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

Is this the end of social networking?

reb00ted.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 503 posts

Re: Is this the end of social networking?

#301

Post by ryanSrich »

saidinesh5 wrote: post #3

I think the "social" part of social networks just moved to group chats. All my friends share updates of their family events, kids' stuff etc.. over Whatsapp and Telegram. Strangers gather over topics that interest them and want to talk about it seem to have moved to discord, slack etc. The whole "broadcast yourself to the world" part of social networks just moved to Tiktok, Twitter, Instagram etc.. I think.

Yeah same for me. If I want to talk to someone, or share info with friends, I create a Messages group. If there’s more than a few people, then it’s a Telegram channel. If it’s work related or networking with colleagues then it’s Slack. If it’s gaming related then it’s Discord.

I look back at my Instagram and my last post was 2 years ago. All of the people that I used to see pop up, the people that would like my photos, and I would like their’s, those people seem to be gone. Friends from college, and high school have all been replaced by short videos of strangers, ads, and influencers.

I think the biggest missing piece for me is keeping up with people I know, but wouldn’t otherwise talk to (by any means listed above). It was nice to see those people pop up sometimes, but I have no way of serendipitously finding them anymore. That’s what social media was to me.

Re: Is this the end of social networking?

#303

Post by tjpnz »

annadane wrote: post #271

It's really simple. All Zuckerberg has to do is drop the "dominate everyone" facade. But I think he's incapable of doing that

He's incapable of dropping it, because despite everything that's said about him living in the future his is a mind that's perpetually trapped in the mid 2000s. That's why Meta's only mode of innovation is through acquisitions and ripping off ideas from elsewhere, and Meta's slowly being torn apart for it.

Re: Is this the end of social networking?

#304

Post by beeskneecaps »

ribosometronome wrote: post #67
bluefirebrand wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My experience is that Neighbour apps are exactly as miserable as Facebook and equally populated only by people my parents age.

I have not found the humans on Nextdoor to be particularly terrible of late in my portion of the South Bay. There are occasional bad takes, for sure, but fewer than I would have expected. Mostly just been discussion of neighborhood cats, garbage days, people not picking up dog poop, etc.

Agreed, people act like every neighbor is terrible but they're just talking about a few that they saw years ago. Most of Nextdoor is like, did you see this coyote? Also diverse people taking to each other which is actually rare to observe on social media.

Re: Is this the end of social networking?

#305

Post by a9h74j »

vorpalhex wrote: post #89
beebmam wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People want their bubbles. We’re all here on HN for that exact purpose. 100% disagree. I'm here to find ideas I disagree with and tell people how they're wrong. I'm not looking for an agreeable experience here. I'm also here to learn about new tech.

A bubble can be less about topics and more about how we communicate - if I ask about sources on HN I'll get links and pdfs in return. If I do that on reddit, I'll get insults. HN has broad tolerance for a lot of ideas - and a lot of subgroups exist here that don't exist on other platforms. No matter what you believe, someone on HN holds a counter view and can probably give you a good debate about it.

There might be some "Three or so core values are enough" pattern being played out in relatively good success here. E.g. respond to a favorable or valliant interpretation of a post, bring in new data and information and references, leave the place better than you found it. Then maybe a few emergent rules of etiquette.

Re: Is this the end of social networking?

#306

Post by stingraycharles »

cwkoss wrote: post #199
dont__panic wrote: post #17

> [TikTok]'s addiction-based advertising machine is probably close to the theoretical maximum of how many advertisements one can pour down somebody’s throat. Well put. It's interesting that we pivoted in my adult lifetime from: 1. Myspace's emphasis on sharing things on your own webpage, essentially a hosted blog 2. Facebook's evolution from "hosted blog" to "friend update aggregator" to "chat client" to "friend upda…

Seems like Tiktok has far fewer ads than other social media platforms. Less than 10% of things are ads. Instagram is like 30+% ads for me.

Yeah I was also surprised at that comment, TikTok has significantly less ads than FB/IG, so I don’t understand why it’s being criticized for that.

Re: Is this the end of social networking?

#307

Post by woweoe »

Reddit is the worst of all the social media considering how toxic the moderation is. You just leave the site full of anger and a desire to shout at all the misinformed on that site.

TikTok is similar to TV. People would sit around the TV for hours per day, TikTok is usually in the magnitude of minutes. The algortyhm also does not feel politically or culturally motivated, unlike Reddit.

Re: Is this the end of social networking?

#308

Post by dgfitz »

satyrnein wrote: post #132
rsweeney21 wrote: post #70

If your stated company mission is not the thing that produces revenue then it will eventually be sacrificed for the mission that does produce revenue. Examples of mission statements that don't produce revenue: Google, Facebook, YouTube, TikTok, most news organizations. Microsoft's missions in 1980 was "A computer on every desk and in every home". Their mission produced revenue. There are lots of examples of mission/r…

Most companies exist for motive X, which they do by providing value Y, then monetizing it via method Z. X is almost always "profit" and Z is something boring like selling physical items, subscriptions, ads, etc, so the mission statement is about Y. The following statements are true but not very interesting: Microsoft was never about computers on every desk and in every home, it was really about selling software licen…

> Microsoft was never about computers on every desk and in every home, it was really about selling software licenses to make money!

And how would they have made money without lots of computers on lots of desks paying subscriptions?

All companies exist to make money, that’s the point.

X === make money. Y === sell something to make money. Z === make money.

I’m really struggling to understand your point.

Re: Is this the end of social networking?

#309

Post by woweoe »

droopyEyelids wrote: post #73
mgraczyk wrote: post #40

TikTok is winning because it is video first. The more immersive the media, the more profitable the ads. Facebook is having trouble pivoting it's products to video. Facebook is betting big that the next more-immersive medium after video will be VR. That's basically the whole story. Notice I didn't use the word "algorithm" or "social"? These takes are tired and naive, TikTok isn't addictive in any operationally useful…

YouTube is video first. I think TikTok is winning because their objective algorithm optimizes for a different outcome. Facebook and YouTube optimize for time spent on the site. Youtube famously cut ad revenue for content that is watched for fewer than 10 minutes. They both make decisions based on what will increase time spent on the site, thinking that's the best way to sell ads. TikTok optimizes for content that peo…

Youtube is also a website first, whereas TikTok is an app first. Apps on mobile are usually harder to leave.

Re: Is this the end of social networking?

#310

Post by dgfitz »

thenerdhead wrote: post #29

Y’all should read “Amusing ourselves to death” by Neil Postman if you’re interested in how mediums have changed over the years. As Huxley hinted, our soma is just technological narcotics. With each new medium of technology brings in a plethora of problems that cannot be reformed.

Huxley + Rand sure seem to have shared the same crystal ball.
Post reply on HN