Facebook

IMO, a social media presence is integral to being a part of digital media.

I can draw clear connections between my Facebook activity and traffic to my site.

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #14268096
IMO, a social media presence is integral to being a part of digital media.

I can draw clear connections between my Facebook activity and traffic to my site.

The question is, does that traffic ever get you anything?
I mean, your drunk adolescent who failed school isn't going to buy any high priced art prints... - not order any other expensive prints.

And do people who work actually have the time to bother with that stuff?

Before FB was My Space. I don't know why but FB has trumped My Space in a big way.
I've been a net junkie since around 95 when I got my first PC and the connection was a 14.4kbs dial up modem. Gasp it was slow.
FB is great for keeping in touch with family and friends overseas. Meeting future wives and husbands. It's also great at helping to destroy struggling relationships.
BIG TIP. If you are in a struggling relationship keep your wife or husband away from social network sites. Be warned. The world is now in your home including those who would do you harm.

DetlevCM wrote in post #14268168
And do people who work actually have the time to bother with that stuff?

yes, because they do FB at work or every other minute just a quick check on a smart phone.

Amazing also that corporates support this, too. We now got a FB Group for our division at work where people can share ... go figure.

bipodsnapster wrote in post #14268405
yes, because they do FB at work or every other minute just a quick check on a smart phone.

Amazing also that corporates support this, too. We now got a FB Group for our division at work where people can share ... go figure.

Explains why less and less gets done, and what does get done gets done with a shoddy quality more often than not... or takes a lot more time...

DetlevCM wrote in post #14268421
Explains why less and less gets done, and what does get done gets done with a shoddy quality more often than not... or takes a lot more time...

Then again, many others browse forums at work, so time waster should equal time waster ... but not FB ... that is perceived as the new integral part of society and how we will communicate and
are connected from now on. Corporates sniff the $$$ opportunity.

bipodsnapster wrote in post #14268428
Then again, many others browse forums at work, so time waster should equal time waster ... but not FB ... that is perceived as the new integral part of society and how we will communicate and
are connected from now on. Corporates sniff the $$$ opportunity.

But not that many people use forums .
Facebook is more prevalent - and uses up a lot more time.

And no, Facebook is not an integral part of society. It never will be either.

DetlevCM wrote in post #14268600
And no, Facebook is not an integral part of society. It never will be either.

Do you still think the earth is flat and that man never went to the moon?

Social media isn't for everyone. Some people are never going to understand the fascination with it. Some people may wish to keep their lives private. There is nothing wrong with that and I certainly don't have a problem with anyone that fits into that profile. People are free to live their lives as they choose.

What I don't understand is the need for people that choose not to participate to try to belittle those that do.

Woolburr wrote in post #14268894
Do you still think the earth is flat and that man never went to the moon?

Social media isn't for everyone. Some people are never going to understand the fascination with it. Some people may wish to keep their lives private. There is nothing wrong with that and I certainly don't have a problem with anyone that fits into that profile. People are free to live their lives as they choose.

What I don't understand is the need for people that choose not to participate to try to belittle those that do.

About the moon bit - hmm, dodgy bit of history. -> Van allen belts?

But back on Facebook: There is nobody there whom I cannot reach otherwise, ignoring that some friends and most if not all of the immediate family don't have accounts on that site. That's besides the fact that I would need to have a browser windows continuously open.

And why do the people that don't use it belittle those that do: Because those that use it how the majority do are idiots.
There is a small minority which restricts which information it provides a US company with - in that case one can argue whether it is good or bad.
But for the majority, it could be used against them so easily:
- Any images from your youth where you were drunk? No job because you are an alcoholic. (In fact, someone who drinks a glass of beer/wine every day is an alcoholic - even when they are never drunk.)
- Political opinions can be judged only from whom you follow on Twitter: So if you are left wing/right wing you could easily be not offered a job.
And you can extend that to any topic you want.
-> And yes, you can't discriminate against an applicant on those grounds, but employers just use the blanket statement "many strong candidates" or find some other excuse.

Sooner or later this will come back to bite the users.
Even more so considering what facebook is for: It is for drunk adolescents who failed school or are doing their best to fail in university if they succeeded in school.

Have you ever noticed that nobody ever has the same harsh words about LinkedIn? Its because the clientel is a different - LinkedIn is meat to be a professional network, rather than a contest as to who is the most exhibitionist.

And lastly, there is the time element. Sites like facebook require you are constantly logged in - otherwise they become useless. E-Mails can be replied to when there is time, the same actually goes for LinkedIn - which isn't realtime. (And neither is a forum).

Add to that the fact that it is a giant moneymaking machine (advertisements, paid for games and other similarly stupid things), why would any sane person use that?
I can understand the alure of sites like facebook for marketing purposes - on the other hand, would I take a company seriously if they advertise in that space? Possibly not. I'd rather go and look for reviews for a product or find some measurements. (Ah yes, I also live in an Adfree world thanks to adblock-plus).

DetlevCM wrote in post #14268974
About the moon bit - hmm, dodgy bit of history. -> Van allen belts?

But back on Facebook: There is nobody there whom I cannot reach otherwise, ignoring that some friends and most if not all of the immediate family don't have accounts on that site. That's besides the fact that I would need to have a browser windows continuously open.

And why do the people that don't use it belittle those that do: Because those that use it how the majority do are idiots.
There is a small minority which restricts which information it provides a US company with - in that case one can argue whether it is good or bad.
But for the majority, it could be used against them so easily:
- Any images from your youth where you were drunk? No job because you are an alcoholic. (In fact, someone who drinks a glass of beer/wine every day is an alcoholic - even when they are never drunk.)
- Political opinions can be judged only from whom you follow on Twitter: So if you are left wing/right wing you could easily be not offered a job.
And you can extend that to any topic you want.
-> And yes, you can't discriminate against an applicant on those grounds, but employers just use the blanket statement "many strong candidates" or find some other excuse.

Sooner or later this will come back to bite the users.
Even more so considering what facebook is for: It is for drunk adolescents who failed school or are doing their best to fail in university if they succeeded in school.

Have you ever noticed that nobody ever has the same harsh words about LinkedIn? Its because the clientel is a different - LinkedIn is meat to be a professional network, rather than a contest as to who is the most exhibitionist.

And lastly, there is the time element. Sites like facebook require you are constantly logged in - otherwise they become useless. E-Mails can be replied to when there is time, the same actually goes for LinkedIn - which isn't realtime. (And neither is a forum).

Add to that the fact that it is a giant moneymaking machine (advertisements, paid for games and other similarly stupid things), why would any sane person use that?
I can understand the alure of sites like facebook for marketing purposes - on the other hand, would I take a company seriously if they advertise in that space? Possibly not. I'd rather go and look for reviews for a product or find some measurements. (Ah yes, I also live in an Adfree world thanks to adblock-plus).

Facebook has over 800 million active users. The odds on the vast majority of them being drunken drop-outs are fairly slim. Wild assertions like that do very little in the way of making a legitimate point.

Since when do you need to be logged in to Facebook or any other site 24/7 to enjoy it? Why would you have to look at ads or play games to use the site? Ad-Block plus removes any ads....and I am absolutely certain that I have never been forced to play a game to use any social media site.

Shy of advocating jihad, murder, arson or some other criminal activity, I seriously doubt that anyone is overly concerned with your political leanings. Oh wait, maybe that is why that van with the blacked out windows and funny antennas on the roof is constantly parked at the end of my driveway!

Trying to compare Linked-In to Facebook doesn't even begin to make sense. They are two entirely different entities, serving two entirely different elements of the social media spectrum. However, using one does not preclude you from using the other. Most of your arguments make about as much sense as saying that if you own a Ford, you can't ride with someone that drives a Chevy.

Whatever your personal problems with alcohol, Facebook, politics and ads are, they are just that....your personal problems. You've made it quite clear that you have a particular disdain for those things and again....I stress that that is certainly your right. What you need to bear in mind is that the rest of the world is entitled to have an opinion, to use alcohol, Facebook, participate in politics and read all the ads they want....none of which make them any less intelligent or functional members of society than you are.

Woolburr wrote in post #14269252
Facebook has over 800 million active users. The odds on the vast majority of them being drunken drop-outs are fairly slim. Wild assertions like that do very little in the way of making a legitimate point.

Since when do you need to be logged in to Facebook or any other site 24/7 to enjoy it? Why would you have to look at ads or play games to use the site? Ad-Block plus removes any ads....and I am absolutely certain that I have never been forced to play a game to use any social media site.

Shy of advocating jihad, murder, arson or some other criminal activity, I seriously doubt that anyone is overly concerned with your political leanings. Oh wait, maybe that is why that van with the blacked out windows and funny antennas on the roof is constantly parked at the end of my driveway!

Trying to compare Linked-In to Facebook doesn't even begin to make sense. They are two entirely different entities, serving two entirely different elements of the social media spectrum. However, using one does not preclude you from using the other. Most of your arguments make about as much sense as saying that if you own a Ford, you can't ride with someone that drives a Chevy.

Whatever your personal problems with alcohol, Facebook, politics and ads are, they are just that....your personal problems. You've made it quite clear that you have a particular disdain for those things and again....I stress that that is certainly your right. What you need to bear in mind is that the rest of the world is entitled to have an opinion, to use alcohol, Facebook, participate in politics and read all the ads they want....none of which make them any less intelligent or functional members of society than you are.

Sites like Facebook make the most sense if you actively follow them. -> That's the whole point. If you want asynchronous communication there is e-mail, text messages, etc.
And the odds of the majority of facebook users not being very "clever" is pretty high. Who in their right minds hands their personal data to a company that exists to make money out of that data?

Ads - yes, you can use an adblocker, but you would be surprised how many people don't. Games - yes, you're not forced to play any games, but you get spammed by messages in the short or long run or alternatively are hit by peer pressure. Not a problem for the older people, but quickly one for the younger users. If five people tell another user to "have a look at a great game" that person will.

And you are sadly very naive to think that political leanings aren't interesting. The UK (prime example of a failing free market economy) proves you were wrong: http://www.guardian.co​.uk …lding-workers-court-hopes
Just imagine facebook decides it wants some extra revenue and sells predictions on people's political leanings?
It it can be abused, it will be. That's just the nature of humanity. In fact, this is where forums and e-mail become so valuable - they are all decentralised. You can have the same username on a forum or 10 different ones. You can be a leftist human rights activist on one forum and a right wing supporter on another, no-one would know. With a central organization like facebook this is no longer possible.
In fact, the bigger facebook gets, the worse it is. If you have a site like POTN it is a small community. I'm sure the admin could do some analytics on people's post and so on - would he ever do it? I highly doubt it.
For a company like facebook, that is easy to do. What's more, they even have a representative sample of the larger "class" of the overall population. Keeping in mind though, that I don't quite consider classes to exist - however one can sort managers/bankers/"nobi​lity"/politicians and the "remaining population" into two groups.
What's more, that latter group is the one companies most want to reach and persuade they need to buy stuff they don't want...

And LinkedIn and facebook can be compared - to some extent. They are both social networks. But one wants to build a professional network. The other? Hmm, the other wants to harvest data. (I'm sure LinkedIn does it to some extent too, but considering that they offer paid for accounts, that's less of a concern for them because they have at least some revenue.)

And my problem with alcohol: It is a poison. Simple as that. Would you swallow cyanide in a tiny amount that isn't lethal? Just because you can? No. So why consume alcohol? It is one of the most additive drugs on the planet too...

Don't know how to break this to you, but there are targeted ads right here on POTN.

Woolburr wrote in post #14269589
Don't know how to break this to you, but there are targeted ads right here on POTN.

I never see them.
-> But then again, I suspect the targeted ads here will be primarily photography, which makes sense as this a photography site.
By using this site I have indicated that I am interested in photography. That's different to taking my posts/followers/people I follow or similar to use targeted advertisements.

Having said that though, I don't think targeted ads would work in my case - the stuff I would like to buy I can't buy because it is too expensive. And when I do end up buying something because I go and research the product anyway to find the best I can/am willing to afford.
The rest of the consumer rubbish I don't care about

DetlevCM wrote in post #14268974
There is a small minority which restricts which information it provides a US company with - in that case one can argue whether it is good or bad.
But for the majority, it could be used against them so easily:
- Any images from your youth where you were drunk? No job because you are an alcoholic. (In fact, someone who drinks a glass of beer/wine every day is an alcoholic - even when they are never drunk.)
- Political opinions can be judged only from whom you follow on Twitter: So if you are left wing/right wing you could easily be not offered a job.
And you can extend that to any topic you want.
-> And yes, you can't discriminate against an applicant on those grounds, but employers just use the blanket statement "many strong candidates" or find some other excuse.

First of all, I do agree with the danger of providing too much information about yourself and that might bite you up the bum, sooner or later. I'm also not a big fan of this.

But to your view of "it's not and never will be" (->never say never!). IMO you are failing to see what's currently going on and that there's quite the new era of how people communicate today.

As I see it, FB has created a massive milestone today. Will it be there forever, I doubt it. But there was MySpace first, very similar, but not cutting it, also mobile devices were not ready at that time.
But FB took this and brought it to the next level. You can see that many vendors & applications are currently developing around this idea. You can also see that more and more (older) family members are
online using it. A fast growing number.

Who says E-mail as you know it today, will be there forever? Email is getting overloaded and misused, people are receiving 100's of emails per day, too many off topic,I think this will stop and change to something
else, and I also believe this will be FB kinda style. (I'm not saying it will be FB, but similar to how that works).

As example, not sure if you know "Sales Force Dot Com", but they have introduced an app called 'Chatter' ... it looks, behaves and smells quite like FB in usage. You can have the complete Sales force of a large corporation communicating
very effectively if used correctly, I can see this kind of communication replacing E-Mail over time. Add to this that applications are moving to the cloud, you will have quite something different in 10 years from now.

Your phone was also ok 10 years back. If someone would have told you that a device from Apple computers is what most people will use in 2012, you would also have said ... never, or? What's wrong with that Nokia I had for donkey years.

Just keep an open mind, things are going fast from here, whether you like it or not

bipodsnapster wrote in post #14269698
First of all, I do agree with the danger of providing too much information about yourself and that might bite you up the bum, sooner or later. I'm also not a big fan of this.

But to your view of "it's not and never will be" (->never say never!). IMO you are failing to see what's currently going on and that there's quite the new era of how people communicate today.

As I see it, FB has created a massive milestone today. Will it be there forever, I doubt it. But there was MySpace first, very similar, but not cutting it, also mobile devices were not ready at that time.
But FB took this and brought it to the next level. You can see that many vendors & applications are currently developing around this idea. You can also see that more and more (older) family members are
online using it. A fast growing number.

Who says E-mail as you know it today, will be there forever? Email is getting overloaded and misused, people are receiving 100's of emails per day, too many off topic,I think this will stop and change to something
else, and I also believe this will be FB kinda style. (I'm not saying it will be FB, but similar to how that works).

As example, not sure if you know "Sales Force Dot Com", but they have introduced an app called 'Chatter' ... it looks, behaves and smells quite like FB in usage. You can have the complete Sales force of a large corporation communicating
very effectively if used correctly, I can see this kind of communication replacing E-Mail over time. Add to this that applications are moving to the cloud, you will have quite something different in 10 years from now.

Your phone was also ok 10 years back. If someone would have told you that a device from Apple computers is what most people will use in 2012, you would also have said ... never, or? What's wrong with that Nokia I had for donkey years.

Just keep an open mind, things are going fast from here, whether you like it or not

I never had a Nokia phone - and won't ever use an apple device - neither dead not alive. But anyway.

Back on topic: What you refer to as "Chatter" sounds like in-house instant messaging. That's fine, and useful. But it brings its own infrastructure with it, which is the key difference. It is a closed environment - i.e. the sales team of that company in your environment. And yes, something like instant messaging can be good for this. Considering how often we get "lost keys", "food left over" e-mails at university. Having said that though, I do not have a spam problem. I'm not sure what that is.
But that is completely different to a global centralized agglomeration of user data.

To mention a different project, Google Wave: If hosted by google, at best a bit of fun. But if you deployed that in a company on their own server, that would be extremely useful. (Sadly google killed it.)

However, this results in the same situation that we have with e-mail - different providers who do not talk with each other. And that is important.
I don't see a problem with an "in-house" network in a company, or even at a university level. But the very moment this is public and a celebration of exhibitionism it will become a problem if it isn't one already.

And with respect to older people using it: I don't know any is the honest answer. Though I have heard they exist.