181–190 of 361 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hotels where you don't pay rent, but everything is sponsored ad placement. I wish I could run a hotel like that in real life, just ads everywhere.
Sounds like a casino.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Social networks are hotels, right. - First they are new and cool. The young, hip and rich stay often. - New becomes old. Shoddy carpet, old fixtures, bad music in the lobby but older people stay until they die. - New hotels sprout up with cool carpet, music and fixtures. The cycle repeats. The only way we can ditch them is to ban them and then they’ll go underground :( What is dead may never die.
I like the metaphor. Next, people think “we need AirBnB! Not stodgy old hotels, but cool, real homes owned by real people, where individuals can provide hospitality to each other and everyone wins.” Consequence: independent operators take on the soulless characteristics of hotels but without the accountability or reliability. I can see us entering the AirBnB era of social networks soon…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you're wrong and not the typical user. Personally, I would never use any social network without strong moderation and banning of toxic users, and I'm that many if not most people share this sentiment. Places without strong moderation turn into hellholes and are generally less interesting. Whether a network is decentralized or not is a completely different, purely technical question. I don't understand why two…
The GP comment’s proposal is not incompatible with what you (and typical users) want. Moderation is very different from censorship. I want strong moderation and “banning” for myself . I would ideally like this to be as automatic as possible, perhaps via default blocklists that update on an ongoing basis, that I can still opt out of if I really cared to do so. On the other hand, I don’t believe that I have any kind of…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "let's ditch social networks!" > "You realize they're optional, right?" > "Technically so are roads and mail and electricity and water!" so... are you saying we should ditch roads and mail and electricity and water? Your response is one of the sillier non sequiturs I've seen in a while, and I browse Reddit.
Obviously the utilization of social networks is fundamental to social engagement in modern life. It's not silly whatsoever, it's a natural response when someone quips that a that a thing that's essentially needed but not absolutely required isn't worth complaining about.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You do realize that social networks are optional ? No one is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to use them.
do you realize that roads are optional? you don't have to leave your house to talk to friends. do you realize that using the mail service is optional? nobody forces you to write post cards. do you realize that electricity is optional? you can get a shack in the forest and burn wood. do you realize that water pipes are optional? you can dig for your own ground water. the world is not made of solipsistic individuals. i…
Social networks are not valuable for me, and they would not improve my life. I don't want to use them, and I don't.
It's that simple, really.
> Building a decentralized network could also give Meta the opportunity for its new app to interoperate with other social products — a previously unheard-of gesture from a company known for building some of the most lucrative walled gardens in the industry’s history. It's clear to me that this person forgot everything what earlier Facebook was doing like Facebook Platform https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook_Platfo…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You do realize that social networks are optional ? No one is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to use them.
They are optional in the same way how postal service is optional. Sure, you may just drive / sail / fly to whoever you want your package delivered... chances are you'd rebel against this seeing how everyone else simply drops their package by the nearest collection point. Social networks today provide service beyond simply catching up with friends and family. They serve as front desks of companies' customer support, t…
What if, and hear me out: we ditch the idea of a better replacement social network and just ditch the concept in general? Let’s go back to not being bombarded by ads every 3rd post, to not getting lost in massive echo chambers, to not doom scrolling for 20-40% of our waking hours, being locked into mega platforms, etc... Is the proposition of “being more connected” really worth the downsides?
And 'proposition' is the right word to use, since its really just the promise of social networks that people like. In practice it has not worked as a means of connecting people to each other. Certainly not better than the alternatives it replaced. We should call the experiment a failure.
I'm all for getting rid of social networks, especially general-purpose ones. I don't see it happening though. Most people see them as a fact of life, inevitable as death or taxes. If you're younger than 30, you probably don't have an intuitive feeling for what the world is like without them. I guess this is understandable, if sad.
What if, and hear me out: we ditch the idea of a better replacement social network and just ditch the concept in general? Let’s go back to not being bombarded by ads every 3rd post, to not getting lost in massive echo chambers, to not doom scrolling for 20-40% of our waking hours, being locked into mega platforms, etc... Is the proposition of “being more connected” really worth the downsides?
Why do "we" need to ditch anything? People are building it because they want to, and will use it if they want to. Or not.