No one wants to hop on 12 different services to see any noteworthy information from various friend and family members. Facebook made it relatively easy to keep up with friends and family in the same place and somewhat control what you saw from them… snapshot in a handful of minutes of everyone.
Did I say 12? How did you get from multiple to… 12?
Or, do you have an account on your Wii / Switch as well as your Xbox / PS4? Is that too onerous for you?
ONE ACCOUNT TO RULE THEM ALL, AND IN THE DARKNESS BIND THEM!
I don’t know if you are being obnoxious on purpose or what but here’s the thing.
I don’t log into my gaming accounts to see if my fourth cousin got married or if my great aunt’s Superbowl party went well.
… but you’re making my point for me. Even if I carved out just the gamers, there are half-dozen accounts right there. They don’t overlap so what makes you think when you carve out the interests and hobbies of everyone else we would’t be looking at a dozen accounts or more.
You want to know why i don’t use Google+, because they screwed up big early on and no one else was on it, but like two people. It was a complete waste of time to give it any attention at all.
I find hobbies and interests to be way more powerful binding material. So yeah, I am advocating for people spending more time on, say, a knitting forum, or in their PS4 / Steam friends list, instead of randomly paging through what a third cousin was up to, or what a friend you haven’t seen since high school 30 years ago is currently doing.
It’s fine if Facebook is one of the multiple services one uses – but if we’re entering an era where not having a Facebook accounts makes you unreachable, then that’s an unmitigated negative for the world.
I believe it’s more convenience than unreachable. To be fair.
Well we’re having this conversation aren’t we? On a hobbyist forum? What makes you think everyone else isn’t doing the same thing… in addition to Facebook?
Facebook just makes is easier for me to know which of my friends are interested in an upcoming movie… i can ask them all at once. I don’t have to call 20 people. I also find out what they like because they share information, again, I don’t have to call twenty people. I care about my extended family, but I am not going to call them once a month… it’s not because I don’t care.
You’re kind of acting like Facebook cause these loose relationships, no… not talking to your second cousins second husbands sister was often a rarity but now you can stay in touch, loosely, if you want to. And everyone is in the same place. There is value to that.
Also, i don’t want snippet texts from everyone under 30 all day long… bleh.
Well, kinda…
Many other examples in the replies to that tweet.
If you expose a person to idiocy, and they embrace it whole-heartedly, perhaps the problem lies not with the vehicle for the idiocy but with said person’s education.
Those who ignore the lessons of history are doomed to repeat it.
There are countless examples where peer pressure has taken people who previously appeared reasonable and made them do awful things.
Facebook has the effect of amplifying the worst voices, creating a more extreme image of the peer group, which becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.
The individuals may be culpable, but to actually change everything we need to change the terms of engagement on facebook (EDIT: It’s not just facebook, although fb does seem to be where it is at its worst)
That’s a lot of daughters!
Could you imagine what kind of hell it would be having 20 something teenage daughters. Brrrrr…
At some point a person has to accept responsibility for their own idiocy.
If idiots knew they were idiots they wouldn’t be idiots.
The Deplorables know they are deplorable, and proudly identify as such.
Obligatory:
The Cleese punchline is funny (why wouldn’t it be, it’s Cleese?), but the premise that you have to be good at something to understand that you are not good at it is, uh, stupid.
Take sports. I can name any number of different sports that I am both not good at and I also understand what the sport requires in order for someone to be good.
That’s what I’m saying – I mean, the ‘facebook turned me stupid’ thing doesn’t entirely wash with me. If our population were where they should be in terms of education and critical thinking they wouldn’t allow a bunch of social media bullshit to zombify them.
You’re misunderstanding what the Dunning-Kruger effect is (which is perfectly understandable, since I posted a Youtube video by a comedian, not a detailed explanation.) It’s not an opinion about how stupid people or smart people think: it’s a scientific hypothesis that’s been tested with data and (so far, anyway) holds up.
So it doesn’t really matter whether you or I think it’s stupid that that stupid people overestimate their skills (and smart people underestimate theirs.) It appears to be how the world works, so far as we can tell.
(Also, to clarify: the Dunning Kruger effect doesn’t claim that stupid or clumsy people think they’re Olympic athletes. A better way to think of it is that people who are way below or way above the average believe themselves to be closer to the average than they really are.)
Almost everyone overestimates the degree to which their executive functions run the show. For the most part, we don’t consciously decide how to feel about things, and exposure to the right stimuli can be very effective, even if you know it’s false.
In short: The speech delivered in the CA video about ‘appealing to fears on a subconscious level’ is accurate. This stuff works, and its effect is not limited to smart people.
Shorter yet: None of us is as smart as we think we are.
Right. Think of it this way… ron knows he’s bad at sports because he good enough to understand the gap between himself and pro athletes. My kids on the other hand…they make 2 free throws in a row and they think they are headed to the NBA. They just don’t have the experience or intelligence to recognize how big a skills gap there is.