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

201–210 of 210 posts

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

#201

Post by mritterhoff »

burnte wrote: post #199
mritterhoff wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's an oversimplification. People have problems sure, but just like alcohol, social media can and does exacerbate them. The answer to dealing with the former is regulation. I'm not sure that is feasible for the latter.

You're actually agreeing with me. I'm not blaming social media nor alcohol, and you are not blaming them as well. Regulation hasn't eliminated alcoholism or drunk driving, etc. We need to go back to the days of teaching kids that there are things in the world that are dangerous and prepare them for it, rather than trying to shield them from everything and launching them into the world totally unprepared but ideologic…

No, I'm not agreeing with you. Regulation hasn't eliminated the down sides of alcohol, but it has certainly helped.

Investing more in education is great, but you seem to think it should be everyone for themselves. I'd prefer systemic solutions to systemic problems.

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

#202

Post by taeric »

unsignedint wrote: post #200
taeric wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a key facet of good moderation is that it doesn't have to be on content, specifically. Behavior is often more troublesome. We can smirk about "tone police," but it really can make a huge difference.

Yes, but that too is nuanced. There are, of course, clear-cut cases of unacceptable behavior that are already moderated as such. However, when you have people coming together from hundreds, if not thousands, of cultures and backgrounds, I doubt there’s a single set of rules that works for everyone. It ultimately becomes another question of where we draw the line.

Agreed.

I'll go further and say that I doubt there is a single set of static rules that will work for anyone.

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

#203

Post by incompatible »

_mlbt wrote: post #173
incompatible wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I follow people I can learn from, not people who try to convince me that everything I already know is wrong. I don't follow people who post misinformation, reject science, or who think that ad hominem attacks are a valid form of debate. There are a lot of them out there!

> I don't follow people who post misinformation A little off topic, but where do you get your news? I am having the hardest time finding credible news sources that aren't full of misinformation or bias to the point of being Soviet Union Pravda levels of propaganda. The best I've been able to do is pick a few sources that are left leaning and a few that are right leaning and try to glean the truth myself using critica…

Various, but including The Guardian and ABC News (Australia). I don't think they knowingly post misinformation in news reports, but there's still selection bias (I usually just read headlines, there's little I really need to know in depth). Their opinion and fluff pieces may or may not be interesting on the day.

I lost interest in "right-leaning" when they basically went mad some time before the first Trump term. Neoliberalism was already on its last legs as a credible doctrine. I'm more or less an anarchist at this point.

Edit: the ABC is somewhat right-leaning, and the Guardian doesn't really lean very far left.

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

#204

Post by incompatible »

greenchair wrote: post #156
squigz wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't really need to see opposing points of view as though they are novel thoughts that I've never considered before I mean, that's fine, if you think that you can consider all conceivable angles thoroughly, by yourself. I for one welcome opposing views, but I suppose if my idea of that meant "religion or conspiracy theories" I'd probably be avoiding it too.

no need to consider all angles about an issue. not possible anyway. think about how much time you've wasted on HN reading opposing views that add no value.

Also bearing in mind that most of us can't really do much about issues in the news, apart from posting a few pithy comments of our own which will disappear into the noise.

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

#205

Post by Digit-Al »

nitwit005 wrote: post #194
dragonwriter wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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,…

> There are social media apps and platforms that don't do that. They are persistently less popular. I think that's a bit murky. Facebook became popular when it was like that. They changed how it worked after it was already popular, seeking to make more mony. Facebook could provide you options to only see friend's content. People have certainly asked for it. They absolutely refuse to.

>Facebook could provide you options to only see friend's content. People have certainly asked for it. They absolutely refuse to.

What are you talking about? On the app, click on the burger menu and select feeds. You will then have a page with get feeds. Song the top you will see "Friends". Select that to see only stuff your friends have posted.

Facebook has loads of options to curate your feed. Lots of people are too lazy or stupid to find them.

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

#206

Post by nitwit005 »

Digit-Al wrote: post #205
nitwit005 wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are social media apps and platforms that don't do that. They are persistently less popular. I think that's a bit murky. Facebook became popular when it was like that. They changed how it worked after it was already popular, seeking to make more mony. Facebook could provide you options to only see friend's content. People have certainly asked for it. They absolutely refuse to.

>Facebook could provide you options to only see friend's content. People have certainly asked for it. They absolutely refuse to. What are you talking about? On the app, click on the burger menu and select feeds. You will then have a page with get feeds. Song the top you will see "Friends". Select that to see only stuff your friends have posted. Facebook has loads of options to curate your feed. Lots of people are too…

You're correct, but they only added it a couple months back, so it's less ignorance than the fact that it was silently added unless you check their blog: https://about.fb.com/news/2025/03/bringing-magic-of-friends-...

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

#207

Post by luxpir »

skeezyboy wrote: post #124
luxpir wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it really is that simple. Have a discovery channel, recommendations side bar, just stop trying to add "shareholder value" through flawed machine learning attempts. Maintain a useful piece of software, is it too much to ask an earnings-driven corp? Probably.

stop using it then.

Guess what...

I left FB around the time of Snowden leaks. And watched the others all go the same way. I only use them judiciously now for specific information. Even YouTube i have history off so I don't see a recommendations page and I just check my subs semi regularly.

So yeah. The web is better and less stressful that way. New generation perhaps doesn't even know it.

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

#208

Post by Digit-Al »

nitwit005 wrote: post #206
Digit-Al wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Facebook could provide you options to only see friend's content. People have certainly asked for it. They absolutely refuse to. What are you talking about? On the app, click on the burger menu and select feeds. You will then have a page with get feeds. Song the top you will see "Friends". Select that to see only stuff your friends have posted. Facebook has loads of options to curate your feed. Lots of people are too…

You're correct, but they only added it a couple months back, so it's less ignorance than the fact that it was silently added unless you check their blog: https://about.fb.com/news/2025/03/bringing-magic-of-friends-...

What you're link refers to seems to be a different way to get to the feed that has been around for ages. The feed I described has been around for over a year (I can't remember when I first found out about it, but it was a long time ago).

[Edit] it looks like it was initially introduced three years ago: https://about.fb.com/news/2022/07/home-and-feeds-on-facebook...

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

#209

Post by fsflover »

grishka wrote: post #116
gyomu wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. Congrats, you now have platforms no one will care about, as attention span gets sniped by competitors who…

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

What do you mean by "demand"? Mastodon has been working for a while.
Post reply on HN