131–140 of 151 posts
It reminds me of how reddit went through a period of turmoil with claims of censorship and mods acting too aggressively and all the freedom of speech zealots decided to jump ship over to voat.co. I like to check in from time to time to see how that site is doing, and well...it's not pretty. I know parler is pulling in some pretty big names to give it some legitimacy, but it's probably going to succumb to the same pro…
My main issue with all these platforms supposedly being born to defend "free speech" is that they're a reactionist measure from certain ideas being deemed inappropriate by the common populace, so it's less about all kinds of free speech and more about protecting their speech. I'm convinced that no centralized platform is able to provide true free speech and even if it does, people should not be denied of the benefits…
Signal is centralized and provides true free speech. End to end encryption means they don't know what you're saying, so they have no way to know what to block. That is comparing apples to oranges though, I assume you meant a Facebook or Twitter type of social network.
I think that all these platforms: Parler, Gab, etc, will end up with one of two fates. They'll either fail to make it big and remain a niche thing for those trolls who enjoy the edginess, like 4chan and its newer alternatives, or... They'll grow big and end up having to deal with "trust and safety" issues when the majority of users on the mainstream end of the spectrum demand protection from those users who would oth…
I don,t think gab will grow to the size of reddit, rather reddit will be picked apart into a billion pieces like a dinosaur after the astetoid.
I just read about this "alternative" here, so whats the benefit of joining this instead of a mastodon instance which has probably better moderation and community support other than the cool factor ?
I think that all these platforms: Parler, Gab, etc, will end up with one of two fates. They'll either fail to make it big and remain a niche thing for those trolls who enjoy the edginess, like 4chan and its newer alternatives, or... They'll grow big and end up having to deal with "trust and safety" issues when the majority of users on the mainstream end of the spectrum demand protection from those users who would oth…
The first recognizable, critical-mass online social media(broadcast, topic driven, message posting) came from BBS operators, mailing lists, Usenet and proprietary variants.
The moderated ones gradually disappeared as users migrated; the unmoderated ones drowned in noise over time. Pieces of it still survive as relics.
The next generation was website driven: home pages, forums and weblogging. Again, a similar pattern: moderated places disappeared, unmoderated ones drowned. But, this time the scale was larger, with different dynamics. Self-publishing was getting easier: at first there were web rings, later a "blogosphere" emerged. Forums were more varied.
But again, some relics were left over.
And from there, social media platforms started emerging, aggregating the space. And each one in turn has followed this life cycle, on slower or faster timelines. Moderating keeps the signal alive, but after a few years people tire of the status quo and look for the next thing, somewhere with fewer gatekeepers, perhaps, or more structure, or stronger or weaker identity models. The signal decays in amplitude rather than drowning in noise.
What tends to be overlooked in social networking and virtual worlds discussions is that there's always a quality-of-service tradeoff dynamic to them. If you engineer the rules to improve one area you may lose some others. This is true even when looking at search systems: they retrieve correlated info that often has an intentionally wrong meaning.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My guess is that it's about education levels. Americans with a 4-year college degree are much more likely to be liberal... and people with 4-year college degrees are, in turn, more likely to be decision-makers in business / academia / the media.
It couldn't be because those colleges promote left wing ideas? I honestly couldn't tell you because I haven't been to one in over 10 years. However there is this idea that left-wing ideas are correct because those that are educated have them as if they came to these ideas because they are better educated. I see no evidence of this at all. Most people who are educated at a University level seem to be just as misinform…
Personally, I don't believe this. In fact, I don't believe "the media" is a useful phrase at all. It's like pigeonholing Trump supporters. It can make you feel superior or smart, but it's not actually informative. I think the Republican Party has chosen the tactic of discrediting media sources after Fox News showed it could work. No news organization is perfect, and it's best to consume a balanced diet, but avoiding all "mainstream media" just leaves us with dregs.
I think that all these platforms: Parler, Gab, etc, will end up with one of two fates. They'll either fail to make it big and remain a niche thing for those trolls who enjoy the edginess, like 4chan and its newer alternatives, or... They'll grow big and end up having to deal with "trust and safety" issues when the majority of users on the mainstream end of the spectrum demand protection from those users who would oth…
This “demanding protection” is one of the root problems with online discourse today. I refuse to concede that words on a screen will ever be something anyone “needs protection” from (short of actual doxxing, stalking and IRL harassment).
Have people forgotten “sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me?” A block/ignore button should be sufficient. We don’t need platforms editorializing or censoring content.
People seek out content that makes them angry (ragebait) and then blame the platforms for disseminating it.
Walk away from the screen. Close your eyes. [0]
[0] https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/tyler-the-creators-cyber-bull...
I wish they went to Mastodon instead.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I like both points here. Twitter gets traction because professional trolls / grifters use it to build their personal brand. They are frequently newspaper columnists, authors, and TV pundits who benefit directly or indirectly from have a large number of followers (whether they following in agreement or follow out of outrage, it matters not). Sadly this is true of the left as well as the right; they are all selling som…
> Sadly this is true of the left as well as the right; they are all selling something. citation for the "both-sides"-ism very much needed.
The news business depends on division to thrive. Division and anger drives clicks and eyeballs. Oh, and let’s not forget the billions of dollars in political advertising that goes into the pockets of corporate news organizations and social media companies — the very same entities that are fomenting the division that necessitates the advertising in the first place. It’s a rage cycle.
As a starting point I would recommend reading Matt Taibbi’s Hate Inc and subscribing to Glenn Greenwald’s substack. They’re two of the only left-of-center commentators who have not lost their integrity over the past five years, and their ideas are worth listening to.
Do they really want just an echo chamber though? As I understand it they are catering to the far right. Some of the fun they have on FB or Twitter is probably arguing, feeling controversial, etc.
Parler isn't catering to the far-right. They are catering for conservatives and other right leaning individuals.