Hacker News Reader

Comment by jimwalsh | Hacker News Reader

I love how the HN type of people come into Facebook threads like this claiming that using the site is bad and that they are above everyone for never using it.

It's not that simple for people that aren't in the same circles as HN readers. Younger generations utilize it as their primary means of keeping in touch with people. That's fine if you get along well without it. But take a step back and look at all the teenagers who grew up with never not having Facebook to keep in touch with their friends/setup events/etc. You remember how difficult the social aspect of your younger days were in school.

Facebook/Twitter/Instagram alleviate some of that for the younger generation. I've seen that in many youth that I've worked with over the years.

View on HN

I understand your point, but it IS that simple. My social network completely uses facebook, I do not. They invite me to things in person and respect my choice, and if they didn't, they would not be my social network.

It seems you are talking about boils down to peer pressure ... how many after school specials about how not to give in do we need?

Which risk is easier to judge and would seem smaller for 90% of teens: "I miss some (or even most) of my peer's social events" or "Facebook may give certain government agencies my information". Resisting peer pressure is a risk assessment and without some impressive "here's what smoking does to your body"-pictures it's a hard sell.

This argument basically boils down to "everyone else is doing it". That's nuts. This is no reason to keep doing something against your own self-interest. Replace the word Facebook with texting while driving and reread your comment.

"Texting while driving" has a simple, safe, more-or-less equivalent substitute: texting while not driving. Facebook, insofar as it is a widely-adopted and community-preferred communications tool, does not: network effects and all that.

Actually it does. The more or less equivalent substitute to "communicating on the internet with Facebook" is "communicating on the internet without Facebook".

Facebook is a subset of Internet communication just as driving is a subset of texting scenarios.

The difference is that you can reach the exact same people paying the exact same amount of attention to the exact same channels by choosing texting-at-rest over while-driving.

So you're asking people to beseech their friends to adopt regular usage of some alternative to Facebook (email, Jabber, Google, etc.) solely so that they can stay in contact. That's equivalent to asking someone "could you please go to my blog regularly to see if I have anything to say to you?".

I am not asking anyone to do anything. I am just saying that it is possible to communicate outside of Facebook. The choice of tools and exercise of free will that make it a realistic possibility for each individual is up to them.

The idea here is not simply about using an existing alternative network. The idea is that creating an alternative network is always a possibility, and that free will exists.

The "network effect", while a real observable phenomenon, is still a flawed rationalization for the existence of a network, and undermines that thing which actually propagates the network - the free will of the individual.

It might alleviate a few problems, but a. There are better solutions, and b. there are much, much worse problems caused by Facebook.

I agree with both, there are cases that support that. But in general it is a very valuable tool for kids trying to fit in during their pre/early teen years.

Now teaching kids how to properly use technology and social media is another aspect that many non-tech savy parents could use some coaching I think.

Do younger people really use Facebook though? The only person I actually know who still uses it is my Grandma, who just plays scrabble on it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com