churn as the stepping around eggshells becomes exhausting. This creates further pressure to conform to the majority.
Some folks with majority opinions may not feel that strongly about their opinion but will post strongly anyway, knowing that they'll get upvotes. I've done this when I was younger as the dopamine boost makes you feel like a community hero, like you're "fighting the good fight." I've actually said some incorrect things due to this in the past but have nonetheless been highly upvoted.
HN has some safeguards here, like not being able to downvote someone who replied to you, hiding downvotes behind a karma threshold, and judicious moderation separate from upvotes/downvotes. But it's hard to change the fundamental nature of upvote based sites and the clique dynamics that form as a result.
Otoh, no-score sites mostly become either *chans or slow forums with lots of ceremony and zero feedback on anything. It turns out if you get rid of groupthink, you get rid of either group or think as well.
I really admire HN dynamics in this regard, as it has a few less obvious tricks in its sleeves, but let’s keep these observations to it.
I really admire HN dynamics in this regard, as it has a few less obvious tricks in its sleeves, but let’s keep these observations to it.
Yeah you're not wrong. I mean if you look at the bottom of most Reddit and HN threads, you just see pure spam or garbage. Upvotes let communities scale with fewer mods. But they come at the cost of groupthink.
Does hacker news count as social media?
[deleted]
No imo. no real names, no real profiles, no following or friending people aka no connections, no chat/DMs, no personal updates, no tagging, no pictures/videos/stories
No opaque ranking system, no advertising, no opaque ranking system to favour content that induces negative engagement...
And now more than before, HN is not social media because it actually has useful content and quality moderation.
And now more than before, HN is not social media because it actually has useful content and quality moderation.
> opaque ranking system
people confused by the first page
> no advertising
all the hiring ads, and thinly veiled corp marketing blogs
people confused by the first page
> no advertising
all the hiring ads, and thinly veiled corp marketing blogs
Yes.
By the dictionary definition, yes. However, there are three key differences. (1) People rank the HN feed instead of an algorithm; (2) the incentives of YC, companies, and the HN community seem better aligned; (3) the user experience degrades significantly when posts get too many comments.
absolutely hacker news is social media..
No, it’s a forum. Everyone sees the exact same website (except for user-setting tweaks). There is no concept of “friends” or “followers”. The wensite intentionally looks boring so that the design doesn’t lure you too stick around too long.
'n' -> [chrome or firefox autocomplete] -> news.ycombinator.com
I have often been thinking about what this reflex does to my mind.
This advice to quit social media is always a hit on HN. When I was 10 years younger I read the same thing on HN, was thoroughly convinced and quit social media. I even followed the advice of trying to stay in touch by email. Sure.
Turns out that a lot of people I knew posted huge life updates that I completely missed out on. I asked them why they didn’t tell me and they were confused. They said the posted it on social media. I can’t speak for everyone, but I know a lack of social media meant that I have lost touch with old acquaintances completely. I have a few close friends and that’s it.
Maybe that’s an ok tradeoff to make, but it’s worth knowing that before getting into it.
Turns out that a lot of people I knew posted huge life updates that I completely missed out on. I asked them why they didn’t tell me and they were confused. They said the posted it on social media. I can’t speak for everyone, but I know a lack of social media meant that I have lost touch with old acquaintances completely. I have a few close friends and that’s it.
Maybe that’s an ok tradeoff to make, but it’s worth knowing that before getting into it.
In general I agree with you that there are some tradeoffs to make. IME it's still worth it. For example, my mental wellness has improved immensely. Also, I tend to use my time in more purposeful ways instead of wasting it doomscrolling.
Regarding life events: I quit all social media about 5 years ago[1]. People I care about know about that, and if they want to tell me about life events they do it with other means. Those who don't, they weren't really friends, just acquaintances. I am OK with that.
[1] with the exception of Linkedin, which I hate and never use, but I have been asked by people in my company to keep a profile for PR-related reasons.
Regarding life events: I quit all social media about 5 years ago[1]. People I care about know about that, and if they want to tell me about life events they do it with other means. Those who don't, they weren't really friends, just acquaintances. I am OK with that.
[1] with the exception of Linkedin, which I hate and never use, but I have been asked by people in my company to keep a profile for PR-related reasons.
The messages about going cold turkey are popular, but you do miss out on a lot. I deleted all my social media in 2015, and didn’t mind too much, but years later when I met my wife (and there was more pressure to be social) I made accounts again so people could message me and I’ve been able to hold back from spending all my time doomscrolling.
I think the social part of social media can be good for us, and we have to figure out a way to avoid the toxicity. I’d like to see more posts about how to bend the algorithm to show you less toxicity- at least on Instagram I’ve managed to use the “not interested/relevant” button enough and turned on content filtering that it mostly shows me wholesome content. I don’t know if everyone realizes that if you hate-watch a video or hate-read a post then the algorithm sees that as engagement and will show you more. You have to nope yourself out of the dark corners as fast as you realize where you are.
I think the social part of social media can be good for us, and we have to figure out a way to avoid the toxicity. I’d like to see more posts about how to bend the algorithm to show you less toxicity- at least on Instagram I’ve managed to use the “not interested/relevant” button enough and turned on content filtering that it mostly shows me wholesome content. I don’t know if everyone realizes that if you hate-watch a video or hate-read a post then the algorithm sees that as engagement and will show you more. You have to nope yourself out of the dark corners as fast as you realize where you are.
> algorithm to show you less toxicity- at least on Instagram
In the case of IG what worked for me, without me even trying to be explicit about it, was to like and watch lots of photos/reels involving dogs and dog-ownership and right now my IG feed is 90% full with dog-related posts, and that’s the way I like it. Maybe it works the same way if one were to adopt similar strategies for other subjects of interest, such as cats, owning cars etc., the thing is that there’s almost no political/societal info on my feed anymore.
In the case of IG what worked for me, without me even trying to be explicit about it, was to like and watch lots of photos/reels involving dogs and dog-ownership and right now my IG feed is 90% full with dog-related posts, and that’s the way I like it. Maybe it works the same way if one were to adopt similar strategies for other subjects of interest, such as cats, owning cars etc., the thing is that there’s almost no political/societal info on my feed anymore.
FB Purity plugin helps. It removes all the suggested posts, advert and other junk. Unfortunately, it only works on desktop: https://www.fbpurity.com/
I can scroll through Facebook now on my laptop, and it means I stop doing so on my phone. I have the phone app just to post updates or to quickly check the location of an event or something.
I can scroll through Facebook now on my laptop, and it means I stop doing so on my phone. I have the phone app just to post updates or to quickly check the location of an event or something.
It's how humans lived for all of history before the Internet. Seems healthier to me. If you're not close enough to someone for them to want to share updates with you specifically, or to see them and catch up, why do you need to know every update on their life?
Tbf I'm in a family group WhatsApp chat, which I guess fulfills the "life updates" part for my family. But no public social media, don't see the need
Tbf I'm in a family group WhatsApp chat, which I guess fulfills the "life updates" part for my family. But no public social media, don't see the need
Losing touch with old acquaintances is just part of getting older. fwiw, my experience is that I stayed on social media (although I don't post anything, I just keep the account) and still missed huge life updates. I reckon about 80-90% of my FB friends don't post to FB or Insta anymore. They just don't post anywhere.
I'm sure the new FB AI will generate synthetic life updates that will seem just as convincing.
One more reason to leave
I totally understand you. What find is that when I need to get into touch with old acquaintances an call or email seems to do just fine. It is a bit more inconvenient.
Another reason to not use big social media is that I would rather not have my network to be exploited by some big corp for who knows what they do with that info.
Another reason to not use big social media is that I would rather not have my network to be exploited by some big corp for who knows what they do with that info.
Because the reasons to quit social media aren't that it isn't useful and that, absent the market conditions it exists within that denotes it's ability to continue existing, it isn't a good product. People love the stuff, it's why it's been the primary use case of the internet, arguably since it's inception depending on whether you consider early stuff like BBSes and news groups/email newsletters to be social media. We had early prototype social media functionality online before we had commerce.
The problem is that these platforms aren't satisfied merely providing a third place within which we can find and build communities, speak with and learn from others with similar interests, and otherwise, be human. Instead we each become a hamster locked in our own little cage, and the principle reason we're there is to sit on our wheel and run, and while we run we're shown a handful of things from people we actually want to hear from and see, and interspersed with those few things are a ton advertisements for products we don't want and aren't interested in, a few we might be, AI generated nonsense that prompts us to engage with the platform to bump metrics up, the dipshit of the day who's said something infuriating that makes us click into the comments and make sure they're getting dunked on (and possibly join!) appropriately that the social media site dug up from obscurity and is now parading to the entire world, and of course, the same posts again.
Genuinely, the way people talk about going back in time to kill baby Hitler, if I had a time machine, I would spend the rest of my days sabotaging whatever countless number of people invented or would invent the Curated Fucking Timeline, on however many platforms it was invented, by however many data scientists. I would argue it is the single most destructive thing Silicon Valley has ever turned out.
The problem is that these platforms aren't satisfied merely providing a third place within which we can find and build communities, speak with and learn from others with similar interests, and otherwise, be human. Instead we each become a hamster locked in our own little cage, and the principle reason we're there is to sit on our wheel and run, and while we run we're shown a handful of things from people we actually want to hear from and see, and interspersed with those few things are a ton advertisements for products we don't want and aren't interested in, a few we might be, AI generated nonsense that prompts us to engage with the platform to bump metrics up, the dipshit of the day who's said something infuriating that makes us click into the comments and make sure they're getting dunked on (and possibly join!) appropriately that the social media site dug up from obscurity and is now parading to the entire world, and of course, the same posts again.
Genuinely, the way people talk about going back in time to kill baby Hitler, if I had a time machine, I would spend the rest of my days sabotaging whatever countless number of people invented or would invent the Curated Fucking Timeline, on however many platforms it was invented, by however many data scientists. I would argue it is the single most destructive thing Silicon Valley has ever turned out.
People drift apart over time sometimes. I’m on Facebook still (TBH it is hard to see much by my friends, between all the algorithmic stuff). Despite being on there, there are some folks I’ve just kind of… lost contact with.
Maybe have a text chain for your friends or something? The folks I really expect to know things about… they’d tell me while we were interacting.
Maybe have a text chain for your friends or something? The folks I really expect to know things about… they’d tell me while we were interacting.
> People drift apart over time sometimes.
It's admittedly a little easier to drift apart though when you deliberately delete your access to the place where they post all the shit that's happening in their lives...
It's admittedly a little easier to drift apart though when you deliberately delete your access to the place where they post all the shit that's happening in their lives...
That seems intuitive, but most of the people who I’ve stayed in touch with aren’t really active on Facebook anymore or don’t even have accounts. I wouldn’t be surprised if social media following people provided something like disincentive to actually stay in touch for real. No need to perform the checks that maintain the relationship if the info is all posted right there.
But that’s also a guess. I suspect neither of us have any data to back up our guesses.
But that’s also a guess. I suspect neither of us have any data to back up our guesses.
I just deleted my FB account yesterday. Believe or not, your experience makes me feel OK about it because even with FB, I’ve drifted apart from all but a few close friends. That makes me think it’s the norm and social media doesn’t do nearly as much to keep us connected as it would like us to believe.
Unfriending specific people in a huge cull of otherwise nice and well meaning people you no longer care about but are chained to by inertia is torturous. Much less psychologically burdensome to unfriend everyone by nuking the account and start over with a clean slate somewhere less corporate and shitty.
> Turns out that a lot of people I knew posted huge life updates that I completely missed out on
This doesn't really seem that important if your only method of knowing this was a post blasted to hundreds (or thousands) of people. Or, to put it another way: if you mattered, you would've gotten a direct message or call from them.
I'd argue that social media has normalized keeping up with people who aren't supposed to be part of your life forever. But, we should take a step back and realize that not everything should or will last forever. If you cross paths again then you can catch up, but having life updates constantly? No thanks.
This doesn't really seem that important if your only method of knowing this was a post blasted to hundreds (or thousands) of people. Or, to put it another way: if you mattered, you would've gotten a direct message or call from them.
I'd argue that social media has normalized keeping up with people who aren't supposed to be part of your life forever. But, we should take a step back and realize that not everything should or will last forever. If you cross paths again then you can catch up, but having life updates constantly? No thanks.
> This doesn't really seem that important if your only method of knowing this was a post
The landscape of human relationships is deep and broad an varied, and if making bold assumptions about what other people should value is your starting point, you're liable to miss a lot of potential connections.
The landscape of human relationships is deep and broad an varied, and if making bold assumptions about what other people should value is your starting point, you're liable to miss a lot of potential connections.
Maybe I could've worded that better, but I was just providing perspective on the obsessive nature that we have on social media now. IMO, it's not "normal" to keep up with acquaintances and people from past times. They're no longer part of your life and you need to let go. If others find the life updates useful and beneficial to them, then so be it. I don't care either way.
> IMO, it's not "normal" to keep up with acquaintances and people from past times.
Fully recognising that you said "IMO", I'll say that keeping up with acquaintances and people from the past is normal in my culture. Social media helps to make that more direct and easier to manage than the gossipy grapevine of yore.
What's normal depends on your culture and context, of course, and I suspect that's not true in yours — but it is in mine, so ditching something like Facebook is just out of the question for me and many people whose cultures place a heavy emphasis on those connections between people.
The middle ground for me has been to check Facebook less and less, accelerated by the algorithm delivering me fewer life updates and more slop reposted from reddit.
Fully recognising that you said "IMO", I'll say that keeping up with acquaintances and people from the past is normal in my culture. Social media helps to make that more direct and easier to manage than the gossipy grapevine of yore.
What's normal depends on your culture and context, of course, and I suspect that's not true in yours — but it is in mine, so ditching something like Facebook is just out of the question for me and many people whose cultures place a heavy emphasis on those connections between people.
The middle ground for me has been to check Facebook less and less, accelerated by the algorithm delivering me fewer life updates and more slop reposted from reddit.
if the goal is easier to manage and more direct, I'd argue it's not that important. Is your culture 20 years old? What did they do before?
There are lots of things in the world where the work required IS the value. Think of a hand written note from your CEO; is it still valuable if it was their assistant and a picture of the signature? "keeping in touch" is not inheriently valuable; it's the effort required that makes it so.
There are lots of things in the world where the work required IS the value. Think of a hand written note from your CEO; is it still valuable if it was their assistant and a picture of the signature? "keeping in touch" is not inheriently valuable; it's the effort required that makes it so.
People before deliberately kept contact with acquitances over time and I recall older people regretting not keeping this or that contact.
> Is your culture 20 years old? What did they do before?
Our people barely left our homelands, our pā and marae, for fear of them being stolen by pākeha-let governments who urbanised the rest of us into poverty.
Now that people in my culture are reconnecting with the importance of whakapapa for whānau, hapū, and iwi, which is a far wider set of people than just one’s immediate family in typical anglospherical thought, there has to be a way to reincorporate all the urbanised people who live far away. Social media, at least initially, provides that.
But thank you for your “is your culture only 20 years old” crack. It’s always refreshing to have the needs of my culture explained to me by someone from without it with an air of armchair authority, as though I or we don’t know what’s good for ourselves to meet our own needs.
Our people barely left our homelands, our pā and marae, for fear of them being stolen by pākeha-let governments who urbanised the rest of us into poverty.
Now that people in my culture are reconnecting with the importance of whakapapa for whānau, hapū, and iwi, which is a far wider set of people than just one’s immediate family in typical anglospherical thought, there has to be a way to reincorporate all the urbanised people who live far away. Social media, at least initially, provides that.
But thank you for your “is your culture only 20 years old” crack. It’s always refreshing to have the needs of my culture explained to me by someone from without it with an air of armchair authority, as though I or we don’t know what’s good for ourselves to meet our own needs.
I agree with you but I think we are kind of the oddballs at this point.
It does seem quite normal now to keep up with people you haven't seen in 10 years in person and will never see again. Maybe even people you would go out of your way to make sure you don't see in person but you can give them a thumbs up when they post a picture of their lunch.
I have no idea why anyone does this but it would be hard for me to say that not having any social media like us is "normal".
It does seem quite normal now to keep up with people you haven't seen in 10 years in person and will never see again. Maybe even people you would go out of your way to make sure you don't see in person but you can give them a thumbs up when they post a picture of their lunch.
I have no idea why anyone does this but it would be hard for me to say that not having any social media like us is "normal".
Due to some unknown circumstances this might not be true for this person, but it’s certainly true for a lot of people. Social media used in that context is effectively automating human relationships. It used to take effort to have a handful of friends, now you can have hundreds. Somewhere along the way though, friendship turned from active effort to passive status.
Are these really friends though? Or just some people you met and appreciated in the past?
People you met and appreciated in the past evolve into friends and friends evolve into people you met and appreciated in the past. Each person can change "the status" multiple times, depending on circumstances. However, if you decide that weaker relationships dont matter, they will never grow into friendships. They will die out.
And to large extend that is what is happening with "loneliness epidemics". We dont care to keep relationships and see it as negative. Then we dont have relationships and act all shocked.
And to large extend that is what is happening with "loneliness epidemics". We dont care to keep relationships and see it as negative. Then we dont have relationships and act all shocked.
> People you met and appreciated in the past evolve into friends and friends evolve into people you met and appreciated in the past. Each person can change "the status" multiple times, depending on circumstances.
Agree with that.
> However, if you decide that weaker relationships dont matter, they will never grow into friendships. They will die out.
I don't think putting thumbs up on social media posts count as "growing into friendship".
> And to large extend that is what is happening with "loneliness epidemics".
I am not even sure a _loneliness epidemics_ exists but if that is true it is mostly self induced and artificial relationship pretense on social medias do not help. Quite the contrary. If you get out of social medias you actually realize your only chance to make relationships is by going outside and meet people that are close to you. And this is how you build relationships that matters and prevent loneliness.
> We dont care to keep relationships and see it as negative. Then we dont have relationships and act all shocked.
I am an expatriate and moved countries several times. I have lost touch with a lot of my old friends as well as a huge part of my larger family because I don't use facebook and instagram. That doesn't mean I don't have relationships. I made new relationships locally, and am keeping in touch with people who are not in the same country but that are as eager as I am to travel once in a while to see me.
OTOH last few years I have called a number of friends who are living abroad or several hours of train/plane/driving away from me at least once a year. Some gave unsolicited apologies and promises that next time they will be the one calling, or that they have plan to visit my area. They never called back, nor visited me and I didn't prioritized them enough to try to visit them either. This year I didn't even try to call them. I just moved them from the _friends_ mental drawer to the _acquaintance_ mental drawer. This is very likely what they passively did 2 years ago already while I was still actively trying to stay in touch.
If for some reason I travel close enough to their last known place, I may try to contact them but it is very likely that I may never see most of them. But I don't need to follow what they are posting on social medias nor publish stuff I am living and pretend that I or they care because really we do not, or not enough for it to matter.
Agree with that.
> However, if you decide that weaker relationships dont matter, they will never grow into friendships. They will die out.
I don't think putting thumbs up on social media posts count as "growing into friendship".
> And to large extend that is what is happening with "loneliness epidemics".
I am not even sure a _loneliness epidemics_ exists but if that is true it is mostly self induced and artificial relationship pretense on social medias do not help. Quite the contrary. If you get out of social medias you actually realize your only chance to make relationships is by going outside and meet people that are close to you. And this is how you build relationships that matters and prevent loneliness.
> We dont care to keep relationships and see it as negative. Then we dont have relationships and act all shocked.
I am an expatriate and moved countries several times. I have lost touch with a lot of my old friends as well as a huge part of my larger family because I don't use facebook and instagram. That doesn't mean I don't have relationships. I made new relationships locally, and am keeping in touch with people who are not in the same country but that are as eager as I am to travel once in a while to see me.
OTOH last few years I have called a number of friends who are living abroad or several hours of train/plane/driving away from me at least once a year. Some gave unsolicited apologies and promises that next time they will be the one calling, or that they have plan to visit my area. They never called back, nor visited me and I didn't prioritized them enough to try to visit them either. This year I didn't even try to call them. I just moved them from the _friends_ mental drawer to the _acquaintance_ mental drawer. This is very likely what they passively did 2 years ago already while I was still actively trying to stay in touch.
If for some reason I travel close enough to their last known place, I may try to contact them but it is very likely that I may never see most of them. But I don't need to follow what they are posting on social medias nor publish stuff I am living and pretend that I or they care because really we do not, or not enough for it to matter.
> I don't think putting thumbs up on social media posts count as "growing into friendship".
The interactions I have seen on social media did not consisted from thumbs up only.
> If you get out of social medias you actually realize your only chance to make relationships is by going outside and meet people that are close to you.
What actually happen to most people is that they stop showing up in meetups organized through social media (majority of them) and over time loose those relationships. From what I have seen, removing yourself from social media does not create new relationships for most people.
You do not build relationships by NOT being somewhere.
The interactions I have seen on social media did not consisted from thumbs up only.
> If you get out of social medias you actually realize your only chance to make relationships is by going outside and meet people that are close to you.
What actually happen to most people is that they stop showing up in meetups organized through social media (majority of them) and over time loose those relationships. From what I have seen, removing yourself from social media does not create new relationships for most people.
You do not build relationships by NOT being somewhere.
> The interactions I have seen on social media did not consisted from thumbs up only.
Not necessarily but in my experience unless those people meet on a semi regular basis (as long as 2 years), or have a special bond (family) this usually slides toward superficiality.
> What actually happen to most people is that they stop showing up in meetups organized through social media (majority of them) and over time loose those relationships. From what I have seen, removing yourself from social media does not create new relationships for most people.
People don't only meet other people through meetups organized in social medias. I usually get invitations to events through calls and messages from friends, coworkers and ex-coworkers and meet other people there where we exchange phone numbers. I meet people on the road while cycling, some through their dance/yoga/crossfit/crochet class, etc. Several of my good friends I met over they years was by seeing them every day in my train commute and ending up talking to. I've met some random people in a bar and ending up sharing tapas with them and going home with their numbers.
Not necessarily but in my experience unless those people meet on a semi regular basis (as long as 2 years), or have a special bond (family) this usually slides toward superficiality.
> What actually happen to most people is that they stop showing up in meetups organized through social media (majority of them) and over time loose those relationships. From what I have seen, removing yourself from social media does not create new relationships for most people.
People don't only meet other people through meetups organized in social medias. I usually get invitations to events through calls and messages from friends, coworkers and ex-coworkers and meet other people there where we exchange phone numbers. I meet people on the road while cycling, some through their dance/yoga/crossfit/crochet class, etc. Several of my good friends I met over they years was by seeing them every day in my train commute and ending up talking to. I've met some random people in a bar and ending up sharing tapas with them and going home with their numbers.
> I don't think putting thumbs up on social media posts count as "growing into friendship".
Unless it was for an invitation to a board game evening and dinner at a friend's house. That would help to grow the friendship.
Unless it was for an invitation to a board game evening and dinner at a friend's house. That would help to grow the friendship.
You write like somehow there would be something to miss out on by not valuing keeping up with people who are far away and most likely have no place in our lives.(by far away I mean you don’t actually get to talk or meet with them or even chat by messanger or so, even if they could live in the same city - I have friends who live far away but we actually meet at least once a year and chat once a week we are far in distance but not far in contact)
I would argue that there is much to miss on by wasting time looking up Jenny from primary school when you have your kids, friends and family who you meet day to day.
There is actually an option to run into mental health issues that we know social media is causing.
I would argue that there is much to miss on by wasting time looking up Jenny from primary school when you have your kids, friends and family who you meet day to day.
There is actually an option to run into mental health issues that we know social media is causing.
> You write like somehow there would be something to miss out on by not valuing keeping up with people who are far away...
Yes, absolutely. The paths our lives take can lead us to have more in common with someone we knew in the past then when we first knew them. And there's a lot of value in having a history with someone, compared to getting to know someone new from scratch. Maintaining loose contact takes virtually no effort but can lead to meaningful interactions down the road.
Yes, absolutely. The paths our lives take can lead us to have more in common with someone we knew in the past then when we first knew them. And there's a lot of value in having a history with someone, compared to getting to know someone new from scratch. Maintaining loose contact takes virtually no effort but can lead to meaningful interactions down the road.
Yes, I have a few very good remote friends which I meet only rarely, but when it's one of the best kind of things.
However most of my "Facebook friends" were shallow faint contacts, where paths may have been close for a while but went apart as each went on with their lives. No more scrolling through which bar they visited, how their kids are doing, or which TV show they were watching didn't take anything from my life, while it encouraged me to reach out more actively to people I really care about, as I didn't "rely" on passive information anymore, assuming to hear about "relevant" events, but became interested in them and shared things which wouldn't make "public" social media.
However most of my "Facebook friends" were shallow faint contacts, where paths may have been close for a while but went apart as each went on with their lives. No more scrolling through which bar they visited, how their kids are doing, or which TV show they were watching didn't take anything from my life, while it encouraged me to reach out more actively to people I really care about, as I didn't "rely" on passive information anymore, assuming to hear about "relevant" events, but became interested in them and shared things which wouldn't make "public" social media.
I think I would add that: if I would be posting stuff and then someone who was an acquaintance only - would hit up a conversation about my wedding photos from 5 years ago how he remembers all were great, or would go with conversation about tv show I just added on my profile.
I would not feel comfortable, to say the least, I would feel creeped out. I would start thinking what kind of MLM he joined or if he looks to borrow money as last resort as no one closer would lend him any.
If that would be my close friend that would be OK.
I would not feel comfortable, to say the least, I would feel creeped out. I would start thinking what kind of MLM he joined or if he looks to borrow money as last resort as no one closer would lend him any.
If that would be my close friend that would be OK.
I think my main argument is having history with someone is not checking his profile.
If I run today into someone from primary school we probably will connect over that.
If that someone will start talking how he have seen photos of my trips or my life events or how he totally loves band I added to my profile half a year ago - without ever sending me even happy new years message - I will be creeped out - and totally not “aw cool you follow my posts”.
If I run today into someone from primary school we probably will connect over that.
If that someone will start talking how he have seen photos of my trips or my life events or how he totally loves band I added to my profile half a year ago - without ever sending me even happy new years message - I will be creeped out - and totally not “aw cool you follow my posts”.
>you're liable to miss a lot of potential connections.
are you really? If you only notice that it's Bob's birthday because you get a FB reminder and the only form of communication is a post on their timeline once a year that's not a connection, that's like talking to your neighbor about the weather out of courtesy because it's awkward to say nothing at all.
The reason a lot of people miss out on life nowadays is not because they have too few connections but because they waste their time on fake ones. Life's short, instead of trying to warm up some high school friendship that's going nowhere, focus everything you have on the few people around you that matter. Cutting connections is as valuable a skill as making them, and an increasingly lost art.
are you really? If you only notice that it's Bob's birthday because you get a FB reminder and the only form of communication is a post on their timeline once a year that's not a connection, that's like talking to your neighbor about the weather out of courtesy because it's awkward to say nothing at all.
The reason a lot of people miss out on life nowadays is not because they have too few connections but because they waste their time on fake ones. Life's short, instead of trying to warm up some high school friendship that's going nowhere, focus everything you have on the few people around you that matter. Cutting connections is as valuable a skill as making them, and an increasingly lost art.
Free for 8 years-ish. Yeah. its hard to look people up. Oh im in this town, yeah wonder what happened to xyz, no chance of finding them or shooting them a message. FB connections are so low key and keeping people around makes them easier to find and stay in touch with, IMO.
But there's also lots of upsides. I guess I dont know one way or the other.
But there's also lots of upsides. I guess I dont know one way or the other.
> a call from them
um... will someone else tell him/her, or should I?
um... will someone else tell him/her, or should I?
My partner (who's family is living 10000km away on another side of an ocean) learned her estranged father died a few days ago and that he had been terminally ill for months.
Apparently someone from that part of the family had posted it on facebook but she didn't notice it as she do not visit it every day.
Apparently someone from that part of the family had posted it on facebook but she didn't notice it as she do not visit it every day.
People are lazy, and the winning solution (like it or not) is apparently the one that most people default to when they are lazy.
For most people, that is arguably currently Facebook.
For most people, that is arguably currently Facebook.
>if you mattered, you would've gotten a direct message or call from them.
That ignores the asymmetry of a lot of life events. For example, if a parent died, I'm not going to call everyone in my life to tell them, I would have more important stuff on my mind. I might post it on social media and then the onus is on other people to reach out to me. And if someone doesn't reach out, it will hurt the relationship a little even if I'm not conscience of it because when I think of people who were there for me during a tough time, the friend who never knew my parent died wouldn't come to mind.
That ignores the asymmetry of a lot of life events. For example, if a parent died, I'm not going to call everyone in my life to tell them, I would have more important stuff on my mind. I might post it on social media and then the onus is on other people to reach out to me. And if someone doesn't reach out, it will hurt the relationship a little even if I'm not conscience of it because when I think of people who were there for me during a tough time, the friend who never knew my parent died wouldn't come to mind.
Indeed and in the olden times a lot of these life events would have been announced in the local newspaper.
But these days, I don’t even know where to even buy a newspaper, let alone make sure everyone is reading it and keeping up with local news.
So social media it is, which sucks because they’re extremely edited and filtered out by the algorithm.
But these days, I don’t even know where to even buy a newspaper, let alone make sure everyone is reading it and keeping up with local news.
So social media it is, which sucks because they’re extremely edited and filtered out by the algorithm.
On Facebook at least, the algorithm is heavily tuned to prioritize major life events: births, deaths, graduations, marriages, etc. Occasionally those posts get filtered out but usually they do get prioritized near the top of your feed.
For the people who you care about, you can contact them directly and set up a time to meet to catch up. Or catch up over text or email. Or start a messaging group with mutual friends and keep each other up to date that way.
My feeling is that if you only get updates about someone's life via their blasts on social media, you're not really friends. So why do you need to hear about all that stuff?
My feeling is that if you only get updates about someone's life via their blasts on social media, you're not really friends. So why do you need to hear about all that stuff?
Right. You post it on social media to the exact same reason you would post it in the newspaper.
And you would have to understand socialization if you wanted to know why people published life events to the newspaper - births, deaths, graduations, marriages, etc.
Not everything in the world is for your bestest friends. It’s OK to not have close friends.
And you would have to understand socialization if you wanted to know why people published life events to the newspaper - births, deaths, graduations, marriages, etc.
Not everything in the world is for your bestest friends. It’s OK to not have close friends.
>> For example, if a parent died...
and yet people died quite often before social media; what did we do then?
If the realtionship is built upon the foundation of social media, it's actually not that strong, absent social media. We'll be fine.
and yet people died quite often before social media; what did we do then?
If the realtionship is built upon the foundation of social media, it's actually not that strong, absent social media. We'll be fine.
you would find out at church or any number of the 3rd places you shared.
Yes, that may have been better, but that doesn't mean deleting social media automatically sends you back in time. Doubly so if all of your friends are still on social media and using it as the primary form of communication.
Imagine deleting your email and telephone in 1999 and saying "if they were really my friend, they would drive/fly to my house and talk to me".
Imagine deleting your email and telephone in 1999 and saying "if they were really my friend, they would drive/fly to my house and talk to me".
In 1999 we had obits and mail, just like in 1899. Of course now all of the newspapers are gone (what’s black and white and dead all over?), so notifying the local community is much harder than 25 years ago.
Also some people back then would brag about not having a TV, the same way vegans still do today.
Also some people back then would brag about not having a TV, the same way vegans still do today.
God damn vegans and their non-TVs, what assholes!
Edit: Jokes aside, I'm vegan and I don't own a TV. Coincidence? Haha
Edit: Jokes aside, I'm vegan and I don't own a TV. Coincidence? Haha
> Also some people back then would brag about not having a TV, the same way vegans still do today.
This is the toupée fallacy mixed in with something else I haven’t yet put a name on.
Most vegans don’t brag about being vegan, just like most TVless people don’t brag about not having a TV. Some people are assholes and brag about anything, and some of those do the things you mentioned. It’s orders of magnitude more common to see people complaining about vegans (or, for an HN example, Apple users) than the actual bragging. It’s a meme, not the reality.
This is the toupée fallacy mixed in with something else I haven’t yet put a name on.
Most vegans don’t brag about being vegan, just like most TVless people don’t brag about not having a TV. Some people are assholes and brag about anything, and some of those do the things you mentioned. It’s orders of magnitude more common to see people complaining about vegans (or, for an HN example, Apple users) than the actual bragging. It’s a meme, not the reality.
Cool idea, but it’s based on my own experience in life, from a girlfriend and various people in college. And even a newspaper article I read literally this morning. Vegan folks who I knew and talked to every day.
That said I could have used airplane pilots for the same example (also based on personal experience).
That said I could have used airplane pilots for the same example (also based on personal experience).
Right, that’s the toupée fallacy.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Toupee_fallacy
You only know about the people who let you know. You have no idea how many vegans or airplane pilots you encounter regularly who never tell you. A small sample is driving the reputation of the whole.
For people with whom you talk every day, it’s no surprise that you know. It’s bound to come up but I doubt it happened on your first conversation with everyone. If it did, you were hanging out with a weird group. If they knew each other, it’s normal that they’d talk about a shared interest. Just like people who hang out on HN would be likely to discuss tech when meeting in person.
I have no doubt you found your share of asshole vegans, just like there are assholes who make it a point to make everyone know they eat meat.
Though it is important to distinguish a true asshole from someone simply sharing an experience. Saying “no, thanks, I’m vegan” when offered a bite of a meat sandwich is not bragging, it’s context. Unfortunately, too many people take it to be a judgement when it most often is not.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExEHuNrC8yU
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Toupee_fallacy
You only know about the people who let you know. You have no idea how many vegans or airplane pilots you encounter regularly who never tell you. A small sample is driving the reputation of the whole.
For people with whom you talk every day, it’s no surprise that you know. It’s bound to come up but I doubt it happened on your first conversation with everyone. If it did, you were hanging out with a weird group. If they knew each other, it’s normal that they’d talk about a shared interest. Just like people who hang out on HN would be likely to discuss tech when meeting in person.
I have no doubt you found your share of asshole vegans, just like there are assholes who make it a point to make everyone know they eat meat.
Though it is important to distinguish a true asshole from someone simply sharing an experience. Saying “no, thanks, I’m vegan” when offered a bite of a meat sandwich is not bragging, it’s context. Unfortunately, too many people take it to be a judgement when it most often is not.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExEHuNrC8yU
Very interesting thought. I didn’t know the toupée itself neither the fallacy. Looks like a cousin of the famous survivor bias and both are children of a "observational bias" category. This is only my humble layman guess.
The video was interesting too, I’ll have a look at that channel. Thanks for sharing.
The video was interesting too, I’ll have a look at that channel. Thanks for sharing.
That video is part of a larger series on Gamergate. If you liked that one, it’s worth it to see everything.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLJA_jUddXvY62dhVThbee...
I also recommend these two earlier videos, on unrelated matters.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmTUW-owa2w
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4N6y6LEwsKc
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLJA_jUddXvY62dhVThbee...
I also recommend these two earlier videos, on unrelated matters.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmTUW-owa2w
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4N6y6LEwsKc
I never called any vegans assholes. Personality quirks are not wrong, they actually make life fun.
I guess the thing I’m getting from you is I shouldn’t comment on my own observations because of toupee bias, and I shouldn’t comment on other people’s common observations because they are just memes an not real. Is there an acceptable threshold for situational humor short of a scientific study? If so, what is it?
I guess the thing I’m getting from you is I shouldn’t comment on my own observations because of toupee bias, and I shouldn’t comment on other people’s common observations because they are just memes an not real. Is there an acceptable threshold for situational humor short of a scientific study? If so, what is it?
> I never called any vegans assholes.
I know, I didn’t say you did. In my first reply I said:
> Some people are assholes and brag about anything
And it’s that narrow definition I’ve been using throughout.
> I guess the thing I’m getting from you is I shouldn’t comment on my own observations
No, of course that’s not it. We can all comment on our own observations, but it’s also important to differentiate from what we each observe as individuals and what we believe the world to be. We shouldn’t let our limited view of the world cloud our understanding of how it is.
> Is there an acceptable threshold for situational humor short of a scientific study?
Were you doing situational humour? I reread your comments and can’t find the joke¹. Judging from the grey colour in the original comment, it doesn’t look like I was the only one to miss it if that was the intention.
Though I will say unambiguously that I don’t think you’re arguing in bad faith. From my perspective, this has been a cordial chat.
¹ I guess the newspaper comment was a joke, but calling that situational seems like a stretch.
I know, I didn’t say you did. In my first reply I said:
> Some people are assholes and brag about anything
And it’s that narrow definition I’ve been using throughout.
> I guess the thing I’m getting from you is I shouldn’t comment on my own observations
No, of course that’s not it. We can all comment on our own observations, but it’s also important to differentiate from what we each observe as individuals and what we believe the world to be. We shouldn’t let our limited view of the world cloud our understanding of how it is.
> Is there an acceptable threshold for situational humor short of a scientific study?
Were you doing situational humour? I reread your comments and can’t find the joke¹. Judging from the grey colour in the original comment, it doesn’t look like I was the only one to miss it if that was the intention.
Though I will say unambiguously that I don’t think you’re arguing in bad faith. From my perspective, this has been a cordial chat.
¹ I guess the newspaper comment was a joke, but calling that situational seems like a stretch.
It’s cordial here, yes, though some other things happened in my life which I shouldn’t have let intrude into this discussion.
HN in general does not like humorous tones, or at least has a mixed reception, I notice a lot of times where my comments go back and forth between +3/-2. This one probably is a worse one. It’s observational like Seinfeld, but then I don’t really like Seinfeld’s style so I probably shouldn’t have written it in the first place.
That said a well written joke at the right time has gotten me over +50. But as I said I probably shouldn’t have been writing here at all that day, nothing good was going to be posted.
HN in general does not like humorous tones, or at least has a mixed reception, I notice a lot of times where my comments go back and forth between +3/-2. This one probably is a worse one. It’s observational like Seinfeld, but then I don’t really like Seinfeld’s style so I probably shouldn’t have written it in the first place.
That said a well written joke at the right time has gotten me over +50. But as I said I probably shouldn’t have been writing here at all that day, nothing good was going to be posted.
also in the old days, your friend bob would have told cory, "hey, did you hear alice's dad died? we should all go out for drinks". but we live in the bowling alone era, where we're increasingly isolated.
quitting social media is not, on its own, going to fix your social life. and being on social media can make you more connected, or more miserable. the responsibility is yours
quitting social media is not, on its own, going to fix your social life. and being on social media can make you more connected, or more miserable. the responsibility is yours
I'm a firm believer being loosely connected to so many people isn't the fix many seem to think it is. I find shallow connections, which is about all social media can support IMO, are worthless at best and detrimental at worst.
YMMV, but my quality of life increased in ways I can't even begin to describe by severing all the dozens or perhaps hundreds of shallow connections social media was encouraging me to cling to.
With the saved time and energy, I've been able to cultivate far fewer-- but much deeper and more (mutually) fulfilling-- connections with those who are _actually_ important.
YMMV, but my quality of life increased in ways I can't even begin to describe by severing all the dozens or perhaps hundreds of shallow connections social media was encouraging me to cling to.
With the saved time and energy, I've been able to cultivate far fewer-- but much deeper and more (mutually) fulfilling-- connections with those who are _actually_ important.
This kind of comment always makes me wonder, are the people doing this doing well financially to afford cutting off all those "loose" connections with people like that? Because I couldn't imagine just destroying these relationships for no reason when I myself have benefited vastly from keeping them alive, even if barely communicating at all with these people.
I think this advice is generally harmful to networking as someone grows, which is vital in today's society
I think this advice is generally harmful to networking as someone grows, which is vital in today's society
I don't think this discussion is about professional networking. It's about personal and social connections. If quitting Facebook makes you un-/under-employed then I think you're Doing Life Wrong.
GP mentions "severing" those connections, but I think that's even too strong a phrasing. There wasn't really anything there in the first place, so there wasn't anything to sever. Simply not reading someone else's social media posts anymore, when you didn't really interact with them outside Facebook (or for some people even inside Facebook) isn't really severing anything.
GP mentions "severing" those connections, but I think that's even too strong a phrasing. There wasn't really anything there in the first place, so there wasn't anything to sever. Simply not reading someone else's social media posts anymore, when you didn't really interact with them outside Facebook (or for some people even inside Facebook) isn't really severing anything.
1. LinkedIn.
2. Keep the other accounts, just in case.
3. How exactly are remote connections helping? In the Western world, for example, people you haven't interacted with for months and months in real life for sure won't help you financially. For jobs stuff like LinkedIn is probably better, plus regular chats on 1 instant messenger. You don't need Instagram to keep up with them.
2. Keep the other accounts, just in case.
3. How exactly are remote connections helping? In the Western world, for example, people you haven't interacted with for months and months in real life for sure won't help you financially. For jobs stuff like LinkedIn is probably better, plus regular chats on 1 instant messenger. You don't need Instagram to keep up with them.
GP deleted their LinkedIn account too.
With GitHub and Discord, these 3 are really hard to boycott for programmers (even more to publicly shame people for using them). And yet, we must dissent.
With GitHub and Discord, these 3 are really hard to boycott for programmers (even more to publicly shame people for using them). And yet, we must dissent.
I had only financial losses from these loose connections. Nobody will shove profit down your throat, but there are many greedy people that will try to extract profit from you. I basically work as a bank for them, muh connections, lol.
I wouldn't agree it is "vital," but that definitely depends on perspective and one's goals, as well as the baseline level of privilege one enjoys.
If someone's goal is to achieve CEO and/or the top 1%, certainly every single connection could hold extricable value. I'm perfectly fine hovering somewhere in the middle, even knowing I have the capability to achieve much more. My future is uncertain; I probably won't retire when I would have liked. I've accepted that, and choose to live in the present rather than focusing on the future. I know at least I won't die miserable tomorrow.
I don't deny I could have done better financially by maintaining the status quo. Now that I think of it, I'm doing worse financially than when I was using facebook & twitter. I had more money, and my career was progressing at a much higher rate, but I was inconsolable. Without the money, and without the accompanying social media-imposed drag, I see the world more clearly. My relationships are stronger with my wife, kids, and close friends. I am much happier.
If someone's goal is to achieve CEO and/or the top 1%, certainly every single connection could hold extricable value. I'm perfectly fine hovering somewhere in the middle, even knowing I have the capability to achieve much more. My future is uncertain; I probably won't retire when I would have liked. I've accepted that, and choose to live in the present rather than focusing on the future. I know at least I won't die miserable tomorrow.
I don't deny I could have done better financially by maintaining the status quo. Now that I think of it, I'm doing worse financially than when I was using facebook & twitter. I had more money, and my career was progressing at a much higher rate, but I was inconsolable. Without the money, and without the accompanying social media-imposed drag, I see the world more clearly. My relationships are stronger with my wife, kids, and close friends. I am much happier.
Couldn't agree more. I haven't deleted my Facebook account, but I no longer sign into it (I kept it because of event invitations, but at this point no one I know uses it for that anymore either). I have a little over 1,000 "friends" there. Back when I scrolled my feed multiple times per day, I read so many things about so many people who I hadn't interacted with outside of Facebook posts for years and years and years. I read so many things about so many people who I didn't even interact with on Facebook, let alone outside of it.
I don't miss any of that. Those connections were beyond shallow, and weren't adding anything positive or useful to my life.
I don't miss any of that. Those connections were beyond shallow, and weren't adding anything positive or useful to my life.
[deleted]
I'm not sure I agree, but I'm not disagreeing on principle.
You make it sound as if something was lost, maybe recently. In the grand scheme of things I'm not that old (41) but I don't even remember how that would have worked out, because I wasn't old enough to have people's parents die before social media, at least in my social circles. Yes, of course you'd hear about grandparents and such from your immediate friends but that's usually a handful and people would maybe not be shaken as much. I agree with you that social media doesn't have to mean "blasting it to hundreds or thousands of followers", but it's a thing where I actually liked Facebook. Not only techies, and getting enough updates from people who are not your closest friends that you have things to talk about (as in reference) when you met again (or talked synchronously, or privately).
You make it sound as if something was lost, maybe recently. In the grand scheme of things I'm not that old (41) but I don't even remember how that would have worked out, because I wasn't old enough to have people's parents die before social media, at least in my social circles. Yes, of course you'd hear about grandparents and such from your immediate friends but that's usually a handful and people would maybe not be shaken as much. I agree with you that social media doesn't have to mean "blasting it to hundreds or thousands of followers", but it's a thing where I actually liked Facebook. Not only techies, and getting enough updates from people who are not your closest friends that you have things to talk about (as in reference) when you met again (or talked synchronously, or privately).
In my circle, very few people maintain a social media presence. I cannot remember posting anything on social media myself - except maybe a job update on LinkedIn, and some light anonymous trolling on X. I don't have Facebook or Instagram accounts and so I never visit those sites anymore (as they require an account to read). Spending a lot of time posting on social media is seen as unintelligent, attention whoring, and a waste of time.
> In my circle, very few people maintain a social media presence.
You are not characteristic for the population at large (neither am I, don't feel sad :-) ).
You are not characteristic for the population at large (neither am I, don't feel sad :-) ).
> but we live in the bowling alone era, where we're increasingly isolated
What I see over years is that, especially in developers online groups, any usual and normal way of socializing is stigmatized. I remember reading comments about how lazy people who socialize with friends are and how we are better if we code every evening. I remember people being proud about spending christmas coding supposedly being superior to the rest of the family that is socializing.
Now we are proud if we remove ourselves from social media.
It is always the same - however other people socialize is wrong, they are stupid and lazy. We remove ourselves, because it is superior to not participate. Eventually those places die out or change, but we do not like the new places either.
And in each iteration, we expect other people to do work of keeping and managing relationships while feeling superior over not doing that.
What I see over years is that, especially in developers online groups, any usual and normal way of socializing is stigmatized. I remember reading comments about how lazy people who socialize with friends are and how we are better if we code every evening. I remember people being proud about spending christmas coding supposedly being superior to the rest of the family that is socializing.
Now we are proud if we remove ourselves from social media.
It is always the same - however other people socialize is wrong, they are stupid and lazy. We remove ourselves, because it is superior to not participate. Eventually those places die out or change, but we do not like the new places either.
And in each iteration, we expect other people to do work of keeping and managing relationships while feeling superior over not doing that.
I don't think the parent poster was arguing to exclude themselves from social life or do coding instead of talking with people. They merely argued that it's better to have fewer but meaningful and deep connections with people you genuinely care about (and they care about you), rather than having a 1000 meaningless connections with people who are basically strangers on facebook.
The role social media plays is in encouraging large numbers of superficial relationships, rather than a small handful of deep ones. It stands to reason: I don't need facebook to keep in touch with a dozen close family and friends. I can do that perfectly well in person, or over phone calls/messages. What the various social media apps did was kill the close circle of friends in favor of having 1000s of followers and turn everyone into a one-way broadcaster.
The role social media plays is in encouraging large numbers of superficial relationships, rather than a small handful of deep ones. It stands to reason: I don't need facebook to keep in touch with a dozen close family and friends. I can do that perfectly well in person, or over phone calls/messages. What the various social media apps did was kill the close circle of friends in favor of having 1000s of followers and turn everyone into a one-way broadcaster.
> What I see over years is that, especially in developers online groups, any usual and normal way of socializing is stigmatized.
Developers are not typical of regular people. They're, basically by design, outliers.
Developers are not typical of regular people. They're, basically by design, outliers.
My mother died when I was in college, before social media was a thing. I told a few closer friends about it, and asked them to spread the news and to tell others that I didn't really want to talk about it. I was missing a few weeks of the semester because of it, and knew that people would ask me where I'd been once I was back, and knew I wouldn't have the emotional bandwidth to tell everyone the story over and over and over, and accept their condolences gracefully.
It makes me really sad if it's true that people assume that when they post big, difficult stuff like that on social media, anyone who doesn't see it doesn't care about them. Even for people who are active on social media, the feed and post promotion algorithms make it fairly likely that a decent chunk of people who really should see that post might not see it.
It makes me really sad if it's true that people assume that when they post big, difficult stuff like that on social media, anyone who doesn't see it doesn't care about them. Even for people who are active on social media, the feed and post promotion algorithms make it fairly likely that a decent chunk of people who really should see that post might not see it.
> I would have more important stuff on my mind. I might post it on social media and then the onus is on other people to reach out to me.
That seems so bizarre. Just 20+ years ago this sort of sympathy seeking broadcasting action was associated with mental health illness, like Munchausen Biproxy. Yes, back in the day if tragedy happened people would take deliberate effort to call each other.
That seems so bizarre. Just 20+ years ago this sort of sympathy seeking broadcasting action was associated with mental health illness, like Munchausen Biproxy. Yes, back in the day if tragedy happened people would take deliberate effort to call each other.
20+ years ago you would have put it in the local news paper.
And that is still a thing where I live here in Italy.
Most of us would not have even done that, though yes, the option was there, but that sort of thing was much more popular 40+ years ago.
There was another discussion where this came up on HN recently, but people get quite emotionally defensive when you start scrutinizing their reasons for staying on social media, so it is hard to have an honest conversation about it without a bunch of hyperbolic takes.
In my experience, it was designed to be addictive, partly by using our own behavior against us and partly by vindicating the desire for attention. The idea that we need to be sharing every aspect of our personal narrative with the world is problematic, as it turns out, but we are so steeped in it that's there's no chance of purifying those waters, again.
To your point, yes, there was some aspect of this back in the day, what with obituaries in newspapers being out there to both acknowledge that a person lived, but also put out the call to any old acquaintances to come say goodbye, but it was a laughable effort by today's standards of maximum self-aggrandizing and competitive social engagement. We have to ask ourselves if that is a socially and mentally healthy position to be in, which is an admittedly scary question.
There was another discussion where this came up on HN recently, but people get quite emotionally defensive when you start scrutinizing their reasons for staying on social media, so it is hard to have an honest conversation about it without a bunch of hyperbolic takes.
In my experience, it was designed to be addictive, partly by using our own behavior against us and partly by vindicating the desire for attention. The idea that we need to be sharing every aspect of our personal narrative with the world is problematic, as it turns out, but we are so steeped in it that's there's no chance of purifying those waters, again.
To your point, yes, there was some aspect of this back in the day, what with obituaries in newspapers being out there to both acknowledge that a person lived, but also put out the call to any old acquaintances to come say goodbye, but it was a laughable effort by today's standards of maximum self-aggrandizing and competitive social engagement. We have to ask ourselves if that is a socially and mentally healthy position to be in, which is an admittedly scary question.
> but it was a laughable effort by today's standards of maximum self-aggrandizing and competitive social engagement.
What does this mean?
> The idea that we need to be sharing every aspect of our personal narrative with the world is problematic
I know about one or two people who does this. And it's far away from an obituary.
I'm not quite sure I get what you a saying. I just meant in my upbringing it was quite normal to share publicly when someone died. And they still do it today.
What does this mean?
> The idea that we need to be sharing every aspect of our personal narrative with the world is problematic
I know about one or two people who does this. And it's far away from an obituary.
I'm not quite sure I get what you a saying. I just meant in my upbringing it was quite normal to share publicly when someone died. And they still do it today.
> What does this mean?
Apologies if my wording was too vague. I am using 'Self-aggrandizing' to mean a high exhibition of self-importance, or to put it another way, advertising one's self in a way that makes minor events or details seem bigger than they are. I am using 'competitive social engagement' as an alternative phrase to "Keeping up with the Joneses" which illustrates comparing yourself to your neighbors in terms of status, wealth, moral fiber, etc.
The invention of Social Media propelled us into extreme versions of these two very-human aspects of our psychology, which I believe to be both dangerous and ill-fated.
My intention was not to attack in any way, I just thought your reference to obituaries was an interesting link to our past prior to social media that was worth exploring and comparing. In a way, we can think of our Facebook profile as an extended obituary since that data is all accessible after we die. In fact, I am experiencing this on Instagram, having just lost a friend on New Year's Day and sitting down to peruse his old Instagram posts for the happy memories therein. Your comment just got me thinking, so I decided to expound on it.
added: I should maybe clarify that I'm of an age that remembers what the world was like before Social Media and the Internet as we know it today. The differences when I compare those two halves of my life tend to be alarmingly drastic, which is something that warrants examination, to me, since many HN readers might be a bit too young to remember, so from their perspective, Social Media habits are likely more normalized.
Apologies if my wording was too vague. I am using 'Self-aggrandizing' to mean a high exhibition of self-importance, or to put it another way, advertising one's self in a way that makes minor events or details seem bigger than they are. I am using 'competitive social engagement' as an alternative phrase to "Keeping up with the Joneses" which illustrates comparing yourself to your neighbors in terms of status, wealth, moral fiber, etc.
The invention of Social Media propelled us into extreme versions of these two very-human aspects of our psychology, which I believe to be both dangerous and ill-fated.
My intention was not to attack in any way, I just thought your reference to obituaries was an interesting link to our past prior to social media that was worth exploring and comparing. In a way, we can think of our Facebook profile as an extended obituary since that data is all accessible after we die. In fact, I am experiencing this on Instagram, having just lost a friend on New Year's Day and sitting down to peruse his old Instagram posts for the happy memories therein. Your comment just got me thinking, so I decided to expound on it.
added: I should maybe clarify that I'm of an age that remembers what the world was like before Social Media and the Internet as we know it today. The differences when I compare those two halves of my life tend to be alarmingly drastic, which is something that warrants examination, to me, since many HN readers might be a bit too young to remember, so from their perspective, Social Media habits are likely more normalized.
Ah, yeah no problem :D
I also had no social media in my upbringing, a bit of ICQ via dial up though. Got an Facebook account and smartphone way later compared to my peers.
I also had no social media in my upbringing, a bit of ICQ via dial up though. Got an Facebook account and smartphone way later compared to my peers.
> Just 20+ years ago this sort of sympathy seeking broadcasting action was associated with mental health illness, like Munchausen Biproxy.
Do you have a reference for the claim that the diagnostic criteria for Munchausen By Proxy (or Factitious Disorder Imposed on Another) once included broadcast-type notices when a family member dies? The DSM-IV would have been in effect 20 years ago, and while version 5 doesn't have that in its warning signs, I guess it could have changed from the previous version?
Do you have a reference for the claim that the diagnostic criteria for Munchausen By Proxy (or Factitious Disorder Imposed on Another) once included broadcast-type notices when a family member dies? The DSM-IV would have been in effect 20 years ago, and while version 5 doesn't have that in its warning signs, I guess it could have changed from the previous version?
I’m not on social media but people have been posting obituaries publicly in newspapers and such for centuries.
Scale matters.
You read the obituaries in your local paper, “oh, so and so has passed away”, you don’t know them particularly well, might or might not go to the funeral.
Posting it to social media, then thinking if whoever doesn’t contact you to… what? “Sorry for your loss”? “My condolences” … hurts your relationship with that person?
Call me old fashioned, but…
Is it narcissistic in here, or is it just me?
You read the obituaries in your local paper, “oh, so and so has passed away”, you don’t know them particularly well, might or might not go to the funeral.
Posting it to social media, then thinking if whoever doesn’t contact you to… what? “Sorry for your loss”? “My condolences” … hurts your relationship with that person?
Call me old fashioned, but…
Is it narcissistic in here, or is it just me?
> Posting it to social media, then thinking if whoever doesn’t contact you to… what? “Sorry for your loss”? “My condolences” … hurts your relationship with that person?
That's not what anyone said, you're out here fighting ghosts.
> And if someone doesn't reach out, it will hurt the relationship a little even if I'm not conscience of it because when I think of people who were there for me during a tough time, the friend who never knew my parent died wouldn't come to mind.
That's not what anyone said, you're out here fighting ghosts.
> And if someone doesn't reach out, it will hurt the relationship a little even if I'm not conscience of it because when I think of people who were there for me during a tough time, the friend who never knew my parent died wouldn't come to mind.
It's implied, "And if someone doesn't reach out to say “Sorry for your loss”, it will hurt the relationship a little".
It's very country specific. I'm from Romania and I think there were obituaries in newspapers, but I'm having a hard time thinking of people I know that did it.
Right but it's not 20+ years ago. 20+ years ago when my family visited relatives abroad, our relatives would get to the airport and often have to wait for our delayed flight because they had no way of knowing and half the day would be lost. If your flight arrived early then you just waited. That was normal. Now we update each other over a web messenger, arrive at our destination, hop onto the free WiFi, then wait until our relatives greet us.
Technology changes the world around us.
Technology changes the world around us.
> 20+ years ago when my family visited relatives abroad, our relatives would get to the airport and often have to wait for our delayed flight because they had no way of knowing
Apart from phoning the airline or airport and checking whether the flight was on time. We used to do that all the time 30+ years ago.
20 years ago you could check on websites IIRC.
Apart from phoning the airline or airport and checking whether the flight was on time. We used to do that all the time 30+ years ago.
20 years ago you could check on websites IIRC.
Back in my day, we had to walk fifty miles in the snow, up hill both ways, and we couldn’t afford shoes, just to phone the airline.
Back when men were real men, women were real women, and small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri were real small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri.
Back when men were real men, women were real women, and small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri were real small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri.
and you tell young people of today that and they just won't believe you.
Thanks for that, I hadn’t seen it for a couple decades, gave me a good chuckle.
What has that got to do with social media?
Instant messaging and group chat, I’d argue, are distinct services / protocols / products vis-à-vis social media.
Strained analogies are weird. I like to call them sieved analogies, the other definition of strained.
I strained your analogy and threw out the dross.
Instant messaging and group chat, I’d argue, are distinct services / protocols / products vis-à-vis social media.
Strained analogies are weird. I like to call them sieved analogies, the other definition of strained.
I strained your analogy and threw out the dross.
If GP has an issue with Zuckerberg => Meta, they might have an issue with WhatsApp too.
The "protocols vs platforms" struggle is more relevant than ever.
(I am surprised that GP doesn't seem to have heard of Mastodon?)
The "protocols vs platforms" struggle is more relevant than ever.
(I am surprised that GP doesn't seem to have heard of Mastodon?)
Approximately no one I’ve ever know in Australia uses WhatsApp, so I generally don’t remember to remember it in these conversations.
I think I once used it to advise someone it’s owned my Facebook and sent them my public key.
I think I once used it to advise someone it’s owned my Facebook and sent them my public key.
> That seems so bizarre.
We got a real pot, meet kettle situation here. It is absolutely wild to suggest that doing something standard like arranging for an obituary in the local newspaper would be viewed as a sign of mental illness.
We got a real pot, meet kettle situation here. It is absolutely wild to suggest that doing something standard like arranging for an obituary in the local newspaper would be viewed as a sign of mental illness.
20 years ago, death announcements were expected and normal. They appeared in places people were expected to see - including local newspapers. You would also see death announcement being read in churche, posted in buildings etc. 20 years ago people met in person more often and you learned this stuff via gossip and word of mouth. Not being told to you personally, but being told to a whole group of people.
The aggressiveness of your response is absurd. No, it was not seen as a mental health illness at all.
When you expect personal one to one call, it is equivalent of removing yourself from other social structures in the past. You can do it, but your relationships will weaken and eventually die out. Just like it happened in the past.
The aggressiveness of your response is absurd. No, it was not seen as a mental health illness at all.
When you expect personal one to one call, it is equivalent of removing yourself from other social structures in the past. You can do it, but your relationships will weaken and eventually die out. Just like it happened in the past.
> I might post it on social media and then the onus is on other people to reach out to me.
Nobody can expect that everyone is on social media, let alone a specific platform. You typically tell your family and some close friends and they will spread the word.
Nobody can expect that everyone is on social media, let alone a specific platform. You typically tell your family and some close friends and they will spread the word.
If someone literally thinks it's going to hurt our relationship that I am not following their facebook nonsense I am totally happy to not have them as friend anymore
When my father died, the last thing on my mind was trying to tell as many people as possible. I didn't (and still don't) have any social media accounts so that was out of the question but I didn't tell almost anyone for a long time until it came up in conversation.
It must be quite common sense to actively contact the people you know were friends or family to your parents. Not necessarily by phone unless you also know them well, but by email or text or whatever contact details your parents have in their contact book.
I very much would think your parents would expect that of their children.
>I'm not going to call everyone in my life to tell them
It's particularly the people in your parents life you should inform, not necessarily the people in your life.
Don't forget that your social media network is not the same as your parent's social media network (if at all they use it).
I very much would think your parents would expect that of their children.
>I'm not going to call everyone in my life to tell them
It's particularly the people in your parents life you should inform, not necessarily the people in your life.
Don't forget that your social media network is not the same as your parent's social media network (if at all they use it).
Good thing we have you, hypeatai, telling us who (and who not) we're "supposed" to stay in touch with.
But it’s also nice to know what’s going on in people’s lives without needing a deep connection...
But why, though? If all you have is a shallow social-media connection with someone, why is it nice to know what's going on in their lives?
We have a finite amount of time and energy to maintain connections with people. Even shallow connections eat into that. I'd rather spend that time and energy on deeper connections. And while it's customary to say "but sure, I guess other people have different views on this, so to each their own", I... well, I honestly believe it's unhealthy to obsessively try to maintain all these sorts of shallow connections. I think this is a part of why I read about how so many people are lonely these days and have trouble forming friendships and keeping them going.
We have a finite amount of time and energy to maintain connections with people. Even shallow connections eat into that. I'd rather spend that time and energy on deeper connections. And while it's customary to say "but sure, I guess other people have different views on this, so to each their own", I... well, I honestly believe it's unhealthy to obsessively try to maintain all these sorts of shallow connections. I think this is a part of why I read about how so many people are lonely these days and have trouble forming friendships and keeping them going.
Because sometimes you rekindle relationships that have drifted apart but you still stayed somewhat tethered to thanks to social media.
I rekindled a friendship with an old friend when I realized he was visiting the same foreign country as I was. Funny enough his wife is a mutual college friend of ours whom he had lost touch with but only met again after reconnecting on social media. I also reconnected with her through my friend.
I rekindled a friendship with an old friend when I realized he was visiting the same foreign country as I was. Funny enough his wife is a mutual college friend of ours whom he had lost touch with but only met again after reconnecting on social media. I also reconnected with her through my friend.
Yep! And those little updates can sometimes lead to unexpected and meaningful reconnections, like your story with your friend and his wife.
Sometimes, those casual connections can spark something more meaningful down the line or just bring small moments of joy! Like, for instance, seeing an old friend’s travel photos or knowing that you're school friend had a baby
Agreed. I also went through it and have found no difficulty with throwing away Facebook, Twitter, etc and sticking to only direct or group messaging.
Some people HAVE gone through the "but I said in X group chat" like above, but it was all unimportant life events that they were happy to fill me in on there instead. All major things people told me directly. Just because I quit social media didn't mean I wasn't aware of the death of my dog from a world away within 2 minutes of it happening.
Some people HAVE gone through the "but I said in X group chat" like above, but it was all unimportant life events that they were happy to fill me in on there instead. All major things people told me directly. Just because I quit social media didn't mean I wasn't aware of the death of my dog from a world away within 2 minutes of it happening.
Yes, agreed. For me, quitting social media went hand in hand with a recognition that I maintained superficial contact with a large number of old friends. My relationship with these people was already “illusory”, or at least unsatisfying. Now my relationships are the product of active work, which I find more valuable, even if it means maintaining contact with a smaller group of close contacts (outside my day to day relationships). It doesn’t mean my relationship with old friends and family has died… we just have a lot more to catch-up about when we talk to each other!
I quit on and off and came to the opposite conclusion. The acquaintances I never heard from, we weren’t really in touch in any way, seeing their posts had just tricked me into thinking we were.
And that’s okay. It means 5 years later when we cross paths for real there’s lots to catch up on.
And that’s okay. It means 5 years later when we cross paths for real there’s lots to catch up on.
Yes, everyone uses social media differently and gets different things out of it.
I've got my Facebook feed so well-curated that it rarely causes me distress. And like you, I like keeping up with old acquaintances, seeing their kids' milestones, etc. I get real enjoyment out of that.
Instagram I post pics when I travel and otherwise ignore it.
Twitter OTOH is probably a net negative for me. I still keep it around to follow sports pundits during games, and I usually only follow my sports list. But I do check in on my main feed during major events, and then inevitably end up doomscrolling. For example, the LA fires hashtags are so far beyond toxic - nothing but engagement farming, malicious misinfo, political nonsense, etc. Amidst all that crap, maybe 1 in 10 tweets has good info, but I have to destroy my psyche to find it.
I've got my Facebook feed so well-curated that it rarely causes me distress. And like you, I like keeping up with old acquaintances, seeing their kids' milestones, etc. I get real enjoyment out of that.
Instagram I post pics when I travel and otherwise ignore it.
Twitter OTOH is probably a net negative for me. I still keep it around to follow sports pundits during games, and I usually only follow my sports list. But I do check in on my main feed during major events, and then inevitably end up doomscrolling. For example, the LA fires hashtags are so far beyond toxic - nothing but engagement farming, malicious misinfo, political nonsense, etc. Amidst all that crap, maybe 1 in 10 tweets has good info, but I have to destroy my psyche to find it.
>Turns out that a lot of people I knew posted huge life updates that I completely missed out on.
TBH I have no idea where or if my friend post stuff on social media anymore. I know maybe 1 person that posted updates often on Facebook, and that was pre-pandemic. Some post more business stuff on twitter.
But overall I just kind of accept that sometimes I'll meet up with someone after a few years and realize "oh yeah, they're married now, took a trip to Japan for 6 months, and is getting some local attention from their band they made a few years ago"
Of course, the first thing men will say after that meeting is simply "I've been fine, can't complain. How about you?". Maybe they'll mention their new job, but the rest will come after some 15-30 minutes of observation and chatting about the newest media.
>but I know a lack of social media meant that I have lost touch with old acquaintances completely. I have a few close friends and that’s it.
likewise, but I'm not sure if social media would have saved that for me. It's definitely a cultural issue, especially with men.
TBH I have no idea where or if my friend post stuff on social media anymore. I know maybe 1 person that posted updates often on Facebook, and that was pre-pandemic. Some post more business stuff on twitter.
But overall I just kind of accept that sometimes I'll meet up with someone after a few years and realize "oh yeah, they're married now, took a trip to Japan for 6 months, and is getting some local attention from their band they made a few years ago"
Of course, the first thing men will say after that meeting is simply "I've been fine, can't complain. How about you?". Maybe they'll mention their new job, but the rest will come after some 15-30 minutes of observation and chatting about the newest media.
>but I know a lack of social media meant that I have lost touch with old acquaintances completely. I have a few close friends and that’s it.
likewise, but I'm not sure if social media would have saved that for me. It's definitely a cultural issue, especially with men.
Problem is facebook decides what you want to see unless you go to the feed which they make hard. Even then the vast majoritiy of what you see is garbage they share instead of life updates that you want.
I wish there was a better way but life updates still a posted there only. Facebook is the only one that has a concept of this is a for my friends only.
I wish there was a better way but life updates still a posted there only. Facebook is the only one that has a concept of this is a for my friends only.
Yeah, I couldn't put it into words on why "Facebook got worse over the years". But that was definitely one of the keys shifts (outside of my friends leaving). I was getting less updates from people I know and more "news that will make you angry" kind of stuff. I probably really "left" around 2017. But 2020 is when I finally got around to freezing the account.
Realistically everything my several hundred friends have to share with me takes maybe 5 minutes a day to go through (close friends of course would call about things that are too personal for facebook so this is about things more distance friends would care about) . There is a lot more money in the handful of people who are scrolling through, finding, and sharing various memes and news that will make you angry (though this is fun if you - like most people - have friends on both the right and the left doing this and so you can see the bias each side is taking) than there is in friends sharing their life which is not lived on facebook (unless your a physically disabled and so you can only live vicariously through others)
> Of course, the first thing men will say after that meeting is simply "I've been fine, can't complain. How about you?".
> Some of this is natural (though I don't believe healthy) but I think some of this is due to social media where people expect others to be aware of all their major events.
I sometimes do this despite not posting any personal stuff on social media. The reasoning here is pretty simple, I usually don't have a full list of all the stuff that happened in the last few years in mind. When meeting someone I see more often, it's quite easy to think about the last week/month and start with the noteworthy events; whereas, when meeting someone after a few years, not only do I need to think about what happened, but also which of those events might interest the person in question and what level of detail is appropriate
I sometimes do this despite not posting any personal stuff on social media. The reasoning here is pretty simple, I usually don't have a full list of all the stuff that happened in the last few years in mind. When meeting someone I see more often, it's quite easy to think about the last week/month and start with the noteworthy events; whereas, when meeting someone after a few years, not only do I need to think about what happened, but also which of those events might interest the person in question and what level of detail is appropriate
> But overall I just kind of accept that sometimes I'll meet up with someone after a few years and realize "oh yeah, they're married now, took a trip to Japan for 6 months, and is getting some local attention from their band they made a few years ago"
This was a big thing I realized, too. For some people in my life I do genuinely want to know about those sorts of things as they are happening, and for those people I'm in frequent contact with them through text, group chat, real-life meetings, etc. But for everyone else, it is completely fine if I hear about those big life updates months or years after they happen, on the less-frequent occasions when we get together and catch up. Some relationships are different, and that's fine.
This was a big thing I realized, too. For some people in my life I do genuinely want to know about those sorts of things as they are happening, and for those people I'm in frequent contact with them through text, group chat, real-life meetings, etc. But for everyone else, it is completely fine if I hear about those big life updates months or years after they happen, on the less-frequent occasions when we get together and catch up. Some relationships are different, and that's fine.
This is just said from my perspective and I understand that others might not share it -
Fine with me. They're acquaintances. Nobody has 200+ "friends", we have a handful of them. Is it nice to know that someone I hung out with a handful of times twenty years ago but otherwise don't really know and haven't said a word to in a decade made a big life change? Sure, I guess, but for the most part it has absolutely no bearing or impact on my day-to-day life nor the lives of those most important to me, and that's where I'm putting my energy.
Fine with me. They're acquaintances. Nobody has 200+ "friends", we have a handful of them. Is it nice to know that someone I hung out with a handful of times twenty years ago but otherwise don't really know and haven't said a word to in a decade made a big life change? Sure, I guess, but for the most part it has absolutely no bearing or impact on my day-to-day life nor the lives of those most important to me, and that's where I'm putting my energy.
I was applying for a job once and recruiter told me I need to have at least 100 Facebook friends to be hired. Played Mafia for a couple of days and got 400 "friends". Was hired and HR presented me at the company meeting as a social media star)
This sounds made up.
I’m not saying it is, just that it’s so bizarre, it’s literally unbelievable.
Like something The Onion would write.
I’m not saying it is, just that it’s so bizarre, it’s literally unbelievable.
Like something The Onion would write.
That's true and happened in 2011. Social media was AI of the day.
If I'd been talking to that recruiter I would have politely declined to continue the interview process. Unless the job itself was directly related to interacting with people on Facebook, the number of Facebook "friends" you have has nothing to do with your ability to do the job.
Heck, I missed huge announcements when I was on social media because social media thought that the stuff they had to show me was more important.
[deleted]
I've quit social media (only use Signal and SMS/telephone/email). My wife functions as my secretary in this. I get the perks without the BS. Win-win. Only thing to remember is SMS/telephone/email aren't secure.
I cannot say much as I don’t know the people.
Turns out that a lot of people I knew posted huge life updates that I completely missed out on. I asked them why they didn’t tell me and they were confused. They said the posted it on social media
My impression is „how can one be so self centered” to imagine everyone HAS to know about their big event if they were not part of it and were not invited directly.
Is that person Kardashian family or something ;).
Even if it was a wedding and they posted photos. I wouldn’t remember a week later - if it is a person I see once in 5 years face to face and I was not invited. There are many big life events of such people.
Turns out that a lot of people I knew posted huge life updates that I completely missed out on. I asked them why they didn’t tell me and they were confused. They said the posted it on social media
My impression is „how can one be so self centered” to imagine everyone HAS to know about their big event if they were not part of it and were not invited directly.
Is that person Kardashian family or something ;).
Even if it was a wedding and they posted photos. I wouldn’t remember a week later - if it is a person I see once in 5 years face to face and I was not invited. There are many big life events of such people.
I think if people want to 'quit' social media, then just use it to keep up to date with friends/family. You follow ONLY friends/family, and limit consumption to only that, don't consume content outside of that circle.
These full fledged 'quit' posts are nothing more than an attempt at a political statement that falls on deaf ears.
These full fledged 'quit' posts are nothing more than an attempt at a political statement that falls on deaf ears.
Does that really work? I haven't used one of these for a while but if I recall they're quite keen to take content that your friends/family have engaged with and ram it down your throat in hopes that you will too. It seems like you'd need all of your friends/family to do the same thing.
So I only use facebook on desktop, I don't have it installed on my phone. When I go to the website, at the top of the page is 'feeds' and on the left is 'friends' filter. I just bookmark that page and only view that.
https://www.facebook.com/?filter=friends&sk=h_chr
https://www.facebook.com/?filter=friends&sk=h_chr
If neither you nor they bothered reaching out, did either of you actually care? It might be a good time to reevaluate the nature of your relationships and start maintaining the ones you actively (instead of passively) care about outside of corporate shopping mall websites.
I think it's perfectly fine to learn about huge life updates from people the next time you actually speak with them. That seems normal.
Seeing people's updates on a wall isn't truly keeping up with friends. Keeping up and staying in touch requires consistent deliberate effort from both parties, via phone calls, messaging, and seeing each other in person. If you're not doing that with someone, then yeah, learning about life updates when you actually chat and catch up just makes sense to me.
Seeing people's updates on a wall isn't truly keeping up with friends. Keeping up and staying in touch requires consistent deliberate effort from both parties, via phone calls, messaging, and seeing each other in person. If you're not doing that with someone, then yeah, learning about life updates when you actually chat and catch up just makes sense to me.
Plus it's a lot more personal and meaningful when you can discuss the changes directly rather than on an impersonal "public" forum.
Right, and when I meet up with a friend in person to catch up (whether it's a close friend who I see weekly or a less-close friend who I see once or twice a year), we both give each other those life updates in a personally-tailored manner that perfectly fits the nature of our relationship with each other. That's how I want my interactions with people to be.
No, I disagree.
This is about lifestyle ergonomics and your community. Like it or not, social media has significantly reshaped the world. Issues aside, it has brought people together and made communication significantly easier than in the past. There is a reason 1/3 of the world is on Facebook.
So, my point is that if you're choosing to be difficult, that is fine but you need to accept the burden falls on you. This is similar to adopting a vegan diet - your body your choice, but don't be intentionally difficult at dinner parties.
Personal example here: I've cut down social media significantly, in my case all notifications are off even if the apps are installed. So you're not bombarded and can engage on a cadence that makes sense to you. That said, I need to dedicate time to checking up on extended family, friends etc - as otherwise you do miss announcements and major events.
This is about lifestyle ergonomics and your community. Like it or not, social media has significantly reshaped the world. Issues aside, it has brought people together and made communication significantly easier than in the past. There is a reason 1/3 of the world is on Facebook.
So, my point is that if you're choosing to be difficult, that is fine but you need to accept the burden falls on you. This is similar to adopting a vegan diet - your body your choice, but don't be intentionally difficult at dinner parties.
Personal example here: I've cut down social media significantly, in my case all notifications are off even if the apps are installed. So you're not bombarded and can engage on a cadence that makes sense to you. That said, I need to dedicate time to checking up on extended family, friends etc - as otherwise you do miss announcements and major events.
I don’t understand how you’re being “difficult” by not keeping up to date on the Facebook updates of your friends. I will of course update all my close friends 1:1 on any life changes, and I expect they will do the same to me. For everyone else, there’s nothing “difficult” about asking for a life update the next time you see them. If anything, it shows interest and is a kind thing to do.
I might guess my comment here in a "meta sense" is looked down upon here (for good reason) but that comment you responded to rings a certain way and along with other dialog here and the issue at hand (world scale industry of eyeballs and diversion) i have to politely guess the thought of astroturfing that came to me might be fair.
> Like it or not, social media has significantly reshaped the world.
Certainly! I don't think that fact is in dispute. But we can definitely debate the quality of relationships that have resulted from that reshaping, and make our own personal determinations as to whether social media has been a net positive or negative in our lives.
The problem is that, for some people, it really has had a negative impact on their lives, but they don't or can't see it.
Certainly! I don't think that fact is in dispute. But we can definitely debate the quality of relationships that have resulted from that reshaping, and make our own personal determinations as to whether social media has been a net positive or negative in our lives.
The problem is that, for some people, it really has had a negative impact on their lives, but they don't or can't see it.
also eschewed social media. it's a different way of relating. normal people now react the way minor celebrities used to react when I'd meet them and not know anything about them, either insulted or very relieved.
I think it has made me a better friend in some ways, as I'm a respite from the narratives they sustain, but to others, also a kind of legacy friend who may be an attachment to an old life, and who isn't part of their present.
there's an aspect where watching their social media would be to participate in the change in their lives, and separating from it (perhaps selfishly) preserves things that might be left behind. but on the other hand, I'm interested in relating in one way too. social media profiles are strange because they say, "see, I am all these things now!" and in not seeing them, it declines to recognize those, like an old uncle you're always going to be a kid to because that's how you always were.
I have more old friends than most, and I often think about whether there is an essential self we see in each other, like a character that all these stories happen around where we can peer across them to one another, protagonist to protagonist, as companions in the real. or are the relationships artifacts of the stories, and when they change, we do? it's prob a mix, but I don't think those essential(ist) aspects of friendship survive being mediated by the churn of updates and the curation of a public persona.
anyway, being outside social media is a very different way to relate and not everything survives.
I think it has made me a better friend in some ways, as I'm a respite from the narratives they sustain, but to others, also a kind of legacy friend who may be an attachment to an old life, and who isn't part of their present.
there's an aspect where watching their social media would be to participate in the change in their lives, and separating from it (perhaps selfishly) preserves things that might be left behind. but on the other hand, I'm interested in relating in one way too. social media profiles are strange because they say, "see, I am all these things now!" and in not seeing them, it declines to recognize those, like an old uncle you're always going to be a kid to because that's how you always were.
I have more old friends than most, and I often think about whether there is an essential self we see in each other, like a character that all these stories happen around where we can peer across them to one another, protagonist to protagonist, as companions in the real. or are the relationships artifacts of the stories, and when they change, we do? it's prob a mix, but I don't think those essential(ist) aspects of friendship survive being mediated by the churn of updates and the curation of a public persona.
anyway, being outside social media is a very different way to relate and not everything survives.
Lots of other replies already so apologies for adding to the clutter, but this sort of message always appears and it feels super dated. Like, 2003-era sentiment about the Facebook heyday.
Facebook is like a ghost town now from the "social" and family perspective. I imagine some circles might be strong on it, but from every time this comes up it's clear that the vast majority of normal people have largely abandoned it. They didn't delete their accounts, but updates are incredibly infrequent. The vast majority of Facebook activity seems to be people who don't really know each other in various conspiracy-oriented or political groups, sports arguments, etc.
As to huge life events you missed out on, even in 2003 if you only knew about something because of a Facebook post, you aren't very close. And the old acquaintances thing grows super old super quick. Everyone joined a bunch of graduating class groups, connected with old coworkers, and then... eh, turns out there was a reason we all lost contact.
In 2025 people use social media overwhelmingly to interact with strangers, not friends or family. Largely to argue and get angry and try to convince and coerce and convert. I mean, HN fits the bill in a microcosm.
Social media is a cancer on society. It has made everything much, much worse. It lets the ill-informed and unintelligent find each other and pump each other up. It monetizes and profits off of the absolute worst human traits. If Meta collapsed into a blackhole, Xitter disappeared, and so on, the world would be a much better place.
Facebook is like a ghost town now from the "social" and family perspective. I imagine some circles might be strong on it, but from every time this comes up it's clear that the vast majority of normal people have largely abandoned it. They didn't delete their accounts, but updates are incredibly infrequent. The vast majority of Facebook activity seems to be people who don't really know each other in various conspiracy-oriented or political groups, sports arguments, etc.
As to huge life events you missed out on, even in 2003 if you only knew about something because of a Facebook post, you aren't very close. And the old acquaintances thing grows super old super quick. Everyone joined a bunch of graduating class groups, connected with old coworkers, and then... eh, turns out there was a reason we all lost contact.
In 2025 people use social media overwhelmingly to interact with strangers, not friends or family. Largely to argue and get angry and try to convince and coerce and convert. I mean, HN fits the bill in a microcosm.
Social media is a cancer on society. It has made everything much, much worse. It lets the ill-informed and unintelligent find each other and pump each other up. It monetizes and profits off of the absolute worst human traits. If Meta collapsed into a blackhole, Xitter disappeared, and so on, the world would be a much better place.
Facebook didn’t exist in 2003.
I was being facetious that Facemash was started in 2003, for the Harvard homies.
The point being simply that Facebook as a social connections property hasn't been a thing for years.
The point being simply that Facebook as a social connections property hasn't been a thing for years.
You can easily replace FB with Instagram in this context. Nobody I know personally posts very much on Facebook, but they do post their updates on Instagram stories.
Facebook's last hook on me is groups - small town community groups especially. If you live in an area with its own group, there's a high likelihood that it's going to be on Facebook.
I don't really have the time to campaign to non tech-savvy retiring gen Xers and their parents that I don't want to use Facebook to know what's happening in my area, find services, etc.
Facebook's last hook on me is groups - small town community groups especially. If you live in an area with its own group, there's a high likelihood that it's going to be on Facebook.
I don't really have the time to campaign to non tech-savvy retiring gen Xers and their parents that I don't want to use Facebook to know what's happening in my area, find services, etc.
> Facebook is like a ghost town now from the "social" and family perspective.
I looked at my Facebook profile with 400 friends and they are mostly ads, memes and inspirational sayings. It’s really useless.
I have four SMS groups of friends/family I care about. My wife gets more value out of it than I do because she is part of a few groups that she cares about
I looked at my Facebook profile with 400 friends and they are mostly ads, memes and inspirational sayings. It’s really useless.
I have four SMS groups of friends/family I care about. My wife gets more value out of it than I do because she is part of a few groups that she cares about
[deleted]
I would distinguish somewhere my friends post stuff for "friends" from social media.
Lets take my friend Em as our example. If the typical message from Em says "Where are you? What time did we say we'll meet" that's a messenger app, that's definitely not Social Media. It might be a fucking SMS, but if it's a WhatsApp or a Signal. it's all the same for this purpose and that's definitely not Social Media.
If the typical message from Em says "They don't know about my trees" and involves an in-joke reference to a movie that six people saw with her in 2008, that's maybe some sort of "social" experience but it's clearly not public. We have a Slack like this, created under pandemic conditions and named "Cabin Fever Mitigation".
If the typical message says "Aw! Piggy" and has a picture of a guinea pig, that is now shading into Social Media. Probably some of the people "following" this feed don't know who she is but they like guinea pigs, or they like her art, or something similar.
And yes obviously if the typical message is a reply to Elon Musk then it's social media and it can fuck off. But hopefully your friends aren't making crucial life updates as a public address to any watching fascists ?
Lets take my friend Em as our example. If the typical message from Em says "Where are you? What time did we say we'll meet" that's a messenger app, that's definitely not Social Media. It might be a fucking SMS, but if it's a WhatsApp or a Signal. it's all the same for this purpose and that's definitely not Social Media.
If the typical message from Em says "They don't know about my trees" and involves an in-joke reference to a movie that six people saw with her in 2008, that's maybe some sort of "social" experience but it's clearly not public. We have a Slack like this, created under pandemic conditions and named "Cabin Fever Mitigation".
If the typical message says "Aw! Piggy" and has a picture of a guinea pig, that is now shading into Social Media. Probably some of the people "following" this feed don't know who she is but they like guinea pigs, or they like her art, or something similar.
And yes obviously if the typical message is a reply to Elon Musk then it's social media and it can fuck off. But hopefully your friends aren't making crucial life updates as a public address to any watching fascists ?
Me too! It's okay, you can't do everything and people "should" appreciate others who don't do social.
You could just call the people most important in your life and speak and hear their updates. It would mean more to them than a comment on FB or whatever other social they are on.
> I know a lack of social media meant that I have lost touch with old acquaintances completely
I think that’s a feature, not a bug.
Most of the life updates people post on social media are the best of the best, which is what triggers so much fomo and trying to measure up. That’s why social media makes most people feel worse about their own lives. (Not to mention all of the other garbage these platforms try to push on you that you didn’t even ask for.)
If these people are really important to us, then we’d find other means of staying in touch: text them, call them, invite them over (if that’s feasible).
And if enough people get off social media, everyone else might also realize they need to make an effort to stay in touch with others, instead of the lazy post of glamour shots for the purpose of internet likes and feeding the dopamine addiction.
I think that’s a feature, not a bug.
Most of the life updates people post on social media are the best of the best, which is what triggers so much fomo and trying to measure up. That’s why social media makes most people feel worse about their own lives. (Not to mention all of the other garbage these platforms try to push on you that you didn’t even ask for.)
If these people are really important to us, then we’d find other means of staying in touch: text them, call them, invite them over (if that’s feasible).
And if enough people get off social media, everyone else might also realize they need to make an effort to stay in touch with others, instead of the lazy post of glamour shots for the purpose of internet likes and feeding the dopamine addiction.
I don't know about other people but social media doesn't make me feel worse about my life. There's no fomo when my 2nd cousin in another state posts about having a baby. She's important to me, and I don't expect her to waste time emailing me directly when the rest of the extended family is all on social media.
Sure, events/posts like that are the main upside to social media.
Unfortunately, that makes up a tiny fraction of most feeds.
Unfortunately, that makes up a tiny fraction of most feeds.
It didn't make me feel worse but it did bring out the worst in me. It's too easy to slip into bragging about your life and how well it's going.
Pretty mugh all my friends stopped doing that after their mid 20s. Eventually everyone figures out that social media status games give little.
Why?
I quit social media 12 years ago and it's been an amazing boost to my personal psychology and productivity. My life is 10x better without it. I've forgotten many acquaintances and gained many more, and forgotten them again. Life is like that, but the core group of people is there, and I'm happy with that.
I did the same thing. Now all I have is github, stackoverflow, and HN. I end up missing out on all sorts of things that I'd like to have been along for. I'm not about to go back, I think that being at the business end of somebody's propaganda machine was even worse for me, but it's still a significant sacrifice.
Which is why I don't think the way forward is for everybody to leave social media. It's just not going to happen en masse, that's asking too much. We need to build media which can't be owned. If we ask people to sacrifice something, it should be an extra few cents on their electric bill and yesteryear's phone plugged in somewhere and hosting their share of it.
I've only been exploring it for a few days now, but nostr seems promising for this kind of thing. The content is awful, just coin bro stuff, but as something to plug into and build apps for... seems legit.
Which is why I don't think the way forward is for everybody to leave social media. It's just not going to happen en masse, that's asking too much. We need to build media which can't be owned. If we ask people to sacrifice something, it should be an extra few cents on their electric bill and yesteryear's phone plugged in somewhere and hosting their share of it.
I've only been exploring it for a few days now, but nostr seems promising for this kind of thing. The content is awful, just coin bro stuff, but as something to plug into and build apps for... seems legit.
For me (been off social media since 2019 or so), the solution has been smaller, targeted groups of friends, as well as making one-on-one effort.
I have quite a few group chats with no more than a dozen people in each one, with many that have only 3 or 4 people. And I make a point to message people one-on-one to keep in touch, and set up time to meet in person for people who are local to where I live. For people who aren't local, we make a point to meet up in some city somewhere once a year or so, depending on the closeness of the friendships in the group.
It requires more work than scrolling a Facebook feed and commenting on people's posts, but it's orders of magnitude more rewarding. And I don't miss the other hundreds of people on Facebook who I don't hear about at all now.
I have quite a few group chats with no more than a dozen people in each one, with many that have only 3 or 4 people. And I make a point to message people one-on-one to keep in touch, and set up time to meet in person for people who are local to where I live. For people who aren't local, we make a point to meet up in some city somewhere once a year or so, depending on the closeness of the friendships in the group.
It requires more work than scrolling a Facebook feed and commenting on people's posts, but it's orders of magnitude more rewarding. And I don't miss the other hundreds of people on Facebook who I don't hear about at all now.
It’s funny, a few groups I belong to solely use FB. One group is for the preservation of weatern history and a friend digitizes and uploads thousands of pictures (if not 10s of rhoughsands) yearly. The only actual digital copies are on FB. It bugs me that he won’t archive elsewhere. The reason is fb is a commons and an additional backup would be a magnitude more work. I’ve offered to buy hard drives.
Why not upload to archive.org?
But Facebook is almost, but not quite entirely unlike commons...
If someone relies on broadcast notifications to communicate, whether it be by snail mail, SMS, email, megaphone, or otherwise, maybe it is not really worth hearing?
To me, it seems like if someone has so many friends or is so busy that they need to manage their life using this strategy, you probably aren't going to have much of a connection anyway.
To me, it seems like if someone has so many friends or is so busy that they need to manage their life using this strategy, you probably aren't going to have much of a connection anyway.
Let us just say that not all friendships, even the ones that start out strong, end up having the same depth to them because of the loss of shared context (e.g. moving out of the same city for jobs, new responsibilities caused by marriage etc.)
In such cases, there's still some reason for the two people involved to at least have a general idea of what's going on in other people's lives, and even reach out should there be something significant, such as a birth of a child or a loss in their families, etc. Without the broadcast aspect, once communication has ceased for some amount of time, it is very difficult to restart it, at any level.
As an introvert, I still find broadcasts weird, because there's that tingling notion that people wouldn't care anyway; and was one of the reasons I ceased to be on social media many years ago. However, I understand why some people choose to do things differently.
(There are similar anecdotes throughout this thread, I'd encourage you to read it for perspectives on this matter.)
In such cases, there's still some reason for the two people involved to at least have a general idea of what's going on in other people's lives, and even reach out should there be something significant, such as a birth of a child or a loss in their families, etc. Without the broadcast aspect, once communication has ceased for some amount of time, it is very difficult to restart it, at any level.
As an introvert, I still find broadcasts weird, because there's that tingling notion that people wouldn't care anyway; and was one of the reasons I ceased to be on social media many years ago. However, I understand why some people choose to do things differently.
(There are similar anecdotes throughout this thread, I'd encourage you to read it for perspectives on this matter.)
I find it weird that after scrolling through hundreds of messages here nobody mentioned blogs.
You would think that this one place where you would specifically find out about huge life events like deaths / births ?!
You would think that this one place where you would specifically find out about huge life events like deaths / births ?!
Most people do not have a unified workflow for reading multiple blogs (RSS etc.) and replying to them, and they also lack the privacy control that is available in social media.
It's a little unreasonable to expect people to put in that effort.
It's a little unreasonable to expect people to put in that effort.
I do think this trade off is real. I came off most of social media for a few years and was the happiest I’ve been in a long time. It is however a bit isolating. I stayed in touch with friends, but lots of acquaintances slipped away without an easy way to keep in touch.
> Turns out that a lot of people I knew posted huge life updates that I completely missed out on.
I wish I would still see those. While I have an account, I rarely use FB nowadays, because the algorithm thinks I’ll be more interested in stuff I don’t care about. So when I go to FB I tend to close the tab again a few seconds later…
I wish I would still see those. While I have an account, I rarely use FB nowadays, because the algorithm thinks I’ll be more interested in stuff I don’t care about. So when I go to FB I tend to close the tab again a few seconds later…
I just started aggressively unfollowing and hiding stuff I really didn’t want to see. I used to hate the idea of doing that, but I realized if not doing it was making me want to cut off everybody then I was probably better off just filtering aggressively.
Now my feed is very pleasant. Family updates, sports news, friends vacation pictures and jokes.
Now my feed is very pleasant. Family updates, sports news, friends vacation pictures and jokes.
I only follow stuff I want to see. But facebook shows me a ton of other things.
Reels every few posts are usually sexily dressed Asian women, or more normally dressed White women, with some kind of clickbait text overlaid. I think I maybe clicked on a reel once or twice ever.
Then my feed is full of suggested content. Which I also don’t want to see. From metal bands I don’t care about and festivals I don’t wanna go to, to offensive content.
And finally: Ordering. Non-chronological ordering makes no sense, because everything is random (probably not, somehow maximizes engagement for users very different from me, I guess). So I can’t even scroll for the stuff I want to see.
Reels every few posts are usually sexily dressed Asian women, or more normally dressed White women, with some kind of clickbait text overlaid. I think I maybe clicked on a reel once or twice ever.
Then my feed is full of suggested content. Which I also don’t want to see. From metal bands I don’t care about and festivals I don’t wanna go to, to offensive content.
And finally: Ordering. Non-chronological ordering makes no sense, because everything is random (probably not, somehow maximizes engagement for users very different from me, I guess). So I can’t even scroll for the stuff I want to see.
>And finally: Ordering. Non-chronological ordering makes no sense, because everything is random (probably not, somehow maximizes engagement for users very different from me, I guess). So I can’t even scroll for the stuff I want to see.
Does https://www.facebook.com/?sk=h_chr not work anymore? It should surface the chronological feed without reels and other recommended slop.
Does https://www.facebook.com/?sk=h_chr not work anymore? It should surface the chronological feed without reels and other recommended slop.
I love you!
This does exactly what I want! It makes FB usable again!
This does exactly what I want! It makes FB usable again!
...np, I guess.
To be honest, I'm actually disappointed in myself for helping fb retain a user
To be honest, I'm actually disappointed in myself for helping fb retain a user
I mean, without a curating algorithm, facebook is pretty cool. I’ve been one of the earlier users (having had to register my German university e-mail as a student mail to be allowed in), and the only negative parts have ever been Facebook forcing things on me that I don’t want.
The Reels, I'm with you on.
It does seem to keep showing you more of what you click on though, so I hit a good trend of funny clips from Modern Family, How I Met Your Mother, Friends and random interesting nature videos and for the most part those dominate now.
But no matter what you click on it seems like they are really determined to keep throwing in the various ladies clips.
It does seem to keep showing you more of what you click on though, so I hit a good trend of funny clips from Modern Family, How I Met Your Mother, Friends and random interesting nature videos and for the most part those dominate now.
But no matter what you click on it seems like they are really determined to keep throwing in the various ladies clips.
I found that this plugin really helped: https://www.fbpurity.com/
Thinking you can blast something on social media and your friends and family will see it is an old mentality. Even non super tech-savvy people know now what the algorithms are, and they know that everyone regularly misses updates from everyone else.
And that light connection to people through social media wasn't a thing that created "close friends" anyway. It add to those weak connections that do have value but I doubt many people create intimate friend relationships solely through social media.
And that light connection to people through social media wasn't a thing that created "close friends" anyway. It add to those weak connections that do have value but I doubt many people create intimate friend relationships solely through social media.
Nice.
Maybe part of the seeming increasing anxiety of society is that we don't have friends in the correct sense and instead we have "friends" in the "just another user ID attached to a database query for your user ID" sense.
Maybe part of the seeming increasing anxiety of society is that we don't have friends in the correct sense and instead we have "friends" in the "just another user ID attached to a database query for your user ID" sense.
Yeah! Facebook is too busy showing me content farm AI slop to show me my cousin's baby photos.
If your acquaintances didn't take the time to update you directly, then maybe either the updates or the acquaintances themselves aren't really relevant for you. And that's ok.
This is my experience too. While I do maintain some accounts, I don't check them much anymore except for updating my statuses and life events, and even then I haven't done those in a while now.
The advice to "quit social media" , "get a FairPhone", " get an FTP account and mount it with curlftps... " is often tossed around HN a lot, but real life flies in the diametrically opposite direction. While I'm not largely affected by it, I still feel a twinge of disappointment not finding out when an old friend has had a major life event.
The advice to "quit social media" , "get a FairPhone", " get an FTP account and mount it with curlftps... " is often tossed around HN a lot, but real life flies in the diametrically opposite direction. While I'm not largely affected by it, I still feel a twinge of disappointment not finding out when an old friend has had a major life event.
> I have a few close friends and that’s it.
Sounds perfect. I rather have a few close friends than two dozen semi-friends.
Sounds perfect. I rather have a few close friends than two dozen semi-friends.
yep
i deleted fb 10ish years ago.
and since then every family event that had been planned, was done on fb (just like before) and i find out about it by a text from my sister.
the trick is to not give a shit. Coz they don't.
i deleted fb 10ish years ago.
and since then every family event that had been planned, was done on fb (just like before) and i find out about it by a text from my sister.
the trick is to not give a shit. Coz they don't.
Dropped FB for HN in 2017... and eventually I find myself now again on X for some #genaury stuff which is basically nowhere else to find. Happily most reasonable tech stuff lists on HN, some interesting stuff on MR, both being more-or-less a social network (of sorts) in a 90s disguise.
Conventional media can be ok for casual reading/scrolling, but feels increasingly out-of-touch. Interestingly these days cnn, bbc, dw, en, and aj list different headlines, which is not what it was 15 y.ago.
Still I'd strongly advise against all push media, and in particular Meta's products which pose a very high-risk of (screen) addiction thanks to hundreds of hidden retention mechanisms.
Conventional media can be ok for casual reading/scrolling, but feels increasingly out-of-touch. Interestingly these days cnn, bbc, dw, en, and aj list different headlines, which is not what it was 15 y.ago.
Still I'd strongly advise against all push media, and in particular Meta's products which pose a very high-risk of (screen) addiction thanks to hundreds of hidden retention mechanisms.
> some interesting stuff on MR
I'm drawing a blank for MR. What does it stand for?
I'm drawing a blank for MR. What does it stand for?
I guess it comes down to weighing the value of those connections against the downsides of staying on the platforms
> Maybe that’s an ok tradeoff to make, but it’s worth knowing that before getting into it.
I think that's the key point. I realized that ultimately I didn't actually care about those huge life updates if they concerned people who I'm not in somewhat-regular contact with. Like, if my Facebook friend John Smith (let's say he's an old high-school friend I haven't seen since high school) posts about his marriage, or new job, or new child, and I don't actually chat with John anymore and don't know anything about his life outside of what I read on Facebook, why do I even care to know this stuff at all? And it turns out the answer is that... I don't! And there's nothing wrong with that. It's not rude or mean; some people are the closest of friends, and some people barely even warrant the "acquaintance" tag -- and everything in between -- and there's nothing wrong with any of that.
And yes, I've missed social media posts about big-life stuff from closer friends who I do care about, but that's fine! I chat with those people via some avenue (email, text, messaging group, real-life, whatever) often enough that I still get those big-life updates, and usually it's in a more personalized manner, that gets me details that are tailored to the level of closeness of our friendship.
For people who I'm not super close with, but still maintain a relationship with, maybe I get that update about their life 6 months later, when we are next in contact. That's also fine! If we were closer friends, we'd chat more often, and I'd hear about it earlier. But we're not, and I don't, and there's nothing wrong with that.
> a lack of social media meant that I have lost touch with old acquaintances completely. I have a few close friends and that’s it.
That's more your choice than anything else. You always have the option to text or email someone directly to say hello and see how they're doing, or to set up a time to meet in person to catch up. Even if they're perhaps not the one-on-one type of friends, you can start a group chat with that person and other mutual friends who might enjoy keeping in touch that way. There are so so so many options for communication these days that it's almost overwhelming! But it certainly need not be a binary between "social media firehose of every person I've ever met" and "I only hear about the lives of few people".
Is it important to you to be in touch with those old acquaintances? If so, reach out to them! If not, then it sounds like quitting social media was fine for you.
I think that's the key point. I realized that ultimately I didn't actually care about those huge life updates if they concerned people who I'm not in somewhat-regular contact with. Like, if my Facebook friend John Smith (let's say he's an old high-school friend I haven't seen since high school) posts about his marriage, or new job, or new child, and I don't actually chat with John anymore and don't know anything about his life outside of what I read on Facebook, why do I even care to know this stuff at all? And it turns out the answer is that... I don't! And there's nothing wrong with that. It's not rude or mean; some people are the closest of friends, and some people barely even warrant the "acquaintance" tag -- and everything in between -- and there's nothing wrong with any of that.
And yes, I've missed social media posts about big-life stuff from closer friends who I do care about, but that's fine! I chat with those people via some avenue (email, text, messaging group, real-life, whatever) often enough that I still get those big-life updates, and usually it's in a more personalized manner, that gets me details that are tailored to the level of closeness of our friendship.
For people who I'm not super close with, but still maintain a relationship with, maybe I get that update about their life 6 months later, when we are next in contact. That's also fine! If we were closer friends, we'd chat more often, and I'd hear about it earlier. But we're not, and I don't, and there's nothing wrong with that.
> a lack of social media meant that I have lost touch with old acquaintances completely. I have a few close friends and that’s it.
That's more your choice than anything else. You always have the option to text or email someone directly to say hello and see how they're doing, or to set up a time to meet in person to catch up. Even if they're perhaps not the one-on-one type of friends, you can start a group chat with that person and other mutual friends who might enjoy keeping in touch that way. There are so so so many options for communication these days that it's almost overwhelming! But it certainly need not be a binary between "social media firehose of every person I've ever met" and "I only hear about the lives of few people".
Is it important to you to be in touch with those old acquaintances? If so, reach out to them! If not, then it sounds like quitting social media was fine for you.
I also quit social media . I did not have this experience. I had no problem following what went on with friends and acquaintances?! I don't know why you had this experience. I'm sorry you felt like that. but for me the info that is important always gets to me. And I enjoy emailing and using the phone and meeting people for social events in stead. And when I miss some post on face I always hear it from someone else....
It’s a matter of perspective and trade offs. If you are a person who experiences anxiety from missing things (FOMO) you are much more likely to notice this. I know since deleting my social media accounts I have missed out on a lot, only because my wife keeps up with stuff, but I cannot say how much I have missed because I really don’t care.
The other side to this is how aggressively a person is willing to take deliberate action to maintain personal relationships in the absence of social media automation. If you are that social butterfly who really owns that aspect of life you are likely to never miss any aspect of social media. Most people aren’t that good at taking dedicated action regularly reach out to people outside their most immediate circle though.
The other side to this is how aggressively a person is willing to take deliberate action to maintain personal relationships in the absence of social media automation. If you are that social butterfly who really owns that aspect of life you are likely to never miss any aspect of social media. Most people aren’t that good at taking dedicated action regularly reach out to people outside their most immediate circle though.
> I have a few close friends and that’s it.
That's enough :)
That's enough :)
If they're close enough they'll tell you irl, if they don't tell you they're not that close and it really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things
Even with close friends who live far away, I prefer catching up once a year around a beer and some food than get a week by week journal of their lives on social media, it makes you feel like you're connected but you really aren't
Even with close friends who live far away, I prefer catching up once a year around a beer and some food than get a week by week journal of their lives on social media, it makes you feel like you're connected but you really aren't
I never had any social media account. Never. When Facebook was still in diapers I have predicted what will happen (while what really happened was far worse) and distance myself from it and warned all the others who, normally, didn't listen.
Dont have FB, twitter, reddit, linkedin, tiktok, not even google account... none of that crap. I am successfully avoiding getting my name anywhere on the internet, I am not posting my photos, videos,...
I have 7 friends I meet regularly, I have friends where our life separated years back and we meet once or twice per year and I have phone with 473 phone numbers of various contacts, from former colleges to dishwasher repair technician, etc.
And guess what, people call me, sms me (oh yes, it works so much better than having 20 various clients installed for different groups of people) or send me email if something important has happened and I am actually physically invited to birthdays, "i got son" celebrations, notified about death (luckily only one, former schoolmate).
When we meet, in person (i hate long phone calls), we have a quality chat as I dont know anything about their ingrown hair on the tip of their toe and they don't know anything about me changing job or having knot on hair in my beard.
For anyone else, I dont care. I dont disillusion myself how I have 473 good friends on some stupid online platform who need to share every intimate detail with me. I cant even handle so many people.
So maybe those tradeoffs are not really the real tradeoffs but rather self deception, how much you matter to the people and to how many people.
I can count them using my fingers. Which is perfectly fine.
Dont have FB, twitter, reddit, linkedin, tiktok, not even google account... none of that crap. I am successfully avoiding getting my name anywhere on the internet, I am not posting my photos, videos,...
I have 7 friends I meet regularly, I have friends where our life separated years back and we meet once or twice per year and I have phone with 473 phone numbers of various contacts, from former colleges to dishwasher repair technician, etc.
And guess what, people call me, sms me (oh yes, it works so much better than having 20 various clients installed for different groups of people) or send me email if something important has happened and I am actually physically invited to birthdays, "i got son" celebrations, notified about death (luckily only one, former schoolmate).
When we meet, in person (i hate long phone calls), we have a quality chat as I dont know anything about their ingrown hair on the tip of their toe and they don't know anything about me changing job or having knot on hair in my beard.
For anyone else, I dont care. I dont disillusion myself how I have 473 good friends on some stupid online platform who need to share every intimate detail with me. I cant even handle so many people.
So maybe those tradeoffs are not really the real tradeoffs but rather self deception, how much you matter to the people and to how many people.
I can count them using my fingers. Which is perfectly fine.
Amen! Same situation, same preferences, same values, same result. Only difference is I have about 70 phone nrs on my dumbphone, I don't own a smart phone, and my vices are this site, usenet and mastodon.
If they don't talk to you personally, you have overestimated your value in the relationship.
> Turns out that a lot of people I knew posted huge life updates that I completely missed out on.
I had the same thing happen, but both they and I were Facebook users, it's just the algorithm decided I don't need to see posts from my friends and it's better that I see adverts (I can live with that, I don't pay to use the platform after all) and hundreds of random pages/groups that I have zero interest in following.
This 2nd "feature" is slowly driving me towards the point where the FOMO of no longer passively interacting with my friends may longer keep me on there.
I had the same thing happen, but both they and I were Facebook users, it's just the algorithm decided I don't need to see posts from my friends and it's better that I see adverts (I can live with that, I don't pay to use the platform after all) and hundreds of random pages/groups that I have zero interest in following.
This 2nd "feature" is slowly driving me towards the point where the FOMO of no longer passively interacting with my friends may longer keep me on there.
> I can’t speak for everyone, but I know a lack of social media meant that I have lost touch with old acquaintances completely. I have a few close friends and that’s it.
I feel like that's the downside of social media in general, like the network effect - since most people are on social media, that's the place where people will post life updates, as opposed to talking to others about that stuff directly as much.
Maybe there could be a healthy way to use social media: to catch up with the people in your social circle, maybe look at a few cute pictures of animals or memes, but don't obsessively doomscroll or compare yourself to the highlights of others' lives.
I feel like that's the downside of social media in general, like the network effect - since most people are on social media, that's the place where people will post life updates, as opposed to talking to others about that stuff directly as much.
Maybe there could be a healthy way to use social media: to catch up with the people in your social circle, maybe look at a few cute pictures of animals or memes, but don't obsessively doomscroll or compare yourself to the highlights of others' lives.
I think some way of batching information from the people/sources that you're interested in (and then perhaps running an LLM over it to surface the most important information) which is then emailed or texted to one might be a solution.
What are you even talking about when you meet them? Are you reiterating each others Facebook posts together?
Not having seen a friend for a longer time and talking about all the things that happened is the one thing that friendship is about IMO.
Not having seen a friend for a longer time and talking about all the things that happened is the one thing that friendship is about IMO.
Also good to consider for that tradeoff: Those people are completely fine to ignore you without some Zuck accounts.
Bring that together with your idea about friendship before you run behind them.
Maybe it's fine for you. Maybe your conclusion is that it's not worth the thing.
It's not a new topic. For me, iit was around 15 years ago. I never had FB or WA. Not even for a day. And that brought a lot of friendships to an end. Most of my friendships in fact. And that was sad!! But well, no other way would even be an option, admittedly! It's sad, but it was the best I could do.
Bring that together with your idea about friendship before you run behind them.
Maybe it's fine for you. Maybe your conclusion is that it's not worth the thing.
It's not a new topic. For me, iit was around 15 years ago. I never had FB or WA. Not even for a day. And that brought a lot of friendships to an end. Most of my friendships in fact. And that was sad!! But well, no other way would even be an option, admittedly! It's sad, but it was the best I could do.
Touché.
Such radical takes are always a hit on HN because they are essentially playing to the gallery. Leaving social media is futile if you don't take efforts to maintain contacts with your friends and families in other ways.
Such radical takes are always a hit on HN because they are essentially playing to the gallery. Leaving social media is futile if you don't take efforts to maintain contacts with your friends and families in other ways.
I recently learned that the daughter of a friend of mine got married and had two children. That happened in the last 5 years, when I actually didn't hear from that friend of mine. Given that we didn't feel the need to send messages to each other for 5 years, are we really friends or only acquaintances? In the latter case it's OK not to be informed about what is going on.
My social media are WhatsApp and Telegram. I get in touch there with people I care about and I don't get streams of useless information like I would if I'd be on FB, X, Instagram or TikTok. I do look for videos on YouTube when I want to learn something for which watching is better that reading.
My social media are WhatsApp and Telegram. I get in touch there with people I care about and I don't get streams of useless information like I would if I'd be on FB, X, Instagram or TikTok. I do look for videos on YouTube when I want to learn something for which watching is better that reading.
[deleted]
Maybe that was possible with Facebook from 2009. Right now, to have any friend updates, you first you need to scroll through a firehose of bots, AI schlock, and ads. Then risk getting pulled into it and wasting valuable hours of your life.
The only winning move is not to play.
I just got together with two friends in RL. One I have not seen for 10 years. There were a lot of missed news we all had to catch up on. This is how it's always been, and it's completely normal. Even the olden Facebook way of being so plugged in into your friends' lives was very unhealthy. If you HAVE to know something, life will find a way of letting you know.
The only winning move is not to play.
I just got together with two friends in RL. One I have not seen for 10 years. There were a lot of missed news we all had to catch up on. This is how it's always been, and it's completely normal. Even the olden Facebook way of being so plugged in into your friends' lives was very unhealthy. If you HAVE to know something, life will find a way of letting you know.
I agree completely, I did the same thing and now I've been going back gradually. Staying in contact passively makes starting conversations much easier, commenting on their stories, them reacting to a big event, etc. It keeps people in contact, because nobody reaches out of the blue now.
Losing such a network of people is costly, socially and from an opportunity perspective.
Still trying to not click anything not related to people I follow, the algorithms on meta apps are just insane.
Losing such a network of people is costly, socially and from an opportunity perspective.
Still trying to not click anything not related to people I follow, the algorithms on meta apps are just insane.
Another problem with Twitter is that majority of content there is provided by content farms, and then it gets reacted by bots. It is difficult to get interactions with real individuals there.
I'm not sure if it should called "social" anymore.
I deleted social media around 2.5 years ago. After feeling extreme anxiety and withdrawal for about a week I realized this was the right move. I gained massive amounts of productivity, felt more awake than ever, and realized just how many HOURS I was killing browsing. It sounds like the usual rant, but I truly think that in 10-15 years there will be a huge anti social media movement after we fully realize the damage. Social media as a concept is wonderful but in reality it adds nothing meaningful to our lives.
What if I told you Hacker News is social media?
there are a several key aspects of HN that are very different than social media networks, and that's why it's in a different category
One of my biggest gripes with the social media you and I have quit is that it has strongly encouraged flippant, black-and-white responses like the one you're responding to. Nuance, by and large, has been removed from public discourse.
Edit: Just speaking for me, HN is next. Doubt I'll stick 'round much longer.
Edit: Just speaking for me, HN is next. Doubt I'll stick 'round much longer.
Shit, maybe now's as good a time as any. Let's see if I can keep this response at the top of my comment history! :D
It went weirdly assumed that HN is somehow different. I don't believe in social media addiction, but addicts are known for lying to themselves and making excuses. If you're quitting social media because you don't think it's healthy, you need to look at any social media you're still on really closely.
There are several key things that make HN different:
- no followers / following (no incentive to increase engagement)
- no notifications of responses to comments (maybe there's a way to do this with RSS but at least it's not obvious)
- no ads
- no endless feed
HN is much more like an RSS feed of interesting articles, where people can leave comments -- there is some back and forth (as in this case) but not a lot; it's centered around the linked content and thoughts on that content, not on engaging with other users. It's not monetized and therefore doesn't employ all the tricks that SM uses to "drive engagement", which is often driven by outrage (which is therefore a highly desirable component of a SM).
- no followers / following (no incentive to increase engagement)
- no notifications of responses to comments (maybe there's a way to do this with RSS but at least it's not obvious)
- no ads
- no endless feed
HN is much more like an RSS feed of interesting articles, where people can leave comments -- there is some back and forth (as in this case) but not a lot; it's centered around the linked content and thoughts on that content, not on engaging with other users. It's not monetized and therefore doesn't employ all the tricks that SM uses to "drive engagement", which is often driven by outrage (which is therefore a highly desirable component of a SM).
HN may survive if upvote/downvotes are removed, but until then it will continue to be astroturfed and manipulated heavily to push narratives and subconsciously teach the startup/hacker community which opinions are favored and disfavored today.
you could argue that the home page is "manipulated" (though I don't think it's as nefarious as you suggest), but you can just as easily view all posts in chronological order instead of the home page; upvoting of articles interesting to see what other users find relevant / useful but wouldn't affect.
I browse the titles and click on what seems interesting to me, regardless of the number of upvotes.
I browse the titles and click on what seems interesting to me, regardless of the number of upvotes.
It’s more about the comments than the front page. Most HNers don’t bother clicking links and just read top of the fold comments.
No ads? The majority of hn submissions are ads! Comments too.
> majority
be serious
be serious
You forgot a big one: content shown to you is not selected by an algorithm developed by a large group of talented psychologists and computer scientists that targets a very human reaction to emotion to maximize dopamine production, addiction and attention.
> no notifications of responses to comments
If you notice you keep hitting the "threads" link, then perhaps there is a case of addiction.
If you notice you keep hitting the "threads" link, then perhaps there is a case of addiction.
It's too boring to be social media (in a good way)
Rather like minded nerds than fear mongering, fake, AI generated, influencer, 'look at how amazing my life is', 'buy this', new age spirituality 'let go of what doesn't serve you' narcissistic brainwashing the algo machines are pushing.
I like technology. I like making things I love and others can enjoy. I like when others make something they think is cool and love and enjoy and I can enjoy them too.
That's why this place is dope. I can't press 'Share' so that's not social media to me.
Plus I can have my name be FJsdkfhKFsdffflKJSHFl and nobody cares. I can just be me.
Kindness > *
I like technology. I like making things I love and others can enjoy. I like when others make something they think is cool and love and enjoy and I can enjoy them too.
That's why this place is dope. I can't press 'Share' so that's not social media to me.
Plus I can have my name be FJsdkfhKFsdffflKJSHFl and nobody cares. I can just be me.
Kindness > *
HN, famously devoid of narcissistic personalities and 'look how amazing my life is' and 'buy this' posting
I mean, where else can I go
But "Share" is just cruft around a link, don't you share HN links ??
(I don't really think that HN is not exactly social media either - since poster ego is de-emphasized so much (not as much as on 4chan of course), we don't even have avatars here ! - but HN sure is addictive ! speaking of...
(I don't really think that HN is not exactly social media either - since poster ego is de-emphasized so much (not as much as on 4chan of course), we don't even have avatars here ! - but HN sure is addictive ! speaking of...
See also:
Don’t build your castle in other people’s kingdoms (2021)
https://howtomarketagame.com/2021/11/01/dont-build-your-cast...
HN Discussion:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41712885
Don’t build your castle in other people’s kingdoms (2021)
https://howtomarketagame.com/2021/11/01/dont-build-your-cast...
HN Discussion:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41712885
This is actually a really tough one.
Obviously, FB, twitter, insta, LinkedIn etc. are a toxic cesspool. I've left my accounts there pretty much dormant for 10+ years.
Ideally, I'd have maintained connections and contacts with my own network, using my own media, direct emails / texts, phone calls, in contexts that I controlled. The problem is... I didn't. I basically just buried my head in the sand and withdrew.
I guess the takeaway is to try to use these platforms in a positive way, as a means to an end, and not get sucked in, or to network in some other, better way, rather than withdrawing, because that's not actually a good alternative.
Obviously, FB, twitter, insta, LinkedIn etc. are a toxic cesspool. I've left my accounts there pretty much dormant for 10+ years.
Ideally, I'd have maintained connections and contacts with my own network, using my own media, direct emails / texts, phone calls, in contexts that I controlled. The problem is... I didn't. I basically just buried my head in the sand and withdrew.
I guess the takeaway is to try to use these platforms in a positive way, as a means to an end, and not get sucked in, or to network in some other, better way, rather than withdrawing, because that's not actually a good alternative.
Meh I still use IRC, whatever.
[deleted]
> he casually mentioned that Meta is teaming up with Trump to fight EU regulations affecting their platforms.
I really hope EU just bans Meta from operating here.
"There you go Zuck, you don't need to worry about our regulations anymore"
I think we would live just fine around here without their awful products. It would also serve as a cautionary tale to other companies willing to undermine regulations around here.
I really hope EU just bans Meta from operating here.
"There you go Zuck, you don't need to worry about our regulations anymore"
I think we would live just fine around here without their awful products. It would also serve as a cautionary tale to other companies willing to undermine regulations around here.
Covering your eyes does not stop the oncoming train.
Yea but if the train is coming regardless then there’s no harm in closing your eyes if you like. Makes no difference.
It's more like thinking you can push back on a train, because maybe a disaster is legitmately coming.
Then you realize you're not bound to the tracks and it's probably best to simply let the trainwreck happen rather than add one more fatality to it.
Then you realize you're not bound to the tracks and it's probably best to simply let the trainwreck happen rather than add one more fatality to it.
I’m hoping we look back at the social media era with some embarrassment at the amount of time we confused typing in a text box with meaningful communication.
Hell of a thing to post on HackerNews...
If we're getting more and more separated, typing into a box and having a (hopeful) human respond is better than nothing.
Yes, yes, heard it all before. And it’s never matched my lived experience.
Social media does have a powerful use case: keeping in touch with friends and family you don’t see often. It feels trite to watch a video of them with their kid and give it a ‘like’ but I’d miss it if it were gone. Especially if it was still there for everyone else, I’d miss their collective presence more than they’d miss my singular one.
Rather than another scolding post telling everyone to delete social media I’d much rather folks think and talk about how we can make a better social media, preferably divorced from the control of giant corporations.
Social media does have a powerful use case: keeping in touch with friends and family you don’t see often. It feels trite to watch a video of them with their kid and give it a ‘like’ but I’d miss it if it were gone. Especially if it was still there for everyone else, I’d miss their collective presence more than they’d miss my singular one.
Rather than another scolding post telling everyone to delete social media I’d much rather folks think and talk about how we can make a better social media, preferably divorced from the control of giant corporations.
My hot take, offered respectfully: The companies attempting to get you hooked on their products have succeeded via the auspices of "FOMO".
I don’t buy that I’m being tricked into caring about the relationship I maintain with friends.
The FOMO is to get you to download the app, make an account, and deter you from uninstalling.
The real game is to keep you on the platform when you compulsively open it. You go in to check in on your second cousins, you stay to scroll through their TikTok clone or whatever attention harvesting algorithm is trendy currently.
The real game is to keep you on the platform when you compulsively open it. You go in to check in on your second cousins, you stay to scroll through their TikTok clone or whatever attention harvesting algorithm is trendy currently.
[deleted]
I stopped going on social media apps and felt my mental health improved at least 2x.
You should try it too!
You should try it too!
I did not know that we could post stupid stuff on hacker news.
The truth is that nobody cares if we delete our accounts on social media.
The truth is that nobody cares if we delete our accounts on social media.
Aside from Facebook (which I was never on), I'm still on Mastodon, but have let Twitter go fallow due its moribund nature.
I deleted LinkedIn (after the MSFT acquisition) 10 years ago, due to the business model change. Even prior to that, it was getting too spammy anyways.
I keep a token Instagram just for viewing the rare family/friend that insists I see something from a trip, but I never post there.
I deleted LinkedIn (after the MSFT acquisition) 10 years ago, due to the business model change. Even prior to that, it was getting too spammy anyways.
I keep a token Instagram just for viewing the rare family/friend that insists I see something from a trip, but I never post there.
I'm puzzled as to why people rage about Twitter and Facebook going down the drain, and then switch to new services like Bluesky or Threads and try to convince everyone to do the same.
I mean, why on earth would you expect anything different this time from yet another "social" thing made and run by a corporate entity?
I moved to Mastodon, which at least has the benefit of not being owned by a corporation, which will perhaps save it from the usual paths of ensh*ttification.
I mean, why on earth would you expect anything different this time from yet another "social" thing made and run by a corporate entity?
I moved to Mastodon, which at least has the benefit of not being owned by a corporation, which will perhaps save it from the usual paths of ensh*ttification.
To be frank, I don't. That migration when a bad community becomes "the" community is simply inevitable and a part of social media. I haven't seen a good way to stop it without extreme measures like paid entry or an invite system. So that's the cost of "free" here.
It's still useful, but it's more like a a car than a town square. you'll have a lot of fun in the beginning, you'll normalize it, it'll start to break down as you try to keep it running, and then eventually it gives up the ghost. So you either accept that and not own a car or you buy a new one.
It's still useful, but it's more like a a car than a town square. you'll have a lot of fun in the beginning, you'll normalize it, it'll start to break down as you try to keep it running, and then eventually it gives up the ghost. So you either accept that and not own a car or you buy a new one.
Because Bluesky isn't being run by a piece of shit, and if that changes in the future then I'll just leave.
I got good years out of Twitter before it sucked, I have no regrets about getting in early on it.
I got good years out of Twitter before it sucked, I have no regrets about getting in early on it.
Nothing like a random politically biased opinion piece to drum up random political opinions on HN. Pass.
I just deleted bluesky and mastodon last week.
The right-turns on FB and Twitter make for big openings in the space.
It strikes me as quite an opportunity to eat FB's lunch, just as BlueSky has been eating Twitter's lunch.
>The right-turns on FB and Twitter make for big openings in the space.
I argue that the whole thing was a net mistake and any "openings" should not be filled. The lunch has spoiled, don't eat it.
I argue that the whole thing was a net mistake and any "openings" should not be filled. The lunch has spoiled, don't eat it.
I like communicating with friends, old and new. It's not hard to eliminate the cruft by using chrome extensions and filtering only by friends' posts, ie https://www.facebook.com/?filter=friends
So again, it strikes me as a huge opportunity, especially for someone who just does the basics.
So again, it strikes me as a huge opportunity, especially for someone who just does the basics.
I doubled down on my social media account (twitter) and htmx finished first in the 2024 rising stars for front end frameworks:
https://risingstars.js.org/2024/en#section-framework
so... it depends.
https://risingstars.js.org/2024/en#section-framework
so... it depends.
For me outright deletion just led to other issues like missing out on events / family photos / chats with people I otherwise wasn’t connected to. The target for most people is probably low-moderate use. <shamelessplug> Personally I struggled to achieve balance with my social media usage for years and spent the last two years building out a coaching service to help people like myself keeping social media under a daily time allowance…think of it as a personal trainer (with real accountability and all) for social media and other everyday habits. We just launched this week at zabit.com if anyone wants to check it out.</shamelessplug>
I had FB account when it was novelty and it was still a social network.
I removed account like 10 years ago when it already was clear it is not social network anymore.
I also never had a twitter really besides some account to check what it is and left it unused.
Only LI is one I keep for business purposes but I don’t care about social aspect or discussion there - it is basically a virtual business card and it is quite popular so it’s useful I guess.
I removed account like 10 years ago when it already was clear it is not social network anymore.
I also never had a twitter really besides some account to check what it is and left it unused.
Only LI is one I keep for business purposes but I don’t care about social aspect or discussion there - it is basically a virtual business card and it is quite popular so it’s useful I guess.
I quit facebook long ago. Recently I found out an old friend from years ago had died in the past 6 months, and I had no idea. I got an email at an old email address but that aside everyone knew except me.
It’s hard to quit when everyone else doesn’t.
It’s hard to quit when everyone else doesn’t.
For those who have achieved this, well done. I've experienced the positive impact of reducing my social media usage over the years, while still keeping my accounts for the occasional need to connect. I've taken steps to limit social platforms from accessing my phone contact list and have set a cap of 20 contacts, including on WhatsApp. This has significantly reduced Meta's profiling and advertising targeting.
Does this mean I have to delete my friendster account?
How about a simple rule of thumb: you have to actually meet or talk with a "facebook friend" (every month or more) or else delete/unfriend them.
If after a few months you have zero "facebook friends" nuke the account.
Internet updates are no substitute for good old meat space.
If after a few months you have zero "facebook friends" nuke the account.
Internet updates are no substitute for good old meat space.
It always shocked me that isn’t the way for all. When I was on FB, I only friended people that I “knew” in real-life. I guess that’s why I only had a handful of friends :)
Tell me you're young without telling me you're young. Friendships are more than just meat space meetings. Children, moving countries, crazy work schedules are all reasons that can prevent you being in the physical presence o your friends. Does not seeing them for years at a time make them less friends? No, not to me.
There's a degree to how much you continue to engage with people once they've made that decision to leave though. Once someone's on the other side of the world, you're not keeping the friendship up by viewing their Instagram/Facebook posts, it's a totally one sided consumption unless you continue to speak to one another at least semi-regularly.
I somewhat agree, but that does not require face to face interaction in my opinion, which was parent's thesis I was arguing against.
He said meet OR talk.
I think if you don't talk to someone in a few years it makes them less of a friend.
I think if you don't talk to someone in a few years it makes them less of a friend.
Exactly, have a video call even!
Related:
Be a property owner and not a renter on the internet
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42581119
Be a property owner and not a renter on the internet
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42581119
No.
Because of what nindalf said, basically: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42678031
Because of what nindalf said, basically: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42678031
"So, I quit. Twitter, TikTok, Facebook — all gone"
I'm always curious here what counts as Social Media, and what's just a useful site?
Github? HackerNews? Reddit? Facebook, but only for FB Marketplace which is now a better local sales site than Craigslist?
What makes it social? Originally with FB and before it with MySpace it was the ability to put up a page about yourself, and then chat with others. HN has a profile and communication, so do the others listed.
I'm always curious here what counts as Social Media, and what's just a useful site?
Github? HackerNews? Reddit? Facebook, but only for FB Marketplace which is now a better local sales site than Craigslist?
What makes it social? Originally with FB and before it with MySpace it was the ability to put up a page about yourself, and then chat with others. HN has a profile and communication, so do the others listed.
> What makes it social?
For the modern definition of social, nowadays: incentives to generate engagement (connect with people, post, like, comment) to build up data to drive advertising sales.
For the modern definition of social, nowadays: incentives to generate engagement (connect with people, post, like, comment) to build up data to drive advertising sales.
Why do people feel the incessant need to post about deleting/not using social media.
They're clearly hypocrites as posting to a blog or HN is pretty much the same thing.
They're clearly hypocrites as posting to a blog or HN is pretty much the same thing.
Corporate social media with a feed designed to maximize engagement monetized with targeted advertising is a very different thing from a blog out a forum.
Don't agree with author, but related to the desire to delete social media... I've noticed Instagram has been adding more features to bait time from users. A new one being, if you wait long enough on a given reel, it'll suggest you posts your follows liked (or commented on) in the top right corner. This is super creepy and I imagine could be easily gamed by stalkers. These types of features that try to engage me even deeper have made me consider actually removing IG altogether like I deleted Facebook a long time ago
Social media has become a river of trash(and for me that’s what advertising and peddling to sell stuff is) that if you spend effort on you can find some good gems. But the effort spent is not worth the gems. It’s more or less rescuing fully undigested peanuts in turds.
Congrats OP, now will you join us in the real world?
Yeah social media has gotten very predatory, especially since short form content blew up due to TikTok. I’ll have chats with people that are just an exchange of instagram reels and reactions.
HN is my only form of social media now on my phone. Now, it’s time to build meaningful relationships in my life again.
HN is my only form of social media now on my phone. Now, it’s time to build meaningful relationships in my life again.
Its been 6 months without social media. I didn't missed any news or update that really matters to me.
Is this text AI generated?
for me is not the daily use that is useful, but from time to time, I need to buy or sell something and Facebook marketplace is good for that. Or I need to find the contact information of someone and it is also useful for that (Facebook). And for twitter, before I didn't even need to create an account I just use it for seeing updates of government officials or app/services updates
I think commenters here are missing out on one beneficial part of social media - Facebook groups and communities of interest especially private, moderated groups. Broadcast and discussions are a perfect use case for it.
And people talk about how bad Facebook is, LinkedIn is far worse. Everyone is trying to be a “thought leader” and no one is genuine on it.
I have a decent LinkedIn Profile with recommendations, up to date career information. But I never post to it.
I’m only really active when I’m looking for a job. I will respond to messages and try to keep my network somewhat warm.
And people talk about how bad Facebook is, LinkedIn is far worse. Everyone is trying to be a “thought leader” and no one is genuine on it.
I have a decent LinkedIn Profile with recommendations, up to date career information. But I never post to it.
I’m only really active when I’m looking for a job. I will respond to messages and try to keep my network somewhat warm.
To me, LinkedIn is nothing more than a Job advertisement board where you open yourself up to being spammed by the recruiter hoards.
The last LinkedIn recruiter saved me from very bad job. Now I have a reasonable boss, private office, no commute time and same salary. Of course, the 20 recruiters before were bad joke.
My father and a few army friends were able to find each other and sometimes find another guy from their year through Facebook. They do big cookouts together and they started with 3 guys and progressively found more of each other and they had long lost contact. They are now great friends again and in their retirement this brings them a huge happiness.
But some people just can't fathom there's different lives too their own and throw the baby out with the bath water.
But some people just can't fathom there's different lives too their own and throw the baby out with the bath water.
> I think commenters here are missing out on one beneficial part of social media
A small group of people surely do, but for others the benefit doesn't outweigh the negative. Social media is great, in theory, but Facebooks implementations suck and I won't support a company like Facebook who I believe negatively impacts society. The problems and much of the anger stems from feeling almost forced to use the products of a company I think manipulates and exploit it's users. It's almost impossible for my kid to have a social life and for me to be involved without a Facebook account and I can't even offer an alternative form of communication because pretty much anything else would be more work for everyone else.
Agree on you with Linkedin. It's basically an account to a job board, that you keep active in case you need to look for work. The people trying to get engagement on their posts are almost all pretty much insane.
A small group of people surely do, but for others the benefit doesn't outweigh the negative. Social media is great, in theory, but Facebooks implementations suck and I won't support a company like Facebook who I believe negatively impacts society. The problems and much of the anger stems from feeling almost forced to use the products of a company I think manipulates and exploit it's users. It's almost impossible for my kid to have a social life and for me to be involved without a Facebook account and I can't even offer an alternative form of communication because pretty much anything else would be more work for everyone else.
Agree on you with Linkedin. It's basically an account to a job board, that you keep active in case you need to look for work. The people trying to get engagement on their posts are almost all pretty much insane.
I use it for events.
I have to facebook friends that I don't interact with very much outside some electronic music events. This helps me find events that might interest me.
Some venues don't even put the dates on their website.
I have to facebook friends that I don't interact with very much outside some electronic music events. This helps me find events that might interest me.
Some venues don't even put the dates on their website.
[deleted]
Remember, the most important step in quitting social media is telling everyone on social media you're quitting social media.
And immediately feeling smug and better than everyone still in it. That's the best part!
But how will other people know about this after a while ? If only there was some tech platform where you get to pretend you're better than other people to people that don't care about you. This is the problem we set out to solve with Bluesky.
Hey, I bucked that important step back in 2012 ;-) So far, HM is the only "social" online place where I participate.
What you say reminds me of an ancient Greek saying (I think it was Epictetus). I'm paraphrasing from memory:
"You starved for a whole day to practice discipline? Great! Now resist not telling it to anyone."
What you say reminds me of an ancient Greek saying (I think it was Epictetus). I'm paraphrasing from memory:
"You starved for a whole day to practice discipline? Great! Now resist not telling it to anyone."
What is your point? It's just one last post.
Nah I just tell everyone on HN instead which is definitely not social media.
I quit Facebook recently when I realized that the only reason I was going there was for the targeted Amazon ads.
They were so good and knew exactly what kinds of things would interest me, that it kept me coming back (subconsciously).
However in Amazon’s own app and website, they really have poor suggestions.
They were so good and knew exactly what kinds of things would interest me, that it kept me coming back (subconsciously).
However in Amazon’s own app and website, they really have poor suggestions.
Regarding Elon meeting members of the AfD party,
> The content? Let’s just say it made me want to yeet my phone into the nearest ocean. How anyone can take that level of garbage seriously is beyond me. But hey, bubbles are cozy, right? Musk, Zuckerberg, and Trump — what a trio. Honestly, this could be the perfect setup for a dystopian sci-fi thriller. Except, spoiler alert: no happy ending here.
He doesn't explain further what "garbage" he's talking about.
Sorry but I just can't take your grievance seriously if you won't at least explain it. This type of writing is the epitome of the echo chamber. If you don't already know what the author is talking about and already aggressively agree with them, not only are you not the target audience but they intentionally make the writing impenetrable to you.
This is the absolute worst type of internet dreck. It's ironic that the author rails against "bubbles" in the quoted paragraph.
> The content? Let’s just say it made me want to yeet my phone into the nearest ocean. How anyone can take that level of garbage seriously is beyond me. But hey, bubbles are cozy, right? Musk, Zuckerberg, and Trump — what a trio. Honestly, this could be the perfect setup for a dystopian sci-fi thriller. Except, spoiler alert: no happy ending here.
He doesn't explain further what "garbage" he's talking about.
Sorry but I just can't take your grievance seriously if you won't at least explain it. This type of writing is the epitome of the echo chamber. If you don't already know what the author is talking about and already aggressively agree with them, not only are you not the target audience but they intentionally make the writing impenetrable to you.
This is the absolute worst type of internet dreck. It's ironic that the author rails against "bubbles" in the quoted paragraph.
They said many things that are just not true. Like Hitler was a left-winged communist… you can’t make this shit up.
Ngl if I were Zuckerberg I'd be doing the exact same thing. I feel like the majority of people are severely underestimating the impact this last election will have and still are in denial. If you think he's doing the wrong thing it's cause you don't know what the consequences will be if he doesn't do this.
Just curious as to what you think the consequences could be if he didn't?
I completely understand Mark. As a business owner, this is actually a helpless solution.
Less censorship on Facebook and less regulations sounds like a good thing (doubt the latter will happen anyway). The problem with Facebook has never been that it allows harmful content. It's that it actively promotes it.
A decision to quit - it’s not easy! I deleted Instagram. It feels like even my mind has been cleared. I don’t want to and won’t go back. And the alternative to slow down and share thoughts more intentionally sounds good.
I use social media in a write-only manner. I keep it around for two reasons:
- I write blogs and share them there. On multiple occasions, I’ve received job offers in my inbox. Job opportunities from acquaintances on Twitter are far better than LinkedIn DM spam.
- Staying up to date with the latest fads also teaches me what not to chase. Sometimes, the firehose is the only way to get that information.
I never had problems dropping the mic and not arguing with strangers.
- I write blogs and share them there. On multiple occasions, I’ve received job offers in my inbox. Job opportunities from acquaintances on Twitter are far better than LinkedIn DM spam.
- Staying up to date with the latest fads also teaches me what not to chase. Sometimes, the firehose is the only way to get that information.
I never had problems dropping the mic and not arguing with strangers.
Anyone feel like the article is thinly disguised moral policing and rather than a post about social media it is more of a broadcast announcement of acceptable thought?
Very little discussion of the actual problems with regulating speech the way the EU or Fact Checkers does. Just an implicit statement it was correct.
Very little discussion of the actual problems with regulating speech the way the EU or Fact Checkers does. Just an implicit statement it was correct.
Yep, I got lost when he started complaining about teens and social media without discussing anything of substance. I understand where he is coming from, he is a father of 2, and is likely already busy with his family and close social circle, however for most people today, they can't grow up today without social media, you'll just isolate yourself since nobody wants to bother be your friend if they can't reach you without friction. The problem as more pointed out is related to controlling its usage, not its deletion
IMO the problem with these social-networks now is that they all turned into ad-machines & "like-bait". The original products worked extremely well - but you gotta make money somehow, and ads seem to be the go-to model.
It's not about accounts, it's more about engagement. I still have my Facebook account, and I actually used it two years ago to fund my gym trainer and tell him I couldn't come.
Social media is a reality one can't simply ignore completely. One can complicatedly ignore it though to some level of success. For me, the minimal rules are: don't write on reddit, don't read on linkedin. Don't touch anything else. The orange site is ok-ish.
Social media is a reality one can't simply ignore completely. One can complicatedly ignore it though to some level of success. For me, the minimal rules are: don't write on reddit, don't read on linkedin. Don't touch anything else. The orange site is ok-ish.
I am 90% social media free. I often wonder my internal desire to ‘broadcast’. Funny thing. So much better without and no need to broadcast.
Politics aside, this text is sobering. The people in charge are all but good leaders. It's comical. If it wasn't our lives that is.
Anyone who needs to advertise they deleted their social media accounts with more than a sentence on said networks is gonna be back on there in a week. They crave approval and engagement and likes and without it will spiral out of control.
I'm not really tethered to social media as much as some. I still text and call my closer friends regularly. Similar for family.
I do find the reactionary response a bit disturbing. Having been caught up in the trap of "fact checkers" for reposting a political cartoon and similar, I'd definitely prefer the community notes approach. All said the inability of many to have a rational conversation with those they don't completely agree is very wrong on so many levels.
I do find the reactionary response a bit disturbing. Having been caught up in the trap of "fact checkers" for reposting a political cartoon and similar, I'd definitely prefer the community notes approach. All said the inability of many to have a rational conversation with those they don't completely agree is very wrong on so many levels.
My issue with lack of moderation in social media is not the political polarization. My issue is the blatant scams pushed by bots, or by questionable companies paying sub celebrity influencers.
Criminals are not willing to have rational conversations. But they just won a free pass from the platforms.
Criminals are not willing to have rational conversations. But they just won a free pass from the platforms.
Fraud is a pretty clearly defined crime. Fact checkers weren't demarking scams and bots.
Bot activity is best handled through system pattern matching, not correcting political cartoons.
You also assume that the people doing the fact checking are better informed or otherwise better people than those with the access to propose and vote on community notes. This is unsubstantiated at best.
Bot activity is best handled through system pattern matching, not correcting political cartoons.
You also assume that the people doing the fact checking are better informed or otherwise better people than those with the access to propose and vote on community notes. This is unsubstantiated at best.
Browsing social media while working is easily solved by not logging in on these services on your work machine or browser. I have social media logged in on another instance of my browser, so I actively have to switch profiles to browse social media.
This added step makes it hard enough to not mindlessly browse it.
This added step makes it hard enough to not mindlessly browse it.
Staying in that theme, remove social media apps from your homepage. It's an extra step to have to look for it through your apps
I don’t even have them on my phone, hah.
This all sounds to me like complaining about fast-food restaurants because you’re overweight. Do they serve trash? Yes. But there’s a simple solution: don’t eat it. And don’t feed it to your kids. I have a facebook app and the only time I use is to check updates for my son’s soccer practice. I also go to McDonalds to buy coffee because it’s good and cheap over here. No corporate entity will ever put your health amd well-being over their business interest. Why is this so hard for people to comprehend? You want fact checking? Read NYT.
While not wrong, your advice of simply not doing it is as usefull as telling a smoker "simple don't put another cigarette in your mouth" or telling the overweight person "just diet and excercise". Been in both camps, and I know that neither is that easy. Giving up addictions are simple, but they are not easy.
[deleted]
There's a simple solution: just don't eat at the food places that dominate every region, because their addictive food and capital allowed them to crush any local competition
simple as that, just avoid them
simple as that, just avoid them
I've been social media free going on almost 10 years ... would never go back. I haven't missed anything important, but skipped all the time waste and bullshit / misinformation / disinformation.
When something is used by billions of people its kinda futile to argue about its utility. But then billions are addicted to tobacco, alcohol, drugs, gambling etc. and those benefiting from providing these "services" will do everything they can to keep people addicted while arguing that they are solving a real problem.
The reality is always a mundane core that gets complicated by human tragicomedy. Of course its wholesome to be able to connect digitally with friends and family. Its also a great economic enabler to connect digitally with professionals. Or to be able to publish to a bulletin board about your brilliant accomplishments.
But to paraphrase Gates, we need these connections, we don't need the self-appointed universal connectors.
Its 2025, and this is HN. I put it to you that technically the only thing preventing us today from having good "connections infrastructure" is the corrupting influence of big adtech. One possible vision of how to organize the digital space in technical and economic terms has become the only vision.
The reality is always a mundane core that gets complicated by human tragicomedy. Of course its wholesome to be able to connect digitally with friends and family. Its also a great economic enabler to connect digitally with professionals. Or to be able to publish to a bulletin board about your brilliant accomplishments.
But to paraphrase Gates, we need these connections, we don't need the self-appointed universal connectors.
Its 2025, and this is HN. I put it to you that technically the only thing preventing us today from having good "connections infrastructure" is the corrupting influence of big adtech. One possible vision of how to organize the digital space in technical and economic terms has become the only vision.
I only use social media for work and WhatsApp for staying in touch with people. WhatsApp is really the killer one that keeps me hooked into the Zuckertrump empire. Just not enough iPhones around me to use Messages, Signal use is very low even among tech friends.
People often ask me why I don't have Instagram: I'm in the business of making these platforms and Pablo Escobar never used cocaine either. I know how these platforms are built and I know how we think about the people that use it.
People often ask me why I don't have Instagram: I'm in the business of making these platforms and Pablo Escobar never used cocaine either. I know how these platforms are built and I know how we think about the people that use it.
> Zuckatrump
Did the Hive approve this, or are you breaking the rules of individualism?
Did the Hive approve this, or are you breaking the rules of individualism?
What are you implying?
That the particular word might not defined in the Freespeak dictionary issued by the Ministry of Liberty, possibly triggering Wokethink and thus should be labeled a Muricrime?
I want to be a producer more than a consumer. I produce videos (admittedly that are technical and dry) so it's not like I get hundreds of thousands of views.
On my downtime I still participate in social media though usually anonymously in the form of shit posting. Or just watching YouTube. I did get sucked into that crap of posting everyday about my glamorous life. Eventually I found I didn't know what to post anymore. Had to find something to post. I'm glad I never got sucked into it completely like TikTok/Instagram.
On my downtime I still participate in social media though usually anonymously in the form of shit posting. Or just watching YouTube. I did get sucked into that crap of posting everyday about my glamorous life. Eventually I found I didn't know what to post anymore. Had to find something to post. I'm glad I never got sucked into it completely like TikTok/Instagram.
I stay in touch with ppl that are important to me by writing or calling them once every 2 months.
I do not care if they do the same. I am old now (almost 30) and came to the realization that all of our lifes are packet and busy and ppl are very bad at keeping up with other ppl that are not continuously presented to them.
This is the price I have to pay to not be on instagram: writing my friends and ask them how they doing.
And it is a very nice price to pay.
I do not care if they do the same. I am old now (almost 30) and came to the realization that all of our lifes are packet and busy and ppl are very bad at keeping up with other ppl that are not continuously presented to them.
This is the price I have to pay to not be on instagram: writing my friends and ask them how they doing.
And it is a very nice price to pay.
> I am old now (almost 30)
I'm 45 and wondering if I should be offended by this....
I'm 45 and wondering if I should be offended by this....
I'm > 60 and if you can find me somewhere to sit and watch while I catch my breath you can beat the young whippersnapper about the upper body with my zimmer frame.
( TBH I still split wood by hand and walk long trails, etc. My father (born 1935) is showing signs of age now )
( TBH I still split wood by hand and walk long trails, etc. My father (born 1935) is showing signs of age now )
> I still split wood by hand
That's incredible. Everyone I know is using an axe these days.
That's incredible. Everyone I know is using an axe these days.
We ancients have honed our strength through decades of punching sand.
Any similarity to tech sector corporate politics is purely coincidental.
Any similarity to tech sector corporate politics is purely coincidental.
Time marches on, the generation younger than yourself and your axe wielding anachronisms are using hydraulic and pnuematic rams now .. with solar charged battery operated pumps.
Come, come and join the elders . . .
Come, come and join the elders . . .
Surely that's a joke "I am old now (almost 30)"
OMG! This is crazy. I literally drafted up a blog post with the same plan of action. I just didn't want to delete my social presence just yet and was trying to figure out how to do it. Reading through every sentence of your blog post, I could totally relate. Wow. This really is such a uncanny coincidence.
I had a dream recently, where Elon Musk said the following:
I'm not actually the bad guy you think I am. It was basically all a show. You had suuuuuuch a hard and looong time understanding the danger of all these corporate social media silos. Where we control what opinions are visible and what not so much. Social media (in that particular fashion) was always a trap, a problem to definitely avoid, since day 1, but it was sooooooo teeeeerribly hard to make you understand.
So I though, well, if you are all too stupid to understand it, I will make a veeeeeery bizarre and freaky show for you that you will never forget. It will be so unreal, even you all will actually _get_ it now!!! Because it's such an important lessons for the upcoming future...
I'm not actually the bad guy you think I am. It was basically all a show. You had suuuuuuch a hard and looong time understanding the danger of all these corporate social media silos. Where we control what opinions are visible and what not so much. Social media (in that particular fashion) was always a trap, a problem to definitely avoid, since day 1, but it was sooooooo teeeeerribly hard to make you understand.
So I though, well, if you are all too stupid to understand it, I will make a veeeeeery bizarre and freaky show for you that you will never forget. It will be so unreal, even you all will actually _get_ it now!!! Because it's such an important lessons for the upcoming future...
I don't understand what people are doing on social media that they can get addicted by it, or at least specifically by the social aspect of it.
E.g. facebook for me is mainly the messenger and a few random photos or people. Everything else on there is not enjoyable.
Reddit is like a forum where I can occassionally say things about my hobbies. Also nothing that sucks me in, in an unhealthy way.
X and Mastodon are mostly news and random people showing off things.
Youtube is like TV where at some point you watched what you wanted to watch for the day.
The only thing that seems addicting to me are Apps like Tiktok or Instagram, where you are just one simple swipe away from the next bit of short term entertainment.
E.g. facebook for me is mainly the messenger and a few random photos or people. Everything else on there is not enjoyable.
Reddit is like a forum where I can occassionally say things about my hobbies. Also nothing that sucks me in, in an unhealthy way.
X and Mastodon are mostly news and random people showing off things.
Youtube is like TV where at some point you watched what you wanted to watch for the day.
The only thing that seems addicting to me are Apps like Tiktok or Instagram, where you are just one simple swipe away from the next bit of short term entertainment.
I don't oppose deleting social media, but I can't see to understand one simple thing.
LinkedIn is the de-facto standard for looking for a job in certain places. I wonder, people who deleted LinkedIn, how do they get along with looking for a job?
LinkedIn is the de-facto standard for looking for a job in certain places. I wonder, people who deleted LinkedIn, how do they get along with looking for a job?
Direct networking works very well (in person, mail, phone, recommandation, job posting sites, etc.).
LinkedIn is merely a glamour social network + "pro" dynamic address book + kind of a standardised CV, nothing much more.
LinkedIn is merely a glamour social network + "pro" dynamic address book + kind of a standardised CV, nothing much more.
Usually in the context of deleting social media, it is Facebook, Xitter, TikTok, Instagram, and Reddit.
LinkedIn is closer to other portfolio sites (ArtStation, Behance, SoundCloud, etc). It’s basically professional achievements with comments.
I suppose it is social media in the broadest sense. But a lot of evils of social media aren’t there, just how perfect people pretend their lives are. But there aren’t many echo chambers, instances of shock content, manufactured outrage, cancel culture, politicking, lord of the fly-ing, etc.
LinkedIn is closer to other portfolio sites (ArtStation, Behance, SoundCloud, etc). It’s basically professional achievements with comments.
I suppose it is social media in the broadest sense. But a lot of evils of social media aren’t there, just how perfect people pretend their lives are. But there aren’t many echo chambers, instances of shock content, manufactured outrage, cancel culture, politicking, lord of the fly-ing, etc.
LinkedIn is an oddity in that, while there is a (very strange) social network there, the vast majority of LinkedIn users do not use it as a social network, they use it as a CV host, and may not even look at it in any given year.
(I do think think contributes to extreme weirdness of LinkedIn posts; there's really ~no-one normal using the social network bit of LinkedIn.)
(I do think think contributes to extreme weirdness of LinkedIn posts; there's really ~no-one normal using the social network bit of LinkedIn.)
Delete your HackerNews acct too, even this platform is beyond corrupted by bad actors and arrogant fools. The Web is 100% dead, killed by AI and poisoned human hearts.
> Delete your HackerNews acct too, even this platform is beyond corrupted by bad actors and arrogant fools. The Web is 100% dead, killed by AI and poisoned human hearts.
Yet you still have an account?
Yet you still have an account?
I haven't had social media for 10+ years. There's been periods where I create a facebook account again, but it is soon deleted within a week or so. I only use WhatsApp to talk to real-life people and Discord to talk to online gaming "friends". I do have accounts obviously on some websites to make comments like this.
It is awfully lonely I must admit. I have a partner of over a decade which helps but not having social media is very isolating. My wife has all the social medias and knows what happens with my family before I do!
My last 'experiment' was the shortest - I registered for an Instagram account and when it suggested that I add my real-life next door neighbour in the sign-up process I immediately stopped and deleted the account. That is scary.
It is awfully lonely I must admit. I have a partner of over a decade which helps but not having social media is very isolating. My wife has all the social medias and knows what happens with my family before I do!
My last 'experiment' was the shortest - I registered for an Instagram account and when it suggested that I add my real-life next door neighbour in the sign-up process I immediately stopped and deleted the account. That is scary.
A few strange things you will miss when deleting social media that are nonobvious.
1. Some companies will not look at your resume or do business with you unless you have a LinkedIn account, especially in the age of AI. Fine by me.
2. If you go to start a business, you will find most of these social media companies require you to have a personal account in order to make a business/marketing account. This is very annoying.
3. Damn I miss Facebook Marketplace. But it's not worth having FB. You can usually have a friend do marketplace stuff for you.
1. Some companies will not look at your resume or do business with you unless you have a LinkedIn account, especially in the age of AI. Fine by me.
2. If you go to start a business, you will find most of these social media companies require you to have a personal account in order to make a business/marketing account. This is very annoying.
3. Damn I miss Facebook Marketplace. But it's not worth having FB. You can usually have a friend do marketplace stuff for you.
For point #2, I've started evaluating business ideas by how much I can either outsource social media posting or not need it at all. Preferably the latter.
I got rid of Instagram and Facebook and have never looked back. It did lead to me losing touch with some people and slightly less serendipity (i.e. someone being in town, which I see on their Instagram story and then we hang out).
Instagram went first and then I realized I hadn't logged on to Facebook in 2 years so why bother keeping it around?
I think for people who can just decide to keep the account and no longer use it, they should keep it just to stay in touch with some folks. But I realize that as long as I'd have an account, I'd keep using it.
Personally, for me the tradeoff between 2+ hours every day on Instagram for an occasional few hours with an acquaintance isn't worth it.
Instagram went first and then I realized I hadn't logged on to Facebook in 2 years so why bother keeping it around?
I think for people who can just decide to keep the account and no longer use it, they should keep it just to stay in touch with some folks. But I realize that as long as I'd have an account, I'd keep using it.
Personally, for me the tradeoff between 2+ hours every day on Instagram for an occasional few hours with an acquaintance isn't worth it.
tl;dr; - My left-wing social media bubble is compromised and there is a risk I may hear opposing view points. Please everyone watch as I performatively delete my accounts.
Honestly this is the tech equivalent of putting your hands over your ears and posting "LALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU." just in case someone says something you disagree with.
Honestly this is the tech equivalent of putting your hands over your ears and posting "LALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU." just in case someone says something you disagree with.
Why can't the EU build their own social media platform?
What if they structured the financing like they do with science?
What if they structured the financing like they do with science?
You are targeting an order of magnitude larger organization than it's necessary. The EU doesn't build anything, people in countries do.
The problem with the EU market is that if I launched anything social, I'm immediately hit with a localization problem so I have to launch first either in English (you lost 53% of people)* or start with a few select countries first with their native language.
It's kinda a mess. Money is not really the issue with EU startups, it's the cultural fragmentation.
There are also many small niche social platforms, but of course nothing like FB/X/etc..
* https://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/detail/2979
The problem with the EU market is that if I launched anything social, I'm immediately hit with a localization problem so I have to launch first either in English (you lost 53% of people)* or start with a few select countries first with their native language.
It's kinda a mess. Money is not really the issue with EU startups, it's the cultural fragmentation.
There are also many small niche social platforms, but of course nothing like FB/X/etc..
* https://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/detail/2979
The motivation is basically "social media now its more diverse in thought". He even signs off with an acknowledgement he might try BlueSky.
Honestly, there are good reasons to quit social media because of their intrinsic toxicities, but at least if you are doing it for ideological motives admit that its about you.
Honestly, there are good reasons to quit social media because of their intrinsic toxicities, but at least if you are doing it for ideological motives admit that its about you.
I have mostly left social media, but I have not seen the need to delete my accounts yet. For Twitter, I never use the feed but rather bookmark links to one specific account that I read. Facebook I open about twice a month just to see if I have been invited to a birthday party or anything like that. Instagram I just went 7 weeks without opening.
Turning off the machine feeding stuff to my brain really has helped me. I feel better, cleaner and less disturbed/distracted.
Now I am actually considering leaving YouTube as well, although it has been such a lovely place at times, since I notice it is deteriorating my health.
I recommend you try it; nothing has to be deleted. It's simply removing the habit of using it. It does make life a bit better :)
Oh, and a good first step is to install the extension `News Feed Eradicator`. This is how I got started. I run it on everything.
Turning off the machine feeding stuff to my brain really has helped me. I feel better, cleaner and less disturbed/distracted.
Now I am actually considering leaving YouTube as well, although it has been such a lovely place at times, since I notice it is deteriorating my health.
I recommend you try it; nothing has to be deleted. It's simply removing the habit of using it. It does make life a bit better :)
Oh, and a good first step is to install the extension `News Feed Eradicator`. This is how I got started. I run it on everything.
Only a sith deals in absolutes.
Social media is for our generation what news and political shows on tv were for the previous. Brain rot.
I hate to promote Reddit, because it’s not worth it, but I have a pretty nicely curated home page of just “good things”, cats, pics, etc that I love to browse when I want to jeep my mind idly occupied. If I make the mistake and go back to popular I get filled with rage, feeling of injustice and hopelessness.
I hate to promote Reddit, because it’s not worth it, but I have a pretty nicely curated home page of just “good things”, cats, pics, etc that I love to browse when I want to jeep my mind idly occupied. If I make the mistake and go back to popular I get filled with rage, feeling of injustice and hopelessness.
[deleted]
Is IRC "social media"? I'm not quitting that.
> Mark Zuckerberg recently announced that Meta is ditching its fact-checkers
There is a global recession coming, everybody is trimming the fat where possible, all tech industries are cutting where possible. I think it can be reasonably argued that the very nature of fact-checking is a dangerous one anyway - by nature of which facts are used (perspective problem) and what gets checked.
> Meta is teaming up with Trump to fight EU regulations affecting their platforms
Why is this a problem? What specific EU regulation being removed causes issue? The ones that curtail freedom of speech? The EU is a largely undemocratic body, where significant positions are not even voted on. Do you really want to be controlled by this unaccountable body?
> Recently, he hosted a live chat on Twitter with Alice Weidel, the co-leader of Germany’s AfD, a party flagged by the “Verfassungsschutz” as a far-right extremist group.
It's the only popular right wing party that has been allowed to exist, and they picked up a large range of unrepresented voters. A unified block of right wing voters is exactly the situation created by trying to suppress an entire wing of politics. The right-wing party of Germany is technically somewhat ideologically aligned with the government Elon will be working for - this is far from crazy that they talk to each other.
> Alice Weidel claimed that Nazi leader Adolf Hitler was not "right-wing," but a communist instead.
When you get to such extremes, the difference between fascism and communism become difficult to see. Putting people in death camps for example, are we talking about the concentration camps or gulags? Extreme nationalism is unique to which ideology? Which ideology was uniquely a dictatorship?
> Profit First, Morality... Somewhere in the Basement
Nothing new. If something is for free, then _you_ are the product.
> Teens and Social Media: A Toxic Cocktail
I have said this for a long time, stop exposing children to unfiltered access on the internet, under any context.
> Once the accounts were finally gone, I realized just how much of a grip these platforms had on me. The number of times I reflexively typed "t" or "f" into my browser bar (which autocompletes to twitter.com or facebook.com) was honestly terrifying.
The trick is to know your limitations and account for them. I don't use social media on my work computer at all, and until recently I didn't even have any chat apps. These were all relegated to my phone, and it's purposefully slow and old.
> Honestly? No idea. Some friends recommended Bluesky, but I’m holding off for now. Maybe I’ll go old-school and write more blog posts. Like back in the early 2000s, when you actually had to think before sharing your thoughts with the world. Sounds quaint, doesn’t it?
The magical new social media will not resolve your issues with social media, social media has been around long enough to know this.
There is a global recession coming, everybody is trimming the fat where possible, all tech industries are cutting where possible. I think it can be reasonably argued that the very nature of fact-checking is a dangerous one anyway - by nature of which facts are used (perspective problem) and what gets checked.
> Meta is teaming up with Trump to fight EU regulations affecting their platforms
Why is this a problem? What specific EU regulation being removed causes issue? The ones that curtail freedom of speech? The EU is a largely undemocratic body, where significant positions are not even voted on. Do you really want to be controlled by this unaccountable body?
> Recently, he hosted a live chat on Twitter with Alice Weidel, the co-leader of Germany’s AfD, a party flagged by the “Verfassungsschutz” as a far-right extremist group.
It's the only popular right wing party that has been allowed to exist, and they picked up a large range of unrepresented voters. A unified block of right wing voters is exactly the situation created by trying to suppress an entire wing of politics. The right-wing party of Germany is technically somewhat ideologically aligned with the government Elon will be working for - this is far from crazy that they talk to each other.
> Alice Weidel claimed that Nazi leader Adolf Hitler was not "right-wing," but a communist instead.
When you get to such extremes, the difference between fascism and communism become difficult to see. Putting people in death camps for example, are we talking about the concentration camps or gulags? Extreme nationalism is unique to which ideology? Which ideology was uniquely a dictatorship?
> Profit First, Morality... Somewhere in the Basement
Nothing new. If something is for free, then _you_ are the product.
> Teens and Social Media: A Toxic Cocktail
I have said this for a long time, stop exposing children to unfiltered access on the internet, under any context.
> Once the accounts were finally gone, I realized just how much of a grip these platforms had on me. The number of times I reflexively typed "t" or "f" into my browser bar (which autocompletes to twitter.com or facebook.com) was honestly terrifying.
The trick is to know your limitations and account for them. I don't use social media on my work computer at all, and until recently I didn't even have any chat apps. These were all relegated to my phone, and it's purposefully slow and old.
> Honestly? No idea. Some friends recommended Bluesky, but I’m holding off for now. Maybe I’ll go old-school and write more blog posts. Like back in the early 2000s, when you actually had to think before sharing your thoughts with the world. Sounds quaint, doesn’t it?
The magical new social media will not resolve your issues with social media, social media has been around long enough to know this.
> There is a global recession coming, everybody is trimming the fat where possible, all tech industries are cutting where possible. I think it can be reasonably argued that the very nature of fact-checking is a dangerous one anyway - by nature of which facts are used (perspective problem) and what gets checked.
https://companiesmarketcap.com/meta-platforms/operating-marg...
What recession??? We've heard this line for 5+ years now. They're cutting where possible because they can and because the job market is in a dumpster at the moment.
https://companiesmarketcap.com/meta-platforms/operating-marg...
What recession??? We've heard this line for 5+ years now. They're cutting where possible because they can and because the job market is in a dumpster at the moment.
Are you relying on mainstream media again in the same way you did in the pre-social media era?
Oh no, it has something to do with the president-elect Trump and of course politics too. The first two paragraphs explained a lot and the later paragraphs were there to cover up his opinions by dragging in morality, teens and how bad the world had become due to social media.
I didn't read a single about misinformation, disinformation, fake news and how to counter them.
Hacker News was created by Paul Graham, and he is using social media. Which means ignoring social media isn't a wise decision.
Oh no, it has something to do with the president-elect Trump and of course politics too. The first two paragraphs explained a lot and the later paragraphs were there to cover up his opinions by dragging in morality, teens and how bad the world had become due to social media.
I didn't read a single about misinformation, disinformation, fake news and how to counter them.
Hacker News was created by Paul Graham, and he is using social media. Which means ignoring social media isn't a wise decision.
>> The number of times I reflexively typed "t" or "f" into my browser bar (which autocompletes to twitter.com or facebook.com) was honestly terrifying.
I reflexively type "news" into the browser. It may not be quite as bad as FB or X, but I should probably stop.
I reflexively type "news" into the browser. It may not be quite as bad as FB or X, but I should probably stop.
You can always choose to unfollow people if their perspectives don’t resonate with you—you don’t have to leave social media entirely for that. By curating your feed, you can focus on content you enjoy, which naturally creates a personal thought bubble. When censorship comes into play, that thought bubble is shaped for you, removing the need to manage it yourself.
It’s worth reflecting on what democracy means in this context. For me, it means being willing to tolerate other thought bubbles, even when it’s challenging. This openness is preferable to having our thoughts policed. In an ideal world, thought bubbles would be more permeable, fostering trust and understanding between people with differing perspectives. That trust can’t grow if we only defend our own bubble. Overcoming the divide is crucial if we want democracy to thrive (or not die).
It’s worth reflecting on what democracy means in this context. For me, it means being willing to tolerate other thought bubbles, even when it’s challenging. This openness is preferable to having our thoughts policed. In an ideal world, thought bubbles would be more permeable, fostering trust and understanding between people with differing perspectives. That trust can’t grow if we only defend our own bubble. Overcoming the divide is crucial if we want democracy to thrive (or not die).
I always forget that we're not quite the normal crowd here in Hacker News. I think I need to stop reading so many comments on this site. Trying to convince me that I'm a sociopath for posting my grandma's obituary on my timeline.
This article is written from an extreme far left perspective if the author thinks it is "far right" to support free speech and oppose intrusive government regulations.
I recently joined social media again.
Turns out the group that shared my interest in my region was here.
So I made a new account and joined.
And the thing is, I am interested still. But I do miss a lot, because the group is chaotic and really important announcements are mixed in with memes and chatter, so it was a chore to waddle through that everyday, only to discover that nothing important was announced.
They kinda have to do it, I guess, because engagement metrics are no joke, and if you don't have them, then why are you here. But it really opened my eyes to how to social media completely failed on its premise when it decided that time spent on app would be a good metric.
Sometimes people just have nothing important to say other to announce, and them it should be okay to keep silent for a while, without being downranked.
And seeing how those, who always chatter even when they having nothing to say, will ultimately rise to the top on any platform that values time wasted, I left social media again.
People in comments say how it's better to have a few close friends then shallow connections, but social networks did allow us to meet someone that shared our more specific interests. My best friend I have met on a forum: our interests aligned and we spend hours talking about things we couldn't discuss with real friends before meeting up. There is value in shallow connections when they are based on shared interests. This value is lost on most social networks today.
IMO mastodon and blue sky are "good social networks" for people who want to connect over specific topics.
And the thing is, I am interested still. But I do miss a lot, because the group is chaotic and really important announcements are mixed in with memes and chatter, so it was a chore to waddle through that everyday, only to discover that nothing important was announced.
They kinda have to do it, I guess, because engagement metrics are no joke, and if you don't have them, then why are you here. But it really opened my eyes to how to social media completely failed on its premise when it decided that time spent on app would be a good metric.
Sometimes people just have nothing important to say other to announce, and them it should be okay to keep silent for a while, without being downranked.
And seeing how those, who always chatter even when they having nothing to say, will ultimately rise to the top on any platform that values time wasted, I left social media again.
People in comments say how it's better to have a few close friends then shallow connections, but social networks did allow us to meet someone that shared our more specific interests. My best friend I have met on a forum: our interests aligned and we spend hours talking about things we couldn't discuss with real friends before meeting up. There is value in shallow connections when they are based on shared interests. This value is lost on most social networks today.
IMO mastodon and blue sky are "good social networks" for people who want to connect over specific topics.
Has anyone pursued ADA accessibility claims against social media platforms? Their algorithms seem clearly predatory toward ADHD users. Basic accommodations like 'focus mode' should be required, just like other accessibility features.
The day you causally find an old work colleague at the top list of hacker news.
Hi Jochen wink
Hi Jochen wink
Community notes is far superior to the bias enforcers.