Fascinating! Definitely get the old school TV vibe when I'm watching it. I'm curious whether I'd find it more or less addictive/mindless than actual YouTube.
> They lack a network effect that makes them grow.
Isn't lack of fast growth a good thing? I swear, I left every social network in the two years after my mom joined.
At some point of a network popularity, it feels like there is an influx of people who want to talk to you but lack reading comprehension to read your answers.
Or maybe it's specifically that every "become popular fast" algorithm tries to repeatedly throw you to them.
Curating a corner of web for yourself takes time and effort, and if a social network popularity outpaces you, then you just can't do that.
Usefulness of proposed metrics aside, I can't wrap my head around proposed use cases there.
If you don't require proof of identification for voting then one local voter can vote limitless times.
If you do require it, why don't you trust it? Surely an identification is enough too choose if someone could vote or not.
It could be a nice addition to some social networks like Mastodon, I suppose, if people wouldn't care enough to create puppet accounts just to swing a vote, and false rejections/positives wouldn't mean losing or gaining something meaningful. Other then that, I have no idea.
The idea is to make things like petitions or demonstrations easier on a global scale and to also make voting data accessible for independent analysis, where further manipulation attempts can be identified and excluded.
My guess is that it's much cheaper to create 10000 fake accounts on facebook etc than to send 10000 requests from unique residential IPv4 addresses in a target country, which are also evenly distributed across Internet Service Providers and IP blocks to evade detection.
My main criticism is that wokeness when applied rationally could be a social lubricant.
Ban a few words and expressions at work, and suddenly your hiring pool is way bigger. People shouldn't be using words like that at work anyway.
The problem is that we didn't arrive at the new norm yet. Is banning compliments overreacting? Or is asking a coworker when she would wear skirt again, complimenting her beautiful knees, completely bonkers? Or maybe skirts are too distracting and we should ban them?
Do we draw a line on a n-word or on a latinx?
We had rules of politeness before, but they didn't work out. And so we are stumbling looking for rules that would work best for tolerating each other, and of course social studies and philosophy majors would suggest most of the rules – this phenomena is right up their alley. Most of everyone else is just testing those rules out and voting about the result (latinx isn't helping anyone, banning skirts scares women from seeking employment with you, etc.).
But the thing is – we need this rules. We need people who would never share a drink in a pub to work together without distracting each other too much.
So we have to endure testing for a bit longer, until the pool of stupid rules is cleaned and smart rules would be renamed from "woke" to "polite"
I recently joined social media again.
Turns out the group that shared my interest in my region was here.
So I made a new account and joined.
And the thing is, I am interested still. But I do miss a lot, because the group is chaotic and really important announcements are mixed in with memes and chatter, so it was a chore to waddle through that everyday, only to discover that nothing important was announced.
They kinda have to do it, I guess, because engagement metrics are no joke, and if you don't have them, then why are you here. But it really opened my eyes to how to social media completely failed on its premise when it decided that time spent on app would be a good metric.
Sometimes people just have nothing important to say other to announce, and them it should be okay to keep silent for a while, without being downranked.
And seeing how those, who always chatter even when they having nothing to say, will ultimately rise to the top on any platform that values time wasted, I left social media again.
People in comments say how it's better to have a few close friends then shallow connections, but social networks did allow us to meet someone that shared our more specific interests. My best friend I have met on a forum: our interests aligned and we spend hours talking about things we couldn't discuss with real friends before meeting up.
There is value in shallow connections when they are based on shared interests.
This value is lost on most social networks today.
IMO mastodon and blue sky are "good social networks" for people who want to connect over specific topics.
I cannot stress enough how the whole thing reads as a parody. Like modern Jerome K. Jerome. To be given such slack by your boss where they just allow you to do "whatever whenever", while not doing a lot, and then attribute your successful bout of work evading to your "work culture". And not only that, but learning lessons from it! Learning how you must work more and better, while gradually doing less and less!
I especially enjoy the little math&physics section, where he introduces few metaphors that are never explained or used.
I really hope that this a parody. It's kinda too sad if it's not.
I disagree on the point that art is propaganda, but I can't point out almost all art contains a propaganda of some kind.
Monet's Water Lilies influences common viewers to find a beauty and romanticism in simple nature.
Long exposure to Monet will in general make people gaze more appreciatively at trees every now and then.
Propaganda doesn't inherently mean bad or political. Healthy lifestyle propaganda is actually a good thing, for example (also the current healthy lifestyle propaganda seems poorly executed. I much prefer the 60s american, european and soviet versions of it).
I already preserved the single most important pdf I have: the postWW2 book listing all wild edible plants in the area I live in. With notations and pictures!
counterpoint: in any given bar interacting with a stranger means this stranger is interacting with you. If the stranger is tapping out, then you are free to go interact with other people.
1:1 interacters to interactee ratio.
In any given social network this ratio is very screwed. Most people have to became interacters at least a couple of times before they can become an interactee.
Hallucinationes hypnopompicae. I've had them too, and they do help falling asleep. I've had them for years, and then I got treated for anixiety and changed jobs, and – poof! – they were gone. Now I only experience them if I'm very tired or stressed.
I had two friends that also saw them, but they only saw them when they were very-very stressed and didn't get enough sleep.
I don't know if they are always a sign of stress, or if some people do see them naturally. My friend group is certainly screwed towards "it's a stress thing" category.
reply