Skip to content

Study: Social media probably can’t be fixed

Technology
150 94 20
  • This post did not contain any content.

    Social media will be fixed by - wait for it...

    Now.

    Done. Fixed it, you may thank me later.

    Yours,

    B-TR3E - the man who fixed social media

  • Can't?

    I'm on Lemmy, am I not?

    It CAN be fixed, the question if the will is there. We need to inform and teach more people

    Most people don't know about this experience, probably aren't looking for this experience, or would not know how to interact with it. I know it sounds crazy, but Reddit still confuses many people. Lemmy's a different ball of similar wax.

    They want the saccharine-coated dopamine-filled mass-produced low-effort meme cesspool that IG, TikTok, etc. all provide. They don't know they want more until they decide they're done with it and start to look. Until then, it's like showing hieroglyphs to an iguana.

  • I’m on Lemmy, am I not?

    It CAN be fixed, the question if the will is there.

    While and improvement Lemmy is far from perfect. The upvote-downvote sytem of reddit alone encourages group think and self censorship. It doesn't really help that much that we can go circlejerk in some other instance if we get hated on or banned by mods. We are still encouraged to keep in line to keep the bubble intact.

    After 20 years of living with it, I've decided I don't like the downvote. The upvote is fine.

    Reddit's founders, early on tried to encourage people to treat the downvote as moderation. It was meant to mean that a thing doesn't belong on reddit and people shouldn't see it. Of course that quickly became mere dislike or disagreement.

    I'd prefer an approach that requires some input about what's wrong with a post in order to reduce its prominence; a restricted list of options as in Slashdot's moderation would be sufficient, I think. I'm not sure whether this should necessarily require also making a report to a more powerful admin/moderator, but I lean toward making that optional in most communities.

  • Can't?

    I'm on Lemmy, am I not?

    It CAN be fixed, the question if the will is there. We need to inform and teach more people

    the problem is algorithms. during the whole bluesky promo all over lemmy while everyone was shitting on mastodon. the only thing that's broken is algorithms, and once you throw them out social media is immediately fixed - but of course the primary argument of mastodon vs bluesky was that mastodon requires you to curate your content (like joining a sub on reddit to see it on your front page stream, before algorithms fucked that site, and the thing is people LOVED old reddit so i fail to see how this is bad and doesn't work, but hey, all of lemmy said so, so who am i to blame) whereas bluesky being a relaunch of twitter and literally curating content for you no matter if you actually want to see it or not but for most people reactionary content is the only content they happily interact with anyway so algorithms makes a lot of sense for them because they feel they are engaging more with the site despite the pointless empty engagement they are doing instead of interacting with real users and real content on pages where you have to actively curate your content instead of being fed the lowest hanging fruit.

    / rant off

  • There will be a big curtaining of Apple, Microsoft, Google and Adobe if Facebook, TikTok and Twitter (and YouTube) have their algorithmic feeds outlawed.

    It would probably cause the AI bubble to burst too so our OSs, Applications and Search Engines (and Government) would become usable again.

    who will pay our representatives to push this through?

  • “Fixing” social media is like “fixing” capitalism. Any manmade system can be changed, destroyed, or rebuilt. It’s not an impossible task but will require a fundamental shift in the way we see/talk to/value each other as people.

    The one thing I know for sure is that social media won’t ever improve if we all accept the narrative that it can’t be improved.

    We live in capitalism. Its power seems inescapable. So did the divine right of kings. Any human power can be resisted and changed by human beings. Resistance and change often begin in art, and very often in our art, the art of words.

    -Ursula K Le Guin

    Particularly apt given that many of the biggest problems with social media are problems of capitalism. Social media platforms have found it most profitable to monetize conflict and division, the low self-esteem of teenagers, lies and misinformation, envy over the curated simulacrum of a life presented by a parasocial figure.

    These things drive engagement. Engagement drives clicks. Clicks drive ad revenue. Revenue pleases shareholders. And all that feeds back into a system that trades negativity in the real world for positivity on a balance sheet.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    Of course -corporate- social media can't be fixed ... it already works exactly they way they want it to...

  • “Fixing” social media is like “fixing” capitalism. Any manmade system can be changed, destroyed, or rebuilt. It’s not an impossible task but will require a fundamental shift in the way we see/talk to/value each other as people.

    The one thing I know for sure is that social media won’t ever improve if we all accept the narrative that it can’t be improved.

    We live in capitalism. Its power seems inescapable. So did the divine right of kings. Any human power can be resisted and changed by human beings. Resistance and change often begin in art, and very often in our art, the art of words.

    -Ursula K Le Guin

    This is spot on. The issue with any system is that people don’t pay attention to the incentives.

    When a surgeon earns more if he does more surgeries with no downside, most surgeons in that system will obviously push for surgeries that aren’t necessary. How to balance incentives should be the main focus on any system that we’re part of.

    You can pretty much understand someone else’s behavior by looking at what they’re gaining or what problem they’re avoiding by doing what they’re doing.

  • Seriously, read her books. I looooove „The Dispossessed“

    LeGuin is a treasure.

  • It's almost like the problem isn't social media, but the algorithms that put content in front of your eyeballs to keep your engagement in order to monetize you. Like a casino.

    Exactly, the one big issue with the modern world is the algorithms pushing for engagement as the only important metric.

  • All those platforms work the same way. In the end it's all about the same social dynamics, about control. "We are the alternative to all the shitty peer groups out there! Join us!" is one of the oldest tricks in the playbook. There is no alternative. Because it's all based on human nature.

    Reddit certainly had its problems but was actually pretty good for the ~15 years before it started getting enshittified more and more to try to extract value.

  • Facebook was pretty boring before they tried to make money. Still ick, but mostly just people posting pictures of activities with family or friends.

  • After 20 years of living with it, I've decided I don't like the downvote. The upvote is fine.

    Reddit's founders, early on tried to encourage people to treat the downvote as moderation. It was meant to mean that a thing doesn't belong on reddit and people shouldn't see it. Of course that quickly became mere dislike or disagreement.

    I'd prefer an approach that requires some input about what's wrong with a post in order to reduce its prominence; a restricted list of options as in Slashdot's moderation would be sufficient, I think. I'm not sure whether this should necessarily require also making a report to a more powerful admin/moderator, but I lean toward making that optional in most communities.

    I’d prefer an approach that requires some input about what’s wrong with a post in order to reduce its prominence

    A lot of the time, I downvote troll content that should not be engaged with. Like, not technically against the rules, but definitely someone who is not posting in good faith. If I responded to the post, I'd be contributing to the problem.

  • I’d prefer an approach that requires some input about what’s wrong with a post in order to reduce its prominence

    A lot of the time, I downvote troll content that should not be engaged with. Like, not technically against the rules, but definitely someone who is not posting in good faith. If I responded to the post, I'd be contributing to the problem.

    I don't mean replying, but selecting from a menu of possible reasons to downrank a post. Slashdot's moderation system that I mentioned earlier has (or had - haven't looked there in a while) "troll" as one of the categories.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    I think just going back to internet forums circa early 2000s is probably a better way to engage honestly. They're still around, just not as "smartphone friendly" and doomscroll-enabled, due to the format.

    I'm talking stuff like SomethingAwful, GaiaOnline, Fark, Newgrounds forum, GlockTalk, Slashdot, vBulletin etc.

    These types of forums allowed you to discuss timely issues and news if you wanted. You could go a thousand miles deep on some bizarre subculture or stick to general discussion. They also had protomeme culture before that was a thing - aka "embedded image macros".

  • I think just going back to internet forums circa early 2000s is probably a better way to engage honestly. They're still around, just not as "smartphone friendly" and doomscroll-enabled, due to the format.

    I'm talking stuff like SomethingAwful, GaiaOnline, Fark, Newgrounds forum, GlockTalk, Slashdot, vBulletin etc.

    These types of forums allowed you to discuss timely issues and news if you wanted. You could go a thousand miles deep on some bizarre subculture or stick to general discussion. They also had protomeme culture before that was a thing - aka "embedded image macros".

    Anything that is topic focussed rather than following individuals is a big difference, and then take away the engagement algorithm and it’s much better.

  • Social media will be fixed by - wait for it...

    Now.

    Done. Fixed it, you may thank me later.

    Yours,

    B-TR3E - the man who fixed social media

    Hi it's still broken on my machine. I've tried turning it off and on again

  • This post did not contain any content.

    Because how to use it is baked into what it is. Like many big tech products, it’s not just a tool but also a philosophy. To use it is also to see the world through its (digital) eyes.

  • I think just going back to internet forums circa early 2000s is probably a better way to engage honestly. They're still around, just not as "smartphone friendly" and doomscroll-enabled, due to the format.

    I'm talking stuff like SomethingAwful, GaiaOnline, Fark, Newgrounds forum, GlockTalk, Slashdot, vBulletin etc.

    These types of forums allowed you to discuss timely issues and news if you wanted. You could go a thousand miles deep on some bizarre subculture or stick to general discussion. They also had protomeme culture before that was a thing - aka "embedded image macros".

    That's what I've been hoping for with Reddit and now Lemmy. I don't care about individuals, I care about topic based discussion.

    My problem with forums is they are more like a club, where you get loss of off-topic discussion by people who happen to share an interest. I don't care what tech nerds think about medicine on a tech nerd forum, and joining dozens of forums to get the right discussion is a huge pain.

    Forums are cool, and I use a few, but I really want a place that connects different subjects.

  • Although I love Lemmy, I find it will be hard to recommend a normal young person to hop on Lemmy, Mastodon, Kbin, Misskey, Iceshrimp, etc. Most people on here talk about tech and politics. If you scroll through the main feed, you won't get stuff from other communities unless you seek it out.

    Not diverse enough, but once it gets diverse, it will probably enshitify and make the community mainstream garbage. Then we're back to square one with people making clickbait posts and attention seeking people.

  • 2 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    6 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 923 Stimmen
    120 Beiträge
    302 Aufrufe
    A
    That's fair, I definitely took longer than that but I'm far from experienced in all this. Still, it was worth the effort in the end.
  • A leap toward lighter, sleeker mixed reality displays

    Technology technology
    9
    1
    41 Stimmen
    9 Beiträge
    59 Aufrufe
    E
    I actually think this is the only way forward past phones. All the AI assistant tools, voice controlled speakers, foldable devices don't really change how we use 99% of the software. VR/AR, when (if?) finally done right will change that.
  • Microsoft C++ static analysis tool bolsters warning suppressions

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    17 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    12 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Hitting the High Notes (2005)

    Technology technology
    2
    1
    12 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    34 Aufrufe
    T
    I always loved reading Joel's stuff, clear & well thought out. It was especially exciting when they were building Stack Overflow, but that's kinda got buried now. Things come & things go...
  • America's largest power grid is struggling to meet demand from AI

    Technology technology
    2
    1
    37 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    37 Aufrufe
    A
    Let's add solar!.... People never ask questions at night when they're sleeping. Sounds pretty ideal to me.
  • 4 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    19 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Why Japan's animation industry has embraced AI

    Technology technology
    12
    1
    1 Stimmen
    12 Beiträge
    123 Aufrufe
    R
    The genre itself has become neutered, too. A lot of anime series have the usual "anime elements" and a couple custom ideas. And similar style, too glossy for my taste. OK, what I think is old and boring libertarian stuff, I'll still spell it out. The reason people are having such problems is because groups and businesses are de facto legally enshrined in their fields, it's almost like feudal Europe's system of privileges and treaties. At some point I thought this is good, I hope no evil god decided to fulfill my wish. There's no movement, and a faction (like Disney with Star Wars) that buys a place (a brand) can make any garbage, and people will still try to find the depth in it and justify it (that complaint has been made about Star Wars prequels, but no, they are full of garbage AND have consistent arcs, goals and ideas, which is why they revitalized the Expanded Universe for almost a decade, despite Lucas-<companies> having sort of an internal social collapse in year 2005 right after Revenge of the Sith being premiered ; I love the prequels, despite all the pretense and cringe, but their verbal parts are almost fillers, their cinematographic language and matching music are flawless, the dialogue just disrupts it all while not adding much, - I think Lucas should have been more decisive, a bit like Tartakovsky with the Clone Wars cartoon, just more serious, because non-verbal doesn't equal stupid). OK, my thought wandered away. Why were the legal means they use to keep such positions created? To make the economy nicer to the majority, to writers, to actors, to producers. Do they still fulfill that role? When keeping monopolies, even producing garbage or, lately, AI slop, - no. Do we know a solution? Not yet, because pressing for deregulation means the opponent doing a judo movement and using that energy for deregulating the way everything becomes worse. Is that solution in minimizing and rebuilding the system? I believe still yes, nothing is perfect, so everything should be easy to quickly replace, because errors and mistakes plaguing future generations will inevitably continue to be made. The laws of the 60s were simple enough for that in most countries. The current laws are not. So the general direction to be taken is still libertarian. Is this text useful? Of course not. I just think that in the feudal Europe metaphor I'd want to be a Hussite or a Cossack or at worst a Venetian trader.