[sydli]

A point that is brought up occasionally, but probably not enough: Deleting Facebook really isn't possible for a nontrivial percentage of the world population, since Facebook is the internet in some places. Their monopoly over internet infrastructure in some developing countries is such that people can't afford non-Facebook internet packages, and seems to disincentivize actual low-cost internet infrastructure from being built out.

[tuna-piano]

Absolutely correct. I've met people in Asia (Myanmar and Nepal) who have just accessed the internet for the first time in the past 12-24 months (through their Android smartphones). But they don't know the true internet - they only know the internet through the Facebook app. They use it like we use Google and web browsers.

To them, Facebook is the internet. They don't have email accounts. They don't use the browser. They don't search the web. I met someone in a small town who never even used the maps feature. I tried to think of what value the true internet might bring them, but when I suggested that "you can search for news and read other things", the response was that they already did that with the Facebook App.

One guy handed me his phone, so I could add myself as a friend on his Facebook. While I started typing my name, I noticed his search history... and to him, Facebook was even a substitute for what people in the USA might use Incognito mode for!

I would call Facebook their internet portal, but it's not really a portal to anything - Facebook is just the entire internet to them.

Buzzfeed (yes, Buzzfeed) did an excellent writeup of Myanmar, that mirrors what I saw there: https://www.buzzfeed.com/sheerafrenkel/fake-news-spreads-tru....

“Nobody asks, they don’t care about the email,” he said, explaining that most don’t know that creating an email address is free, and easy. “No one is using that. They have Facebook.”

[bogomipz]

>" I've met people in Asia (Myanmar and Nepal) who have just accessed the internet for the first time in the past 12-24 months (through their Android smartphones). But they don't know the true internet"

Yes and at one time AOL occupied a similar role. And everyone moved out of the walled garden and onto the real internet just fine.

[ReverseCold]

> Yes and at one time AOL occupied a similar role.

This time they have algorithms that can prevent you from wanting to leave.

I doubt it's the same thing.

[barell]

I didn’t know you can have Facebook account without having email address.

[kawera]

A phone number is enough, at least in certain parts of the world.

[fwgwgwgch]

> buzz feed

Since you are as surprised as I was a month back, I've looked further and concluded that buzz feed actually funds very high quality journalism (yes yes shocking I know) and presents facts from both sides. They do it using the money generated from click baits. I'd even make what will sound like a hyperbole , if you are the sort that wants truth on both sides of political spectrum and not just an echo chamber , go to buzz feed, and not NY TIMES or wapo.

[gowld]

> both sides.

There are more than 2 sides to a story.

[coatmatter]

Many, many people don't realise there is an entirely separate section of BuzzFeed called BuzzFeed News. BuzzFeed News are the ones who first published the "Steele dossier" to the public (as far as I recall; if there was another organisation in partnership, I only remember BuzzFeed News).

I recall at the time that people kept nitpicking over the misspelling of a bank (in a way that suggested people of a certain expertise never make spelling errors, which is simply untrue). It was a sensational story at the time, but all one needs to do now is to look back and compare it to what we know now.

[dibstern]

https://youtu.be/T77frLL_bsg

They’re not just click bait, they do create incredibly biased content.

[bgilroy26]

These h3h3 videos (The pro man-spreading one and the whiteface MTV one) are kind of silly.

Would you really say that Buzzfeed's bias strains your credulity, or is it more likely that you simply disagree with them?

[dibstern]

All of h3h3's videos are silly. That's his style of comedy.

You can't see that a video shaped entirely by left-wing identity politics that blames all men for the crimes of a few, that ignores practical realities contributing to the issue, has a left-wing bias? Are you serious?

[bgilroy26]

It will be difficult for us to become friends. What do we have in common in the first place?

[bogomipz]

>"Their monopoly over internet infrastructure in some developing countries"

In which developing countries does Facebook have a "monopoly" over internet infrastructure?

[sydli]

This is the model for internet/Facebook access in several sub-saharan African countries and others: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Basics#Participants They've partnered up with large telecom operators in these regions to offer zero-rated Facebook access.

The Guardian has a couple of decent writeups about it too:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/01/facebook-free-...

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jul/27/facebook-...

[freyir]

Facebook has been actively targeting developing countries that lack Internet infrastructure. They offer a walled garden consisting of Facebook and a few other sites for free. They initially called it Internet.org, but it’s since been renamed Free Basics.

I guess the concern is that people will confuse Facebook for the Internet, and they’ll think they’re getting the Internet for free. It then becomes very difficult for a real ISP offering full Internet access to enter the market.

[juststeve]

you got a link?

[freyir]

https://info.internet.org/en/story/free-basics-from-internet...

I don’t know if they have “monopolies”, as OP claimed, but these are the countries where they operate:

https://info.internet.org/en/story/where-weve-launched/

[juststeve]

ok thanks yeah i get the vibe

[harry8]

I'm not in favour of nationalization as a rule. I can see it being a populist thing to do in those countries.

Facebook are the agent of foreign states, we must control our own critically important infrastructure! (cheers) Free internet for all! (more cheers)

Populism is so hot right now.

[jimmywanger]

> I'm not in favour of nationalization as a rule. > we must control our own critically important infrastructure! (cheers)

You're conflating two things. If the US somehow lost all steel foundries without being able to spin things up in a reasonable amount of time, we're screwed in a war. You must indeed make sure that you're self-sufficient in things that are essential for living in case you're cut off due to circumstances.

I'm not quite sure what your point is.