RE: https://social.coop/@scottjenson/116352522288234148
shameful junk
this is commercial UX posturing 101 that amounts to the complaint that generative AI positivity does not get engagement on mastodon.
"community", "inclusivity", "bring more voices", "marginalised communities"
the problem?
Mastodon lacks an algorithmic feed that boosts AI positivity posts
"The Mastodon team is finally getting some traction" is an important phrase to consider.
Mastodon has traction. It is an internet cockroach that will out last any other current social network.
But that kind of traction is not recognised in this context because this is not a good faith post made by a serious person
Claiming the argument is not made in good faith by a serious person seems to miss the mark pretty badly. Scott Jenson does not match this description, and we should do better.
Similarly, @carnage4life does not appear to be some huge AI evangelist. [Edit: It seems I'm probably wrong here]
To me the story here is that Mastodon gives less voice to central nodes in the network, instead distributing the conversation. That may indeed be bad for journalists, but maybe good for us.
@fasterandworse
@sab @fasterandworse here’s dare, many years ago https://techcrunch.com/2008/10/12/the-prickly-prince-strikes-again/
the guy is in fact currently a huge AI evangelist (it’s really weird to claim otherwise) with a long history of bad faith
Dare Obasanjo, a Microsoft employee and the son of a former President of Nigeria, doesn't like it when people disagree with him. I found that out in 2007 when Obasanjo vandalized the TechCrunch Wikipedia page in response to a post we wrote that was mildly critical of Microsoft's hiring of a blogger to edit certain Wikipedia entries relating to Open Office standards. His actions as an individual and as a representative of Microsoft were outrageous. Today he writes a post accusing us of "encouraging...garbage" on TechCrunch because we've reported on the market fall over the last week, pointing to three examples (out of over 100 posts last week) where we chronicle the fall of Yahoo and Google stock, and the Seesmic layoffs. A number of other blogs jumped on the bandwagon, calling for the negativity to stop (obviously none of these writers read TechCrunch this last week). "The last thing we need is popular blogs AND the mass media spreading despair and schadenfreude at a time like this," he says.
@zzt @sab @fasterandworse also it's really quite valuable to highlight the political dynasty, which *directly* implies a certain taught-exposure around communications and the employment of power dynamics
to blindly argue otherwise is silly, to argue otherwise while this is plainly observable is outright foolish
Yeah, I based my judgment on the posts I have seen doing well on fedi as well as a quick screening of the profile mostly going after MTG. Clearly I was wrong here.
I still think @scottjenson is worth taking seriously, though he (as me) seemingly failed to be a good judge of character in this case. Shit happens without it being evidence of bad faith. @froztbyte @zzt @fasterandworse
@fasterandworse @sab @froztbyte @zzt Thanks for that. I think this boils down to a reasonable goal "More inclusivity" that was poorly stated. I do NOT equate AI bros and Black Twitter but I can see how people might make that connection. That's my fault.
I also don't endorse AI bros, I used them as a foil but again people assumed I was endorsing them.
I want to be VERY clear that this mess is my fault. I made a complex point very sloppily and I shouldn't be surprised people are jumping down my throat
> I shouldn't be surprised people are jumping down my throat
Speaking of problems with social media that Mastodon has yet to solve. :)
@scottjenson @fasterandworse @froztbyte @zzt
@sab @scottjenson @fasterandworse @zzt can't solve social problems in technological means
scale is lossy
(rapid iteration) communications are preferentially slanted to imprecise takes
these two things voltron together in a fairly nasty way at times
@sab @scottjenson @fasterandworse @froztbyte @zzt
It even happens with email.
@sab @scottjenson @zzt @fasterandworse I don't really have much to say outside of: much like trading, past performance is not indicative of future outcomes
e, to expand on this lightly: "having done good shit in $x" is not a direct, guaranteed, transitive success path to "will do good in $y"
it might raise the likelihood, but that's all
in _this_ case, I don't think scott's posts have been worth taking seriously at all
@sab @fasterandworse
> That is indeed bad for journalists, but maybe good for us.
anecdotally, this doesn't match my observations at all. there's a number of journalists in the fedi that post here _intentionally_, and they have *extremely* good engagement and following. their output frequently reverbs through various wings of the fedi (you can see this propagate by day)
there's a separate argument about discoverability, but it is a distinctly different problem
also: lol @ wrong about Dare
Yeah, I was running out of characters to express my point properly there. It's clearly bad for influencers and those who thrive on algorithmic social media, including a lot of what journalism has become. I think it's good for good investigative journalists who don't post a lot, but who produce quality content when they do.
I think it's more fair to say that algorithmic social media has been bad for journalism, but those who thrived there will have to reinvent here.
@froztbyte @fasterandworse
@sab @fasterandworse ye, I getcha
the fedi isn't perfect (and the jank is a feature), but there's certainly some stuff we definitely can do better once we figure out how
the nice thing is that I think it is _likely_ to get figured out here, even tho I dunno when that might be
I guess like me he was oblivious to the broader agenda of this poster. The whole debate looks very different before and after learning more about @carnage4life.
I maintain that it's made in good faith, but that of course does not mean that it's a good point.
@fasterandworse
@fasterandworse I believe this reply is a misunderstanding of the quoted sentence. The “traction” refers to the development process, AFAIK both in terms of team size (recent hires) and process optimization (doing more with less), not platform market share.
My feeling matches Scott's that feature development has sped up considerably. I recommend @mergebot for a finger on the pulse.
Scott's larger point is these improvements haven't yet impacted usage numbers visibly, which is another matter.
@fasterandworse "this is not a good faith post made by a serious person"
I worked with Scott at Symbian at the turn of the century. The issue is not so much that you're wrong (oh, you are) but that you seemingly believe that you're bringing something of value to others by publishing your ignorance.
He's one of the top most UX experts in tech for the last few decades, and as he has now retired he freely offers his time helping with UX in open source. He has no commercial motivations whatsoever, he's driven by the fact (and yes, it's a fact) that many open source projects don't have access to competent UX resources while commerical companies do.
He's not some AI proponent - he's one of the persons actively working with the Mastodon team on making our UX better.
You'll find his name here: https://joinmastodon.org/about
@troed @fasterandworse okay okay, that's nice, much previous credential very awe! I, too, am capable of looking up someone's past! (and in fact I did)
but again I ask you: can you argue _why_?
you make a substantive claim that someone else is wrong, with no argument as to why other than "bc he said so!", a naked appeal to (perceived) authority
if you want to argue a point, *argue a point*. bring your points, I'll bring the snacks!
@troed @fasterandworse I mean if you need the pompoms instead of snacks, just say: I'm sure we can scrounge some up for you to fan-stan from the sidelines
still not a very useful argument tho
Sorry, I was unaware that you didn't understand English. I can't help you then.
@troed @fasterandworse aww babby made a darvo!
but it's okay, I took a look around your public profile too (wow, imagine me doing that! implausible) and I don't think it's worth engaging with you in any seriousness any further
hope you have a good day!
The facts answering the question were in the post I had already made. The reply was not made in good faith, which can be seen from other posts as well.
I don't debate trolls. Too old for that shit.
@troed @froztbyte @fasterandworse the "facts" in your post tell us what a principled, smart guy scott is. so now we know that if we we want to commit the fallacy of Argument From Authority, we can definitely use him as one.
now, perhaps you'd like to contribute to the actual debate?
Maybe it is you who think there's another debate that has nothing to do with my post?
This is what I replied to - OP's statement:
"this is not a good faith post made by a serious person"
My post factually describes both why 1) Scott's post was in good faith and 2) That he's a serious person.
If you don't get that - guess what.
@troed @froztbyte @fasterandworse it does not show either of those things, because, once again and as others have pointed out, you are using Argument From Authority.
"this is is very serious smart person! so he must have been serious and posted in good faith!"
no and goodbye.
@troed @fishidwardrobe @fasterandworse really? "omg, he was serious once!"? that's your _whole_ pitch?
you ....do realize.... that people can, like, fuck up over time? can make mistakes later?
are you really *that* Hung Up(tm) on your once-exemplary colleague, that you've made _this_ series of posts?
.....I'm sorry, I know the next bit is gonna hurt
@fishidwardrobe @fasterandworse I’m untagging them for this reply (because it doesn’t seem there will be a productive outcome)
they simply don’t seem to get it. that most recent “I already answered you! Why are you asking?!” post is …. well, yeah
I’m not gonna advocate punching bags, as much as I’d say: keep note of the who and what. Because that can provide rapid future devaluation where needed.
Your ignorance lies in the "this is not a good faith post made by a serious person" part which is a provably false statement.
I will however defend your right to make a fool of yourself in public, so carry on as you were.
@fasterandworse about that good faith thing. You underestimate how incredibly wrong even very serious people can be so I don't know if this passes my personal threshold of bad faith yet.
But my mastodon community is very much biased against AI and I like that but it also has me somewhat concerned about the quality of information I'm getting here.
@fasterandworse so many people want mastodon to be twitter. they want it to be corporate friendly, addictive by design, let users impose themselves on just about anyone they want. they want all that engagement bait bullshit most ofus here are trying to avoid
also what's this bullshit about people on fedi being lukewarm on politics?
Stephen Farrugia
Ghostrunner
foundseed
Anton Zadorožnyj
Stian
[object Object]
JP
Scott Jenson
Enema Cowboy
Julian Fietkau
Troed Sångberg
Fish Id Wardrobe ⁂
betalars 
@home
Yza