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

Meta is building a decentralized, text-based social network

platformer.news

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 361 posts

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

#151

Post by [deleted] »

aaronharnly wrote: post #114
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.

I like the metaphor. Next, people think “we need AirBnB! Not stodgy old hotels, but cool, real homes owned by real people, where individuals can provide hospitality to each other and everyone wins.” Consequence: independent operators take on the soulless characteristics of hotels but without the accountability or reliability. I can see us entering the AirBnB era of social networks soon…

[deleted]

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

#152

Post by mariusor »

yalogin wrote: post #133

Why is this obsession with decentralized? I don’t see the benefits of it at all. A central server is better if they have a good moderation plan built in. This whole decentralized idea is to wash their hands off moderation and not take a blame for the hellhole it will become. From a pure functional point of view, how can a decentralized network provide any performance guarantee? What am I missing?

Decentralized implies smaller scale than centralized. Smaller scale means less burden on moderation. Smaller scale means less resources required. Smaller scale means a better community.

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

#154

Post by elicash »

OgAstorga wrote: post #138
melling wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[Successful] Companies build what consumers want. You aren’t locked into social networks. Don’t use them. Consumers vote with their dollars. The constant noise of “Paywall” is why so much is ad based. So, if you’ve got a better idea, build it and see if they come. [Updated] Clarified that I meant successful companies.

Companies build what consumers want. You aren’t locked into Heroin. Don’t use it. Consumers vote with their dollars. So, if you’ve got a better idea, synthesize it and see if they come.

I get they both are "addictive" given the broad sense of the term. Yes, your brain gets a little reward with each refresh. But I don't think it's fair to compare the addictive nature of social media to heroin. (Let alone their impact on people's lives. But even putting that aside.)

Do you really think social media and heroin should be regulated at all similarly?

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

#155

Post by crabbone »

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.

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, they provide easy means of feedback to important political figures... they became a public good and need to be recognized by the state as such.

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

#156

Post by m3kw9 »

turnsout wrote: post #149
yalogin wrote: post #133

Why is this obsession with decentralized? I don’t see the benefits of it at all. A central server is better if they have a good moderation plan built in. This whole decentralized idea is to wash their hands off moderation and not take a blame for the hellhole it will become. From a pure functional point of view, how can a decentralized network provide any performance guarantee? What am I missing?

> a good moderation plan ^ This is the reason decentralized is better for everyone, including Meta. At a certain scale, content moderation goes from "hard" to "actually impossible." With enough users, you will eventually have an Kurdish knitting group that meets in Turkey, who uses ethnic slurs ironically as a commentary on the government's treatment of immigrants, and you'll have to unravel the whole thing when some…

There is ideal and there is practical, most people will not just switch from twitter because it allows someone to by pass govt. It will be difficult if no content is there.

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

#157

Post by commandlinefan »

bigger_inside wrote: post #143
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.

do you realize that roads are optional? you don't have to leave your house to talk to friends. do you realize that using the mail service is optional? nobody forces you to write post cards. do you realize that electricity is optional? you can get a shack in the forest and burn wood. do you realize that water pipes are optional? you can dig for your own ground water. the world is not made of solipsistic individuals. i…

> "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.

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

#158

Post by rchaud »

melling wrote: post #115
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?

[Successful] Companies build what consumers want. You aren’t locked into social networks. Don’t use them. Consumers vote with their dollars. The constant noise of “Paywall” is why so much is ad based. So, if you’ve got a better idea, build it and see if they come. [Updated] Clarified that I meant successful companies.

> Companies build what consumers want.

This isn't at all true. If it were, WeWork and Uber and Doordash would all be profitable and wouldn't need eye-watering levels of subsidies. Companies build whatever the purse strings holder is comfortable with them building.

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

#159

Post by turnsout »

nonethewiser wrote: post #129
footlose_3815 wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Widely held beliefs Can you elaborate on these "Widely held beliefs"? You appear to have done some research into the topic so I think it would be beneficial to your point if you gave examples of the beliefs. Because of Bandwagon fallacy, because we know just because something is widely-held doesn't necessarily make it valid, so these popular beliefs, I'd like to see what they are.

You will get banned on Reddit if you say trans women aren’t real women. They call it promoting hate towards a marginalized group. You may be sympathetic towards that so think twice before moving the goalpost.

The goalpost is always moving—it's called the Overton window. And whether you like it or not, the window is not moving in your direction on this issue.

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

#160

Post by spaced-out »

bhupy wrote: post #100
jonathanstrange wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're wrong and not the typical user. Personally, I would never use any social network without strong moderation and banning of toxic users, and I'm that many if not most people share this sentiment. Places without strong moderation turn into hellholes and are generally less interesting. Whether a network is decentralized or not is a completely different, purely technical question. I don't understand why two…

The GP comment’s proposal is not incompatible with what you (and typical users) want. Moderation is very different from censorship. I want strong moderation and “banning” for myself . I would ideally like this to be as automatic as possible, perhaps via default blocklists that update on an ongoing basis, that I can still opt out of if I really cared to do so. On the other hand, I don’t believe that I have any kind of…

>I want strong moderation and “banning” for myself. I would ideally like this to be as automatic as possible, perhaps via default blocklists that update on an ongoing basis, that I can still opt out of if I really cared to do so.

This is fine for you perhaps, but I don't want to be a moderator. I prefer social networks like, say, Hacker News where moderation is handled for me.

>Email works this way today and most people are perfectly fine with that.

Most people only use email for work and don't particularly enjoy it. They prefer to spend their free time on other social networks.

Post reply on HN