Let's start with Facebook "in the beginning" being some sort of respectable space in the Interwebs for those normies who didn't like the egalitarian and intelligent, or at least free and brave, and also deep and diverse (not in the sense of demonstrative insincere tolerance to LGBTQZPNA, where Z stands for zoo-, P stands for pedo-, N stands for non-carbon and A stands for antimatter, and other culture war markers, but in the sense of a thousand different cultures forming not only the content of webpages, but also how they would be interconnected, how they would look and how they would work), culture of the Web back then.
It was almost a LinkedIn alternative.
Teens who'd want to be there were the more social and sociopathic types, who knew that the Web and that techy stuff is new and cool, but despised the people who'd actually exchange useful information there, and that actual information, that whole part of the world.
Facebook back then just didn't seem usable as compared to Skype and ICQ and all the web forums.
Unfortunately worthy people are gullible and lack willpower, so that sociopathic crowd has rebuilt the Web for itself. They don't even use it as much as we do FFS.
Remember when on a forum you'd usually see which specific moderator removed or edited your post? (And what was there before the edit, quite often) And it was good tone for moderators to only edit out forbidden parts, not just delete everything. And it was good tone to give out warnings first.
Facebook was a MySpace alternative for “academics” (college students / alums) instead of teens.
LinkedIn was a MySpace alternative for “professionals” instead of teens.
Forums were an evolution of BBSs that predated “social” media because it wasn’t you, it was an avatar, a fake persona you created rather than “first name,” “last name.”
ICQ and Skype were purely chat platforms, competing in a completely different space.
I have no idea what point this rant is trying to make but all the comparisons between services are way off base.
I'm 41.....you telling me the kids today don't think of me as the greatest person who ever existed??? Pssshhh that's malarkey! I won't hear of it! EVERYONE thinks I'm the greatest person who ever existed! My lexicon includes words like "malarkey" and "lexicon"! Kids think that's cool right???
Yes, although to nowhere near the same extent as Facebook and Instagram.
The chats are E2EE using Signal's encryption protocol, so very good.
But they will certainly mine everything else they can get. They may not know what you're saying, but they do know who you're talking to, when you're doing it, your contacts, your profile pic, how often you send images, etc. any web links with tracking info embedded in the URL will likely be tracked too, once you open them.
E2EE doesn't mean that the developer/company can't be a member of the "ends" in "End-to-end encryption". WhatsApp is closed-source, so nobody can really confirm which E2EE algorithm is at play. However, considering that the E2EE is the implementation of a known E2EE algorithm, such algorithms often support more than two keys (hence, more than two people), so, a third-key from Charlie can be part of the conversation, unbeknownst to Alice and Bob. If Meta would inject their own key inside every WhatsApp conversation, they could effectively read things.
For example: GPG/PGP support multiple public keys, so the same encrypted message can be decrypted by any private keys belonging to those public keys. Alice can send a message to both Bob, Charlie and Douglas, collectively specifying their public keys at the moment of the encryption. Then, the exact same payload would be sent to them, and they would use their own private keys to decrypt the message.
So, let's suppose that a closed-source messaging app company/developer had their own pair of public and private keys, and they public key is injected in every conversation made through their app. They'd also obfuscate it from the UI so the UI won't show the hardcoded "third-party". This way they could easily read every single message being exchanged through their app. It's like TSA with a "master key" that can open everyone's travelling bags, no matter where you bought the travelling bag.
Even Signal may have this. Yeah, libsignal is "open-source", but the app isn't. What if their app had some hardcoded public key from Signal team? The only trustworthy E2EE is encoding it yourself using OpenPGP and similar. And if one is more privacy-worried than me, there are projects such as the "Tinfoil Chat" which is almost-immune to eavesdropping, involving optocoupled (hence, airgapped) circuitry, separate machines for networking, decryption and encryption, Onion-routing, and so on.
In summary: nobody should trust out-of-the-box E2EE, especially those hidden within a closed-source app.
Ah, the curse of algorithmic social network. It’s full of angry middle-aged men if you follow those / interact with them. There are / were big communities formed around various pop stars on Twitter and those are quite different demographics.
Gee I wish they had just left Facebook as a way to share photos and updates with friends and family, instead of turning it into a viral content clusterfuck to capture the youth audience. It didn’t even work.
That is a weird way of describing it. Teens aren't "abandoning" FB & X; they never signed up to begin with. And why would that? They are platforms built for and filled with millennials+.
My family has a signal group. I started it two years ago.
Almost no one pays any attention to it, unless they accidentally open the app once a month, but they're all still there and can be spoken to.
I put a PSA out a month ago that I'll no longer respond on Facebook Messenger or SMS after the turn of the year. Tough shit. There was some groaning but, if there's no other way, either use Signal or invest in a Pigeon coop and get training.
Look at the graph in the article: it’s the only newsworthy piece. Assuming the numbers are legit, the lines crossed about 6 years ago.
Of course the x axis not having any labeled points there doesn’t fill me with confidence. Perhaps it’s just two points for each and they drew a straight line
WhatsApp has channels (public feeds centered around topics, a bit like microblogging), communities (groups about a subject, much like Facebook Groups), and updates (temporal video/photo statuses to share with your friends). You might only use it for DM, but it has much bigger aspirations.
That's just it, Facebook is kinda the default option, and almost everyone has an account there. It's why so many clubs arrange everything through a Facebook page.
It might be that I’m looking at this from a US perspective. Craig’s list has been a bit rough when I’ve tried it. Scammy and shadier people. I hope you’ve had better experiences here than me.
I found cash converters out of the UK. Is that correct? It seemed comparable to a pawn shop at first glance.
Weird that this is your association as using it would require an iPhone which most youth don't have. My thought was Telegram, which is omnipresent at least around me, with Whatsapp often being kept just for the parents or older relatives.
They’ve been trying to ban it for awhile now, so no. They want to ban it because they can’t directly control the companies that own those platforms overseas whereas Facebook, IG, etc. are very much able to be controlled if necessary by those in power
It's a delicate topic. TikTok collects a ton of data from devices and infers a ton of data from watching patterns. This is really true of most of the modern web apps, but especially true of TikTok because the short-form means more content to churn through, and the algorithm is practically an IV drip of dopamine.
The much, much more important issues are user privacy and truth-in-media, and is something that just as well needs to be pointed at Meta and Twitter and Reddit and Google. TikTok is probably more critical at the present moment, because it's run by a country our president-elect wants to start a trade-war with, and they've got quite an upper hand with all the data that we, the users, give them for free, via a propaganda machine under their control.