FWIW, I don't believe that any feature explicitly designed to help people come together over differences would be one that would see much use, despite its positive intentions.

It's a well trodden hypothesis that Facebook optimizes for similarities, but I don't know if it's that straightforward.

Something that might be worth considering is what kinds of interactions are enabled by Facebook for any given person—who they are between, what the substance of the interactions are, etc. For example:

- I communicate with my friends, family, and extended network of people I've met over the course of my life (college, work, travel, projects, etc.) with my profile, News Feed, and Messenger

- I buy and sell random products on Marketplace

- I engage with communities of people over shared interests, identity, causes, initiatives, etc. on Groups, with Fundraisers

- I read news and updates from publishers I subscribe to on Pages

- (This list isn't exhaustive, but you see my point...)

In a way, it's a wide ranging social infrastructure—like a digital city. In some of those interactions, you meet people who are similar to you (and you _want_ that). In others, you meet people who you wouldn't ever imagine yourself communicating with, but you've found a context that you share some kind of edge that brings you together. By exposing yourself to people different from yourself on vectors that actually bring you together, you also expose yourself to their perspectives, worldviews, and lives.

Of course, I'm not naive into believing that every person's experience on Facebook mirrors this diverse, multi-faceted exposure to people both similar and different from oneself. For some people, the experience might just be a big reflection and validation of their worst instincts, but this isn't actually as frequent as people think. There _are_ ways to build product that enable people to find an experience that is expansive to their lives instead of constraining of it, and as much as it may not seem to be the case, I do think Facebook consistently moves in that direction as it continues to grow and evolve.

> By exposing yourself to people different from yourself on vectors that actually bring you together, you also expose yourself to their perspectives, worldviews, and lives.

Your premises do not lead to this conclusion. In fact it leads to the opposite. Facebook does its best that people I meet today are exactly the people I already know and like (pun intended). I don't see a single initiative where facebook even attempts at bringing together people who have only 20% shared views. In fact, at least from what I gather in the news and conferences, facebook wants to match people who have 100% shared views. Because that will drive engagement. People like to see their beliefs repeated and to be frank most social media sites prey on that. The algorithm is matching me to stories which I would like to hear, to people who I would most likely be friends with and groups where I am by default in the in-group. I fail to see how any of this helps me have a diverse exposure.

Didn't mean for this to turn into a back and forth or debate about FB, but I don't get the sense that you and I are working off of similar bases of information. I do think the matter is a little more nuanced than you're suggesting though.

I was infact mostly going by the premises you established. By selectively feeding you information, and optimizing over information you want to see, coupled with the inherent human bias of deriving enjoyment from getting your views repeated, I don't think there is any other conclusion we can lead to apart from silos. Which has happened and I don't see it stopping. You can't just insert nuance by claiming it, if you intend to, present the nuance.