I'd rather it be: you post it, and others will see it in 100 days.
Minus
131–140 of 182 posts
Re: Minus
#132I wonder what sorts of social media we'd see if it wasn't dependent on selling ads. The need to drive engagement and sell things to people tends to limit the types of social media. It's nice to see an experiment like this but I don't know if it will go anywhere. I was thinking the other day of an idea where you take turns with people in your circle to become a 'star' for a period of time(day, days, week, hour, whatev…
> I wonder what sorts of social media we'd see if it wasn't dependent on selling ads.
Probably there are two best answers to this.
1) hn. No ads. Social network (in the way that Reddit is).
2) build it! FB monetizes each person on the order of $10-20 per human per year. So just start up a social network that costs $10/year. Pick a few principles you want to stick to and see if it survives.
Edit: I see my estimates are wrong since time has passed; it's now more like $40-50 per human per year, but I think maybe some of the properties are worth more per person (almost certainly instragram is worth more per person than fb proper).
Re: Minus
#133I don't use social media, so I'm probably not the target audience anyway -- but I don't understand this at all. It just seems like an arbitrary and stupid limitation.
Limitation breeds creativity.
Re: Minus
#134In my mind the best social network would limit people to 1 post per week (or month?). Then no one is creating more noise than anyone else, you get to what's really important, and you can actually catch up with everyone.
Re: Minus
#135Is there no way to view the timeline without creating an account?
Re: Minus
#136This could work if it had groups based on topics.
Re: Minus
#137Is there no way to view the timeline without creating an account?
Use temp-mail.org
Re: Minus
#138I love this as an idea, but I suspect as a user, I would use either zero or one posts. I do like the idea that the platform can actively disrupt the "addictive" patterns that develop elsewhere. Other things I've wanted: - Instagram with an ML layer that auto-rejects pics with faces or text. Landscapes, vistas, animals, architecture etc all would be welcome. - high latency Twitter, where no post is viewable until at l…
The trouble with making a worse option is that people still have choice and will simply use the more entertaining version instead. You can't just make a new social network that's not as engaging as the existing ones because nobody would use it. The moment you're really curious about the thing being hidden from you in the degraded service, you'll sneak a look at the real one to find out. If you had so much self contro…
In this case the community would be a self-selecting group of people with self control and a value for more thoughtful communication. The resulting content would presumably be different from what you'd get if you just viewed mainstream social media on a restricted schedule.
Re: Minus
#139Re: Minus
#140I wonder what sorts of social media we'd see if it wasn't dependent on selling ads. The need to drive engagement and sell things to people tends to limit the types of social media. It's nice to see an experiment like this but I don't know if it will go anywhere. I was thinking the other day of an idea where you take turns with people in your circle to become a 'star' for a period of time(day, days, week, hour, whatev…
> if it wasn't dependent on selling ads. The need to drive engagement Driving engagement isn't a consequence of ads. Netflix tries to aggressively drive engagement too and it doesn't have ads. The reason is simple: the less people use a service, the more likely they are to unsubscribe. The more likely they are to spend their time on a competing service that's doing a better job at driving engagement. Driving engageme…
Well, there always has been a substantial difference in the quality of journalism between newspapers (subscription based) and tabloids (sold individually), wasn’t there?
What the internet adds, of course, is the constant competitive pressure of other content which will always be flashier, clickbaity, and emotion-triggering than yours. So people will switch faster if you don’t compete on these terms.
By contrast, a NYT reader 30 years back never got exposed to much of the competition’s content. So there was no reason for switching. You just stuck with the partner you had chosen, simply because there was no “Tinder”, so to speak.