Nothing lasts forever— not even on the internet.
December 3, 2019 1:51 AM Subscribe
A Better Internet Is Waiting for Us - My quest to imagine a different reality. SLNYT opinion piece featuring mefi's own jscalzi.
Didn't RTFA because of FP (Paywall), but does jscalzi speak of those halcyon days when the Internet was a place of love, wisdom, peace, and cats with bacon taped to them?
posted by dannyboybell at 4:18 AM on December 3, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by dannyboybell at 4:18 AM on December 3, 2019 [1 favorite]
From the article: Mr. Scalzi is fascinated by the unintended consequences that flow from new discoveries. When he thinks about tomorrow’s technology, he takes the perspectives of real, flawed people who will use it, not the idealized consumers in promotional videos.
He imagines a new wave of digital media companies that will serve the generations of people who have grown up online (soon, that will be most people) and already know that digital information can’t be trusted. They will care about who is giving them the news, where it comes from, and why it’s believable. “They will not be internet optimists in the way that the current generation of tech billionaires wants,” he said with a laugh. They will not, he explained, believe the hype about how every new app makes the world a better place: “They’ll be internet pessimists and realists.”
posted by ellieBOA at 4:43 AM on December 3, 2019 [6 favorites]
He imagines a new wave of digital media companies that will serve the generations of people who have grown up online (soon, that will be most people) and already know that digital information can’t be trusted. They will care about who is giving them the news, where it comes from, and why it’s believable. “They will not be internet optimists in the way that the current generation of tech billionaires wants,” he said with a laugh. They will not, he explained, believe the hype about how every new app makes the world a better place: “They’ll be internet pessimists and realists.”
posted by ellieBOA at 4:43 AM on December 3, 2019 [6 favorites]
I have a hard time imagining that the internet children will grow up to be exceptionally different than TV kids, where some indeed did learn to distrust the messenger, but even more did not and simply enjoyed the diversion it provided while being led down the river over and over again. It seems to me that people will be people and the technology they use simply distorts their realities in the ways they find preferable to their daily lives.
The internet might provide less direct gatekeeping, maybe, but the added choices of information conduits place a greater burden on individuals to select the best information and added burdens aren't a big selling point for many, and of course new gatekeepers will always seek to arise and control the flow of information in ways that best suit their own needs, so even that "benefit" is far from a sure thing. But, hey, what do I know, I'm a social pessimist I haven't found need to specialize in specific technologies yet.
posted by gusottertrout at 5:25 AM on December 3, 2019 [9 favorites]
The internet might provide less direct gatekeeping, maybe, but the added choices of information conduits place a greater burden on individuals to select the best information and added burdens aren't a big selling point for many, and of course new gatekeepers will always seek to arise and control the flow of information in ways that best suit their own needs, so even that "benefit" is far from a sure thing. But, hey, what do I know, I'm a social pessimist I haven't found need to specialize in specific technologies yet.
posted by gusottertrout at 5:25 AM on December 3, 2019 [9 favorites]
I found the first half of the article full of fluff – and didn’t bother to read the second half.
To get a better internet we need practical, specific improvements. Here are my suggestions.
1) Pay for what you want. Paid email, and a paid social network eliminates the need for ads, and all the surveillance and other bad side effects that come from a net which is based on advertising.
2) Since your personal data are valuable, we need to start talking about personal information from a civil rights perspective. It's your data, they belong to you, they can't be freely exploited as if they belonged to no one.
3) Couldn’t universities and national libraries cooperate and create a non-profit, reliable search engine that beats Google? Again: no need for ads and surveillance.
posted by Termite at 6:08 AM on December 3, 2019 [5 favorites]
To get a better internet we need practical, specific improvements. Here are my suggestions.
1) Pay for what you want. Paid email, and a paid social network eliminates the need for ads, and all the surveillance and other bad side effects that come from a net which is based on advertising.
2) Since your personal data are valuable, we need to start talking about personal information from a civil rights perspective. It's your data, they belong to you, they can't be freely exploited as if they belonged to no one.
3) Couldn’t universities and national libraries cooperate and create a non-profit, reliable search engine that beats Google? Again: no need for ads and surveillance.
posted by Termite at 6:08 AM on December 3, 2019 [5 favorites]
A Better Internet Is Waiting for Us
I hope so. Can't scroll or page down in Firefox on the mac to read the article, it just sticks at the top of the page.
posted by jabah at 6:38 AM on December 3, 2019 [6 favorites]
I hope so. Can't scroll or page down in Firefox on the mac to read the article, it just sticks at the top of the page.
posted by jabah at 6:38 AM on December 3, 2019 [6 favorites]
This article is by Annalee Newitz, a well known journalist and columnist. Metafilter's own, although just barely. Scalzi is quoted for a couple of paragraphs along with several other women and men.
Agreed the presentation is gratuitously difficult. I was able to read it on Firefox/Windows by using down arrow to scroll past the fanciness to the text.
posted by Nelson at 7:24 AM on December 3, 2019 [4 favorites]
Agreed the presentation is gratuitously difficult. I was able to read it on Firefox/Windows by using down arrow to scroll past the fanciness to the text.
posted by Nelson at 7:24 AM on December 3, 2019 [4 favorites]
Firefox also provides a "Reader" view that works wonders on too-clever Javascript formatting.
posted by tobascodagama at 8:03 AM on December 3, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by tobascodagama at 8:03 AM on December 3, 2019 [1 favorite]
She predicts that social media will be supplanted by immersive 3-D worlds where the opportunities for misinformation and con artistry will be immeasurable.
I thought we already did Second Life.
posted by doctornemo at 8:17 AM on December 3, 2019 [5 favorites]
I thought we already did Second Life.
posted by doctornemo at 8:17 AM on December 3, 2019 [5 favorites]
immersive 3-D worlds where the opportunities for misinformation and con artistry will be immeasurable.
well that's one way to describe literally just existing
(I'm paywalled so any greater context is lost on me)
posted by ToddBurson at 9:59 AM on December 3, 2019 [1 favorite]
well that's one way to describe literally just existing
(I'm paywalled so any greater context is lost on me)
posted by ToddBurson at 9:59 AM on December 3, 2019 [1 favorite]
this article went nowhere and said next to nothing of value. I kept waiting and waiting for something of significance to show up, but it was just a puff piece about what? Getting together in real life as a solution to Facebook's hierarchy?
I'm all for reading a substantive piece about life Post-Social Media but this sure wasn't it. Open to suggestions about more thoughtful and more in-depth research. Now get off my GD virtual lawn.
posted by Lipstick Thespian at 10:04 AM on December 3, 2019 [1 favorite]
I'm all for reading a substantive piece about life Post-Social Media but this sure wasn't it. Open to suggestions about more thoughtful and more in-depth research. Now get off my GD virtual lawn.
posted by Lipstick Thespian at 10:04 AM on December 3, 2019 [1 favorite]
I do like the idea of "slow media". The current trend is that communication should strive to be "frictionless", but friction (or damping in its more positive guise) is what stops systems from blowing up from amplification feedback loops.
What if a tweet took one second per follower to send-- if you have a hundred followers, that would be about two minutes, whereas if you have 100k that would be over a day. What if accounts were limited to say a thousand friends/followers-- so that social media would be more limited to genuine social (rather than highly asymmetric para-social) relationships.
posted by Pyry at 10:12 AM on December 3, 2019 [4 favorites]
What if a tweet took one second per follower to send-- if you have a hundred followers, that would be about two minutes, whereas if you have 100k that would be over a day. What if accounts were limited to say a thousand friends/followers-- so that social media would be more limited to genuine social (rather than highly asymmetric para-social) relationships.
posted by Pyry at 10:12 AM on December 3, 2019 [4 favorites]
None of this speculation is particularly reassuring.
posted by escape from the potato planet at 10:27 AM on December 3, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by escape from the potato planet at 10:27 AM on December 3, 2019 [1 favorite]
She predicts that social media will be supplanted by immersive 3-D worlds where the opportunities for misinformation and con artistry will be immeasurable.
I thought we already did Second Life.
I thought we already did VRML.
posted by symbioid at 10:56 AM on December 3, 2019 [5 favorites]
I thought we already did Second Life.
I thought we already did VRML.
posted by symbioid at 10:56 AM on December 3, 2019 [5 favorites]
That slowness would give human moderators or curators time to review content. They could quash dangerous conspiracy theories before they lead to harassment or worse. Or they could behave like old-fashioned newspaper editors, fact-checking content with the people posting it or making sure they have permission to post pictures of someone.
As fascinating as that idea is, why would anyone who's familiar with the internet think "every bit of content gets reviewed" leads to anything other than "the site owners' personal ideology controls all content on the site?" And a solidly related, "marginalized groups get shut down a lot."
we won’t solve the problem of social media until we change the outdated metaphors we use to think about it.
Twitter and Facebook executives often say that their services are modeled on a “public square.” But the public square is more like 1970s network television, where one person at a time addresses the masses. On social media, the “square” is more like millions of karaoke boxes running in parallel...
She's looking for tech solutions for social problems.
We won't solve "the problem of social media" until we encourage a culture of giving a damn about the strangers who are reading our words.
posted by ErisLordFreedom at 11:16 AM on December 3, 2019 [4 favorites]
As fascinating as that idea is, why would anyone who's familiar with the internet think "every bit of content gets reviewed" leads to anything other than "the site owners' personal ideology controls all content on the site?" And a solidly related, "marginalized groups get shut down a lot."
we won’t solve the problem of social media until we change the outdated metaphors we use to think about it.
Twitter and Facebook executives often say that their services are modeled on a “public square.” But the public square is more like 1970s network television, where one person at a time addresses the masses. On social media, the “square” is more like millions of karaoke boxes running in parallel...
She's looking for tech solutions for social problems.
We won't solve "the problem of social media" until we encourage a culture of giving a damn about the strangers who are reading our words.
posted by ErisLordFreedom at 11:16 AM on December 3, 2019 [4 favorites]
Pay for what you want. Paid email, and a paid social network eliminates the need for ads, and all the surveillance and other bad side effects that come from a net which is based on advertising.
You can make that stuff, and a few people will use it, but we're always gonna have the free-internet-supported-by-some-other-business-model that has most of the people on it. I mean, just look at all the kids playing Fortnite on cell phones. A crappy experience that most people can join is always gonna beat a good experience that lots of people can't join.
I think the only alternative that might work would be if the other business model is taxes.
posted by straight at 11:17 AM on December 3, 2019 [6 favorites]
You can make that stuff, and a few people will use it, but we're always gonna have the free-internet-supported-by-some-other-business-model that has most of the people on it. I mean, just look at all the kids playing Fortnite on cell phones. A crappy experience that most people can join is always gonna beat a good experience that lots of people can't join.
I think the only alternative that might work would be if the other business model is taxes.
posted by straight at 11:17 AM on December 3, 2019 [6 favorites]
1) Pay for what you want. Paid email, and a paid social network eliminates the need for ads,
Or to translate, "No poors allowed."
I wonder how many of these "improve the internet" solutions really boil down to "Make sure only my well-off white friends can use the internet"?
posted by happyroach at 12:17 PM on December 3, 2019 [5 favorites]
Or to translate, "No poors allowed."
I wonder how many of these "improve the internet" solutions really boil down to "Make sure only my well-off white friends can use the internet"?
posted by happyroach at 12:17 PM on December 3, 2019 [5 favorites]
I thought we already did VRML.
Anyone want my unused Microsoft "v-chat" t-shirt?
posted by maxwelton at 12:20 PM on December 3, 2019 [1 favorite]
Anyone want my unused Microsoft "v-chat" t-shirt?
posted by maxwelton at 12:20 PM on December 3, 2019 [1 favorite]
He imagines a new wave of digital media companies that will serve the generations of people who have grown up online (soon, that will be most people) and already know that digital information can’t be trusted. They will care about who is giving them the news, where it comes from, and why it’s believable.
This feels... incredibly naive to me? Like, it assumes that the meaning of truth itself isn't slowly disintegrating before our eyes, collapsing into hundreds of thousands of shards of people's own "essential truths" that basically allow them to believe whatever they want, as long as it supports their own conception of the world. The idea of a social network where everyone is blocked and you have to let people in by default doesn't really seem that different from how Twitter and Facebook started, and it also doesn't appear to address the common problems of echo chambers and confirmation bias that can lead people down the rabbit hole to "oops I became a white supremacist and only read The Daily Caller now."
posted by chrominance at 1:34 PM on December 3, 2019 [5 favorites]
This feels... incredibly naive to me? Like, it assumes that the meaning of truth itself isn't slowly disintegrating before our eyes, collapsing into hundreds of thousands of shards of people's own "essential truths" that basically allow them to believe whatever they want, as long as it supports their own conception of the world. The idea of a social network where everyone is blocked and you have to let people in by default doesn't really seem that different from how Twitter and Facebook started, and it also doesn't appear to address the common problems of echo chambers and confirmation bias that can lead people down the rabbit hole to "oops I became a white supremacist and only read The Daily Caller now."
posted by chrominance at 1:34 PM on December 3, 2019 [5 favorites]
The idea of a social network where everyone is blocked and you have to let people in by default doesn't really seem that different from how Twitter and Facebook started, and it also doesn't appear to address the common problems of echo chambers and confirmation bias that can lead people down the rabbit hole to "oops I became a white supremacist and only read The Daily Caller now."
The problem with the curation argument is that it misses the point, looking at online hate as being an issue of personal visibility rather than one of public harm. Once again, it winds up arguing that as long as you can't see it, the toxic waste ceases to be a problem, which is not how toxic waste works.
posted by NoxAeternum at 1:58 PM on December 3, 2019 [2 favorites]
The problem with the curation argument is that it misses the point, looking at online hate as being an issue of personal visibility rather than one of public harm. Once again, it winds up arguing that as long as you can't see it, the toxic waste ceases to be a problem, which is not how toxic waste works.
posted by NoxAeternum at 1:58 PM on December 3, 2019 [2 favorites]
“You may not develop artificial or undesired entities for use in Photon Emission Products (PEPs).”
“We retain 14 of your detachable drones to monitor, detect, reproduce and regularly update your virtual questions, software and datalogues.”
“You may not transmit a child virus, via Bluetooth, Group Connection Beans/Sweets, or bee Collision Marketing Eradia virus with your Student or Student Solutions Phone.”
The above from an art AI project that the editorialist consulted after she discovered scifi authors were boring about topics in the far far present. I think there are a few good points but all were muddied with future think. Are social networks "broken"? Is the telephone/TV/paper mail broken in some ways? Even the telegraph was broken in some ways. Facebook continues to be an excellent tool for many. If I get duped and loose a few thousand dollars or buy a crappy product that does not actually let me see through walls (or shirts) should we shut down the post office?
There is finally legislation to wipe out spam phone calls, took years, legislation is slow, and that IS A GOOD THING.
Twitter in all it's lameness may be a keeper if only due to being the best app while bored waiting in line.
When will there be a new thing that grabs mindshare and explodes big enough to leverage the network effect, Mastadon, hmm well enough said.
I finally had a long session with a really interesting cutting edge VR app, and was secretly screaming inside to take off the really annoying goggles. Love VR but it's much harder in physiological, hardware bandwidth, and other non-software issues than most in that industry will admit.
Good luck thinking about the future, I still, personally; want to fly in dirigibles.
posted by sammyo at 5:25 PM on December 3, 2019
“We retain 14 of your detachable drones to monitor, detect, reproduce and regularly update your virtual questions, software and datalogues.”
“You may not transmit a child virus, via Bluetooth, Group Connection Beans/Sweets, or bee Collision Marketing Eradia virus with your Student or Student Solutions Phone.”
The above from an art AI project that the editorialist consulted after she discovered scifi authors were boring about topics in the far far present. I think there are a few good points but all were muddied with future think. Are social networks "broken"? Is the telephone/TV/paper mail broken in some ways? Even the telegraph was broken in some ways. Facebook continues to be an excellent tool for many. If I get duped and loose a few thousand dollars or buy a crappy product that does not actually let me see through walls (or shirts) should we shut down the post office?
There is finally legislation to wipe out spam phone calls, took years, legislation is slow, and that IS A GOOD THING.
Twitter in all it's lameness may be a keeper if only due to being the best app while bored waiting in line.
When will there be a new thing that grabs mindshare and explodes big enough to leverage the network effect, Mastadon, hmm well enough said.
I finally had a long session with a really interesting cutting edge VR app, and was secretly screaming inside to take off the really annoying goggles. Love VR but it's much harder in physiological, hardware bandwidth, and other non-software issues than most in that industry will admit.
Good luck thinking about the future, I still, personally; want to fly in dirigibles.
posted by sammyo at 5:25 PM on December 3, 2019
I wonder how many of these "improve the internet" solutions really boil down to "Make sure only my well-off white friends can use the internet"?
I don't think it's this conscious. The end result may be as you say, but I suspect it's driven more by an unconsciously blinkered way of looking at things.
The same thing often struck with me people who were down on sampling. They saw it as non-creative types being lazy, stealing good ideas from proper artists, which was true some of the time. But I couldn't help noticing that the first crowd to really take the technology and run with it were from the hip-hop side of the tracks -- not exactly the rich part of town. Suddenly a sixteen year old kid from the mean streets of Baltimore or wherever could have John Bonham as his drummer. Talk about leveling the playing field.
So yeah, I'm immediately skeptical of most pay-to-play versions of re-imagining the interwebs. The future whatever it may be is forward, not back.
posted by philip-random at 6:17 PM on December 3, 2019 [2 favorites]
I don't think it's this conscious. The end result may be as you say, but I suspect it's driven more by an unconsciously blinkered way of looking at things.
The same thing often struck with me people who were down on sampling. They saw it as non-creative types being lazy, stealing good ideas from proper artists, which was true some of the time. But I couldn't help noticing that the first crowd to really take the technology and run with it were from the hip-hop side of the tracks -- not exactly the rich part of town. Suddenly a sixteen year old kid from the mean streets of Baltimore or wherever could have John Bonham as his drummer. Talk about leveling the playing field.
So yeah, I'm immediately skeptical of most pay-to-play versions of re-imagining the interwebs. The future whatever it may be is forward, not back.
posted by philip-random at 6:17 PM on December 3, 2019 [2 favorites]
I wonder how many of these "improve the internet" solutions really boil down to "Make sure only my well-off white friends can use the internet"?
So who is using the paid services that already exist - Spotify, Netflix, etc? Only your "well-off white friends"?
A paid alternative to Facebook would likely cost a few dollars a month, and it would be free from a lot of the things which make Facebook dysfunctional. No ads, no need for clickbait. The users would be paying customers, not raw material to be harvested and manipulated.
The entire idea of "free" services provided by data gathering global corporations needs to go. You can never build a society - and the internet is a society - out of a handful of ad funded global monopolies.
posted by Termite at 12:03 AM on December 4, 2019 [1 favorite]
So who is using the paid services that already exist - Spotify, Netflix, etc? Only your "well-off white friends"?
A paid alternative to Facebook would likely cost a few dollars a month, and it would be free from a lot of the things which make Facebook dysfunctional. No ads, no need for clickbait. The users would be paying customers, not raw material to be harvested and manipulated.
The entire idea of "free" services provided by data gathering global corporations needs to go. You can never build a society - and the internet is a society - out of a handful of ad funded global monopolies.
posted by Termite at 12:03 AM on December 4, 2019 [1 favorite]
A paid alternative to Facebook would likely cost a few dollars a month, and it would be free from a lot of the things which make Facebook dysfunctional.
But it already didn't work, and people went where the other people were. I'm sorry, I like the idea, and Estonia might be able to pull something like that off, but there's no way government facebook TM actually gets a user base in the "drown it in a bathtub" USA. For one thing have you used a govt. website? Healthcare.gov anyone?
posted by aspersioncast at 5:04 AM on December 4, 2019
But it already didn't work, and people went where the other people were. I'm sorry, I like the idea, and Estonia might be able to pull something like that off, but there's no way government facebook TM actually gets a user base in the "drown it in a bathtub" USA. For one thing have you used a govt. website? Healthcare.gov anyone?
posted by aspersioncast at 5:04 AM on December 4, 2019
Incidentally, Jimmy Wales is on the case?
[FPP]
posted by aspersioncast at 1:13 PM on December 4, 2019 [1 favorite]
[FPP]
posted by aspersioncast at 1:13 PM on December 4, 2019 [1 favorite]
I’m on mastodon and my feed is so full I can’t see all the posts anymore. I love it, and I love the community on it.
It's not, not for the “poors”. Several of my friends are on a 50-person instance that costs $31/month to run, so 62 cents per person per month. (That doesn’t mean they can only talk to 50 people. Like email, if you use gmail, you can exchange email with people not on gmail. But also like gmail, your server can choose to block abusive domains.).
The server owner wrote the best discussion I’ve ever read on where social media can and should go , arguing for small-scale decentralized networks. I can see no way around the moderation problem of large scale networks that cause ptsd in workers. But when you're running a server with 50 people you already know, you just have a chat with anyone being problematic.
The trolls tried to invade mastodon, but folks just blocked and de-federated, and now the gab server is the most insular one in the fediverse, which makes mastodon a poor recruitment platform.
If you think it failed, you probably didn't give it a chance. At this point I check Twitter maybe once a month, and it's always a horrible experience. I don't have a FB or instagram account anymore, mastodon is home.
posted by antinomia at 4:50 PM on December 4, 2019
It's not, not for the “poors”. Several of my friends are on a 50-person instance that costs $31/month to run, so 62 cents per person per month. (That doesn’t mean they can only talk to 50 people. Like email, if you use gmail, you can exchange email with people not on gmail. But also like gmail, your server can choose to block abusive domains.).
The server owner wrote the best discussion I’ve ever read on where social media can and should go , arguing for small-scale decentralized networks. I can see no way around the moderation problem of large scale networks that cause ptsd in workers. But when you're running a server with 50 people you already know, you just have a chat with anyone being problematic.
The trolls tried to invade mastodon, but folks just blocked and de-federated, and now the gab server is the most insular one in the fediverse, which makes mastodon a poor recruitment platform.
If you think it failed, you probably didn't give it a chance. At this point I check Twitter maybe once a month, and it's always a horrible experience. I don't have a FB or instagram account anymore, mastodon is home.
posted by antinomia at 4:50 PM on December 4, 2019
The trolls tried to invade mastodon, but folks just blocked and de-federated, and now the gab server is the most insular one in the fediverse, which makes mastodon a poor recruitment platform.
Blocking Gab is easy because it attracts assholes who act out, making the argument to not federate simple for most instances. But what about an instance that doesn't actively engage in open trolling - they just feel that "everyone should have a voice." That's a harder sell to block, and yet that can be even more poisonous. (Think of the difference between the approach of the John Birch Society vs. William Buckley.)
Federation is not a magical answer to social issues.
posted by NoxAeternum at 6:20 PM on December 4, 2019 [2 favorites]
Blocking Gab is easy because it attracts assholes who act out, making the argument to not federate simple for most instances. But what about an instance that doesn't actively engage in open trolling - they just feel that "everyone should have a voice." That's a harder sell to block, and yet that can be even more poisonous. (Think of the difference between the approach of the John Birch Society vs. William Buckley.)
Federation is not a magical answer to social issues.
posted by NoxAeternum at 6:20 PM on December 4, 2019 [2 favorites]
So who is using the paid services that already exist - Spotify, Netflix, etc? ... The entire idea of "free" services provided by data gathering global corporations needs to go.
If you think that paying for a service means you're not subjected to data gathering I have a bridge to sell you. The only difference between a free internet service and a paid one is the paid service has one extra revenue source.
posted by Mr.Encyclopedia at 6:33 PM on December 4, 2019 [2 favorites]
If you think that paying for a service means you're not subjected to data gathering I have a bridge to sell you. The only difference between a free internet service and a paid one is the paid service has one extra revenue source.
posted by Mr.Encyclopedia at 6:33 PM on December 4, 2019 [2 favorites]
But what about an instance that doesn't actively engage in open trolling - they just feel that "everyone should have a voice." [...] Federation is not a magical answer to social issues.
Federation means I stopped seeing that argument roughly one week after I first saw it. It first cropped up when several mastodon app developers announced that their apps would now block logins from abusive domains. That outed the free speech absolutists and after a week of blocking and defederating they were effectively gone.
I occasionally (maybe once every two months?) see the argument pop up in a thread. But it's a testament to how well defederation works that I don't see it more often than that, whereas on twitter I see it (plus abuse and bigotry) every time I view a comment thread.
posted by antinomia at 12:46 AM on December 5, 2019
Federation means I stopped seeing that argument roughly one week after I first saw it. It first cropped up when several mastodon app developers announced that their apps would now block logins from abusive domains. That outed the free speech absolutists and after a week of blocking and defederating they were effectively gone.
I occasionally (maybe once every two months?) see the argument pop up in a thread. But it's a testament to how well defederation works that I don't see it more often than that, whereas on twitter I see it (plus abuse and bigotry) every time I view a comment thread.
posted by antinomia at 12:46 AM on December 5, 2019
If you think it failed, you probably didn't give it a chance.
Failed is probably too strong, but how many actual users does Mastodon have now, not counting the Gab fork? Is it over 2 million yet?
posted by aspersioncast at 4:52 AM on December 5, 2019
Failed is probably too strong, but how many actual users does Mastodon have now, not counting the Gab fork? Is it over 2 million yet?
posted by aspersioncast at 4:52 AM on December 5, 2019
Federation means I stopped seeing that argument roughly one week after I first saw it. It first cropped up when several mastodon app developers announced that their apps would now block logins from abusive domains. That outed the free speech absolutists and after a week of blocking and defederating they were effectively gone.
This is, once again, the "I can't see the toxic waste, therefore it is no longer a problem" argument. And once again, this ignores how toxic waste works. Yes, you defederated - but did others? Because if only some of the network defederates, well...you still have them in the network.
This is why federation isn't the answer - it doesn't actually deal with the problem, but just allows portions of the network to wash their hands without looking to see if the actual issue - the people supporting allowing hate - has been removed.
posted by NoxAeternum at 6:28 AM on December 5, 2019
This is, once again, the "I can't see the toxic waste, therefore it is no longer a problem" argument. And once again, this ignores how toxic waste works. Yes, you defederated - but did others? Because if only some of the network defederates, well...you still have them in the network.
This is why federation isn't the answer - it doesn't actually deal with the problem, but just allows portions of the network to wash their hands without looking to see if the actual issue - the people supporting allowing hate - has been removed.
posted by NoxAeternum at 6:28 AM on December 5, 2019
The toxic waste is a problem when it can impose itself on its intended victims. When they can't flood people with death threats while all their friends look on and cheer, that takes away their power.
Can they still organize irl attacks on self-hosted platforms? Sure. That possibility will never go away, but they already choose side platforms for organizing violent attacks and use Twitter as a recruiting and abuse-magnification tool. Having them isolated removes the recruitment and abuse-magnification vectors.
I understand that we should not turn a blind eye to these types of people. And I fully agree with that, and that it's a problem that must be addressed. But engaging with them on social media is not an effective way to change their minds, it only helps them. In the same way that giving wood and matches to pyromaniacs would not be a good way to raise awareness that pyros need to be dealt with because look at all the fires they're starting. In both cases it's just a good way to hurt a lot of people.
posted by antinomia at 7:00 AM on December 5, 2019 [1 favorite]
Can they still organize irl attacks on self-hosted platforms? Sure. That possibility will never go away, but they already choose side platforms for organizing violent attacks and use Twitter as a recruiting and abuse-magnification tool. Having them isolated removes the recruitment and abuse-magnification vectors.
I understand that we should not turn a blind eye to these types of people. And I fully agree with that, and that it's a problem that must be addressed. But engaging with them on social media is not an effective way to change their minds, it only helps them. In the same way that giving wood and matches to pyromaniacs would not be a good way to raise awareness that pyros need to be dealt with because look at all the fires they're starting. In both cases it's just a good way to hurt a lot of people.
posted by antinomia at 7:00 AM on December 5, 2019 [1 favorite]
The toxic waste is a problem when it can impose itself on its intended victims. When they can't flood people with death threats while all their friends look on and cheer, that takes away their power.
Can they still organize irl attacks on self-hosted platforms? Sure. That possibility will never go away, but they already choose side platforms for organizing violent attacks and use Twitter as a recruiting and abuse-magnification tool. Having them isolated removes the recruitment and abuse-magnification vectors.
My point is that you have no idea if you are actually isolating them. Since the decision to federate or not is per node, all you can do is choose who you federate with, which means that if the other nodes choose to federate with a node that allows this behavior, you have no say in the matter. This is why federation isn't the answer - either it remains a decentralized decision to isolate where you can never tell if bad actors are isolated, or nodes will have to organize to be able to do so, in which case you're breaking the whole point of the federated structure.
posted by NoxAeternum at 7:32 AM on December 5, 2019
Can they still organize irl attacks on self-hosted platforms? Sure. That possibility will never go away, but they already choose side platforms for organizing violent attacks and use Twitter as a recruiting and abuse-magnification tool. Having them isolated removes the recruitment and abuse-magnification vectors.
My point is that you have no idea if you are actually isolating them. Since the decision to federate or not is per node, all you can do is choose who you federate with, which means that if the other nodes choose to federate with a node that allows this behavior, you have no say in the matter. This is why federation isn't the answer - either it remains a decentralized decision to isolate where you can never tell if bad actors are isolated, or nodes will have to organize to be able to do so, in which case you're breaking the whole point of the federated structure.
posted by NoxAeternum at 7:32 AM on December 5, 2019
« Older There once was a note, pure and easy... | I've got red in my ledger, I'd like to wipe it out Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by otherchaz at 2:53 AM on December 3, 2019 [3 favorites]