Talk:2106: Sharing Options

Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
Revision as of 16:03, 4 February 2019 by (talk)
Jump to: navigation, search

Certainly true for Twitter where it's either public or private. (Nothing about 300, but the amount of requests one can accept over a lifetime is finite.) As for the "friends-of-friends" option, it's possible that Randall only has ~300 within that wider circle. 17:17, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

The 300 may be in reference to a widely reported average number of Facebook friends of 338 (although not sure where this number comes from). For Twitter it looks like the average number of followers is slightly lower [1]. Both Twitter and Facebook have well over a billion users. 300 friends is also around the maximum number of close acquaintances that the human brain is thought to be able to cope with. AlChemist (talk) 20:27, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
Dunbar's Number is closer to about 150. 11:46, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Pretty sure the title text is meant to have been spoken by "the screen" vs. Randall/Cueball. The screen is attempting to appease Cueball's privacy concerns by proposing that if a company such as Google, Amazon, eBay, etc. mines a large number of Cueball's social posts for their own agenda, instead of notification of that event, Cueball will instead receive a single "like" to one of his posts at random from the company's CEO. This practice would be deceptive and of little value. Cueball might easily miss the like, not know who the CEO of various companies are, may forget the significance of receiving such a like, etc. 19:42, 1 February 2019 (UTC)Pat

For me, I found the idea enticing because targeted advertising is so creepy, and it would show where it comes from. 21:54, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Shouldn't this be categorised under "Comics featuring Megan," "Ponytail," "Hairy," and "White Hat" as well, even if they're just in the background? 00:46, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm confused. Why is the explanation "Da da dur dur ma ma hur hur"? 02:23, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

No one bothered to explain it yet.
A lot of vandalism to the article has been reverted, apparently. That was one of the strings of text that the/a vandal had left. 17:46, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

New xkcd up! 23:57, 2 February 2019 (UTC) NEVER MIND; I WAS WRONG 23:59, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Actually other than in the cartoon (cartoons always show simplified versions of reality) Facebook offers a 3rd and a 4th option: Set your post to be kind of "private" by default and wait until the default changes afterwards. And share your post with your friends, their friends and I think also the friends of everyone else who pressed the "share" button on it. Yuck!

Facebook has several sharing options, but they take a bit of time to set up. You can collect your friends into groups and (on a per-post basis) specify that your posts are only to be visible to people in certain groups. Much like the (soon-to-be-gone) Google+'s concept of circles. I used that for years (before I shut down my FB account altogether) to categorize my posts and only show them to friends I think care about the subject (e.g. only show politics and religion posts to those not likely to respond with flames, keep movie and TV reviews from those who hate spoilers, etc.) Shamino (talk) 15:59, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Why do the clouds have to represent cloud servers? Why can't they just be clouds, because, ummm, I don't know - they're flying?

What the hell is all this business about VR? I just saw the sky and stuff as an abstract representation of social media. What are you guys smoking? 16:03, 4 February 2019 (UTC)