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

Study: Social media probably can't be fixed

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 210 posts

Re: Study: Social media probably can't be fixed

#141

Post by johnnyanmac »

Mouvelie wrote: post #28
PaulHoule wrote: post #3

I work in survey research and I'm rather appalled at how many people would rather survey a sample of AIs than a sample of people and claim they can come to some valid conclusion as a result. There are many ways AIs differ from real people and any conclusions you can draw from them are limited at best -- we've had enough bad experiments done with real people https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment#Int…

Genuine question : are you scared for your job ? I see this tendency to use "synthetic personas" growing and frankly, having to explain why this sucks is insulting in itself. Decision makers are just not interested in having this kind of thought argument.

Yes and mostly No. No, because I work in games and I've seen enough people thinking that a "good game" just needs pretty graphics and a facsimile of "fun" to know that AI can't ever simulate this. Mkst Humans can't even seem to do it consistently, on all organizational levels.

But i have a footnote of "yes" because as you said, decision makers are just not interested in having this discussion about "focus on making fun games". So it will unfortunately affect my job in the short and even medium terms. Because so much of big money in games these days is in fact not focused on making a game, but on trying to either generate a gambling simulator, an engagement trap, or (you guessed it) AI hype. Both to try and claim you can just poof up assets, and to try and replace labor.

Knowing this, I do have long term plans to break out into my own indie route.

Re: Study: Social media probably can't be fixed

#142

Post by grishka »

rickdeckard wrote: post #130
grishka wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean by "no one"? There is definitely demand for such a platform.

It's a dilemma. There might be demand, but this "platform A" will be in competition with a dopamine-focused engagement "platform B" which also supports to host updates from "the lives of people you follow". The majority of people will then have both installed but spend more time on "platform B" as it is actively engaging them. Platform A will again end up in competition for user-attention with Platform B, as it needs…

> The majority of people will then have both installed but spend more time on "platform B" as it is actively engaging them.

And why would that be a problem? Most people also spend more time sleeping than using social media, so what? Let them be. Give them a tool that they would decide how to use best to suit their lifestyle.

> Platform A will again end up in competition for user-attention with Platform B, as it needs money to operate their business etc.

It would not, because it would not be run by a commercial organization. At this point I'm convinced that it's impossible for a sane social media platform to exist unless it's decentralized and/or run by a nonprofit. As soon as one touches venture capital, enshittification becomes only a matter of time.

Re: Study: Social media probably can't be fixed

#143

Post by KaiserPro »

wk_end wrote: post #24
KaiserPro wrote: post #23

Social media can be fixed, its just the incentives are not aligned. To make money, social media companies need people to stay on as long as possible. That means showing people sex, violence, rage and huge amounts of copyright infringements. There is little advantage in creating real-world consequences for bad actors. Why? because it hurts growth. There was a reason why the old TV networks didn't let any old twat with…

> Social media can be fixed, its just the incentives are not aligned. So social media can't be fixed. Incentives are what matter.

The US does not have a working legislature. It hasn't for possibly ~15 years.

But, if you think how closely network TV was regulated, by a government regulator, despite the power that those networks wielded (and against the incumbent radio and newspapers) We know it has happened.

The issue is that government in the USA has been dysfunctional for >30 years, not that regulation is ineffective.

Re: Study: Social media probably can't be fixed

#144

Post by johnnyanmac »

PaulHoule wrote: post #40
reactordev wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I trust your judgement more than Ars Technica. For us layman, the flaw of using AI trained on people for surveys is, human. Humans have a unique tendency to be spontaneous, wouldn’t you say? How would a focus group research team approach this when they’re bombarded by AI solutions that want their research funds?

The worst problems with people these days seem to be they don’t pick up the phone. Probability-based polls are still pretty good about most things unless they involve Donald Trump —- it seems some Trump supporters either don’t pick up the phone or lie to pollsters. Some polls correct for this with aggressive weighting but how scientific it really is is up in the air.

Yeah. Sadly our phones for any unidentified number fell to spam. These days, if the message is important then they can leave a voicemail... And 90% of this voicemail reveal spam as well.

>unless they involve Donald Trump

A sense of shame perhaps. If you ask someone "how often do you brush your teeth" and compare it to more pragmatic testing, you see people have some sense of wanting to give the "right" answer. Even in a zero risk anonymous survey.

Re: Study: Social media probably can't be fixed

#145

Post by seydor »

What do they mean "fixed"? Wasn't social media , from day one, about gossip , self-promotion and gaslighting? they excel at that so one would say they serve their purpose.

It's very misguided to pretend that social media mobs would replace "the press". There is a reason the press exists in the first place, to inform critically , instead of listening to hearsay.

Re: Study: Social media probably can't be fixed

#146

Post by seydor »

grishka wrote: post #109

Social media as a concept can definitely be fixed. Just stop doing algorithms, period. Strip the platforms of any and all initiative. Make them dumb pipes. Stop pretending that people want to use social media for entertainment and news and celebrities. Stop trying to turn it into interactive TV. Stop forcing content from outside of my network upon me. Make the chronological feed the only option. Social media is meant…

it will fix very little. The "problems" of social media are rooted in selfish human behavior, it's like a giant high-school. You can't "fix" that because it's ingrained in humans

Re: Study: Social media probably can't be fixed

#147

Post by johnnyanmac »

SkepticalWhale wrote: post #8

I'd like to see more software that amplifies local social interactions. There are apps like Meetup, but a lot of people just find it too awkward. Introverts especially do not want to meet just for the sake of meeting people, so they fallback on social media. Maybe this situation is fundamentally not helped by software. All of my best friendships organically formed in real-world settings like school, work, neighborhoo…

Indeed, you're describing the lack of a 3rd place. These days, maybe even the lack of a 2nd place as you graduate school and work is now fully remote. Without that societal push towards being in a public spot, many people will simply withdraw to themselves.

A third place would fix this, especially for men who need "things". You go to a bar for "thing" and if you meet some others to yell at sports with, bonus. We have less "things" for gen Z, and those things happen rather infrequently in my experience. I'm not sure if a monthly Meetup is quite enough to form strong bonds.

Re: Study: Social media probably can't be fixed

#148

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

dragonwriter wrote: post #138
grishka wrote: post #109

Social media as a concept can definitely be fixed. Just stop doing algorithms, period. Strip the platforms of any and all initiative. Make them dumb pipes. Stop pretending that people want to use social media for entertainment and news and celebrities. Stop trying to turn it into interactive TV. Stop forcing content from outside of my network upon me. Make the chronological feed the only option. Social media is meant…

> Stop pretending that people want to use social media for entertainment and news and celebrities People actually want media, social and otherwise, for exactly that. > Stop forcing content from outside of my network upon me. There are social media apps and platforms that don't do that. They are persistently less popular. People, by and large, do want passive discovery from outside of their network, just like they do,…

People want addictions. The answer is to regulate addictive algorithms, not to give them more things to be addicted to.

But addictions are wonderfully useful politically, so that's unlikely to happen.

The point is simple - an algorithm is a form of meta-content. It's curated and designed, not neutral. And so are its commercial, psychological, and political effects.

Currently SM companies have been allowed to use algorithms with little or no oversight. The emphasis has been on regulating privacy, not influence.

In the same way the media need to have a Fairness Doctrine restored to restore sanity and quality to journalism, algorithm providers need to be able to demonstrate an equivalent for their platforms.

This is very much against the spirit of the times, but that spirit is algorithmically created - which just proves the point.

If you're thinking "Yes, but government..." - how do you know that's a spontaneous original thought, and not something you've been deliberately conditioned to believe?

Re: Study: Social media probably can't be fixed

#149

Post by fraboniface »

fireflymetavrse wrote: post #101

Why can't it be fixed? Just remove algorithms and show only subscribed content in chronological order. That's how most of the early platforms worked and it was fine.

They mention that chronological order increases the amplification of extreme content. They don't seem to have tested only subscribed content though.

Re: Study: Social media probably can't be fixed

#150

Post by saberience »

AuthAuth wrote: post #73
delichon wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whitelisting solves the problem for me. I curate every tweet I see with a browser extension. Strangers can't kick down the door. I only see content from my direct follows. It dramatically reduces the stress. Maybe a little like horse blinkers.

How do you find new things to follow? If everyone did this it would be extremely rare to encounter new content.

Is this really an issue? I only message on WhatsApp with people I’ve met in real life and I prefer it that way.

I only want to engage with people on Twitter if I specifically add that person to a whitelist. I don’t want to be subject to an algorithm that is trying to increase “engagement”. I don’t want more engagement with Twitter, I want to see random posts which an AI thinks are going to enrage me so I stay on the site longer.

Post reply on HN