this post was submitted on 26 Oct 2024
1308 points (97.8% liked)
Technology
59599 readers
3455 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
ITT: People in their mid-twenties or later, who feel superior to those that like one form of media over their preferred media.
Elitism aside, I don't really see what federation solves here. What benefits does federation offer the user? How does the recommendation algorithm give users what they want? How will a decentralised platform perform the kind of centralised events a platform like TikTok is known for?
You're just waving away an important fact, which is that shorts and their equivalents are notoriously known for killing attention spans and disrupting the management of dopamine in the brain, causing depression in particular.
We are no longer simply in the traditional custom of the elderly who despise the activities of the younger generations, we are talking about health.
While true, how is that any different to the arguments that were used for TV? Additionally, Lemmy is a social network in the same way that Reddit is. Is this not also dangerous?
As has been the recommendation for practically everything for the four decades I've been on this earth, moderation is key. Instead of hating new media, either regulate it (if the evidence is truly that great) or treat it with healthy moderation.
Let's be blunt here. Most of the people in this thread aren't worried about health. They don't like short-form video/foreign-owned companies/things they didn't grow up with, and their elitism is getting the better of them instead of them letting people like what they want to like.
I made a rule that i only do social media on desktop pc. Phone is only for emails and rss feeds. Seems to work
Television is bad because it is a passive activity, but it is less harmful than the continuous ingestion of micro-videos. But I don't see what it has to do here.
What's the connection? I didn't mention Reddit.
This would be to ignore the particularly addictive nature of this kind of content. It would be like comparing apples to Snickers: both are sweet, yes, but one is much more problematic.
That could be a point, but I'm pretty sure that if you ask anybody, the main reason given would be that it makes you stupid. But I can agree that this opinion would not necessarily be based on anything other than the eternal contempt for novelty as video games or manga were, for example, before they became popular.
A distributed service is much less vulnerable to being bought up by a single narcissistic billionaire who can ruin the online experience of millions of people at once.
A distributed service like Lemmy is spread out over 600 Instances in countries all over the world. If someone buys the most popular Lemmy Instance and wrecks it, those users can simply move to the same communities on the second or third or fourth most popular Instance and the original Instance will wither and die. This also works for communities with power tripping moderators. You can quickly find out through a search which community is the "real" one by the number of subscribers it has.
But again, what tangible benefit does that have for the average user? They don't give a fuck about billionaire ownership, moderation, or where an "instance" or server is located.
Well, you should care about it because that's how online communities get ruined. Case in point: Twitter has become a propaganda tool for an apartheid-loving fascist since he bought it.
Why should a user care about the health of an online community? To them it should "just work".
(I'm being purposely facetious here, because the average person really doesn't care about this shit. When Twitter no longer serves its purpose to them they just leave and go to the next place)
Why should a person who goes to the park care about the park?
If people are dumping trash everywhere and all the plants and animals are dying, I assume you wouldn't like to spend much time there anymore.
Sure another park might be opened, but constantly changing parks isn't what you want to do long term. If someone buys up the basketball court and turns it into a cesspool of hate, you can unsubscribe from that court and remove it from your park. Adding another one that is nicer, without completely going to a new park.
You have more control over your front-page content. If you don't want to get a particular feed, you unsubscribe from it.
Federation can solve the danger zone content for you, how about a federation network with just kids content, other with more adult ones, etc to the just nsfw isolated from each others?
That's...actually a really good use case for something like this. I'd argue that a recommendation algorithm that tailors to the best content a given federated service can provide for their use-case is probably a better source than what you'd get from a single source of truth that could give you everything and nothing.
Moderation
You may see shorts in lemmy in the near future because of that.
Authwalls, data sovereignty, self controlled open source algorithms for finding content without manipulation by corporations, etc
All true, but what explicit problem do they solve for the average user?
Authwalls are an issue for everyone because everyone doesn't have an account unless they create one.
I don't think they'll be able to do any type of direct competition for TikTok with a lack of advertising and payments You're not going to draw quality creators. Decentralized algorithm sounds like a nightmare to manage.
However one place they will have some advantage is censorship. Anything that's not explicitly illegal Will be a hell of a lot harder to stamp out. Moderation will probably be very light.
I don't watch the TikToks. I get my information from a source I know I can trust.
I might argue that the ability to curate your own content, rather than being plugged into the Main Feed that just front-loads whatever the highest bidder wants shoved into your eyeballs, is a relative improvement to the current Facebook/Google ad-supported algorithm model.
But in the end, it just gives more weight to advertisers and influencers. You have to lure people into subscribing (like old school newspapers/radio/TV had to do) rather than buying visual real estate directly in their eye-line. You're still going to have InfoWars and Drudge Report and Joe Rogan tier content. Its just something you're going to be baited into opting into rather than struggling to opt out of.
But it will keep you using the Fediverse as a model longer, because you feel like you've got a degree of control (I don't have to listen to Rogan if I don't want to). Whereas services like YouTube and Facebook are forcing their users to choose between getting injected with the cheapest, hackeyest swill or to switching providers.
the benefit i can see is that instead of having to share out to other social media, you can just see it in any fediverse account you have thanks to activity pub which eliminates one of the barriers to being viral.
that said i don't think it will get mainstream appeal.