Shoq 🌿Dec 11, 2022

What drove the internet in the 90s and 00s was that it was so cool to be doing good shit with it. Social media was like a giant manure dump all over that culture. We've never recovered.

The Fediverse and the death of Twitter promise a rebirth of that culture, if we don't let the cool kids and a lazy press bury the public in vapid bullshit again.

We wasted 16 goddamn years enduring Facebook and Twitter. In the end, they were both toxic and regressive. Can we please not go back there? Please?

Show threadDavid Wilson-BurnsDec 11, 2022
@shoq let’s consider how social media got that way: ad-funded business model. Rather than paying for a service that takes billions (or whatever) to run with a monthly subscription, we let the ads pay for it….then bitched about it. With the ads came the data and then the AI that effed the world. The only way this works is our financial support. It’s crowdfunded, and we’re the crowd. It will be worth a donation once in awhile…like for public radio, pbs, or Wikipedia.
Show threadAdam Elman
@davidwburns @shoq The thing is - most people don’t care all that much about the ads, which is why Facebook, Twitter, and for that matter broadcast TV/radio and newspapers have always functioned the way they have. IMHO, there’s absolutely no reason why the Fediverse couldn’t have ad-supported instances alongside crowdsourced ones - if I want to use a site that is highly reliable and has fantastic moderation that occasionally shows me an ad, that’s my choice.
Dec 12, 2022 at 8:26pmWeb
Show threadAdam ElmanDec 12, 2022
@davidwburns @shoq The knee-jerk anti-capitalism I often see from old-school Fediverse folks reminds me a lot of the knee-jerk anti-capitalism I saw on USENET and elsewhere on the early Internet in the early 90’s, which didn’t stop anything. I think it’s counter-productive to what we really need to focus on, which is having a “public square” that can’t come under the control of a crazy/evil (take your pick, or take both) billionaire.
Show threadDavid Wilson-BurnsDec 12, 2022
@aelman @shoq choice being the key. People act like they didn’t have a choice but to dump their whole lives into an ad machine. Given the choice of a monthly fee for ad free Facebook I would take, not because ads are annoying but because I don’t want to give FB the need to collect my data and use it to manipulate my experience.
Show threadAdam ElmanDec 12, 2022
@davidwburns @shoq I think we all have a choice, and for millions and millions of us, the down side of the ads has been *well* worth the benefit we get from engaging on FB/Twitter without having to spend any money at all. You can certainly argue that much of that is based on a lack of awareness of the true down sides both on a personal and societal level - which is why we need regulation. But even fully informed people may make a rational choice that ads are ok.
Show threadAdam ElmanDec 12, 2022
@davidwburns @shoq My point is that the fundamental architecture of the Fediverse makes it a lot easier to make a rational choice, because the choice isn’t between “give up my data” and “completely lose access to my community”.
Show threadAdam ElmanDec 12, 2022
@davidwburns @shoq as another example - I use Gmail for my personal mail, despite the fact that I know Google is using data in my email to target me with ads, because a) I trust that they’re not maliciously manipulating me, and b) it works well and fast and doesn’t cost me money. You, on the other hand, can choose to get an account on a private, non-ad-supported mail server, or even set up your own, and we can still mail each other.
Show threadShoq 🌿Dec 12, 2022

@aelman @davidwburns

So long as ads are supporting some other value, I have never objected to them. Ads or subscriptions should not be the determinant. Only value. If someone wants to use a commercial instance because they get better performance, or different tools, great. Just don't impede the free service everyone else uses for free and everyone wins.

Show threadDavid Wilson-BurnsDec 13, 2022
@shoq @aelman the harm is that FB , for example, gives you want it thinks you need to keep the app in front of you. If you click on a Big Foot link, FB might say hmmmm, let’s give him another far out post…maybe a conspiracy theory. click on that, next thing you know the world through FB looks a lot different. You still thinking reality is diverging. It doesn’t sync up with the news….so THAT must be a conspiracy too!
Show threadAdam ElmanDec 13, 2022

@davidwburns @shoq yeah, no disagreement from me on that. FB has been irresponsible in addressing the impact of their design decisions on society. I honestly believe they’re trying to do better (as was pre-Elon Twitter) but it takes time and they’ve already done massive damage.

I think there are ways to do a responsible ad-based social media business, but the existing ones are hardly examples.

Show threadDavid Wilson-BurnsDec 13, 2022
@aelman @shoq yes. I have hope yet for FB.