Comment on YSK that Chris Hughes, one of the founders of Facebook, says the company must be dismantled
kelpie_returns@lemmy.world 5 days agoI think the purpose is that this could be eye-opening for people who aren’t as tuned in as the average lemming. A co-founder of a company saying that the same company is bad and should not exist is a very workable route toward getting more kinds of people to see situations like this as what they truly are.
Most/many of us here are just not the intended demo for articles like this, but a lack of personal relevance is not the same as a total lack of value.
tyler@programming.dev 5 days ago
I mean it is a total lack of value, because it once again means that people listen to some rando on where our society should move towards rather than scientists. Facebook is bad for society. Don’t listen to founders, don’t listen to millionaires, don’t listen to billionaires. Listen to scientists.
If people actually listen to this dude and not to scientists, that’s an even bigger problem, because once again people are incapable of understanding value at a basic level.
kelpie_returns@lemmy.world 5 days ago
It’s entry level and that is not without value. Everybody has to start somewhere, or else they never start at all. If this article inspires even a couple hundred others to start paying attention where it counts, that would be a positive and valuable change.
tyler@programming.dev 4 days ago
Entry level would be listening to scientists on news sites… not continuing to listen to billionaires on news sites. Their behavior has not changed one iota if they continue to listen to billionaires on the news.
kelpie_returns@lemmy.world 4 days ago
Entry level is whatever gets people to enter a new line of thought. It gets the process started. What you’re talking about is someone who has already begun the process and made it past the gate which you are currently playing keeper to. What youre talking about is someone who already knows the entry level things and so now reflects that in the ways they choose to educate themselves.
This article gives people who need it a little push and a reason to start changing their behavior and thought process, instead of just telling them that they’re stupid and wrong for not already knowing and agreeing with whatever you think is best.
Being upset about their behavior not magically changing on their own is not helpful to this cause. Giving them reasons to reconsider why they see things the way they do is helpful, because the whole point is to get them thinking and behaving differently, not getting them feeling defensive and possibly scaring them off from ever trying again. If the goal is positive change, that change must begin with perspective and information.
If not here, and through things like this article, where do you expect that change to begin? Because we’ve had enough pooled time to tell its not going to spontaneously happen just because we want it to. So, very genuinely, if you know a better way than now is the time to share it with the rest of us. How would you better begin the process of convincing these people to start living in ways which you would deem worthwhile?
Pessimism doesnt justify denying the reality that if we want these people to know and do better, than there simply have to be steps taken toward starting that process, which is clearly the goal of this piece.
You are currently gatekeeping the barrier-to-entry of that betterment, and for what? Because people aren’t already where you want them to be? That can be read as many things, but ‘helpful’ is just not one of them.
FrostyTheDoo@lemmy.world 4 days ago
The general public won’t click on an article about what scientists say, but more like will click on an article about the founder of Facebook. That’s just how it is. So if you want people to wake up to a fact, it’s helpful to meet them where they are.
Or you can just tell them what they should value as a source of information, that usually works really well with humans.