Meta is building a decentralized, text-based social network • Hacker News Board

Re: Meta is building a decentralized, text-based social network

#201

Post by enraged_camel » Fri, Mar 10, 2023, 4:12 PM UTC

itsoktocry wrote: post #190

mym1990 wrote: post #83

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?

> What if, and hear me out: we ditch the idea of a better replacement social network and just ditch the concept in general? 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.

I think an argument can be made that social networks have been a net negative on society, despite (or because of) being very good ad delivery mechanisms and making some people and some companies very rich.

Re: Meta is building a decentralized, text-based social network

#202

Post by JohnFen » Fri, Mar 10, 2023, 4:15 PM UTC

mym1990 wrote: post #104

jollofricepeas wrote: post #90

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.

To me the difference is that 1) you pay for hotels and you know exactly what the cost is 2) hotels provide a tangible benefit, mostly being the bed to sleep in. Social media often has this idea that it is “free” and so people don’t think about the massive amounts of time and privacy that is given up as the hours whizz by.

Hotels where you don't pay rent, in exchange for the hotel recording everything you do in the room, in the lobby, and if you aren't careful, putting a GPS tracker on your person.

Re: Meta is building a decentralized, text-based social network

#203

Post by JohnFen » Fri, Mar 10, 2023, 4:17 PM UTC

crabbone wrote: post #155

zeroonetwothree wrote: post #130

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…

Although you can get along perfectly fine without having a social media account at all. You can still reach customer service, you can still interact with political figures, you can still do all of the things you want and need in your life.

Re: Meta is building a decentralized, text-based social network

#204

Post by realce » Fri, Mar 10, 2023, 4:18 PM UTC

msm_ wrote: post #185

realce wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

How is it obvious? I (and most of my friends) don't use social networks at all. They're not "absolutely required" for absolutely anything (unless your country is significantly different from mine). You'll only "miss out" on things that are only happening on social networks, but that's the point, right?

I literally said they were not "absolutely required" and I don't know why you'd go out of your way to misquote my 2 sentence statement.

My mom didn't have a telephone, she had other friends without telephones, but having a telephone when she was a kid was fundamental to building robust social relationships. The reduction of social bandwidth generally results in fewer opportunities for social advancement, and most people would like to experience social advancement of some type.

Re: Meta is building a decentralized, text-based social network

#205

Post by ROTMetro » Fri, Mar 10, 2023, 4:19 PM UTC

gonzo41 wrote: post #69

salmonellaeater wrote: post #31

> Individual servers would let different groups set their own community standards, though likely with a “floor” of rules set by Meta, in a fashion similar to how Reddit’s individual communities work. This is not praise. Reddit bans people for expressing widely held beliefs. Subreddit mods are required to enforce the site-wide rules regardless of the subreddit's own preferences. As another commenter put it [1], the pr…

You see mods on reddit go on ego trip ban spree's all the time. It's classic 90's mod meltdown stuff. I don't think subscribing to a benevolent master is a good model. What happens if their gaze turns to you? Moderation is really hard. And it's especially hard because a lot of people have very para-social relationships between themselves and rando's they talk to online. Whilst I know that sometimes those rando's turn…

There is an open music making forum. It is completely toxic. Even if I set to ignore garbage users they influence the discussions and most threads. A relevant music making subreddit deleted my music on an open to all feedback request thread without giving me any reason, yet I still prefer that subreddit because it's not just pure toxic negativity. We need a mix of both with people free to choose their model.

Re: Meta is building a decentralized, text-based social network

#206

Post by gwd » Fri, Mar 10, 2023, 4:20 PM UTC

karaterobot wrote: post #189

mym1990 wrote: post #83

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?

> 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 g…

> 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.

I went off FB for a year or two, only to come back on when the pandemic started. I definitely missed the connections and conversations I had with family and friends across the world while I was gone. If I could have that without feeling like I was contributing to all the shenanigans, I would do it.

For work I created a Mastodon account, and so far it seems very nice. There are lots of cool people posting interesting stuff, and no ads. Unfortunately I'm not interested in the "public-only microblog" experience for my personal life, and fine-graned access control in a federated system is a tricky problem; and my experience with the systems that are attempting to address that issue haven't been very positive.

Re: Meta is building a decentralized, text-based social network

#207

Post by JohnFen » Fri, Mar 10, 2023, 4:20 PM UTC

gruez wrote: post #188

crabbone wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Going back to the OP, if people are voluntarily using social networks because they make it easier to catch up with friends and family, why should we "ditch the concept in general"? Should we go back to the days of communicating to each other via letters?

I think the concept in general has been proven to be terrible on pretty much every count, so yes, I advocate ditching the idea.

> Should we go back to the days of communicating to each other via letters?

Or email, or phone, etc. There is no lack of other communications channels.

That said, I'm not in favor of banning these services. I just think society in general, and people in particular, would be better off if they stopped using them.

I haven't used social media for several years, and my life is in no way poorer for it. I miss out on nothing.

Re: Meta is building a decentralized, text-based social network

#208

Post by JohnFen » Fri, Mar 10, 2023, 4:23 PM UTC

realce wrote: post #174

commandlinefan wrote: post #157

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.

> Obviously the utilization of social networks is fundamental to social engagement in modern life.

That is not obvious at all. I think it's not even true.

Re: Meta is building a decentralized, text-based social network

#209

Post by xwdv » Fri, Mar 10, 2023, 4:26 PM UTC

zeroonetwothree wrote: post #130

mym1990 wrote: post #83

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?

You do realize that social networks are optional ? No one is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to use them.

Social networks are like cigarettes. If everyone is smoking everywhere you’re still affected even if you decide you won’t smoke.

Re: Meta is building a decentralized, text-based social network

#210

Post by exitb » Fri, Mar 10, 2023, 4:26 PM UTC

RobotToaster wrote: post #195

exitb wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's roughly how Mastodon works. Each instance is responsible for moderation of their own users. If an instance does not meet arbitrary standards of moderation, other instances may choose not to federate with them, but nothing can stop willing instances from federating.

Unfortunately that's ended up with a netsplit between covenanted and free servers, some servers will even de-federate you for federating with the "wrong" servers. So the only way to access the whole fediverse is either have multiple accounts, or run your own server.

This is not a technical problem, but a societal one.