Facebook isn’t free – the cost is information they collect about users that they then use to profit. It is a mutually beneficial relationship, and I disagree that Facebook is under no obligation to consider the concerns of its users. What a stupid, stupid argument.
I agree with this 100%. I like the new changes and I remember when people were griping about the changes that were made before that people now want to go BACK to. The point is that people often resist change. I’m just tired of hearing the complaining. Shut up and learn how to use it. You’ll find it’s actually improved.
Uh… Compared to the previous alternatives (classmates.com, anybody?) it is absolutely free. And classmates would tell you people who were on the site, only to find out that they weren’t on the site. They did a lot of shady crap. And they made you pay, what, $10/mo for it?
And anonymous, targeted ads are mutually beneficial, too. Did you ever think of that? Of course, I never click on ads (I don’t even see them any more), but if I did it would certainly be useful to show me things pertinent to what I want as opposed to something completely random. Good for advertisers, good for people who want relevant ads.
As one of the owners of the eyeballs that you sell to advertisers, as someone who has paid to run ads on your site, plus paid for services in games, I would think you would do a lot less to piss me off, especially now that Google+ exists.
The point is, goober, that Facebook’s not a charity, which is what the silly post offered here makes it out to be. I, like every other Facebook user, am a consumer that is being profited from, and I have every right to complain if I don’t like the product. I also have the right to stop using it, of course, but that’s also true of every single other product or commodity ever, so if you wouldn’t use that argument all the time, then you can’t use it here (“you” meaning not “you,” but “hypothetical person”).
Also, Facebook is not an alternative to classmates.com. They are in totally different universes. People use Facebook for way, way, way more than just getting in touch with old schoolmates. The early days of Facebook were like that, but it hasn’t been that way in at least five years. I remember when I signed up for Facebook (not sure how close that was to the beginning), you could only register with a valid university e-mail address, and could only see people who were either your friends or on the same university network. It has changed so radically since then, there’s really nothing else on the Internet like it that makes for an apt comparison.
I don’t have facebook, but I do want to point out that because of loyal users, the facebook company has done quite well for itself. They’re in a business model in which their users don’t pay for services directly, but it is sort of like television: if nobody uses it, they’re not going to make money. Their money comes from ads which, sure, like goober said, could benefit the users, but _they wouldn’t even be there_ if the users weren’t there.
So they do kind of owe the users. The users are the ones who made the whole thing possible in the first place.
It is rather like that Simpsons episode several years ago, when Bart argued that Itchy & Scratchy provide free entertainment and the viewers, if anything, owed them. But the fact is that a tv show gets its money because of its viewers (not to mention that in this case, we do pay for cable access and suffer through annoying commercials).
4am, I agree with you, except with your point that Facebook’s changes are always improvement. Have you seen the different stages the photo uploader has gone? It has become more and more complicated, and it’s unnecessary. You used to be able to use checkboxes to select photos; now you have hold the control button and be careful you don’t let go of it for a second and accidentally unselect everything. You also can’t change windows while you’re selecting pictures (like to check the quality of the photo in its actual size) or else that awkward pop-up box disappears.
The worst part isn’t the cosmetic changes (though those are a right pain in the ass to wake up to). No, it’s the privacy changes that piss me off. Whenever Facebook decides to go on an updating rampage, they fuck around with the privacy settings. My status updates and wall posts were apparently all reset to public view, the select individuals I blocked from viewing my profile were decidedly less than they were yesterday…
Dicking around with consumer privacy just ain’t cool. Some of us have our privacy settings fine-tuned for very good reasons (future employers, stalkers, evil ex boyfriends, you know, that sort of stuff).
Fuck that shit, now I have to go back to the notes I want to keep private and reset them to private all over again.
And the constant changing of the photo uploader is bullshit, it’s only gotten worse.
why does fb INSIST on changing everything around when we all raise hell about it every single time?! i’ll never understand. i really hate it this time though..too much clutter and too many new feeds..can’t i just have one?!
and #9, you don’t have a facebook and you come here? not that there’s a problem with that, i just think it’s interesting lol
This is ridiculous. All the Facebook users will be gone within the blink of an eye if Facebook decided to charge their users. That has got nothing to do with charity at all, like it’s a gesture of graciousness that Facebook feeds off all the details of my private life instead of my money. If people are bothered by people bitching about Facebook changing stuff they are in no way obligated to listen.
@ hootie,
They can only collect the information you choose to give them. So that makes it a voluntary contribution. You could still have a facebook and put absolutely none of your personal information in it.
While Facebook may be free to use, they do have some obligation to their users if you take into consideration the amount of advertising sales they get thanks to those faceless masses who view the ads. Not to mention all the people who buy credits for the various games on there. You’re not going to get as many ad views if you piss off your userbase enough that they quit coming on.
Subscribe to Tom Anderson’s feed. He’s giving details of all the upcoming changes to Facebook, as shared / presented by Facebook executives to a multitude of internet geeks.
Just my opinion, but I think the added benefits and functionality will far outweigh the inconvenience of having a new ticker on your page, and minimal users will actually leave. People may have a Google + account as well, but I reckon Facebook is assuring its social network monopoly for the long-term and are making all the right moves.
I honestly don’t have much of a problem with Facebook’s new design. I only visit the site once or twice a day, so it’s not like I’m constantly wrestling with it (the same can’t be said with some of my friends, however). My only real problem with the new layout is how unwieldy it’s making the site, but then again Facebook was always a little clunky.
I hate the FB thing, simply because I speak my mind against morons a lot on certain pages. With the new stalker function. I may come off as bitch. So far, haven’t had any deletions. But if they take me off, then they obviously want friends who are pussies and and quiet.
@dr, you have a partial point. We have no obligation to use it. But if you try to delete it? Practically impossible. It’s like you’re nearly forced to stay. So yes, once you join, there IS an obligation.
Another very slow day in the LB ‘news’ room.
Apparently, yes.
Facebook isn’t free – the cost is information they collect about users that they then use to profit. It is a mutually beneficial relationship, and I disagree that Facebook is under no obligation to consider the concerns of its users. What a stupid, stupid argument.
I agree with this 100%. I like the new changes and I remember when people were griping about the changes that were made before that people now want to go BACK to. The point is that people often resist change. I’m just tired of hearing the complaining. Shut up and learn how to use it. You’ll find it’s actually improved.
Uh… Compared to the previous alternatives (classmates.com, anybody?) it is absolutely free. And classmates would tell you people who were on the site, only to find out that they weren’t on the site. They did a lot of shady crap. And they made you pay, what, $10/mo for it?
And anonymous, targeted ads are mutually beneficial, too. Did you ever think of that? Of course, I never click on ads (I don’t even see them any more), but if I did it would certainly be useful to show me things pertinent to what I want as opposed to something completely random. Good for advertisers, good for people who want relevant ads.
Dear Facebook,
As one of the owners of the eyeballs that you sell to advertisers, as someone who has paid to run ads on your site, plus paid for services in games, I would think you would do a lot less to piss me off, especially now that Google+ exists.
The point is, goober, that Facebook’s not a charity, which is what the silly post offered here makes it out to be. I, like every other Facebook user, am a consumer that is being profited from, and I have every right to complain if I don’t like the product. I also have the right to stop using it, of course, but that’s also true of every single other product or commodity ever, so if you wouldn’t use that argument all the time, then you can’t use it here (“you” meaning not “you,” but “hypothetical person”).
Also, Facebook is not an alternative to classmates.com. They are in totally different universes. People use Facebook for way, way, way more than just getting in touch with old schoolmates. The early days of Facebook were like that, but it hasn’t been that way in at least five years. I remember when I signed up for Facebook (not sure how close that was to the beginning), you could only register with a valid university e-mail address, and could only see people who were either your friends or on the same university network. It has changed so radically since then, there’s really nothing else on the Internet like it that makes for an apt comparison.
Sorry for the long rant.
Sorry Hootie, TL:DR
STEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEVER
I don’t have facebook, but I do want to point out that because of loyal users, the facebook company has done quite well for itself. They’re in a business model in which their users don’t pay for services directly, but it is sort of like television: if nobody uses it, they’re not going to make money. Their money comes from ads which, sure, like goober said, could benefit the users, but _they wouldn’t even be there_ if the users weren’t there.
So they do kind of owe the users. The users are the ones who made the whole thing possible in the first place.
It is rather like that Simpsons episode several years ago, when Bart argued that Itchy & Scratchy provide free entertainment and the viewers, if anything, owed them. But the fact is that a tv show gets its money because of its viewers (not to mention that in this case, we do pay for cable access and suffer through annoying commercials).
4am, I agree with you, except with your point that Facebook’s changes are always improvement. Have you seen the different stages the photo uploader has gone? It has become more and more complicated, and it’s unnecessary. You used to be able to use checkboxes to select photos; now you have hold the control button and be careful you don’t let go of it for a second and accidentally unselect everything. You also can’t change windows while you’re selecting pictures (like to check the quality of the photo in its actual size) or else that awkward pop-up box disappears.
The worst part isn’t the cosmetic changes (though those are a right pain in the ass to wake up to). No, it’s the privacy changes that piss me off. Whenever Facebook decides to go on an updating rampage, they fuck around with the privacy settings. My status updates and wall posts were apparently all reset to public view, the select individuals I blocked from viewing my profile were decidedly less than they were yesterday…
Dicking around with consumer privacy just ain’t cool. Some of us have our privacy settings fine-tuned for very good reasons (future employers, stalkers, evil ex boyfriends, you know, that sort of stuff).
Fuck that shit, now I have to go back to the notes I want to keep private and reset them to private all over again.
And the constant changing of the photo uploader is bullshit, it’s only gotten worse.
why does fb INSIST on changing everything around when we all raise hell about it every single time?! i’ll never understand. i really hate it this time though..too much clutter and too many new feeds..can’t i just have one?!
and #9, you don’t have a facebook and you come here? not that there’s a problem with that, i just think it’s interesting lol
This is ridiculous. All the Facebook users will be gone within the blink of an eye if Facebook decided to charge their users. That has got nothing to do with charity at all, like it’s a gesture of graciousness that Facebook feeds off all the details of my private life instead of my money. If people are bothered by people bitching about Facebook changing stuff they are in no way obligated to listen.
@ hootie,
They can only collect the information you choose to give them. So that makes it a voluntary contribution. You could still have a facebook and put absolutely none of your personal information in it.
I can’t believe nobody’s pointed out that #2 has spelt ‘mildly’ wrong…
While Facebook may be free to use, they do have some obligation to their users if you take into consideration the amount of advertising sales they get thanks to those faceless masses who view the ads. Not to mention all the people who buy credits for the various games on there. You’re not going to get as many ad views if you piss off your userbase enough that they quit coming on.
I hear a lot of whine. Cheese, anyone?
Please. I like a bit of brie, myself.
Subscribe to Tom Anderson’s feed. He’s giving details of all the upcoming changes to Facebook, as shared / presented by Facebook executives to a multitude of internet geeks.
Just my opinion, but I think the added benefits and functionality will far outweigh the inconvenience of having a new ticker on your page, and minimal users will actually leave. People may have a Google + account as well, but I reckon Facebook is assuring its social network monopoly for the long-term and are making all the right moves.
Yes. Because the fact that it is free and that we have no obligation to use it also means we’re not allowed to voice our opinion of it.
You’re welcome to voice your opinion. But the fact that it is free and you have no obligation to use it makes your opinion stupid and petty.
I honestly don’t have much of a problem with Facebook’s new design. I only visit the site once or twice a day, so it’s not like I’m constantly wrestling with it (the same can’t be said with some of my friends, however). My only real problem with the new layout is how unwieldy it’s making the site, but then again Facebook was always a little clunky.
I hate the FB thing, simply because I speak my mind against morons a lot on certain pages. With the new stalker function. I may come off as bitch. So far, haven’t had any deletions. But if they take me off, then they obviously want friends who are pussies and and quiet.
@dr, you have a partial point. We have no obligation to use it. But if you try to delete it? Practically impossible. It’s like you’re nearly forced to stay. So yes, once you join, there IS an obligation.
@Keona: Are you mentally retarded? How is it hard to deactivate your faceboook?
Account settings –> Security –> Deactivate your account.
Yeah. Real hard.