Live data from Hacker News

Toxicity on Social Media

thenoisyroom.com

101–110 of 136 posts

Re: Toxicity on Social Media

#101
post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly take me back to time ordered forums. Threads, voting, algorithms were all a mistake.

They still exist. You just need to be content with smaller communities.

they're probably more numerous than ever, just harder to find

Re: Toxicity on Social Media

#102

Platform algorithms are a big part of the problem but I think this misses another important part. I don't think it is simple as a passive silent majority being drowned out by a few loud voices. For most of its history, Reddit didn't have an algorithm that promoted stories beyond upvotes and time since posting, that might even still be the case. Despite this, we have still seen a steady trend toward extreme views on t…

> Despite this, we have still seen a steady trend toward extreme views on the platform. There were 3 conditions that were working and were removed very very quickly 1) it was a web application only. Which enforces an interaction that is more contientous 2) it skewed older. Compared to other sites like IFunny or Instagram the age profile was closer to 30 than 12. 3) the upvote/downvote mechanic was used to upvote rele…

Slashdot's rating system was the best I've ever seen. But I'm sure it doesn't help improve engagement, in fact the system had so many rules (for an online ratings system) that I'd guess it reduced engagement. Which might have been a feature in its glory days.

Re: Toxicity on Social Media

#103
post #40

Huh. I guessed 13% of Demographic voters as LGBTQ, and the correct answer is 6%. But if you look at wikipedia the numbers globally for gay, lesbian, and bi should be above 6%. That's weird. I would expect Democrats to be slightly above the general numbers...

There's a couple of reasons this might be.

- A fair number of LGBTQ people don't feel represented by either party and so wouldn't answer yes to aligning with either the Dems or the Republicans. More communists, anarchists, third-party voters, etc.

- Voters tend older than the general population, and a lot of the LGBTQ elders are either dead or not attached to the community. The biggest demographic in the LGBTQ community by numbers are the bisexuals and a lot of 65 year old bisexuals went through their lives acting and living as straight. Likewise, a lot of older people with gender dysphoria never knew being trans was an option, so they may never have identified with it.

Re: Toxicity on Social Media

#104
post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because I don't think the problem has to do with who owns the platform, but rather its that the platform's design relies on infrastructure that can be owned in the first place. The people who run existing social media didn't start out evil, being in a powerful position made them that way. I'll be rooting for this user owned thing to stay true to its goals, but if it's shaped like the other ones in all ways but its ow…

I believe that threat could be prevented with the suggestions in the article. > The people who run existing social media didn't start out evil Um, not all of them: > On July 6 instant messages by a 19-year Zuck appeared on Twitter, along with a link to a 2010 Business Insider story about an exchange that took place shortly after the Facebook founder launched the social-media phenomenon in his dorm room. > “Yeah so if…

Touche re: Zuck, but I still think that even had he started a saint, he'd be a sinner by now.

Re: Toxicity on Social Media

#105
post #75

Platform algorithms are a big part of the problem but I think this misses another important part. I don't think it is simple as a passive silent majority being drowned out by a few loud voices. For most of its history, Reddit didn't have an algorithm that promoted stories beyond upvotes and time since posting, that might even still be the case. Despite this, we have still seen a steady trend toward extreme views on t…

> For most of its history, Reddit didn't have an algorithm that promoted stories beyond upvotes and time since posting, that might even still be the case. Reddit is heavily botted, including by capital interests, and has been for a long time. This includes basic up/down vote activity. > I think there is a significant percentage of users that do not initiate extreme content but participate in amplifying it. Yes, it's…

The problem with the bots explanation is that it is unfalsifiable. On top of that, this fits a very recognizable pattern of human behavior. I'm very skeptical that blocking all the bots would even move the needle.

Re: Toxicity on Social Media

#106

Platform algorithms are a big part of the problem but I think this misses another important part. I don't think it is simple as a passive silent majority being drowned out by a few loud voices. For most of its history, Reddit didn't have an algorithm that promoted stories beyond upvotes and time since posting, that might even still be the case. Despite this, we have still seen a steady trend toward extreme views on t…

> Despite this, we have still seen a steady trend toward extreme views on the platform. There were 3 conditions that were working and were removed very very quickly 1) it was a web application only. Which enforces an interaction that is more contientous 2) it skewed older. Compared to other sites like IFunny or Instagram the age profile was closer to 30 than 12. 3) the upvote/downvote mechanic was used to upvote rele…

(3) here was always just a fantasy. It never actually worked that way.

Re: Toxicity on Social Media

#107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do we need their permission to implement it? Could be a browser extension.

Or post it as a reply in url, hope for the silent majority to support it enough to send it to the top. If the platform only supports out-links it's tough.. maybe use QR codes as avatars?

Trouble with replies is that:

1. They're not as visible as the post they're attempting to moderate, so people just won't notice that there's more info.

2. Many people practice https://indieweb.org/POSSE so you now need to duplicate your reply across many separate social networks if you're going to match the reach of the specified content.

The nice thing about a plugin is you can associate the annotation with the underlying content by CTPH hash (i.e. the underlying tech for virus signatures) so it shows up wherever the annotated content shows up, regardless of URL and and with identical visibility since you're going by what appears on the screen not by whatever internal logic the underlying site uses.

Re: Toxicity on Social Media

#108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do we need their permission to implement it? Could be a browser extension.

true. but that's on the individual vs. the platform so it won't be perfect adoption. better than nothing tho.

Sure, its opt-in, but it has the potential to span platforms. Works just as well on somebody's blog as it does on Twitter.

Re: Toxicity on Social Media

#109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> “The medium is the message”. What's this mean?

It’s a famous phrase coined by McLuhan. He means that the form of a medium determines the kind of overall message it delivers. A case of scrolls carries a different message from a bound codex collecting those same scrolls, and so on. Whatever the hypothetical ability to deliver the same messages over books, TV, silent films, talkies, YouTube shorts, tweets, radio, handwritten letters, emails, et c., in practice the m…

I'm not sure how that affects the arguments at play here. Social media is not a single thing. It has various forms each bearing its own kind of "message" revealing and influencing parts of society in a variety of ways depending on the platform.

It's a lot easier to not have to delineate the myriad of effects that each platform has on its users and issue broad-sweeping legislation that will have consequences on how information is distributed and how people can interact with each other according to how information is spread.

We're dealing with technology capable of containing various kinds of media at a scale far unlike what McLuhan observed 60 years ago. That's not so say that he's become obsolete.

Read this and let me know if I'm getting it wrong...

https://web.archive.org/web/20060605204535/http://individual...

Re: Toxicity on Social Media

#110
post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe that threat could be prevented with the suggestions in the article. > The people who run existing social media didn't start out evil Um, not all of them: > On July 6 instant messages by a 19-year Zuck appeared on Twitter, along with a link to a 2010 Business Insider story about an exchange that took place shortly after the Facebook founder launched the social-media phenomenon in his dorm room. > “Yeah so if…

Touche re: Zuck, but I still think that even had he started a saint, he'd be a sinner by now.

True, which is why you'd need well defined safeguards in place from the very beginning, with high visibility into the organization that you normally wouldn't find in a closed, for-profit business.
Post reply on HN