17
votes
Stop talking to each other and start buying things: Three decades of survival in the desert of social media
Link information
This data is scraped automatically and may be incorrect.
- Authors
- Catherynne M. Valente
- Published
- Dec 22 2022
- Word count
- 3446 words
Starts out really ranty, but settles down (slightly) later on. Here's a few parts I particularly enjoyed:
(emphasis mine)
That's not a full summary of the article. There are a lot of themes there. It's largely about the epicycles around how communities form online and then get taken over by finance people (and, more recently, authoritarian governments) and ruined. But also about how tiring it is to keep having to rebuild in their wake.
Woof, that's really heavy. I've never thought about it in such cut and dry terms.
I think optimizing anything strictly for profit is a huge problem. I say this pretty much applies to any product, though it is much easier to do with technology. It's pretty much Oracle's whole business model.
We all need to eat to live. And food is legitimately fun to make and to eat. But if your entire life revolves around wolfing down food to impress everyone else with how much you can shove down your gullet. . .
I just finished watching The Menu and it’s funny how on point it is with this comment I just made.
Weirdly I watched it last night as well. It's interesting just how much "eat the rich" content is coming out recently: The Menu, Triangle of Sadness, White Lotus, Squid Games, or even the new Glass Onion. Looks like we're right on track for a 1900s repeat.
Lol, great analogy.
Dang that was a fantastic read. I'm around the same age and that sums up my feelings towards the matter of social media pretty nicely. Putting effort into building communities only to have them crumble out from underneath you because the platform itself becomes unstable... over and over. It gets exasperating and tiring. There are quite a few people I have known who have helped shaped my life that I will likely never hear from again because it's hard to stay in touch with every single leaf that has been scattered to the wind.
This wouldn’t be a problem if people stopped relying on commercial services to build their communities on. There has always been a socially-owned, nonprofit, and open source option. I have always advocated for their use but this is something that nobody ever listens to me about. I’d tell people to forget their AIM and ICQ accounts and join me at Jabber. Hey, it even works with Google Talk now! While my AIM and Yahoo Messenger and MSN messenger accounts are all long gone, the last time I checked my original Jabber.org account still worked.
And the thing is that these community-run communities have the tendency to stick around. Diaryland, whatever that is, is still here. The WELL is still here and it predates the internet. The community of Megazeux users still exists in spite of the author abandoning that program decades ago.
What’s even crazier is that even the most right-wing friendly communities never get taken over by them. That’s because they actually enforce a set of sane community standards that punishes people who publish harmful things.
One thing they do tend to have in common though is that they are community funded. So here’s an unsubtle reminder to make a donation to tildes.
The author makes a big deal out what we'd now call a "click-bait" headline for a newspaper article about Prodigy. They claim they've thought about this article weekly. Did they bother to figure out which newspaper it was and maybe find the original article? Or learn about what Prodigy's business was, and what happened to it? Apparently not. It's a disappointing but sadly typical lack of curiosity.
Like, all that matters is what they thought about it as a kid, not what was going on in the world.
If you're curious, the Wikipedia article is more informative:
Sounds expensive.
[...]
Some context: back then, everything in computing was more expensive, including networking (phone lines, modems, long distance calls) and computing (mainframes and minicomputers). For comparison, an early bulletin board service started by some California idealists called The Well charged $2 per hour back then, and some people would run up big bills chatting.
There were also free bulletin boards run by hobbyists, but often with only one or two phone lines, and you would pay any long distance charges yourself. Sometimes they'd only be open at night so that the phone line could be used during the day.
In retrospect, figuring out how to provide bulletin boards cheaply might have been a better business plan.
That sounds like exactly what she was describing. The part that mattered to her was the loss leader, and when Prodigy couldn't make enough money off of people, it engaged in further monetization efforts and then shuttered it.
Also, does it matter that there was a practical business reason behind it? There was a system she loved, that made her life better, and for prurient reasons outside of her control it was killed. And this pattern has repeatedly been borne out.
That she didn't specifically talk about that article in more detail doesn't imply a lack of curiosity to me; she framed it accurately and sufficiently for her thesis.
I think it's okay to not want to get into it, but not to then assume malice like she's spinning it.
When, say, a restaurant you liked goes out of business, we don't assume it was because they were too greedy. We assume they tried to make money and failed because business is hard and that there's probably more to it that we don't know. Maybe they screwed up badly? Maybe some people involved did villainous things? But we can't tell their stories without learning the specifics about how it happened.
I mean, there's a few well documented examples of malice which, in the absence of clear internal documents coming to light in all the other cases, makes it hard to differentiate between indifference or incompetence leading to the closing or dissolution of a community and malice leading to exactly the same end. Yes, yes, Hanlon's Razor, but with evidence that our public squares are sometimes overthrown by powerful forces in the process of serving their own ends, I don't see why an assumption of malice is inappropriate? A local restaurant can't enable the overthrow of governments, so there's a lot less necessary skepticism when one fails.
By "overthrow of governments" are you referring to Arab Spring?
As well as the efforts of people elsewhere to organize for change, even when it's not so dramatic.
I think saying you don’t know what happened is fine when you haven’t looked into what happened. Keeps you humble. (-ish). And you can avoid investigating anything you don’t feel like investigating.
I don't think she's citing that headline as a primary example of a business model gone wrong.
Frame it a different way. She saw it when she was, what, 12? Mentioned that it made a big impact. Memories like that can stick in your mind for a long time, detached from external events. They float around, touching on other experiences, reinforcing themselves through repetition.
It wasn't the content of the article, but rather just that notion described by the headline that she reiterates throughout.
I have a similar memory from a similar age. The line, "There's always someone better" has stuck with me. I think it was originally in the context of martial arts, but I have no idea who said it regarding what exactly. It doesn't matter to me. Because I've found that to be so ubiquitous. I've gleaned a lot of insight through the repetition of that line over my life, and even though I'll probably never bother finding out the original context for it, it doesn't change the insights that I've had regarding it.
I am pretty sure this was from a Batman: The Animated Series episode where a young Bruce Wayne is learning karate alongside a rival and their master is warning Bruce's rival about the folly of pride.
Edit: Indeed! Go to timestamp 3:46
https://youtu.be/TCTsumZ_gbQ
I think this is a common phrase used when teaching martial arts. It was one of the first things that was taught to me when I briefly took a martial arts class in the mid 80's. It was used as a caution against getting too cocky about our new skills.
Ok that makes sense. So not so much from a single source as it is a general bit of wisdom. I've found that it's not only useful for keeping myself in check from being cocky, but also for relieving the self imposed expectation of trying to be the best at something. It has also been a useful bit of insight into other people's various motivations.
Little bits like that which just float around in my head and become repeating themes kind of evolve into lenses through which to analyze the world around me.
lol that's hilarious. I mean I know for certain was my stepdad that originally burned it into my mind. I just don't know where he got it. He was in muy thai for a long time, and when he mentions that it's in that context. But it would definitely be hilarious if he saw me watching that, heard that line, and figured it was a good enough quote.