Some 8 years ago, Facebook was something that I really enjoyed using. I left way too many friends, close friends, and well, lovers behind. Facebook allowed me to have a healthy relationship with them, even if at a distance.
I went back to Spain on 2010 for the wedding of a close friend, and it was like I've been out of the country for 2 months instead of 2 years, and that was mostly thanks to Facebook.
I can't point exactly at the moment when all that went to shit (May be 5, 6 years ago?) but nowadays FB is a constant string of shitty videos from companies trying to stay afloat, shitty videos made by shitty people, fake news by the thousand - and people adhering to the fake news narrative! - and stupid motivational shit of the kind that really demotivates you, people viciously attacking other people for the stupidest reasons...
I disabled my account some 3 months ago, and I feel much better without it.
Instagram, on the other side, is a different beast. Even with the strong push by FB in order to monetize the network, I think that fact that people can't easily share other people's post, and are kind of forced to post their own material still makes it an interesting place.
As long as instagram does not allow reposting, I think it'll maintain a certain degree of quality.
I also have disabled my insta account, but I do miss the information from the people I was following there (Mostly, artists and crafstmen of all kinds).
>As long as instagram does not allow reposting, I think it'll maintain a certain degree of quality.
This is a fascinating insight I never considered. Disabling reposting results in higher quality, higher-effort discourse. Trashy memes and fake news can’t spread as rapidly or at all without the ability to easily, mindlessly repost them millions of times. It’s like a circuit breaker to our lizard brain, forcing us to actually think about what we’re doing instead of thoughtlessly queuing up another dopamine hit with a quick repost.
This seems to work pretty well in preventing the spread of bad messages, as a boost of such message will imply that you agree with it. That way you're not getting the typical "look at what this horrible person said" messages.
Even if there might be some people willing to make the effort of re-sharing certain posts, the chain is incredible weaker.
A few years ago I started actively clicking "not interested" on every type of content that I didn't want to see, and slowly but surely I managed to get rid of all memes, news, and uninteresting bits.
Now I'm left with discussions about AI papers, local events that friends are attending, and updates from friends in other countries. And even then, my feed is so uninteresting that I'm not tempted to scroll through it every day. Of course, this doesn't remove the million other issues with Facebook but at least it doesn't mess with my happiness
Whenever someone posts something annoying, like a string of recycled memes or bad political arguments, I hit that snooze button and they disappear from my feed for 30 days.
In 30 days they've usually calmed down.
What worries me is this is just the start. Wonder how social interactions will be in 50 years...
People basically stopped posting to Facebook and it became an endless stream of mindless videos, cutesy images with quotes and supermarkets trying to push offers directly to users (successfully though).
Facebook lost the thing that made it interesting, news about long lost friends and insights into the everyday of the people you know. I'm not sure if it's something Facebook did, or if people just stopped posting.
That's an interesting observation, this is one of the reasons I don't enjoy Twitter, everything is retweeted (maybe I just don't get it).
I find Instagram to be a bit too addictive though. It feels like an endless magazine of glossy images, which learns what you want to see, to keep you engaged... forever
The code is opensource as well: https://github.com/matthewmorek/blindfold
The features are kept in place, and that's a good thing.
But the other Americas, Europe and Africa are so heavy on it. It really is becoming the platform that you see in Asian countries for business, which Zuck had hoped he could have. Clout and reputation for business is all on whatsapp for many people. Compared to websites and public pages from decades past, which are still indicators of legitimacy in the US. Luxury watch dealers just post on their whatsapp story when something new comes in, and its sold in minutes. At the other end of the socioeconomic spectrum, people post sneakers they get in stock right onto their story and its a mad dash to obtain it. Professional group chats highly active for private equity deal making and collaboration, organic group chats created on the fly. Location specific group chats existing in perpetuity.
I spend almost all day on it now, out of necessity. And I like how utilitarian it is, it doesn't need to "wow" anyone with UI bells and whistles and they are completely invisible if you are not part of groups that use whatsapp.
I don't like that it forces you to share your phone number, but the etiquette seems self-enforcing. The chat size limit is a blessing and a curse, but they probably shouldn't change it.
Its not about what other chat applications can do, its about what happens.
FWIW at least in my neck of the woods I stopped receiving messages on WhatsApp about 2 or 3 years ago and when I got a new phone in October last year I didn't even install it.
Everyone is on Telegram and while I see people joining Signal all the time, the first time I actually had a conversation with anyone on Signal was a few weeks ago.
Regarding Instagram, I never thought about it in this way, and now that you mention it, perhaps that is why out of the 3 x services I talked about, this one was the least worrysome for me. Restricting reposting does seem to be pretty key to keeping content at a higher 'quality'.
I've never been a big Instagram user, but considering one of my big complaints about FB is the prevalence of regurgitated reposted garbage (memes, crap news, chain letter nonsense), I might have to revisit my IG account and see if I can salvage a bit there.
Bail. Find an alternative from Europe or Canada instead. Or simply let it go.
I think these comments come from people who have no trouble engaging with facebook without any unhealthy habits forming. But there are people who are unable to engage with facebook in a healthy way. I personally struggle with facebook's newsfeed and have to put up some serious barriers to ensure I don't waste an hour of my day looking at it. Presumably many of the negative comments about how terrible facebook is come from people like me.
The first step to helping those who are impacted negatively is to acknowledge that there is a real problem here. The next is to attack the problem with various solutions. Some of them facebook will not like.
An ever so brief study of psychology shows this is a bad model to predict human behavior, and an even worse model to use when constructing and shaping our environment. It leads us to construct hostile environments and experiences where we always have to be on edge, and diminishes our humanity.
The usual retort to this is that hostile environments are a good way to teach us to be sharper, but that's just a lazy way of rationalizing the current situation , and represents a lack of understanding of how people learn.
If you want to teach people to be more rational you need to create environments where they are set up to succeed and make challenges within reach. In other words, it matters a lot the exact degree to which the environment is hostile or extractive (and to whom), and if you go over that, people are set up for failure.
 which itself is an irrational bias toward maintaining status quo belief, because it requires less cognitive effort to unwind its knock-on effects
How much Dopamine they can sell to their addicts has to be regulated because as with all addiction, people's ability to control their own behavior degenerates in the face of never ending free dopamine rewards.
† which is why I'm here on HN, if I'm honest
Being addicted to discovering new information and sharing with others sounds pretty healthy to me. I think the difference with HN vs FB is that at some level, you are driving your HN interaction, while FB is driving your FB interaction.
I think it only becomes "internet addiction" when you're not the one in control.
My interaction on HN could be more focussed to learn something new and not comment something old...
As a side note, and relevant to what I am working on, MakeCode and Scratch are very good at encouraging coders to fall into the pit of success. I find it quite difficult to find a real program breaking bug in MakeCode scripts for the Micro:bit. Which helps make it excellent as a teaching tool because you can focus on things that will engage younger learners in coding and engineering.
I have no impulse to watch the kind of things that make me feel bad, but many people do. I hear of people wanting to break Netflix addiction. I think certain types of people tend to indulge in certain types of entertainment, and they get drawn into bad behaviour that they wish they could stop.
I think you are right, but there is a larger group who merely think they 'have it under control' and are unaware of how unhealthy their use of social media actually is.
Like people who drink too much but will absolutely refuse to acknowledge they have a drinking problem, even if they can't remember when a day has gone by without using a glass or two.
I have posted such comments. But they are usually in response to people telling me it’s also the best thing I can do. When people make sweeping statements, they should expect pushback.
This is me. :(
Personally, I just use FB in a pretty restricted way. I unfollow most friends unless they post stuff I like engaging with. I give FB the bare minimum of my own personal data, and block all the ads they serve. I mostly post questions for discussion, rather than highlights of my life.
I don't use Insta, although I'm considering it. Lots of friends have described really fun, healthy little communities they're part of. (I still think of Instagram as a photography community, which is how old I am.)
I don't use WhatsApp by choice, but occasionally it's someone else's preferred way to communicate. I don't have a problem with it.
I think this is a good point, just like you are expecting people to contact you on telegram there must be some people who would like you to contact them on whataspp.
Wait what? When did that change? I must be old too...
I used Facebook pretty early on and still have my account but login less then once per month now.
This. It's the same problem as when participants self-select into a study. They have different motivations than the average person.
I'm just making the point that if you are persuaded by this article to also get off FB (because it made his life better), you might be disappointed, because you weren't already dissatisfied with FB.
I'm happy that with Facebook I can still keep in touch with most of my friends that I made around the world traveling. I end up meeting quite some friends that I haven't seen in decades when I travel.
I understand that some people are unhappy about the downsides of social networks, and Facebook in particular, but I wish more people would realize the upsides as well.
Facebook in 2010 was what we all loved. It's garbage now, and we all know it.
When you outsource you usually lose in resiliency.
These platforms make everything so easy, so additively easy, and it's awkward and difficult to ask for methods of contact outside of the platform or even any other kinds of backups.
Almost as difficult as someone who's never used, and refuses to use these platforms.
It would be nice if there were a similar app in the US with that kind of market share, instead of everything being scattered among various apps, etc.
The only real issue I felt with deleting my facebook was losing access to facebook groups. I was very close to making a burner account to participate in some groups, but I never ended up wanting it that -that- badly as meetup sufficed.
not really, nobody use these apps outside of their respective countries
Facebook is mostly a birthday reminder feature hidden in a glorified walled garden email, its whole point is vacuuming personal data and find ways to make as much profit as possible with it.
IMHO email is vastly superior to facebook as it is open and offers interoperability.
I met lots of elementary/junior high school friends many years ago who have been lost contact with more than 2 decades via this platform.
Useful, isn't it? Remember, it was before 2010.
And I don't spend much time scrolling on my timeline because I prefer group discussions.
Remember that Google had shut down it's consumer version of Google Plus.
My de facto messenger app. Many years ago, it was BlackBerry Messenger. Now Whatsapp.
I like this app because it's essentially just a messenger app without useless stuffs like news, job search etc (yes Line, I'm looking at you).
Telegram is also cool. It's open source so you can make your own modified version.
Ahh Instagram. I don't want to sound like an grumpy old man. Do you remember that in 2010 till 2012, it was a "privillege" only iOS users can enjoy?
And when they announced Android version, we Android users shouted in joy? I'm a photography enthusiast so I purposefully post my photos on it.
You won't find my latest dinner photos or selfies on beautiful beaches there, promise.
I also follow the accounts of some famous photographers and photographers hashtags to provide me more visual references.
People some also to forget that many many years ago, back in the film era, gaining recognition is harder:
you need to build years of reputation, publish your works on magazines, do exhibitions on gallery etc. Now? We have social media. Waaayyy easier.
Post your photos and in less than 5 minutes, people in Africa or Alaska can enjoy them. Even any kid can do that.
Despite the useless craps, I'm glad that there are people who still use social medias in a sane way :)
A gallery show will bring people to you and your work, let you sell prints, collect emails, potentially meet publishers/other curators/etc. Good luck getting noticed in all the noise on Instagram, or making any money.
Well, it does have some not-so-essential features like "whatsapp status". It should have just been a messenger instead of switching over to the social media hype.
It'd be myopic if we ignore all the persuasive techniques they employ.
If you want to give up communicating remotely with humans, OK I guess. Have fun. But giving up one specific interface? That's meaningless. It's like giving up Sauvignon Blanc but drinking Pinot Grigio everyday.
-- most of the planet, but you'd never know it by reading HN
-- most of the planet.
I never personally felt depressed when using these platforms in the past. In my post I suggest that those who may not necessarily understand the unfair comparisons they make of themselves versus other people's 'picture perfect' life could be negatively affected.
For me the issue was more about my data being used to serve ads back to me, and being disgruntled over all the outrageous things they were allowing to happen across the platform.
Beside couple of people, everybody else from my social circle seem to be just fine using FB (and others). Though there's definitely more usage of Instagram than FB nowadays (FB Messenger is still super popular)
(not from US)
Maybe the rest of the world feels better on Facebook. But that will only last until Facebook randomly decides one day to throw them into a depression.
As a certified clinical research professional (CCRP), this is pretty outrageous to hear. Might be an interesting discussion for one of our upcoming glorified journal club roundtables. TY!
I got rid of the timeline by unfollowing _everyone_. Timeline is completely empty. It's bliss
BTW I also had to use Facebook once - because everybody at the uni did so its Messenger was the way we texted each other. Now I use Telegram and WhatsApp.
I mean Instagram is a pure time&attention wasting tool, Facebook is the same + a messenger (which is an essential thing everybody needs nowadays - that's the way we communicate with people who don't stand right in front of us at the moment), WhatsApp is a pure messenger, isn't it?
By the way, I've just came up with an idea of what's really wrong with messengers like Telegram and WhatsApp: you can't read a message without telling the sender you've read it. And this forces you to answer. This way I often have to avoid viewing a message so they don't get notified. This is a huge annoyance which kind of ruins my life every now and then. Thanks G-d they don't insist to show when you are online. I would even pay some reasonable subscription to have a stealth mode so people would have no means to see whether I am online and if I've read their message.
However, the fact Russia has unbanned Telegram after Durov's claims they have implemented an illegal content busting mechanism seem alarming: we all know some harmless things many good people like (e.g. discussing government's faults, smoking weed or sharing voluntarily-taken nude pictures) are illegal in many countries.
I've never had WhatsApp. E-mail works fine. Phone call for people who don't E-mail.
These questions always puzzle me: "How do you do X without Y?" The answer is always easy: the same way I did X before Y even existed.
Basically facebook being facebook and doing facebook things to the people that were escaping its grasp.
edit: Here's some better links from @bigbugbag down below:
I hope that everyone else isn't addicted to another drug that is called 'Twitter' which one of its side-effects is 'getting the worst out of everyone' and all sorts of nasty media stories spreading over there.
So many important topics are "discussed" on Twitter with the outcomes of these discussions often leading to financial, political or mental ruin. Complex topics such as politics, inequality, racial issues, or gender diversity should never be discussed on Twitter. It's impossible to adequately to condense these complex issues into 240 characters.
it is possible. it's even more so when you there is a picture or a video with a caption.
Only 240 letters for a words alone that offer a nuanced, carefully crafted, fully informative message? Sounds unlikely to me.
A link to some other richer media; maybe.
You control idea by controling the language. It turns the internet is actually the social media and each and every thing online is de facto also a social media.
Email is a social media, a blog is a social media, bbs is a social media, usenet is a social media, a forum is a social media, a wiki is a social media, and so on.
The name social media is a marketing ploy akin to the "cloud" to manipulate opinion and mind into thinking a certain way about large companies whose business is massively collecting user personal data without providing any meaningful service other than sitting in between the people wanting to interact.
It's a good old switcheroo. When you hear "social media" you could actually revert it back to "the internet" as it used be.
But when you hear social media you actually think facebook / twitter, which means the marketing ploy succeeded in its attempt of replacing the internet by facebook/twitter.
And it's not only the word, facebook has actually tried to replace the internet in several countries, notably with the facebook basics program outrageously disrespecting net neutrality.
But a few companies are also quite literally replacing the internet infrastructure by their own and the decentralized distributed design by a centralized one.
persistent identity and status, that is to say the 'social' part. A lot of damage of social networks arguably is rooted in the competition for status and attention that you get when you get twitter likes and people complementing you, and the horror when you end up in a shitstorm and your reputation is suddenly ruined. It's also what makes it addictive.
Most people on HN just seem to post more or less anonymously. The upvote or downvote mechanisms aren't even particularly visible.
The worst thing you get here is 4 downvotes and a heated discussion. This is not like twitter where your career and face is on the line.
Most forums were based around a hobby or a particular subject, and communities formed around that. Sure, you'd have arguments, or someone stepping out of line, easily solved by a moderator. Sometimes moderators got to powerful and people left and joined another or did something else.
Most of my forum days were based on PC building or video games. Most of them had a bunch of boards with varying topics - and possibly a politics one. You could always separate it out easily because it wasn't visible by default.
Social media today everything is visible by default without anonymity. There is no effective way to filter content - only people, or profiles.
I really doubt this. The mask of anonymity completely removes accountability on forums. Pseudonomity is a better approach, along with moderation, and ultimately, a community committed to civil discourse. But the quality of commentary on any forum is a fragile balance, as the evolution of HN has demonstrated.
Accountable to whom? What accountability? Why was this necessary? Accountability wasn't necessary, as most forums were never big enough to really matter. Facebook, Reddit, Twitter are now forces of nature, especially in politics and matters of public opinion.
This has varying degrees of anonymity - you need to further express what you mean by this, because on its own you could support anonymity through pseudonyms.
> and ultimately, a community committed to civil discourse. But the quality of commentary on any forum is a fragile balance, as the evolution of HN has demonstrated.
Yep, something much easier to do on the old forums of yesteryear - they were much smaller, much easier to moderate, and much easier to remediate if they were unfairly moderated.
Accountable to the community represented by the forum itself. Participants in a forum need to have some kind of skin in the game, even if it's based on their pseudonymous identity, which brings us to ...
> This has varying degrees of anonymity
By this I mean a consistent identity that has a history, credibility deriving from a track record of adhering to the community standards. It doesn't have to reference your legal identity, but things like the HN "throwaway" drive-by accounts are a problem, IMO, except in rare cases where the individual would take a great personal risk by speaking out even as their pseudonymous identity. But in that case, the bar of evidence for assertions should be very high.
That's pseudonymity, is it not? Otherwise why the quotes around "know"?
The most efficient way is to infuriate people. Hence the business model of these companies is to have people outraged and infuriated.
This is a similar strategy to using the media spread fear so people consume more. Simply said someone who's happy, live a fulfilling life free of worry does not feel the urge to buy and consume.
Not that that's a defining feature of social media (at least it shouldn't be).
But I would say that traditional forums and ones like this and Slashdot fall within this (somewhat arbitrary) definition:
> Websites and applications that enable users to create and share content or to participate in social networking.
There is a difference if you use it to discuss your interests with like minded individuals or if you broadcast to an audience.
I think this is why social media mostly works in small groups or why many people on facebook still find groups with limited topics useful even if they hate the rest.
It is also my main gripe with things like SSB or the fediverse. They work much better than other social media, because they encourage smaller, more tight knight communities, but they are often still people focused, not discussion focused.
And I'll be honest, although the writing is on the wall, I really don't want that to happen. I like BBS-style forums! But I refuse to subject myself to the dark-pattern morass that is modern social media design.
Moderating some subreddits I feel like I often have to stick with the new reddit design just to use everything properly and it gets annoying having to flip flop back and forth.
My kingdom for more simple text-only craigslist style websites.
Deleting Facebook etc. is not the solution; it seems like the author threw out the baby with the bathwater here.
getting rid of facebook is the right move here.
Don't get me wrong, having more freedoms is an extraordinary thing. But everything has a valid use-case, including Facebook. Blanket deleting social media at this point just feels like a cheap-shot to get clicks and overshadows the more realistic benefits such as reconnecting with old friends, talking to tech illiterate family members, etc.
And that's the rub: all of these things can be replaced with email.
Email - plain old text - can carry just as much info as all the web things, to my eyes - and, doesn't allow for much emerald-king manipulation behind the mirrors and smoke, either.
If only my friends and family all understood how to use email properly, in the first place.
Because this writing skill has been supplanted by software-usage skills. Why learn to top/quote/bottom, or properly cite text, or contract a useful file-archive and include URL's .. when this 'is what the computer is for' ..
Seriously though, I could radically reduce my social sphere down to the people I know can handle email etiquette and methodology well enough, and I won't need any other third-party service. Even my pizza guy can handle an email.
However, literacy being what it is, people don't have time or motivation to become proficient in email, as a tool. Its far easier just to swipe and touch things to share information, apparently .. perhaps the time has come for me to finally write an email client, hmm ..
Couldn't get of WhatsApp, yet, as it's too often the default for friends and family.
These things are useful, and just because they can be misused does not make them any less useful.
However I spent way too much time on it and Facebook is way to hungry for personal data.
Facebook was very easy to get reed of in fact. IG I was hesitant, since I like photography. It was obvious though quickly after it was bought that it had quickly become a narcissistic sewage and nothing to do with photography.
But, similar to the author, I'm having more difficulty getting rid of WhatsApp. This is my primary means of communicating with friends and family all over the world. And for some of them I know it's just not an option to try get them to switch to another platform, especially since I'm not sure which is the better platform. In my opinion, WhatsApp strikes the perfect balance of security and usability. Telegram makes me nervous due to the Russian roots and the numerous security concerns I've read online. Signal is overly secure to the point that usability for regular folk suffers (I've personally had terrible experience with their support after losing a bunch of SMS messages.) Matrix, Riot, MatterMost, and many other opensource apps all look good but not overly user-friendly for novices.
What else is there?
My phone happens to a smartphone that's not running windows/apple/google so whatsapp never bother to release for this phone.
Whatsapp being a walled garden it prevents everyone from the outside from reaching people jailed inside.
As you do not have a data plan, I have no internet access with this pocket computer we use as telephone.
Whatsapp is utterly pointless and useless to me, and coherent with facebook way of doing things it actively prevents me from contacting other people, which is shocking to me who grew accustomed to thing like email, jabber or sms .
Also security issues, lack of privacy, lack of proper encryption, censorship, etc. among a long trail of reasons.
Also whatsapp founder quitting and leaving 850millions dollars on the table doing so over the way facebook makes money out of whatsapp and for th way facebook made him mislead the european commission to have them green light the sale of whatsapp to facebook.
He also called repeatedly for people to get rid of Facebook services.
for exemple this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WhatsApp_snooping_scandal
and this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reception_and_criticism_of_Wha...
It's also not related to the Facebook app so it makes no sense.
I hardly ever use them, but sometimes it comes in handy.
For example, at least twice I found someone's wallet or ID and was able to contact them quickly using Facebook, because their name was the same.
I never got into instagram. As an american expat I find whatsapp convenient to contact my family overseas using their day-to-day telephone.
Anybody else never really joined social media?
2. Do you have backups? Can you make them?
3. What guarantees for consistency have you?
4. How do you know handing over such private info will never be abused? Did you hand out your contact list before to third parties?
5. How do you control the spread of your contact info?
When most people in your circle are on WhatsApp, you're tied to it as well. Sometimes even your bosses and colleagues need to reach you with that. Also if you just delete the account for Telegram there's less motivation for friends to reach you to just catch up because they don't use Telegram. Sure your best friends and family will reach you through whatever platform but that's about it. You lose friends. Some are ok with that but others should be aware of what switching messaging platforms costs.
What's a good alternative that has a web client at least when you are on desktop + you can video call too?
You can pay $10/month for your own Modular.im Matrix server host and use that with your family (it also funds the devs).
They have Jitsi support for video (you can also just use Jitsi stand alone).
I think signal also has video calling, but not sure about group call support.
Both have mobile and desktop apps. Both are encrypted and ad free. Matrix is federated, but modular.im makes setup easy.
I also realized that the hundred thousands points I had mean exactly nothing.
It was a relief beyond what I expected.
I created a new account for the only sake to ask questions on the tech subreds which are of interest. I do not read r/all and other similar trash subreds
To be honest, OP deleted only Facebook, WhatsApp, and Instagram accounts (all Facebook family), but NOT Twitter
I unfollow most pages also. Can recommend testing this method out.
I'm in the process of adding a day on each end. Or perhaps going *less Mon, Wed and Fri.
And perhaps too bad actors weren't involved.
Behind the scenes FB was nefarious then and now.
If you trust Google to protect them that is fine. Personally I don't expect Google to fail me in that particular way.
But it also means any E2E-encryption argument from WhatsApp goes out the window.
Living abroad, having a few friends and contact locally but a lot of connections non easily reachable physically makes the shutdown of FB, WA or IG hard, especially when most of your contacts uses ONLY the aforementioned platforms and nothing else.
That means killing your connections and cut bridges with people.
When I did that for BBC News and 9gag, I decided that I didn't want to go back to reading those sites (although I do click through sometimes from HN).
I still use Facebook messages through mbasic.facebook.com on an old phone. I don't use 3G (or 4G or 5G), but read books on my phone or offline Wikipedia when on the bus. The news feed never interested me; it was all about having contact Lists, organising Events, and discussing topics in common-interest Groups.
WhatsApp won't work on my old iOS 6, so I use it on Bluestacks and check it only when needed. The group chats on there would drive me crazy if they actually made notifications on my phone. Instagram seems to be full of pretty girls and memes, which I guess isn't that different to 9gag in some ways.
Instead of complaining about data being sold, why don't we try to build a better social network? CouchSurfing put up a paywall. The community is moving en-masse to BeWelcome, a donation-funded, volunteer-driven, open-source, ad-free platform.
The BeWelcome site is managed under a French non-profit, BeVolunteer: the same structure as Wikipedia and Wikimedia. I think that other projects could be part of the same organisation. Why stop at hospitality exchange? I think that if BeWelcome can get critical mass, a related site could then break into mainstream social networking.
Sorry, editing to clarify because this sounds unnecessarily combative. What I mean is your self-worth should not be externally determined by where you stand in some (mostly imaginary) ranking system compared to random strangers or celebrities, thus it should not be chipped away at by seeing anyone doing better than you in some aspect. This is a crucial skill to learn. You don't have to let your mood and self-worth to be subject to random vagaries of whatever you happen to be looking at at the moment.
This trend of telling people that they are helpless victims of their circumstances comes from a place of compassion, but it is ultimately causing more harm than good. Yes, some things that happen to you, beyond your control, may put you at a disadvantage compared to others. This is not usually insurmountable, and it does not mean that you aren't capable of overcoming it.
You can offer sex ed classes, it is up to the kids to pay attention and apply what they teach. Nobody else can learn something for you. You can offer cancer treatments, but people have to show up and stick with them. You can offer therapy and medication, but people still have to go to the therapy and take the meds.
If every time something goes wrong for you, everyone tells you that hey, "there's nothing you could have done", "of course it doesn't work out for you because of X circumstance in your life". Maybe it feels like you're being kind, but you're just robbing them of agency and telling them that they are doomed no matter what. Is your goal to actually make people's lives better, or to make yourself feel better by adhering to some "good person" script?
good luck deleting Whatsapp (and Messenger) in Europe, you essentialy cut yourself from most of the communication
also replacing Whatsapp with E2E Signal encryption by default with unsafe Telegram with no encryption by default and even optional with questionable quality doesn't seem like very clever choice, I would have expected switch to Signal, Riot etc. instead notgoriously unsafe service, which doesn't even provide videocalls
For one simple reason: bots.
One of my Raspberry Pi projects is a bot to delete from the family group any post containing the name of politicians. This wiped out political flame-wars and fake news.
It is very easy to make Telegram bots. You basically create a website, register it in a dynamic dns, add an ssh certificate (letsencrypt or your own) and add it to your group.
It is not a perfect solution, sometimes people send images with political memes. For these I made another bot that temporarily puts the offender under quarantine.
Also, remember to use regular expressions to filter out common letter substituions. So, in Brazil, to filter out our very stupid president (Bolsonaro) I use: b[0o][1l][5s][0o]n[a4]r[0o]
>Not too big, about 50 people.
Your country has a different definition of "big family" than mine :)
My family WhatsApp is 5 people.
I'm a retiree. My kids and family are scattered. Social media is an important part of maintaining family cohesion and my role in the family. I've reconnected with old friends that I otherwise would have lost forever. Deleting social media would impoverish my life and drastically increase my loneliness and isolation.
Do gooders: give it a rest.
Facebook can decrease family cohesion and alienate family members as well. I stopped posting on there and stopped logging into my accounts after too many Fox news brainwashed great aunts and uncles ranted about how minorities should get out of the country or the NFL should ban black players who kneeled.
If you're lonely and isolated, consider moving closer to family and interacting with them in real life instead of expecting your family to sacrifice their data privacy to make Mark Zuckerberg more rich.
Group text is free too in case any of your family members have ethical reasons why they don't want to be on facebook or want to get off it to improve their mental health.
I'm sorry about your loneliness and isolation. I agree that Facebook is convenient and free but imo not worth the time sink. Cheers.
> Facebook can decrease family cohesion and alienate family members as well. I stopped posting on there and stopped logging into my accounts after too many Fox news brainwashed great aunts and uncles ranted about how minorities should get out of the country or the NFL should ban black players who kneeled.
I still have no explanation as to why people hate Facebook, the advertising system (do they also hate TV and magazines?) and in particular the idea that Zuckerberg is making money
...so my suggestion is to keep the account but start clearing the data out and poisoning it. Be especially careful about the IP's you log into it from (and randomize that MAC!).
Isn't that all the more reason to do it, though? The more people who delete it or don't have accounts, the more normalized it will become to not have social media profiles.