• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

Do you still use Facebook? Why?!

Hadron said:
No, no, no: Facebook is the absolute worst news source on the planet. You'll just get stuff filtered to suit what their algorithms think are your existing prejudices (the "filter bubble" problem), with no regard for veracity (falsehoods spread via Facebook is what the term "fake news" was invented to describe).

People getting their news from Facebook is a genuine social problem. Don't join them.
Click to expand...
^ What he said!
 
Notes_Norton said:
Fox News is the worst with only 8% truth.
Click to expand...
No surprise there.
MSNBC does a little better with 9%.
Click to expand...
I find that somewhat surprising.
According to Politifact, CNN has the best truth rating and was the most impartial (that surprised me)
Click to expand...
Me too. I assumed they were as bad as the others.

I stopped watching any news but local 7-8 years ago. I was a heavy CNN and its sister station, Headline News, watcher, with occasional stops at MSNBC. I even tried Faux News...er, I mean, Fox News. But I don't want anyone's spin on things--left or right. As Sgt Joe Friday would say, "just the facts, ma'am." I want factual information. I want to make up my own mind about various issues.

Oh, I can hear the cries of "you're in LA! Don't you think your local news is [liberal] biased?!" Well, I do the best I can. I watch multiple stations, and I read a lot. I'm interested in what's happening locally, and globally. I have to get my news somewhere!

I also watch ABC World News Tonight with David Muir. A little eye candy never hurts. :D
 
President Reagan and his GOP propagandists abolished the "Fairness Doctrine"

The Fairness Doctrine required anything called News to be impartial and anything that was opinions to be clearly labeled as Opinion. Furthermore it required both sides of the opinion to be aired.

The Fairness Doctrine understood the public broadcast frequencies belong to all the people, not just one political party. The Fairness Doctrine was the opposite of the then USSR propaganda TV policy.

But the GOP wanted USSR type propaganda, and thus Faux News - er Fraud News - 'scuse me Fox "News" was born with 60% of what they say ranging from mostly false to pants on fire lies.

The public bandwidth should belong to the public, not either political party.
 
Notes_Norton said:
it required both sides of the opinion to be aired.
Click to expand...
Years ago, there was a regular segment on 60 Minutes that my husband and I just loved. It was called "Point/Counterpoint," where Shana Alexander (liberal) and James J Kilpatrick (conservative) slugged it out over various topics. :o

But it was civil, and done intelligently, and both sides got to say their piece; you were left with something to think about, something to ponder, even if you were thought you were solidly on one side or the other.

I miss those days...
 
MoodyBlues said:
Years ago, there was a regular segment on 60 Minutes that my husband and I just loved. It was called "Point/Counterpoint," where Shana Alexander (liberal) and James J Kilpatrick (conservative) slugged it out over various topics. :eek:

But it was civil, and done intelligently, and both sides got to say their piece; you were left with something to think about, something to ponder, even if you were thought you were solidly on one side or the other.

I miss those days...
Click to expand...
I too out of the closet was an avid fan of sixty minutes with my father watching it, but as time chips away, a little bit later on watching Headline News sometimes too. I tend to outgrow that and just look around for news that intrested in me.
 
Unfortunately one political party and the corporate money behind it commandeered the public bandwidth to broadcast USSR style propaganda to the willing.

We will forever pay the price for that in a great destruction to our democratic process.
 
MrJavi said:
Whos excited about Facebook Pay?
I dont even trust Facebook with my data, the heck if I'm going to trust them with my money. Please

https://www.xda-developers.com/facebook-pay-new-payment-system-whatsapp-instagram-messenger/amp/
Click to expand...
Well it's pretty clear that Facebook's own cryptocurrency "Libra" is DOA, but I guess they think that with every phone vendor and many others having their own mobile payment system there's space for them as well. Of course even if they don't leak the data or sell it to some dodgy company I can't see how letting Facebook know what you buy, when, where and for how much is good for you (that's one reason I'll never use Google Pay, after all).
 
MoodyBlues said:
Ditto. I've never used Google Pay either. Oh, I've thought about it, its convenience and everything...but that's as far as I've gone.
Click to expand...

Hard to believe credit cards are old fashioned. The way I see it is I miss place my cell phone more often then my wallet.
 
Hadron said:
Well it's pretty clear that Facebook's own cryptocurrency "Libra" is DOA, but I guess they think that with every phone vendor and many others having their own mobile payment system there's space for them as well. Of course even if they don't leak the data or sell it to some dodgy company I can't see how letting Facebook know what you buy, when, where and for how much is good for you (that's one reason I'll never use Google Pay, after all).
Click to expand...

You make a very good point Mr. Handron. I guess you cant blame Facebook for wanting to increase their profit margins. I just dont trust Facebook. I think "past performance is indicative of future behavior".
Of course as you know, having rooted with SuperSu, a permissive kernel, complete mount R/O and the Xposed framework leave no chance of passing SafetyNet. If I were willing to switch to Magisk, I could pass SafetyNet but Naaaa... I'll keep my money in my wallet and Netfix at home on the big tv screen. :)
 
I don't use my phone to pay for anything, and I am very conservative about the apps I install. If they ask for permissions they don't need, I won't d/l the app. For those I have, I prefer to pay for them than to let advertisers in.

If I lose my phone, I don't want the devastation that would follow. Plus I don't trust the apps to be immune to a hacking.

I'm not a luddite but I'm not a beta tester either. I try to find a mid-point between the two extremes.

And IMO facebook is untrustworthy and evil.

Bob
 
Hadron said:
I've met extremely smart older people and extremely dumb young ones.

All generalisations are wrong...
...apart from that one, which by being correct is therefore wrong, and hence correct.
Click to expand...
Depends on the outcome on their own background, no shit, dumb people who cannot use common sense.
 
Notes_Norton said:
For those I have, I prefer to pay for them than to let advertisers in.
Click to expand...
I've stated many times that I don't do ads--and I mean it! For TV, I DVR anything I might want to watch [on DirecTV], and then skip the ads while watching.

With Android apps, I have two oft-stated reasons for only using paid apps*: I can't stand ads, and I want to reward talented developers for their creativity and skills.

Of course, any app -can- do bad things, but I feel that the double protection of Google's scrutinizing Play Store apps, and paying for them, minimizes the odds.

*I do use a few free apps, but only if they do not contain ads. My standard example, even though I haven't played them in ages, would be the Candy Crush series of games. They're free, and they don't have ads; they make their [considerable] money via in-app purchases. They're not crippled, either--at no point are you forced to buy something in order to proceed.
 
My phone is mostly a phone, then a text, and e-mail device. After that it is google in my pocket (actually I use StartPage or DuckDuckGo), GPS, a weather radar app (paid), or a camera.

I work either from my home or on a gig. I silence it on the gig and at home I have a tablet for couch surfing and a computer.

Nothing is the newest, latest, tech but I'll use the old stuff until I actually need something new (as opposed to want). I think consuming less is better for the environment.

Notes
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom