EmailDiscussions.com - View Single Post - Is not joining Facebook a sign you're a psychopath?

Tsunami · 10 Dec 2012, 10:13 PM

I have used MySpace and Facebook and found both of them unsatisfying. Then I discovered the political and economical system behind it and simple indifference turned into dislike. It is one of the reasons I never joined Twitter, I thought it was wise not to make the same mistake thrice and look for an alternative run on non-commercial ways.

Sadly enough it is undeniable that the likes of Twitter and Facebook changed the world. Back in the days a murder could occur 100 miles down the road and you'd never hear about it. No computers or smartphones to quickly spread the word. Now if a simple minor accident happens on the other end of the planet and a bypasser tweets it, journalists 10000 miles away know of the event within seconds. In elections, communications between government and people is done partially via social networks. Companies advertise on social networks as much as on their own sites. Even in war torn areas, re-establishing damaged internet infrastructure is a priority as Twitter is seen as the big thing to distribute news globally within seconds.

So while annoying, there is no denying that the likes of Facebook have changed society. I would however question that it were changes for the better.

Abstaining is fine, the one issue you get is that some people will simply ignore you because they don't understand that some people simply don't want to be on those social networks. As a writer this is what annoys me most. People wrote, sold and read books for ages before the internet existed. Now there is an attitude amongst artists that without Facebook and Twitter to promote your creations, you're doomed. I notice this attitude whenever I talk to other writers (or people involved with other arts such as music) : some of them don't even like social networks but fear they would end up being forgotten if they are not using it. Almost as if they feel it is obligatory.

I would like social networking if it wasn't for the fact that it got out of hand. Discussions on certain topics where people with shared interests meet: great! But now a lot of traffic on social networks is no longer about exchanging info but about random facts such as "I am sitting on the train" or "one more hour before working day ends". I think efficient exchange of info through social networking would require to shield it from the public eye, like a social network on an intranet where only people really wanting to debate can be connected to.

10 Dec 2012, 10:13 PM	#46
Tsunami The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: in between the bright lights and the far unlit unknown Posts: 2,341	I have used MySpace and Facebook and found both of them unsatisfying. Then I discovered the political and economical system behind it and simple indifference turned into dislike. It is one of the reasons I never joined Twitter, I thought it was wise not to make the same mistake thrice and look for an alternative run on non-commercial ways. Sadly enough it is undeniable that the likes of Twitter and Facebook changed the world. Back in the days a murder could occur 100 miles down the road and you'd never hear about it. No computers or smartphones to quickly spread the word. Now if a simple minor accident happens on the other end of the planet and a bypasser tweets it, journalists 10000 miles away know of the event within seconds. In elections, communications between government and people is done partially via social networks. Companies advertise on social networks as much as on their own sites. Even in war torn areas, re-establishing damaged internet infrastructure is a priority as Twitter is seen as the big thing to distribute news globally within seconds. So while annoying, there is no denying that the likes of Facebook have changed society. I would however question that it were changes for the better. Abstaining is fine, the one issue you get is that some people will simply ignore you because they don't understand that some people simply don't want to be on those social networks. As a writer this is what annoys me most. People wrote, sold and read books for ages before the internet existed. Now there is an attitude amongst artists that without Facebook and Twitter to promote your creations, you're doomed. I notice this attitude whenever I talk to other writers (or people involved with other arts such as music) : some of them don't even like social networks but fear they would end up being forgotten if they are not using it. Almost as if they feel it is obligatory. I would like social networking if it wasn't for the fact that it got out of hand. Discussions on certain topics where people with shared interests meet: great! But now a lot of traffic on social networks is no longer about exchanging info but about random facts such as "I am sitting on the train" or "one more hour before working day ends". I think efficient exchange of info through social networking would require to shield it from the public eye, like a social network on an intranet where only people really wanting to debate can be connected to.