Live data from Hacker News

Attention Media ≠ Social Networks

susam.net

121–130 of 283 posts

Re: Attention Media ≠ Social Networks

#121
My mental model for all of this is that my attention is valuable. I can choose where to spend my attention and it should cost something to these platforms and their advertisers to command that attention. Unfortunately, these platforms have figured how to lower their cost by triggering lizard brain reflexes. The best solution is to simply remove any pathways they have to command that attention: uninstall apps and turn off all notifications. My attention is more under my control in this way.

Re: Attention Media ≠ Social Networks

#122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instagram followed a similar trajectory for me. For a while, as a photography hobbyist, it was a far more "active" social community for photography enthusiasts than whatever came before (Flickr, Smugmug, photo.net, various niche forums). I made photography friends thru it that I met in person even when traveling overseas. This lasted maybe 2 years. Then all the "normies" got on it and my feed started to just be casua…

> Then all the "normies" got on it and my feed started to just be casual snaps by people I knew in real life... which rapidly lead to its final form Most people who use social media want to see photos and updates from their friends they know in real life. This is the core value proposition. If seeing casual photos from your real life friends you call “normies” is disappointing to you, Instagram is probably not what y…

> Keeping in touch with friends is the primary use case of the platform.

I think unfortunately for IG in particular, it evolved for a segment of people into a status flexing game more than genuinely keeping in touch.

Re: Attention Media ≠ Social Networks

#123

IMHO, any social network that offers an "explore" section (i.e. a feed of strangers' posts) is doomed, independently of whether it is algorithmically filtered or chronologically. I ultimately dropped Mastodon because the "dumb" feed from my instance was already enough to waste my time. To prove this, just use Instagram or Facebook from your browser with the proper extensions and they'll stop being absolute worthless…

[dead]

Re: Attention Media ≠ Social Networks

#124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instagram followed a similar trajectory for me. For a while, as a photography hobbyist, it was a far more "active" social community for photography enthusiasts than whatever came before (Flickr, Smugmug, photo.net, various niche forums). I made photography friends thru it that I met in person even when traveling overseas. This lasted maybe 2 years. Then all the "normies" got on it and my feed started to just be casua…

You might like Foto https://fotoapp.co/

Or Pixelfed, for a decentralized fediverse option.

Re: Attention Media ≠ Social Networks

#125
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To an extent, sure, but I think also a sign their analytics were never as good as they claimed. For example, so far as I know my name is strongly gendered male, so why the boob surgery ads?

> my name is strongly gendered male, so why the boob surgery ads? Probably so you can suggest it to your partner.

This. My wife and I can hardly buy each other surprise gifts because the targeted advertising gives us away every time.

Re: Attention Media ≠ Social Networks

#126
post #81
post #80

I'm surprised there's not more discussion here and in general about symmetric- vs. asymmetric-relationship networks. Facebook worked in the beginning because relationships were symmetric and there was no concept of getting "follows" -- friendships are modeled after real life ones, where the friendship is between two people. I can see why the big networks moved away from that: pushing "content" has a lot more friction…

What does that mean exactly, how do you see that manifesting itself? Would we even be aware of these networks, sounds like email

The friendship link on the site would need to go both ways. Request and accept. There is no concept of “Follow”.

In addition, I’d say limit the number of “friends” a person can have. Maybe cap it at 200 (Dunbar's number plus a little extra). This eliminates celebrity, news, and meme accounts. It also eliminates people playing the silly game of seeing who can get the most followers or bragging about follower counts.

These are your actual friends, who also consider you a friend. Even if a celebrity were to join, the site would be useful for sharing with actual friends, not their fans or casual acquaintances.

Facebook started out similarly, but I don’t think it ever had a friend cap. I remember some sorority girls try to get me to make a Facebook account around 2004/5, because they had a contest to see who could get the most friends. I thought this was stupid and said no. Since this happened almost instantly after launch, I think those friend limits are important to make people use it for actual friends and not a popularity contest. Facebook went the opposite way, leaned into it, and created the Follow option. It was all downhill from there.

Re: Attention Media ≠ Social Networks

#127
post #100

I will admit, one thing the crowd attention model does exceptionally well is surface the best comments on content. Whether it's HN, Instagram, YouTube, etc... the top comments are usually the "best", depending on how best is defined in the given context. On the silly Instagram meme videos my algo serves up, the top comments are invariably hilarious, often funnier than the actual content, and as you scroll it's impres…

> the top comments are invariably hilarious, Sadly that is all that reddit is, now. Have a serious question? Expect multiple top replies to be some sort of [un]funny joke answer. It's a wasteland and devalues the platform when everyone competes for Internet Points. /r/aviation is just one example of being full of this crap. Oddly enough, I don't see it as much in gaming subreddits, even the more generic ones.

Retvrn to oldschool forums with chronological posting.

Re: Attention Media ≠ Social Networks

#128
post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would like to see social networks that facilitates real life, face-to-face encounters to a much larger extent that the current state of affairs. The Fediverse has the pieces to this puzzle, but I do not know of one project that combines them in the right way yet. We do have Mobilizon for events, we have Mastodon and all the other similar projects for sharing and commenting, but we need something that puts the piece…

Social media is full of in-person events. The only reason I use Facebook lately is to keep up with groups that organize in-person events.

I was thinking about social networks that is not Facebook. The challenge is to make something that can compete in this respect. It would be so nice to have the in-person part, but without the ads, scams, data theft and blackbox algorithms!

Re: Attention Media ≠ Social Networks

#129
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm happy they've been able to build a $1,660,000,000,000 company on the back of me logging in once every two months, scrolling 3 posts, getting disgusted with slop, and closing the tab. Gives me hope that my harebrained ventures may also succeed!

I don't buy it. You use it more than that - otherwise you'd just delete your account.

I've used my Facebook account once in the last decade, still keep it open as I have no reason to delete it and give up my parked identity (I share a name with a nationally recognizeable politician).

Re: Attention Media ≠ Social Networks

#130

"Over time, my timeline contained fewer and fewer posts from friends and more and more content from random strangers. " It still baffles me that Facebook fills up my feed with random garbage I have no interest in. I barely use it now because their generated content gets in the way of the reason why I opened facebook to begin with. These algorithmic feeds clearly work for someone but its not what I am looking for, I w…

While number of active users still grows, one have to ask a question, who is left on facebook aside from dopamine junkies and bots. The only reason why I didn’t delete facebook is messenger, where I chat with old folks.

There are some apparent niche communities both on Facebook and Instagram. Heavy metal and hardrock music fans is one group that hasn’t migrated anywhere else yet. I both play in a band and promote events, and both are still required in my geographic area to reach out.
Post reply on HN