Some interesting food for thought about the nature of social media. I particularly liked this paragraph with a metaphor for the specific kind of social media with a tendency towards noxiousness.
Some interesting food for thought about the nature of social media. I particularly liked this paragraph with a metaphor for the specific kind of social media with a tendency towards noxiousness.
And just to be clear: obviously the definition of “social media” is a spectrum. When I’m using it here, I mean mostly those sites on the end of one side of the spectrum, like Twitter and Facebook and Instagram—especially with its upcoming changes. Despite both being video sharing platforms, TikTok is further along the social media spectrum than YouTube, as it’s built on a constant stream of 30 second clips, whereas YouTube is built on 30 minute Mr. Beast videos. While other websites like Twitch or Substack have a social component, like accounts and subscriptions or followings, they don’t throw you into an all-to-all instantaneous web of interaction and virality. They don’t insert you into a realm governed by an always active group-mind focus of attention that sweeps, lighthouse-like, from subject to subject, and poor soul to poor soul.
Good quick read. I do wish the author made suggestions on what could work for a social network, based upon "so what happened when those apes finally got out of their high school phase?" But I...
Good quick read. I do wish the author made suggestions on what could work for a social network, based upon "so what happened when those apes finally got out of their high school phase?" But I guess the article's only point is that "we can't". Which is a shame, because evidently we did. Religion, for one. Suddenly the shaky old man with twig arms can beat up the beef cakes. Tribal identity, enjoyment and protection of a natural resources, a matron, a shared dream...We've done it before time and time again: put aside our differences and celebrated the weak together. That's what we're trying to recreate on this new digital world.
The simple truth that, unless someone is already famous for other reasons, no one gets a million Twitter followers by being nice.
I like that Tildes has no followers system. Reddit didn't used to either. Slashdot had friends and freaks but I can't speak on how, if, it was popularly used. I posit that "following" of a person is only not an essential part of a healthy culture, it is toxic to it. It's the difference between a mere group and a mob or a cult.
How can a community (online or off) get rid of the malice treadmill? Maybe if we get rid of the followers system, get rid of putting spotlight on anyone and anything other than worthy content made by human beings.
I noticed that Tildes has an Exemplary tag that is awarded sometimes: not on users, not even on Admin, but on individual comments. That's one physical way of spotlighting worthy content and not a person, and certainly not spotlighting bad actors engaging in bad behaviour.
I also notice that there is no such thing as sort by controversy, and that there is an active ban-hammer in place policing for tone and content. In real life groups, these are also necessary. Examplary tags are not awarded based on number of words or number of replies below or even how many users voted on it. It doesn't sticky at the top of a thread, and doesn't make itself known on the main page ("This post has 3 examplaries!"). It's just kind of quietly set apart in a small way.
Human beings hide/obscure/protect what is important and/or delicate and/or easily spoiled: a veil, a door, an inner chamber, a safe, encryption, a secret handshake, ID cards.......a mesh over food, a lid on a beer stein.
Things that are sacred -- Latin sacrare "to make sacred, consecrate; hold sacred; immortalize; set apart, dedicate," -- are set apart.
A social media site's design will tell you what it holds sacred by setting it apart from users' decision on what to see: Ads that cannot be downvoted or unsubscribed from; pages that keep populating with algorithmically controversial post; hashtags telling you what today's two minute hate will target; the number of people you can beg a job from; an endless scrolling sea of pictures...
Tildes has black text on white background. Don't like this text, then ignore it and it's gone. Even the Votes number is pushed aside to the right instead of on the left of the post. Each posts has to fend for itself based on the text that describes what it is. It's actually pretty hard to see who posted it, not even visible if it's a link.
Perhaps that is what is being held sacred here: ideas, standing on their own.
This is one of the things I like about Tildes so far. An option like that is specifically designed for hate. I want to spend my time on these sites talking with other nerds about homelab stuff and...
I also notice that there is no such thing as sort by controversy
This is one of the things I like about Tildes so far. An option like that is specifically designed for hate. I want to spend my time on these sites talking with other nerds about homelab stuff and niche 30 year old RPGs no one cares about. Not feel the urge to constantly validate myself by looking at comments people are metaphorically laughing at for being ridiculous
I believe it has to do with anonymity. It's the size of the community. If you don't know the people in your community, you tend to have less empathy for them. Eventually, the faceless masses just...
How can a community (online or off) get rid of the malice treadmill?
I believe it has to do with anonymity. It's the size of the community. If you don't know the people in your community, you tend to have less empathy for them. Eventually, the faceless masses just become, well, a mass. Not a person that you know and for whom you care what they think or feel.
I believe you're right. On reddit, I never really knew anyone. There were just too many people across too many subreddits. The chances of seeing the same person twice and noticing it felt low...
I believe you're right. On reddit, I never really knew anyone. There were just too many people across too many subreddits. The chances of seeing the same person twice and noticing it felt low unless you were on support subreddits or they had a novelty account.
Meanwhile I used forums a lot as a kid, and they had a real sense of community where we knew each other. Even after the forums died, people still kept in contact through other means. I fell out of the loop but reconnected with them at the start of the pandemic (literally, got linked to their discord on March 12, 2020), and it's been so great to see all these names that I know. Even if I didn't really interact much with the person themselves, just seeing their name gave me a rush of fond nostalgia as I remembered their avatar.
I agree with your point about community size, but I don't think it's anonymity as much as it's the illusion of safety. On facebook for example, people will use their real names and pictures, but...
I agree with your point about community size, but I don't think it's anonymity as much as it's the illusion of safety. On facebook for example, people will use their real names and pictures, but will still post the most hateful vile stuff to each other. It's because the immediate threat of being punched in the face isn't there. It works the same way as road rage. You're not anonymous in your vehicle, people can see you, and potentially even identify you by your license plate number. But people will feel comfortable yelling incredibly vicious stuff at each other on the road, because when you're driving inside your car, you have the feeling that you can't be touched (you can, of course, but it doesn't FEEL like you can).
I resonate with the vast majority of your comment, but I did want to touch on your last line, and some of its implications that I see. When this is combined with a strong policing of tone, and...
I resonate with the vast majority of your comment, but I did want to touch on your last line, and some of its implications that I see.
Perhaps that is what is being held sacred here: ideas, standing on their own.
When this is combined with a strong policing of tone, and content, you end up with an echo chamber. It’s cliche, but the adage “who watches the watchers” fits well here. I don’t think this is a bad thing, but it does open the idea to “what ideas do we allow to be held sacred here?”.
To clarify, I don’t mean the inherently inflammatory ideas, but the more mundane distinctions between the idea of a collective vs. an individual, or capital and labor, etc.
I think if we safeguard 'the sanctity of the conversation itself' that the rest will sort itself out. It's the enforcement of a minimal ruleset aimed at civility and productivity, with a handful...
what ideas do we allow to be held sacred here
I think if we safeguard 'the sanctity of the conversation itself' that the rest will sort itself out. It's the enforcement of a minimal ruleset aimed at civility and productivity, with a handful of bad behaviors that are frowned upon because we can't fully trust our own tribal instincts. When those behaviors show up they derail everything, so we nip them in the bud. Case in point - most people on Tildes knew this one was getting locked as soon as it appeared, it was just a question of how long it could sustain. Honestly, that thread was not a bad run for a controversial topic.
Here's what I want out of a social media site: Old-school message board-like interaction. Images/memes are optional (but appreciated in small doses... too often, once memes are introduced they...
Here's what I want out of a social media site: Old-school message board-like interaction. Images/memes are optional (but appreciated in small doses... too often, once memes are introduced they become the dominant communication form.) That's it, though. I cut my internet teeth on message boards in the 90s. I miss those times. Not coincidentally, Tildes reminds me of a small scale version of that time.
Yeah, a web form with a semi modern UI, the ability to have all your forums in a central place with RSS style feeds, and a default assumption where you can crtl-v images is really all I want. Just...
Yeah, a web form with a semi modern UI, the ability to have all your forums in a central place with RSS style feeds, and a default assumption where you can crtl-v images is really all I want.
Just please for the love of all things holy let these systems be not controlled by just one company already.
I don't think there will ever be a "good" social media site. Social media is what you make of it, people complain about Facebook being garbage, but if I join a Facebook group about a specific...
I don't think there will ever be a "good" social media site. Social media is what you make of it, people complain about Facebook being garbage, but if I join a Facebook group about a specific hobby it'll probably be quite good and informative. Same goes for curating my Twitter followers and only following people who's feeds I think are interesting. There's plenty of good Subreddits but /r/all is mostly garbage. Just follow people who you think will post good content and you'll have a good social media experience.
I don't think you're right. At least not the extent you think. Sure, social media is what you make of it, but you are also made by social media. Just take a look around Tildes, great people...
I don't think you're right. At least not the extent you think. Sure, social media is what you make of it, but you are also made by social media. Just take a look around Tildes, great people treating each other nicely everywhere. That is the same people from Reddit. Sure, we're a subset of previous Reddit users, but let's not fool ourselves, we may be different but we are not superior. Not really.
I am not the same merry self when I communicate on Reddit. I just can't. It's a different environment. The platform matters.
I feel like you’re touching on the differences between a walled, and open garden. When you can control the garden, plants that you enjoy can flourish, whereas an “open” garden is dominated by the...
I feel like you’re touching on the differences between a walled, and open garden. When you can control the garden, plants that you enjoy can flourish, whereas an “open” garden is dominated by the most successful plants. Sadly, I think the most successful plants is akin to controversy on social media, it’s what ends up dominating. If you want to point to a human condition to explain the appeal, that’s a separate argument, but I can see it being made.
I think that the main problem with "social media" is that it seems that most of them have some sort of idea that the people making it are somehow improving upon how people interact with eachother....
I think that the main problem with "social media" is that it seems that most of them have some sort of idea that the people making it are somehow improving upon how people interact with eachother. And for the most part, they are not. These platforms are not "lube for social interactions" - they are simply a medium of communication. And the single most important part of these platforms is the people who are using them.
Granted this media does have some social benefits, as they eliminate space as a barrier and add the element of time/timing to the meaning of messages. But I don't see you can improve in those aspects.
That's what I was thinking. You can try to whittle your feed down, but the site and app will still throw absolute crap at you, and woe be to you if you accidentally click or tap any of it.
That's what I was thinking. You can try to whittle your feed down, but the site and app will still throw absolute crap at you, and woe be to you if you accidentally click or tap any of it.
Interesting read, I guess that all social media has a problem; how do you make your website/community engaging, but only in a positive way? Because negativity is extremely engaging… All I can...
Interesting read, I guess that all social media has a problem; how do you make your website/community engaging, but only in a positive way? Because negativity is extremely engaging…
All I can think of is removing superficial engagement/clout chasing by not including features like Followers or Karma, but those are the bread and butter of social media…
That counts for a lot honestly. It keeps people who don't have anything interesting to say from saying things. Tildes briefly experimented with hiding vote counts actually and after a week or two...
That counts for a lot honestly. It keeps people who don't have anything interesting to say from saying things.
Tildes briefly experimented with hiding vote counts actually and after a week or two of it everyone agreed that it made the place feel emptier because we didn't know whether anyone was actually reading the stuff we posted. But you'll notice there isn't any sort of aggregated karma or really anything that can be used as a "score" that a user would want to increase.
Things like upvotes, reactions, likes, etc all appeal to us at a basic almost caveman level. It's a little hit of dopamine or whatever that your brain likes. It's the same thing as little...
Things like upvotes, reactions, likes, etc all appeal to us at a basic almost caveman level. It's a little hit of dopamine or whatever that your brain likes. It's the same thing as little satisfying sounds and colors that slot machines and video games use to reward you when you do something. I'd even extend that to things like unlockables and achievement points. It all increases your engagement with it.
As long as social media platforms belong to publicly traded companies there will be problems. For these companies it's all about ads and rage bait for engagement. I think a donation model is a way...
As long as social media platforms belong to publicly traded companies there will be problems. For these companies it's all about ads and rage bait for engagement.
I think a donation model is a way to go. I know Wikipedia tried/is trying with WT Social, and I'm not entirely convinced of their execution but Wikimedia being donation driven is a step in the right direction.
Some interesting food for thought about the nature of social media. I particularly liked this paragraph with a metaphor for the specific kind of social media with a tendency towards noxiousness.
Good quick read. I do wish the author made suggestions on what could work for a social network, based upon "so what happened when those apes finally got out of their high school phase?" But I guess the article's only point is that "we can't". Which is a shame, because evidently we did. Religion, for one. Suddenly the shaky old man with twig arms can beat up the beef cakes. Tribal identity, enjoyment and protection of a natural resources, a matron, a shared dream...We've done it before time and time again: put aside our differences and celebrated the weak together. That's what we're trying to recreate on this new digital world.
I like that Tildes has no followers system. Reddit didn't used to either. Slashdot had friends and freaks but I can't speak on how, if, it was popularly used. I posit that "following" of a person is only not an essential part of a healthy culture, it is toxic to it. It's the difference between a mere group and a mob or a cult.
How can a community (online or off) get rid of the malice treadmill? Maybe if we get rid of the followers system, get rid of putting spotlight on anyone and anything other than worthy content made by human beings.
I noticed that Tildes has an Exemplary tag that is awarded sometimes: not on users, not even on Admin, but on individual comments. That's one physical way of spotlighting worthy content and not a person, and certainly not spotlighting bad actors engaging in bad behaviour.
I also notice that there is no such thing as sort by controversy, and that there is an active ban-hammer in place policing for tone and content. In real life groups, these are also necessary. Examplary tags are not awarded based on number of words or number of replies below or even how many users voted on it. It doesn't sticky at the top of a thread, and doesn't make itself known on the main page ("This post has 3 examplaries!"). It's just kind of quietly set apart in a small way.
Human beings hide/obscure/protect what is important and/or delicate and/or easily spoiled: a veil, a door, an inner chamber, a safe, encryption, a secret handshake, ID cards.......a mesh over food, a lid on a beer stein.
Things that are sacred -- Latin sacrare "to make sacred, consecrate; hold sacred; immortalize; set apart, dedicate," -- are set apart.
A social media site's design will tell you what it holds sacred by setting it apart from users' decision on what to see: Ads that cannot be downvoted or unsubscribed from; pages that keep populating with algorithmically controversial post; hashtags telling you what today's two minute hate will target; the number of people you can beg a job from; an endless scrolling sea of pictures...
Tildes has black text on white background. Don't like this text, then ignore it and it's gone. Even the Votes number is pushed aside to the right instead of on the left of the post. Each posts has to fend for itself based on the text that describes what it is. It's actually pretty hard to see who posted it, not even visible if it's a link.
Perhaps that is what is being held sacred here: ideas, standing on their own.
This is one of the things I like about Tildes so far. An option like that is specifically designed for hate. I want to spend my time on these sites talking with other nerds about homelab stuff and niche 30 year old RPGs no one cares about. Not feel the urge to constantly validate myself by looking at comments people are metaphorically laughing at for being ridiculous
I believe it has to do with anonymity. It's the size of the community. If you don't know the people in your community, you tend to have less empathy for them. Eventually, the faceless masses just become, well, a mass. Not a person that you know and for whom you care what they think or feel.
I believe you're right. On reddit, I never really knew anyone. There were just too many people across too many subreddits. The chances of seeing the same person twice and noticing it felt low unless you were on support subreddits or they had a novelty account.
Meanwhile I used forums a lot as a kid, and they had a real sense of community where we knew each other. Even after the forums died, people still kept in contact through other means. I fell out of the loop but reconnected with them at the start of the pandemic (literally, got linked to their discord on March 12, 2020), and it's been so great to see all these names that I know. Even if I didn't really interact much with the person themselves, just seeing their name gave me a rush of fond nostalgia as I remembered their avatar.
I agree with your point about community size, but I don't think it's anonymity as much as it's the illusion of safety. On facebook for example, people will use their real names and pictures, but will still post the most hateful vile stuff to each other. It's because the immediate threat of being punched in the face isn't there. It works the same way as road rage. You're not anonymous in your vehicle, people can see you, and potentially even identify you by your license plate number. But people will feel comfortable yelling incredibly vicious stuff at each other on the road, because when you're driving inside your car, you have the feeling that you can't be touched (you can, of course, but it doesn't FEEL like you can).
I resonate with the vast majority of your comment, but I did want to touch on your last line, and some of its implications that I see.
When this is combined with a strong policing of tone, and content, you end up with an echo chamber. It’s cliche, but the adage “who watches the watchers” fits well here. I don’t think this is a bad thing, but it does open the idea to “what ideas do we allow to be held sacred here?”.
To clarify, I don’t mean the inherently inflammatory ideas, but the more mundane distinctions between the idea of a collective vs. an individual, or capital and labor, etc.
I think if we safeguard 'the sanctity of the conversation itself' that the rest will sort itself out. It's the enforcement of a minimal ruleset aimed at civility and productivity, with a handful of bad behaviors that are frowned upon because we can't fully trust our own tribal instincts. When those behaviors show up they derail everything, so we nip them in the bud. Case in point - most people on Tildes knew this one was getting locked as soon as it appeared, it was just a question of how long it could sustain. Honestly, that thread was not a bad run for a controversial topic.
Here's what I want out of a social media site: Old-school message board-like interaction. Images/memes are optional (but appreciated in small doses... too often, once memes are introduced they become the dominant communication form.) That's it, though. I cut my internet teeth on message boards in the 90s. I miss those times. Not coincidentally, Tildes reminds me of a small scale version of that time.
Yeah, a web form with a semi modern UI, the ability to have all your forums in a central place with RSS style feeds, and a default assumption where you can crtl-v images is really all I want.
Just please for the love of all things holy let these systems be not controlled by just one company already.
I don't think there will ever be a "good" social media site. Social media is what you make of it, people complain about Facebook being garbage, but if I join a Facebook group about a specific hobby it'll probably be quite good and informative. Same goes for curating my Twitter followers and only following people who's feeds I think are interesting. There's plenty of good Subreddits but /r/all is mostly garbage. Just follow people who you think will post good content and you'll have a good social media experience.
I don't think you're right. At least not the extent you think. Sure, social media is what you make of it, but you are also made by social media. Just take a look around Tildes, great people treating each other nicely everywhere. That is the same people from Reddit. Sure, we're a subset of previous Reddit users, but let's not fool ourselves, we may be different but we are not superior. Not really.
I am not the same merry self when I communicate on Reddit. I just can't. It's a different environment. The platform matters.
I feel like you’re touching on the differences between a walled, and open garden. When you can control the garden, plants that you enjoy can flourish, whereas an “open” garden is dominated by the most successful plants. Sadly, I think the most successful plants is akin to controversy on social media, it’s what ends up dominating. If you want to point to a human condition to explain the appeal, that’s a separate argument, but I can see it being made.
I think that the main problem with "social media" is that it seems that most of them have some sort of idea that the people making it are somehow improving upon how people interact with eachother. And for the most part, they are not. These platforms are not "lube for social interactions" - they are simply a medium of communication. And the single most important part of these platforms is the people who are using them.
Granted this media does have some social benefits, as they eliminate space as a barrier and add the element of time/timing to the meaning of messages. But I don't see you can improve in those aspects.
Uggh twitter, twitter pushes alt right stuff to my notifications, so annoying
That's what I was thinking. You can try to whittle your feed down, but the site and app will still throw absolute crap at you, and woe be to you if you accidentally click or tap any of it.
Interesting read, I guess that all social media has a problem; how do you make your website/community engaging, but only in a positive way? Because negativity is extremely engaging…
All I can think of is removing superficial engagement/clout chasing by not including features like Followers or Karma, but those are the bread and butter of social media…
That counts for a lot honestly. It keeps people who don't have anything interesting to say from saying things.
Tildes briefly experimented with hiding vote counts actually and after a week or two of it everyone agreed that it made the place feel emptier because we didn't know whether anyone was actually reading the stuff we posted. But you'll notice there isn't any sort of aggregated karma or really anything that can be used as a "score" that a user would want to increase.
Things like upvotes, reactions, likes, etc all appeal to us at a basic almost caveman level. It's a little hit of dopamine or whatever that your brain likes. It's the same thing as little satisfying sounds and colors that slot machines and video games use to reward you when you do something. I'd even extend that to things like unlockables and achievement points. It all increases your engagement with it.
Mastodon became generally available in 2017.
As long as social media platforms belong to publicly traded companies there will be problems. For these companies it's all about ads and rage bait for engagement.
I think a donation model is a way to go. I know Wikipedia tried/is trying with WT Social, and I'm not entirely convinced of their execution but Wikimedia being donation driven is a step in the right direction.