The entire stackexchange and English Wikipedia dumps including all media is less than 90 Gig. Even low end cell phones have men expansion slots to 128 gig. Whatever you plan to do socially maintaining a local copy is not a storage issue. Non of the cloud ppl will tell you that though.
But I bet Facebook is much larger. If this were to really meet my needs (i.e. people I actually know start using it regularly), I can see this becoming an issue that needs to be solved, especially on mobile. Bitcoin ran into this issue as well, the need for a client to get the whole blockchain. I can see some solutions once cross device identity is done where I get a small amount of the network, perhaps the most recent, then it syncs up with the larger storage on my home PC later.
> Thank goodness Facebook isn't what I want my social feed to look like... all those GIFs and garbage updates.
Sure, but I have few enough friends as is. I know literally no one who would use this, as neat as it is. Bootstraping a social network is hard for both developers and users, but once it gets going, storage requirements would rise fast.
Pointless stories that supposedly "educate and inform" the public, about something way above their pay grade seem to be the norm these days.
As a manager most of my time these days seems to get spent in reminding people they don't have to come up with constructive narratives for every complex problem the internet or life dumps on them.
If you are really interested in an issue put in the work. Find an expert. If the experts don't have great answers and you are still interested put in the work. This discipline seems to have evaporated these days.
Every one is programmed for instant gratification that comes from just reacting and being satisfied with the like button counter of the reaction.
Hard problems are hard. Its okay to say you have no idea how to solve it. But don't use it as an excuse to not get an expert involved.
Why does any story need to have an agenda? I didn't get one from this, and I would be hard pressed to find an agenda from most of the fiction I read either.
This is the story of a whole family's life and how they died. You think it's pointless to read or publish it? Why?
'Pay grade' statements weaken your statements fatally so we'll ignore them.
I'm not looking for gratification or some shortcut to a solution for a problem I'm not trying to solve but I can't understand what you're trying to say here..
Are you saying I'm wrong for thinking about what to learn from this terrible tale? Should the only people commenting on things outside their field only be allowed if they're willing to have a field of independent experts backing them up? Eh?
Yes because times have changed. People spend more time reacting to things they can't solve than on developing the discipline it takes to address them. Social media and news media are totally architected to encourage this kind of thinking and behaviour. And its costing us big.
Most people in the world aren't well prepped to deal with this overloading of complexity. Its like constantly bombarding a bunch of second graders with tenth grade problems. There are huge consequences to that playing out right now in society.
This concept that people with access to info will develop healthy ways to parse the info by themselves is total BS. Its like saying access to a library is a kid needs to get educated. If that were true why do we need teachers and schools.
With speed and scale of info delivery comes a responsibility unlike ever before to think about the unintended consequences. Its just not happening. People are falling over themselves reporting complex things whose solutions they barely understand.
If you're going to lecture from on high and pass judgment on the poor plebs who can barely understand complex ideas, _please_ learn that "its" is possessive. You want "it's".
I may be accused of pedantry but you committed this error repeatedly. It grates.
Unfortunately, the forces which affect everyone in our society today tend to be too deep and too complex for everyone to actually understand them.
For any given problem, the people who understand the problem are often unwilling to fix it because doing so might not align with their financial interests.
The few expert dissidents that exist in any given area need the support of the uninformed masses in order to change things.
I find it hard to buy this argument today. Obama and Trump have proved getting support by pandering doesn't take us anywhere closer to solutions.
But the current architecture of our socialnetworks and media keep promoting this notion. All I see happening is more pandering until the underlying architecture that reinforces this behaviour changes.
