Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Slow Social, a social network built for friends, not influencers

slowsocial.us

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 391 posts

Re: Show HN: Slow Social, a social network built for friends, not influencers

#361

Post by EdgarVerona »

CitrusFruits wrote: post #9

Hey everyone, OP here. I, like many others tend to waffle between loving and hating social media, so this is my take on what I think a better solution looks like. This is something I've been working on for the past couple of months and a concept that I think will be though provoking, if nothing else, to the HN community. If you want to read more on my thoughts and the story behind this, you can check out my blog post…

This is great!

Coincidentally I've been working on a prototype that is almost the exact same idea. I had very similar motivations and a feeling that "slow social" (I was calling it the same thing even!) is something that can potentially break some people free from cycles of nonstop engagement and the unexpected downsides of always on, public and sharable social networks.

I hope you have success with it! Know that you're not alone in feeling like we need a solution like this. I think I'm far enough along with my prototype that I might as well see it through to completion anyways, but either way it's heartening to see that folks are feeling the same way I am about social networks.

Re: Show HN: Slow Social, a social network built for friends, not influencers

#362

Post by EdgarVerona »

How do you get around the CAN-SPAM act and GDPR for the sending of emails in response to posts, when the people being sent them haven't already signed up on the site?

I had to bend over backwards to try and make a workaround for that issue, basically by letting people manually send invite links if they weren't already registered for the site because of the restrictions around who you are allowed to send emails to, when, and for what purpose. It's a real pain in the butt, but maybe I didn't have to go that far?

It was articles like this one that got me paranoid about it, really set back my prototype as I went around trying to change features related to email as a result:

https://privacyvox.com/news/social-media-inviting-non-user-f...

Re: Show HN: Slow Social, a social network built for friends, not influencers

#363

Post by EdgarVerona »

EdgarVerona wrote: post #362

How do you get around the CAN-SPAM act and GDPR for the sending of emails in response to posts, when the people being sent them haven't already signed up on the site? I had to bend over backwards to try and make a workaround for that issue, basically by letting people manually send invite links if they weren't already registered for the site because of the restrictions around who you are allowed to send emails to, wh…

(for context though, I love your site! I just would love tips as someone thinking in this area who ran into what he thought was trouble in this area... I might have just been overly paranoid)

Re: Show HN: Slow Social, a social network built for friends, not influencers

#364

Post by alxndr »

CitrusFruits wrote: post #68
lvl102 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looks great and love the concept. What’s the tech stack behind it?

I'm using Supabase, Sveltekit, Tailwind, SendGrid, and Netlify. SvelteKit has been a lot of fun but definitely has a few rough edges. Supabase has been awesome, but as you can probably see, from the comments elsewhere, has some kinks around magic link based authentication.

The email-based create-an-account link is 404ing for me, using an iPhone and Brave browser.

Re: Show HN: Slow Social, a social network built for friends, not influencers

#365

Post by grumple »

scarface74 wrote: post #87
grumple wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When Facebook was first created, there was no feed. We flocked to it because it was useful for a few important reasons: 1) communicating with friends, 2) finding events to go to, 3) organizing groups, 4) storing and sharing photos, and 5) meeting new people (sometimes). It was great as a tool to supplement your social life. When they introduced the feed, Facebook gradually became worse at all of those things. Faceboo…

The feed was introduced in 2006. Facebook was founded in 2004. Not many people “flocked” to Facebook before the feed.

Those first few years when it was limited to certain edu addressed fueled the hype and growth.

Re: Show HN: Slow Social, a social network built for friends, not influencers

#366

Post by linsomniac »

CitrusFruits wrote: post #9

Hey everyone, OP here. I, like many others tend to waffle between loving and hating social media, so this is my take on what I think a better solution looks like. This is something I've been working on for the past couple of months and a concept that I think will be though provoking, if nothing else, to the HN community. If you want to read more on my thoughts and the story behind this, you can check out my blog post…

I wonder if a "leaky bucket" analogy might be interesting, with a bucket size >1. Say, 5 posts a week, you can make 5 today and then another one once the bucket empties enough.

Or maybe a couple categories: Cat 1, limited to 1 a week, cat 2 limited to 1 a day, cat 3 limited to, I dunno, a few times a day. Or 1/month, 1/week, 1/day? Then when I subscribe to someone I can pick which level I want?

I, personally, tend to prefer more smaller things, as opposed to a big wall of text. But, I'm also willing to admit this just might not be for me.

Re: Show HN: Slow Social, a social network built for friends, not influencers

#367

Post by Alan_Dillman »

bornfreddy wrote: post #149
CitrusFruits wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks, that's a good tip! I'll definitely check them out. And yup, definitely a concern. Makes me think that perhaps there's a possibility to not cap the posts, but rather have any posts outside of the first one in a week have something like a "secondary" tag. Then again, you might run into the problem that Instagram has where everyone stopped posting as soon as stories caught on. Alas, it's a tricky problem.

I would definitely not cap the posts, nor would I limit in any way their consumption. If I have something to say, why should I not be able to? And if I am interested in what someone does, I don't want to wait for a week to read it. That said, it is important how the posts are presented. A person who posts all the time about each plate of food... might not be as interesting as another friend who writes only once a mon…

A "I only want to see [5] posts a day from Freddy" function would be good.

Re: Show HN: Slow Social, a social network built for friends, not influencers

#368

Post by Alan_Dillman »

bityard wrote: post #97
murphyslab wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rate limitation sounds good for a general audience of one's connections, but there are a lot of times when life calls for more frequent updates, particularly in times of emergency and medical crisis where the changes to one's life circumstances change by the day, if not by the hour. Posting, "Andy is in the hospital", then needing to wait a week to post, "Andy died 1 hour after being admitted to the hospital". On…

Not the OP but I think the answer for this is that communication of medical/health issues is best handled by a more private form of media.

Maybe. The only reason I keep facebook active is because I have 25 first cousins, and that doesn't include their spouses, or the 25 children that comprise my younger first cousins once removed, some of who are adults already.

So when one of my 2 score aunts and uncles has a medical emergency, nobody wants to play phone tag around the world, even with group text messages.

Point being, even people without huge families like mine sometimes have big social groups.

Re: Show HN: Slow Social, a social network built for friends, not influencers

#369

Post by xpe »

civilized wrote: post #44
Barrin92 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think 'the algorithm' truly is the bogeyman of our time. Have you considered that it is precisely people themselves who crave engagement and that it is the often reviled paternalism which liberates people from following their worst instincts?

Paternalism isn't categorically bad but I see it as a last resort. People have never had the option to filter out garbage from their feeds. If they did, there might be little need for paternalism.

Paternalism? Call it that if you want -- just realize the word choice is loaded.

Consider also: It can be useful to think of this as 'save me from my worst habits' or 'let my rational, planning self setup some guardrails for my self-defeating self'.

Also, ask this: Is maximum freedom achieved by letting one act on their whims? Try defining freedom as 'the practical likelihood of achieving a goal' rather than 'the theoretical possibility' of doing so. What are the advantages of seeing freedom in such a light?

When can constraints lead to better outcomes?

Philosophers have a lot to say on these topics.

I suggest moving past latching onto only one word (paternalism) that, for many people, can shut down critical and diverse thinking. Look at many perspectives and soak in the complexities.

Post reply on HN