You’re thinking long term strategy, YT is owned by Alphabet, a publicly traded company, they are only able to think in quarters. All that matters is short term gains for investors, and besides once the short term gains run out the investors will just dump the stock and move on to extracting what they can from the next company.

Technology advances, something is cutting edge, then the standard, then outdated.

I donated to st Jude for a while, every month I got mail multiple times a week asking for more money along with my “free gift”. Even talking into account buying supplies in bulk and using every conservative low-ball numbers I estimated I was getting around 60% of my donation back every month. I just gave up and stopped donating, and even sent them a letter telling them why I was ending my donation. I still get mail from them at least once a month and it’s been at least 15 years since I last donated.

They are doing something extremely important, but I don’t want my donation being thrown away like that. Send me a donation envelope once a month, that’s fine even though I was making my donation online, but the almost every other day mailing that was packed with notepads and return address labels? Nope I’m not fund that. On the plus side I haven’t bought return address labels since Obama was in office, and I doubt I’ll have to buy any until Chad who just graduated from DeVry, becomes our 64th president.

We choose to do these things not because they are easy, but because we thought they would be easy.

I completely agree that facebook is an evil company and guilty of most if not all that you have laid out. I qualified that since some of the things you stated I have not heard of since I don’t pay attention to facebook for the most part.

The second half of my comment was directed at your final line “Also this problem is mostly Ais fault.” this just sounds like a broad anti-AI statement and not one aimed at facebook’s use of AI. I was trying to communicate that many people, myself included, have found AI to be very helpful as a tool, and a generalized statement tagged onto the end of your comment could be seen as anti-AI to those who see value in AI.

I fully agree I could have explained that better in my previous comment, that is on me. I do hope this helps clarify my statement, and you can see that, while not worded the best, my intention was only to help you not turn others away from your core argument.

I was with you until the last line. This has nothing to do with A.I. Facebook has been doing this kind of stuff long before A.I. was a thing.

You can be anti-A.I. that’s fine, but don’t conflate the two when one proceeds the other. You’re just hurting your own argument when you throw in things like that.