I really loathe you, Zuckerberg

[deird1]

I don't use Facebook very much, but one thing that has been helpful is that I could get group notifications from them.

So:
- my choir updates their group page with regular info on rehearsals/concerts/etc
- my roleplaying group regularly post to figure out when we can meet next
...and so on.

This is great, but only because it means I'm guaranteed to get a notification whenever anything happens.


So, what did Facebook just do?

*sighs*

"You were receiving all notifications from these groups, but we've updated this to only show highlights!"

...with an air of "Isn't this convenient? Aren't I helpful, to figure this out for you?"



Facebook, no. You are never helpful, and every time you try to be, you only make things worse.


Not wanting to miss out on unimportant updates like, for instance, my friends wanting to know if they can roleplay at my house this evening, I changed it back. Which took FOUR DIFFERENT WEBPAGES before I could change them all.


Not. Happy. Jan.

Comments

[conuly]

I don't know what the hell FB has against a simple feed that updates in order of posting.

[deird1]

Totally.

I used to open it up and instantly switch my feed to “in chronological order” instead of Facebook’s weird order, every time. Because you couldn’t save that preference. Then they stopped making it available at all...

[conuly]

Honestly, out of all the ridiculous shit Facebook pulls, this one is the most outrageous to me.

[zeborah]

In case this isn't a rhetorical "don't know" but a real desire for information (and if not, you're forewarned and can stop reading now):

Facebook simply doesn't want what you want. You want to get the most relevant information to your life in the most efficient way possible. Facebook wants to get money from its advertisers. Advertisers pay for views. Ad views arise from page views. Therefore, the simple analysis would show, Facebook wants to present information to you as inefficiently as possible.

It's actually more complex than that because if they're too inefficient then you'll stop using them. *Unless* they can give you some other reason to stay - like "Based on your likes, we bet you'll want to read this too!"

(I was reading a particularly horrifying article today about the algorithm that does this, and how it's inherent in its design goals to push more and more extreme content at people because that maximises engagement. And while I was looking to find that again I came across this even more horrifying article about how a change in Facebook's algorithms seems to have triggered the whole Yellow Jackets thing in France. In short, social media is supremely horrifying and I don't know what the solution even theoretically could be.)

[conuly]

It *is* rhetorical, but now my question has shifted "Geez, isn't FB wealthy and influential enough already!?"

[zeborah]

The thing is. I'd actually feel better if Facebook was trying to take over the world.

Because then they'd presumably want the world to be more or less in one piece once they'd taken it over.

But because all they care is getting as much money as possible as quickly as possible, and then retiring to their bunker in New Zealand when the end times come, they simply don't care, and may not even notice, that as a side-effect of all this they're hastening those end-times by wreaking complete sociopolitical havoc across every country on the planet.

Oh well, as one of my siblings says, humans will all go extinct soon due to climate change so there's not much point worrying about this kind of thing.