or how about stuff that just can't be, you know, VERIFIED? Unless you take Tucker Carlson at his word and that this proof did exist, he just lost it. Oops.
Greenwald seems to have gone way off the deep end, what the heck happened???
As usual, what's old is new again. Makes sense given that user interfaces and "styles" of software are just like styles in anything else (ie: fashion) -- they come and go and come back again.
Fast forward another 3 - 7 years and users will be wondering at the marvels of a chatbot where one can simply click on the picture of the action they'd like it to perform! Perhaps entire menus of actions will be presented, in horizontal or vertical strips inside the chat interface... these actions will of course be represented by hieroglyphs expertly designed to convey just what they do and no more, to as cross-cultural an audience as possible. Maybe we'll call them icons or something.
I'm an ex-Facebook user, so obviously I'm not unbiased in my feelings (general disdain) towards the product... but over and over again it seems there are distinct classes of users, those who view it as a useful utility for maintaining "low-intimacy" (casual) relationships, and those who view it as an intrusive/unwanted/psychologically harmful distraction.
I've certainly lost touch with many casual connections by de-Facebooking, but I feel like my overall mental state is better... the old "your everyday versus everyone else's highlight reel" is no longer thrust to the foreground of my consciousness multiple times a day. Worthy tradeoff to me, but is it for most other people? Maybe I'm just too sensitive or insecure to be a "good Facebooker".
It will be interesting to see if the "I get enough out of this to make up for the bad stuff" crowd grows or shrinks over time for FB.
> On the other hand, dying in the middle of a highway and being forced to call a tow-truck is not an experience that should be common on a high-end luxury vehicle.