Combating Loneliness in the Digital Age: Can New Social Platforms Help?

[YT-Main]

Hello Hacker News community,

I've spent a considerable amount of time grappling with a pervasive issue in our tech-centric society: the growing sense of loneliness and social isolation, particularly among younger adults. It's a paradox of our times – we're more connected online than ever before, yet many of us feel increasingly isolated.

The problem is more pronounced than we might realize. A 2020 study by Cigna threw up some alarming statistics: a significant portion of the population reports feeling a deep sense of loneliness. This isn't just about the quantity of interactions; it's the quality that's missing. Traditional social media, despite its potential to connect us, often ends up fostering a cycle of passive engagement, where meaningful interactions are few and far between something I experienced firsthand as a 20-year-old.

As a response to this challenge, I developed an app called Commune (getcommune.com). My goal was to create a platform that could counteract the superficial nature of typical social media interactions. Commune is designed to encourage real-life, face-to-face interactions through local events and interest-based communities. It's an attempt to merge the convenience of digital connectivity with the authenticity of in-person communication.

I'm sharing this here because I value the insightful discussions this community offers and I’m eager to hear your thoughts. Do you think an app like Commune can provide a meaningful solution to the loneliness epidemic? Is it possible for digital platforms to foster genuine connections and community building, or is this just an idealistic notion?

I’d love to hear your perspectives, especially if you’ve encountered similar challenges or have experiences with platforms attempting to bridge this digital-personal divide.

Looking forward to an engaging discussion!

[d--b]

Just thinking out loud:

I think that the sense of loneliness comes from asynchronous communication.

I have used IRC/discord for - oh god I am so old - 30 years. And it's a place where you _don't_ feel lonely. There is always someone to talk to, and in most places, people are really nice. Second Life also was like that. You can easily make actual friends there.

Asynchronous social communication feels very differently. I don't exactly know the reasons for this, people will say it's because FOMO, or over-curating their lives, or the algorithms, or whatever, but deeply I think it's just the fact that it isn't spontaneous.

[YT-Main → d--b]

That really makes a lot of sense and I guess that's why voice channels and things are so popular, I guess I did not communicate the platform as well as I could have because by social media I meant that it was more so a platform where you go to events first and then stay in contact with the people you meet there and only people that are into the same events as you.

It started as a sort of spontaneous event discovery tool because I remember when first moving to a new city discovering where to go and do stuff was quite daunting while everyone seemed to know each other already.

I don't want another platform where you are just glued to a phone all day because that just makes it worse.

[volkk → d--b]

that's a good point, IRC back when I played CS1.6 was so fun to use. And if i think back to as recently as when I actively used facebook (in like 2012), the fun part was actively chatting with people randomly over messenger that were online

[austin-cheney]

My solution to loneliness is marriage, church, Army Reserves, extended family, and so forth. I don’t do social media, as I would rather spend that time writing software, home automation, or playing games.

[idontwantthis]

I’m sorry, but literally go outside.

Join a team, join a gym, take a dance class, go to open mics, read a book in the park, go for a hike, says hi to people on the street, wear an interesting shirt to a bar.

If technology got us into this mess, it’s definitely not getting us out.

[thepablohansen]

I've thought a bit about this issue and technology's potential role in fixing it. A generalized app that promises community isn't going to reach mass adoption outside of an extremely viral built-in mechanism. Mostly because the required user density is inevitably so high (also why most new dating apps fail). If you (or any other entrepreneur) is focused on tackling this issue, I'd do it incrementally, by fixing a clear problem in one very specific segment of your potential audience's life, and expanding from there.

Look at an website like https://www.lu.ma which is in some sense accomplishing a similar mission.

[YT-Main → thepablohansen]

Thanks a lot for the feedback, I too was facing the same problem, as with a community-related app the key thing is getting to a critical mass to where it becomes useful.

Interesting, you said about a specific problem, can you expand on what you mean by that?

[atomicnature]

I often felt more connected to many books/authors/historical figures, than live people whom I interacted with on a day to day basis.

I realised company/loneliness is not merely about the physical, but it is about a sort of connection that happens at a subtler mental level.

Not sure whether others have had similar experiences.

Either way, if there is any truth to my experience, then you may have to think deeper about what is connection about and how to make it happen more often.

Another pattern I've noticed, natural communities emerging from hobbies/topics, such as in Discord and Youtube.

[YT-Main → atomicnature]

That is interesting, I too have had similar experiences like sometimes reading you think you know the characters better than real people.

Will do that for sure that's why these responses have been great, and I saw what you said too and that's why with the event first the thought is to get people to find others that have those same hobbies like sports or reading in person easier before talking to them online and so that they are local to you.

[RGamma]

Old topic, as old as smartphones. There have been several communities like yours posted over the years, but I haven't saved them and probably won't be able to find them anymore (another modern disease).

Teens are glued to the screens because of technologists dopamine-hacking their minds and later realize that it was all a waste of time (or they don't realize it and are just left in an uncomfortable, diffuse void). You can see these sorts of engagements happening live on mainstream social media en masse around the clock.

I'm find it unlikely to solve via yet another platform, because:

1. it will be unfocussed by default. The best virtual connections I made were in communities built around something else (e.g. specific (and obscure) games/topics). It got your foot in the door and served as a self-selection mechanism/created common ground from the get-go.

2. it will be inherently more tedious to engage in than in the passive consumer setting. Making interesting, lasting connections means getting to know social quirks and habits and all and may require lurking/revisiting for weeks/months depending on the setting, and most importantly mutually solidifying your new connection (i.e. it doesn't stay optional). It definitely cannot be bought by making donations to your favorite streamer. This may strongly depend on mutual intent, and I may be wildly off here.

I'm also convinced that we connect on a mental level. F2F interactions are sideshows to me at first and I'd rather not do it until I already have a good picture of you (voice is okay), but YMMV. For a very personal connection they become important eventually (but this level I haven't reached with anyone I met online because I didn't want to).

Good luck anyway. Everybody's different. I'm certainly glad I have most of my school (and even some kindergarten) friends still with me!

Also, the best way to solve this IMO would be to turn off all the parasitic platforms. Things would sort themselves out very quickly, but in this market you unfortunately cannot sell anti-consumption...

Also, your in-person angle seems something that one might do on their own, i.e. you'd look for local sports, arts clubs or the like (see 1.). Haven't used your platform, but these should probably be involved on there.

[YT-Main → RGamma]

Thanks for the great feedback. Yeah, you are right in that similar things have been tried and I would also think that with the more of these types of platforms that have failed, it makes it even harder.

I wanted to hear your thoughts on one thing maybe that is I made the platform F2F first with the hopes of trying to bypass some of the normal pitfalls. As you said in your last line the goal is you start off by going to one of the events like sports or art clubs or car meets and then join a community and the online aspects like posts are to strengthen ties with that community that you are trying to foster.

[thepablohansen → RGamma]

Agree on relatively strict self-selection being a necessary component for any thriving community. Also, most (dare I say all?) of my friendships have been formed not because I stumbled across an interesting person I decided to bond with, but because some external circumstance (living situation, hobbies) made it so that we were in close contact over an extended period of time.

[YT-Main → thepablohansen]

That is what I was thinking in that you can only join a community after going to an event with it, the goal is to not turn communities into another subreddit but a place where people are truly connecting.

That last line is also completely true for me and the thought is events would lead to an increased amount of those chance encounters especially because people are meeting over things that they like.

[RGamma → thepablohansen]

Good point; unfortunately I sort of missed clarifying that (it's implicit in the school/kindergarten part).

Forced, especially childhood, interaction may yet be the strongest connector of all.

In a way that's what one sets out to do by becoming involved in a club after all, although it's not really the same as it was...