41–48 of 48 posts
If the future of social media looks like Reddit, we should just cancel the internet and go outside instead. 95% of Reddit is a cesspool...never the subs you frequent, though...
Discord yes, small communities with barriers to entry, posts broadcast only to that community not the entire planet. Reddit, no. Reddit is 15+ years old now. It is what it is, a news aggregator site with volunteer mods to police content. I don't see how they grow either revenues or users which is why they are trying to ipo and cash out.
Think of walled off 'private communities' with HOAs. My take is people want the internet that self selected for only the certain social groups/classes of people that could afford the internet in the early 2000s without having to say that is what they want. Mainly college students and post-college professionals with enough disposable income to afford the limited practical use the internet offered back then. Maybe make…
This is what I want. There. I said it. Go lay down with the lambs on Reddit and Facebook to cry more about it.
If the future of social media looks like Reddit, we should just cancel the internet and go outside instead. 95% of Reddit is a cesspool...never the subs you frequent, though...
You say that on a website that shares 99.99999999% of its DNA with Reddit. Maybe we should all be destitute and go touch grass?
I heard people around here don't like that...
I think the future is going to be fake social media websites that tailor make all the content to your preferences. Aka LLM generated content. You know how in Minecraft (and other games) how they have infinite maps? You just keep on exploring and the game generates new lands for you to explore? That is what the future of social networks will be.
> I think the future is going to be fake social media websites that tailor make all the content to your preferences. Aka LLM generated content. What would be the point of that? I thought the purpose of social media was to interact with people.
delete discord and reddit. embrace github. being constrained to support git is a fantastic constraint.
You can't really post political rants on Github, though. Unless you manage to sneak them in via issues.
one of my most active repos right now is just ranting about alignment mostly lol
if anything searching github for politics hits a bit different, there is some heavy stuff in there like a db that tracks every swedish politician XD
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm just hoping that the robots dont hand wave away my arguments by making fun of them as "sophomoric". I didn't hand-wave it away, I just labeled it correctly and addressed it. A mind-blowing trump card of an "argument" it wasn't.
Dude, your argument against it was 1) that a technology that has been public for six months isn't perfect 2) that smart people would just know that comments were not being made by humans. I truly don't understand how you are interpreting this conversation.
That makes sense, because you're pretty badly misunderstanding me (which your summary makes perfectly clear).
I mean, 1 was part of a direct answer to your own question "how do you know that you are talking to an actual human right now and not a GPT powered hackernews bot." Emphasis mine. Your 2 is just a total misunderstanding. Hint: I was talking about social knowledge, not "smart people just knowing" in any particular case.
So it feels like a lot of communities want a space where they can carefully vet who can participate, lock out those trying to cancel or shut them down and keep discussions among themselves without randoms jumping in and stirring up trouble.