One of the curses of Facebook is endless chat and the mechanism for chat is someone may respond to something you have posted.
In turn, you may type a reply or you may enter something else to continue within the thread.
But not anymore and this is the gangster part.
Facebook now forces you to enter a reply rather than continuing the thread and this is gangster part because it enforces a mandatory compartmentalization of thought because other people will not see the replies unless they select them ... and they probably won't.
This is overt thought control and not so much for the purpose of making you quack like a duck but in terms of reducing world view and forcing the almost ubiquitous demand to put things into pigeon holes.
Zuckerberg remains one of the Worst People in the Universe for what he has done to destroy society, independent thinking, and humanity in general.
In most cases in Facebook now, it is necessary to reply to someone before it is possible to continue the open thread (i.e. the conversation). It had been optional until today but some goombah manager decided this must stop and now it's mandatory.
This change is fundamentally destructive to the nature of human conversation in which everyone hears each part of that conversation and replies in whatever turn they deem necessary. However, this mandatory compartmentalization of conversation runs immediately counter that and is, thus, disruptive of the nature in which humans normally converse.
People seem oblivious to these types of subtle thought control and don't get nuts about aluminum hats but rather review things as simple facts and conclude whatever you will. My proposal is this gangster chat concept (i.e. forcing the way of chatting) is fundamentally destructive to conversation and the aluminum hat aspect is thinking it's intentionally destructive.
However, think through the process by which that code ever got into production. Somewhere a whizkid was presenting a list of reasons which make this Something Necessary. Some Faceless FB Goombah nods wisely and says, yes, we should go forward with this. Perhaps we even drags into some other FFG's and together they nod wisely. Yes, it is good.
No-one's going to get any code change into Facebook without going through an extended process which exists in any large production shop regarding how changes are made. So multiple saw this change and thought it worthy for production.
So, in that context, my view is that it was deliberate. Perhaps that was because the programming crew did not look far enough but the other alternative is they are looking longer toward the never-ending ideal of obedience, passivity, and compliance. Compartmentalize and control.
OK, so that's got it all, right out through total aluminum hat. Come one, come all. Lunacy for everybody and fun for the kids.
In turn, you may type a reply or you may enter something else to continue within the thread.
But not anymore and this is the gangster part.
Facebook now forces you to enter a reply rather than continuing the thread and this is gangster part because it enforces a mandatory compartmentalization of thought because other people will not see the replies unless they select them ... and they probably won't.
This is overt thought control and not so much for the purpose of making you quack like a duck but in terms of reducing world view and forcing the almost ubiquitous demand to put things into pigeon holes.
Zuckerberg remains one of the Worst People in the Universe for what he has done to destroy society, independent thinking, and humanity in general.
In most cases in Facebook now, it is necessary to reply to someone before it is possible to continue the open thread (i.e. the conversation). It had been optional until today but some goombah manager decided this must stop and now it's mandatory.
This change is fundamentally destructive to the nature of human conversation in which everyone hears each part of that conversation and replies in whatever turn they deem necessary. However, this mandatory compartmentalization of conversation runs immediately counter that and is, thus, disruptive of the nature in which humans normally converse.
People seem oblivious to these types of subtle thought control and don't get nuts about aluminum hats but rather review things as simple facts and conclude whatever you will. My proposal is this gangster chat concept (i.e. forcing the way of chatting) is fundamentally destructive to conversation and the aluminum hat aspect is thinking it's intentionally destructive.
However, think through the process by which that code ever got into production. Somewhere a whizkid was presenting a list of reasons which make this Something Necessary. Some Faceless FB Goombah nods wisely and says, yes, we should go forward with this. Perhaps we even drags into some other FFG's and together they nod wisely. Yes, it is good.
No-one's going to get any code change into Facebook without going through an extended process which exists in any large production shop regarding how changes are made. So multiple saw this change and thought it worthy for production.
So, in that context, my view is that it was deliberate. Perhaps that was because the programming crew did not look far enough but the other alternative is they are looking longer toward the never-ending ideal of obedience, passivity, and compliance. Compartmentalize and control.
OK, so that's got it all, right out through total aluminum hat. Come one, come all. Lunacy for everybody and fun for the kids.
No comments:
Post a Comment