Shame on them if they don't highlight the fediverse.

Post-Zuckerberg? I'm confused on the eras of Facebook I guess. He's still CEO isn't he? Wouldn't that make the whole history of the company the Zuckerberg era?

It’s probably referring to the era past when Zuckerberg was an up-and-coming CEO and was still doing a bunch of new things, and when almost all of social media growth revolved around Mark Zuckerberg. Now we’re in an era where he’s an establishment tech CEO. The stuff he does now is less about innovation and more about driving blind profits.

Your link is borked. Here's a fixed version: https://www.c-span.org/program/senate-committee/meta-whistleblower-testifies-on-facebook-practices/658354

tuning its algorithm to promote the most divisive material possible. Because that is what will increase engagement

But at the same time in every case I described on Lemmy an experience not maximizing engagement by maximizing conflict, I was downvoted to hell's basement. Despite two of three modern social media experience models being too aimed for that, that'd be Facebook-like and Reddit-like, excluding Twitter-like (which is unfortunately vulnerable to bots). I mean, there's less conflict on fucking imageboards, those were at some point considered among most toxic places in the interwebs.

(Something-something Usenet-like namespaces instead of existing communities tied to instances, something-something identities too not tied to instances and being cryptographic, something-something subjective moderation (subscribing to moderation authorities you choose, would feel similar to joining a group, one can even have in the UI a few combinations of the same namespace and a few different moderation authorities for it), something-something a bigger role of client-side moderation (ignoring in the UI those people you don't like). Ideally what really gets removed and not propagated to anyone would be stuff like calls for mass murders, stolen credentials, gore, real rape and CP. The "posting to a namespace versus posting to an owned community" dichotomy is important. The latter causes a "capture the field" reaction from humans.)

...And under the current model, the egos of mods get crazy big as they see their community army grow bigger and they can shape it how they want, even stackoverflow suffered and developers left in droves long before LLM took its place.

I do miss the original imageboards though that used sage and was a community driven effort into moderation.

The mod ego problem will exist as long as there's moderation, unfortunately.

It was present in the web even before it was expelled from heaven.

But it's not necessary to remove all moderation, just global identifiers of posts and many different "moderating projections" of the same collection of data can be enough to change the climate for most of the users. Not moderation itself really matters - the ability to dominate, to shut someone's mouth matters. If the only way you see a post is without such at all - then maybe it's too rude. If it's removed on the instance level on most of instances - then maybe it's something really nasty that shouldn't be seen. But if in some projection it's visible and in some not - then we've solved this particular problem.

In such a hypothetical system.

He should just adapt Careless People for film

Yeah I agree of sorts and people have the right to be offended so I prefer looser moderation over the absolute otherwise there's no difference between those groups that preach 'everything inclusive (except what we don't like)' and those who are clearly extreme and have their own biases. The irony of freespeech is you're going to hear things you don't agree with, and that's fine.

What I'm speaking about is that it should be impossible to do some things. If it's possible, they will be done, and there's nothing you can do about it.

To solve the problem of twiddled social media (and moderation used to assert dominance) we need a decentralized system of 90s Web reimagined, and Fediverse doesn't deliver it - if Facebook and Reddit are feudal states, then Fediverse is a confederation of smaller feudal entities.

A post, a person, a community, a reaction and a change (by moderator or by the user) should be global entities (with global identifiers, so that the object by id of #0000001a2b3c4d6e7f890 would be the same object today or 10 years later on every server storing it) replicated over a network of servers similarly to Usenet (and to an IRC network, but in an IRC network servers are trusted, so it's not a good example for a global system).

Really bad posts (or those by persons with history of posting such) should be banned on server level by everyone. The rest should be moderated by moderator reactions\changes of certain type.

Ideally, for pooling of resources and resilience, servers would be separated by types into storage nodes (I think the name says it, FTP servers can do the job, but no need to be limited by it), index nodes (scraping many storage nodes, giving out results in structured format fit for any user representation, say, as a sequence of posts in one community, or like a list of communities found by tag, or ... , and possibly being connected into one DHT for Kademlia-like search, since no single index node will have everything), and (like in torrents?) tracker nodes for these and for identities, I think torrent-like announce-retrieve service is enough - to return a list of storage nodes storing, say, a specified partition (subspace of identifiers of objects, to make looking for something at least possibly efficient), or return a list of index nodes, or return a bunch of certificates and keys for an identity (should be somehow cryptographically connected to the global identifier of a person). So when a storage node comes online, it announces itself to a bunch of such trackers, similarly with index nodes, similarly with a user. One can also have a NOSTR-like service for real-time notifications by users.

This way you'd have a global untrusted pooled infrastructure, allowing to replace many platforms. With common data, identities, services. Objects in storage and index services can be, say, in a format including a set of tags and then the body. So a specific application needing to show only data related to it would just search on index services and display only objects with tags of, say, "holo_ns:talk.bullshit.starwars" and "holo_t:post", like a sequence of posts with ability to comment, or maybe it would search objects with tags "holo_name:My 1999-like Star Wars holopage" and "holo_t:page" and display the links like search results in Google, and then clicking on that you'd see something presented like a webpage, except links would lead to global identifiers (or tag expressions interpreted by the particular application, who knows).

(An index service may return, say, an array of objects, each with identifier, tags, list of locations on storage nodes where it's found or even bittorrent magnet links, and a free description possibly ; then the user application can unify responses of a few such services to avoid repetitions, maybe sort them, represent them as needed, so on.)

The user applications for that common infrastructure can be different at the same time. Some like Facebook, some like ICQ, some like a web browser, some like a newsreader.

(Star Wars is not a random reference, my whole habit of imagining tech stuff is from trying to imagine a science fiction world of the future, so yeah, this may seem like passive dreaming and it is.)