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

Attention Media ≠ Social Networks

susam.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 283 posts

Re: Attention Media ≠ Social Networks

#201

Post by haunter »

florakel wrote: post #198

I have never used mastodon, but why is it so much better than X (twitter)? I also follow a small group of people on X that I find interesting and I get a chronological feed of their posts in the “following” tab. I know that the “For You” tab abyss is right there. I opened it once, was shocked by all the crap the system assumed I would like, and never went back. The good thing is that nobody forces me to use it. I am…

> I get a chronological feed of their posts in the “following” tab

Which is broken for 2 weeks now. The small drop down to change it to "most recent" have been disappeared for a lot of people both on web and iOS/Android so you see ALL tweets from accounts you follow, even replies you don't care about.

Re: Attention Media ≠ Social Networks

#203

Post by erentz »

Barbing wrote: post #99
JKCalhoun wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Too late. (And I don't do mobile anyway.) I don't wish to sound like I am shooting the messenger here, but Meta just has way, way too much baggage for me to ever consider returning.

and keep your kids away from it too before Mark’s robots get handsy https://reuters.com/investigates/special-report/meta-ai-chat... Warning: truly disgusting

The adult engineers and adult managers responsible for such things should get the same treatment as any adult having such conversations directly. You can’t just say “wasn’t me, it’s the AI layer I built to do the abuse for me”. You’re actively choosing to abuse and groom children. Sick stuff.

Re: Attention Media ≠ Social Networks

#204

Post by throawayonthe »

lukeschlather wrote: post #179

The funny thing about Facebook is that it's got a perfectly good social network in there, I think the only one that exists. In the menu is "Feeds" which is what you want. It only shows friends and followed things. If they made that the default when you go to facebook.com I don't think I'd have any complaints feature-wise, though an ad-free option would be nice. It's a genuine social network. Of course, then there's t…

facebook does have an ads-free paid option: https://www.facebook.com/help/262038446684066/

in europe

Re: Attention Media ≠ Social Networks

#205

Post by vmg12 »

BloodyIron wrote: post #194
isodev wrote: post #163

I’m quite literally experiencing a physical reaction whenever I need to browse some algorithmic timeline. Even YouTube, what used to be a couple of related videos is now a wall full of “recommendations” - the unskippable ads on every video are more relevant than the actual videos… Mastodon and related (for me Loops mainly) are a breath of fresh air and I wish more people can (re)learn to enjoy that.

YouTube recommendations are very well tuned for me. You need to mark videos "not interested" and downvote stuff you don't actually like, as well as stopping videos when you've decided you're not interested. This and other aspects WILL improve your recommended feed. So if your recommended feed sucks, well that's on you there bud, you can influence it completely.

Do you use youtube intending to be drawn into watching things you never intended to watch? I don't want a feed but the people operating these sites do not care that they are destroying people's time. Go to twitter, click on "following". Next time you sign in, somehow it's on "For you" (the algorithmic feed).

Thankfully on Youtube I can completely disable recommendations on the site and I use it purely as a source of information, not as a dopamine addiction funnel.

Re: Attention Media ≠ Social Networks

#206

Post by throawayonthe »

i find this sorta thing very interesting because not only have i never experienced the 'early' social networks as described (too young), i've never even considered using one of these sites as described - why would i voluntarily forgo pseudonymity on the public internet? I don't think this was fully a generational thing, i remember being genuinely baffled when i discovered my peers/classmates were using their real names, posting pictures/videos of themselves, and interacting with each other on these public platforms; wasn't internet safety 101 "Don't Do That?"

Re: Attention Media ≠ Social Networks

#207

Post by jMyles »

baxuz wrote: post #191
creamyhorror wrote: post #4

I was always perturbed by the shift from calling them "social networks" to "social media". It signalled a friends-to-famous shift (plus ads) that I didn't particularly want. Why fill my personal feed with stuff I normally get on dedicated discussion/news sites? (Rhetorical; it's obvious why.) They still call it SNS (social networking service) in Japan. We need to keep moving to a new iteration of this - hopefully one…

If it's media, it should be regulated like media.

Is this code for, "I want the cops to stop people from doing things online I don't like" or "we need more regularity / predictability"?

Re: Attention Media ≠ Social Networks

#208

Post by hapticmonkey »

Zak wrote: post #200
godot wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, I did not know about this Feeds page despite being a daily FB user for 20 years (yes, to the ridicule of most people, I know). Thanks for pointing this out. I wish this was the default homepage or at least a way to set it as default.

Each feed has a unique URL, so you can bookmark it in your browser. For people using Facebook via native mobile apps, my recommendation would be to stop and use a browser.

Annoyingly I can not get it to work on mobile (iOS Safari). Loading the url cause the page to refresh and take me to the main page.

Re: Attention Media ≠ Social Networks

#209

Post by anonymars »

Zak wrote: post #200
godot wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, I did not know about this Feeds page despite being a daily FB user for 20 years (yes, to the ridicule of most people, I know). Thanks for pointing this out. I wish this was the default homepage or at least a way to set it as default.

Each feed has a unique URL, so you can bookmark it in your browser. For people using Facebook via native mobile apps, my recommendation would be to stop and use a browser.

> Meta not being a particularly trustworthy entity

> For people using Facebook via native mobile apps, my recommendation would be to stop and use a browser

Related (2025): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44169115

Re: Attention Media ≠ Social Networks

#210

Post by dredmorbius »

grishka wrote: post #53
wussboy wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure you can. You can not post political things on social networks. They're not doing any good anyway. They're not changing anyone's mind. They're not providing depth or width to the discussion. I don't say this to be insulting, but rather a realist.

My point is that I just want to be able to discuss any topic with my followers without self-policing lest a bunch of anonymous accounts butts into the conversation and completely derails it.

What you're probably looking for is closer to a closed discussion group or mailing list than "social media", which is presently universally-readable, algorithmically-targeted, feed-based, advertising-supported, and increasingly, saturated with AI slop (which itself has replace clickbait and ragebait).

Which reminds me of Kitman's Law: Pure drivel tend to drive off the TV screen ordinary drivel.

From Marvin Kitman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvin_Kitman#Television_criti...>

Cited in Arthur Bloch, *Murphy's Law and Other Reasons Things Go Wrong!" (1977) p. 30.

https://www.scribd.com/document/672553711/Arthur-Bloch-Murph...>

Post reply on HN