Skip to main content

Facebook creeping is no longer totally anonymous

Facebook's new "Stories" update is here, and it ruins the best part about the entire social network: Mindlessly plumbing your friends' lives without fear of getting caught.

When you watch a friend's Story — which exists for 24 hours and is comprised of one or more photos or short videos — that friend will know you're creeping. This is how Stories work on basically every platform that supports them (Snapchat, Instagram), but in the context of Facebook, it's kind of messed up.
First, for reference, here's what that looks like:





So far, so good. But the list of people who viewed my content is an awkward who's-who that includes a couple of folks I probably wouldn't even make small talk with at a party. Which is fine! I appreciate the content views, friends. It's just that I haven't seen one or two of you since eighth grade, and, well, here you are, looking at my cats.

Here's the rub

Facebook is THE BIG ONE, a monolithic social media force that shoves everyone you know into an interactive database of photos, text and video. But it doesn't want you to think of it like that — it wants to be a place where you talk to your friends and enjoy yourself.
Thus, it's done whatever it can to ape Snapchat — a much smaller rival that specializes in intimate messaging. But Stories don't make sense on a platform with years and years of social baggage. 
Facebook's algorithms are smart enough to keep your News Feed filled with people and brands you actually enjoy interacting with, but Stories are a bit messier. They're supposed to depict you unfiltered, in the moment — which doesn't really work if your audience includes the kid from your middle school English class, your high school economics teacher, someone you slept with once, your best friend, someone you're trying to be friends with, and your boss.  
Even as Facebook is fundamentally about connecting real people, there's something about the illusion of anonymity that's really important to the platform. It can be fun and kind of addictive to look through profiles without "liking" anything and giving yourself away. 
The simple act of scrolling through your News Feed and quietly admiring that one funny person who always pops up — even though you haven't had a real conversation with them in more than a decade — is probably the primary way most of us use the app to begin with.
So, in its rush to wipe Snaphat away and become the main place for social sharing online, Facebook has inadvertently highlighted that it's at its best when it does a slightly less-good job of connecting you to your friends. Funny how that works.
Not that it matters much: Few people I'm friends with appear to be using Stories to begin with. As of this afternoon, I had three to choose from — out of a pool of 943 friends.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Internet providers in US say that they are not going to sell their consumers’ internet browsing history

Comcast Corp, Verizon Communications Inc and AT&T Inc said Friday they would not sell customers’ individual internet browsing information, days after the US Congress approved legislation reversing Obama administration era internet privacy rules. The bill would repeal regulations adopted in October by the Federal Communications Commission under former President Barack Obama requiring internet service providers to do more to protect customers’ privacy than websites like Alphabet Inc’s Google or Facebook Inc . The easing of restrictions has sparked growing anger on social media sites. “We do not sell our broadband customers’ individual web browsing history. We did not do it before the FCC’s rules were adopted, and we have no plans to do so,” said Gerard Lewis, Comcast’s chief privacy officer. He added Comcast is revising its privacy policy to make more clear that “we do not sell our customers’ individual web browsing information to third parties.” Verizon does not sell person
Post a Comment
Read more

The Galaxy S8's misplaced fingerprint scanner was probably a last-minute change

Ask anyone to tell you where a smartphone's fingerprint reader should be and, though the answers will vary, you'll never be told "off center, right next to the camera lens on the back." But lo and behold, that's exactly where Samsung plopped  its  fingerprint scanner on the new (and otherwise delightful) Galaxy S8. It's a perplexing decision if we consider it as a deliberate design choice, but reports ahead of the S8's launch, which now seem validated by the device itself, suggest that it was a last-minute alteration enforced by the slower-than-desired development of more ambitious technology. A March 13th report out of Korea lays it all out lucidly. Samsung, working in collaboration with Synaptics, had initially hoped to build the fingerprint sensing tech directly into the screen itself. "Samsung poured resources into Synaptics’ fledgling technology last year but the results were frustrating," an informed source is quoted as saying. "W
Post a Comment
Read more

The Freedom 251 isn’t dead, it’s returned as the Freedom 420 4G feature phone for Rs 420(6.48$)

As we’re all aware by now, the  Freedom 251 smartphone  turned out to be a sham. The makers of the smartphone, resellers to be precise, were unable to follow through on their promise of delivering a smartphone at Rs 251 to the Indian public. Practically speaking, building such a  smartphone was impossible  to begin with. The bill of materials alone would place the cost of the device at over Rs 1,000 and despite claims of unnamed “partnerships” and tax breaks under the Make In India initiative, it would have been impossible to bring down the price of the smartphone and the plan fizzled out. Reality struck a harsh blow to the company and it’s offices have since been shut down. The original owners have also quietly disappeared and at least one has been arrested. It now appears that the company never gave up trying. We’ve learned that the company, now under new management, has taken a more realistic approach to the problem and have come up with yet another outrageous, but less lud
Post a Comment
Read more