The Problem With Facebook on HackerTube: recommended by 3 Hacker News commenters across 9 separate months, 2014–2018.
explainer · dated
Veritasium's Derek Muller argues that Facebook's business model works against pages and creators, because it charges them to reach the audiences they built. He explains how filtering and paid promotion undermine the value of likes.
HN commenters recommend it, with its follow-up, as an exposé of fake likes and bot activity, and as a warning before spending on Facebook ads.
“before you waste any money, watch these two videos”
13 Hacker News comments link this video. Each one links back to its thread.
for a fantastic expose of how facebook is riddled with fraud and bots, check out veritasium's two videos: facebook fraud [link] the problem with facebook ▶ this video
in “A Facebook bot purge clobbered USA Today” · View on HN
for those interested in this topic these two excellent videos from veritasium corroborate this article and go beyond to explain the stark implications for facebook's business model: facebook fraud: [link] the problem with facebook: ▶ this video > From January 2013 to February 2014, a global team of researchers from the Max Planck Institute for Software Systems, Microsoft’s and AT&T’s research labs, as well as Boston and Northeastern Universities, conducted an experiment designed to determine just how often advertising campaigns resulted in likes from fake profiles. The researchers ran ten Facebook advertising campaigns, and when they analyzed the likes resulting from those campaigns, they found that 1,867 of the 2,767 likes—or about 67 percent—appeared to be illegitimate. After being informed of these suspicions, Facebook corroborated much of the team’s work by erasing 1,730 of the likes. Sympathetic researchers from a study run by the online marketing website Search Engine Journal have suggested that targeted Facebook advertisements can yield suspicious likes at a rate above 50 percent. In the fall of 2014, Professor Emiliano De Cristofaro of the University College of London presented research which found that even a page explicitly labeled as fake gained followers—the vast majority presumably bots. > The bot buildup can even affect companies that aren’t advertising with Facebook, but are just passively hoping their pages gain real fans. In 2014, Harvard University’s Facebook fan
in “The Bot Bubble: Click Farms Have Inflated Social Media Currency” · View on HN
facebook ads are junk and have been proven to be so before you waste any money, watch these two videos: [link] ▶ this video
in “With New Ad Platform, Facebook Opens Gates to Its Vault of User Data” · View on HN
If you haven't yet watched Derek's earlier video about "the problem with facebook", you should: ▶ this video because in it he lays bare several fundamental structural issues about facebook which 99% people don't realize. Well worth the watch. Unless fb changes drastically, it will die a surprisingly fast death.
in “Facebook Fraud [video]” · View on HN
Derek Muller burned money on Facebook ads, and did an analysis showing that their metrics are flat-out horseshit. Definitely have a watch if you're considering spending on Facebook. ▶ this video
in “How we unnecessarily burned 20k with Facebook Ads” · View on HN
facebook as a platform and business is hollow, but very few realize it. this is similar to Enron, Madoff, the financial crisis, Groupon, etc. history has shown that 99.99999% of people totally miss these business models that are built on a MASSIVELY fraudulent or hollow foundation. When the music stops thousands and thousands of gallons of pixels will be spilt trying to explain how nobody saw their collapse coming and why they are not to blame. Here are two videos that succinctly introduce the reality of facebook's mirage: [link] ▶ this video
in “Why Facebook’s video theft problem can’t last” · View on HN
Since this seems to just be a braindump, I might as well add Veritasium's comments on the matter: ▶ this video [link] I found them pretty interesting listening from a content-distribution and -consumption side of things, rather than from a social-network perspective.
in “Reasons not to use Facebook” · View on HN
Veritasium on youtube has a couple of videos breaking down the numbers - not only do you have to pay to get views now, but the views delivered above and beyond what you usually get are fraudulent. He showed the usage of his page beforehand, with users clustered in Western countries, generally 20-40% of whom interacted with his page in some way. After paying for more views, they were all from developing countries, a profile of users he'd never seen before with very little (0-1%) engagement with his page. It's worth checking out his videos if you want more detail on the patterns he found. It's pretty clear that it's fraudulent. ▶ this video (explores problems he sees with FB as a marketing platform) [link] (massive influx of unengaged developing-world pageviews)
in “Facebook earnings gain as ad sales surge 82%; CFO is stepping down” · View on HN
Ambiguous headline: 'over' meaning 'finished'? Or 'over' meaning 'located'? Veritasium has an interesting related video explaining some of the Facebook shennanigans where they withhold your posts from a large amount of your subscribers if you're popular, unless you pay them money: ▶ this video
in “The Free Marketing Gravy Train Is Over on Facebook” · View on HN
in case you haven't watched these videos from Veritasium yet: ▶ this video [link] both videos show why facebook's model is inherently self-destructive and incoherent and will inevitably implode
in “The Free Marketing Gravy Train Is Over on Facebook” · View on HN
Facebook manipulates the feed to show only those posts which guarantee maximum user engagement. When a new post is made, the post is initially shown only to a small subset of fans. It will be shown to more people only when they engage with your post or if you cough up money to promote the post. Here's science journalist Derek Muller (of Veritasium) describing his observations on this issue in detail: ▶ this video
in “Mark Zuckerberg on Facebook’s hardest year, and what comes next” · View on HN
I mean, we're practically all advertisers in some way or another - every time we share a promotion with our friends, or even just discuss a new product we're interested in. Most of the time we're not advertising for the sake of profit, but just sharing interests with like-minded people. Social media outlets attempt to tap into our general ignorance of advertising profitability - and they act as the middle-man between companies wishing to advertise, and the people who're sharing with friends - but facebook take all of the profit by inserting themselves between these relationships, and the users who are sharing don't notice they done a large part of the advertising work, for free. Facebook can obviously provide some usefulness, because it knows where you are, what your interests are, and your recent activities - so it can target you for specific promotions. A recent video by Vertitasium[1] showed how this isn't without problems though, and does not directly correspond to ROI for advertisers. (Likewise with many advertising models, there's always people trying to game them to earn a quick buck). Facebook provide the "advertising seed", by predicting who is likely to share. I see a different potential model that could arise with the gaining popularity of cryptocurrencies and electronic transactions though - one where advertisers only pay when it results in a direct ROI, by tracing electronic signatures through a public, distributed ledger. If a company wants to promote a product,
in “Ask HN: Idea Sunday” · View on HN
This has been called The Problem with Facebook ('Facebook uses its filtering power to make money [...] we are all advertisers') by the guy currently on the frontpage for his 'Facebook Fraud' video ( [link] ). The Problem With Facebook ▶ this video
in “Facebook Puts a Downer on Upworthy” · View on HN