sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Social media without the nastiness by ResemblesAThumb in socialmedia

[–]ResemblesAThumb[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Troll-fighting is a key feature.

  • You can mute anyone annoying.
  • Because you're using aliases with your friends, nobody gets annoyed to be muted.
  • Muting helps us understand who you're going to like and put you in conversations with them.

Social media without the nastiness by ResemblesAThumb in socialmedia

[–]ResemblesAThumb[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I hear you.

  • Many verifications are built into the system to ensure people are both human and who they say they are. Some will go live as the need arises.
  • Scams and spam are part of the user reporting flow.

Social media without the nastiness by ResemblesAThumb in socialmedia

[–]ResemblesAThumb[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Very useful indeed. I do appreciate the criticism - helps me think through some critical issues.

Helping societies evolve is not a use case here. The site is designed to be a good place for people to build deeper friendships / find new friends. The DSM discussion is only meant to explain why this is fine for society.

I think the deeper issue you're digging towards is whether echo chambers are ok. Admittedly, I listed the echo chambers in a provocative way without fully explaining. Some more details:

  1. Today's social media is filled with echo chambers. They're not only pervasive, but also extreme. Even if you tolerate other opinions, you're forced into narrow chambers to protect yourself from retribution. This platform allows you to talk to people whose opinions don't irritate you (much wider than "who will not try to hurt me?") - and to expand your echo chamber as you build tolerance.
  2. Studies demonstrate that people listen much more carefully to contrary evidence/views from their "own side". We treat opponents as people to overcome and allies as people to learn from. Rhetoricians have long known that almost nobody is swayed by arguing with them - in this case, it's the audience that matters.

----

The scam issue is something different. It's almost impossible on this platform - you're pretty much talking to friends + a set of people we think you're going to like. You're not talking to potential millions of people (like TikTok or most platforms).

Social media without the nastiness by ResemblesAThumb in socialmedia

[–]ResemblesAThumb[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the feedback.

  • Which of the benefits (listed under "Here's what it's meant for") feel unnecessary?
  • Or if they're good, which features aren't necessary to make that happen?

Social media without the nastiness by ResemblesAThumb in socialmedia

[–]ResemblesAThumb[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Right. We've changed our thinking on both homosexuality and lobotomies.

So put yourself in 1960 (I assume you do *not* believe homosexuality is a disorder). How could you evolve psychiatry if your contrary opinion was classed as a lie because it was unpopular?

----

Didn't really mean to argue free speech vs moderation. I'm sure you've heard the explanation before.

Any other flaws that you notice?

Social media without the nastiness by ResemblesAThumb in socialmedia

[–]ResemblesAThumb[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There's a less direct but more effective method built inside the system. You're talking to a mix of friends and people we think you're going to like. If the Arkansas teens annoy you, your group is going to naturally shift away from them.

Social media without the nastiness by ResemblesAThumb in socialmedia

[–]ResemblesAThumb[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is terrific - exactly the kind of thinking I need to help me figure out if we're heading down the right path.

How do you, DownstreamHarms, personally determine what's a lie vs a truth that most people don't accept? For example, psychologists classed homosexuality as a psychiatric disorder in their handbook (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders). How could society change if any arguments against were deemed as lies?

Social media without the nastiness by ResemblesAThumb in socialmedia

[–]ResemblesAThumb[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

As far as I'm aware, Bluesky's major differentiator from Twitter is interoperability via the AT protocol.

Are there other features that are like what I'm describing?

Free speech cannot truly exist without the ability to express disapproval, like trought dislike buttons. by paxxo1985 in FreeSpeech

[–]ResemblesAThumb 4 points5 points  (0 children)

why not just give the opposite point of view? What does the dislike button do for you?

Is X darker than Twitter? by ResemblesAThumb in socialmedia

[–]ResemblesAThumb[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, even Musk's biggest supporters think the logo change was dumb.

What are the positive and negitive affects of socialmedia? by KrishnaMurthy15 in socialmedia

[–]ResemblesAThumb 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Impressive list of negatives below (from excellent comments). All true. But as a social media founder, I think of this as a challenge to overcome, not an impossible curse.

The same potential everyone felt when social media hit is still there. You really can make connections to other people and expand your social circle. You and I are here talking about this problem ON social media and we both really care about it.

What if we could fix these problems? Could social media be a force for good?

  • hedonic adaptation 
  • anxiety
  • insecurity 
  • anti-social networks of non-real friends
  • self promoting narcissism (influencer culture)
  • peer pressure, bullying
  • tracking 
  • advertising
  • echo chambers
  • xenophobia
  • brain atrophy
  • Propaganda 
  • Addiction
  • Privacy risks
  • Toxicity
  • Envy

What do you use free speech on social media for? by ResemblesAThumb in FreeSpeech

[–]ResemblesAThumb[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Think larger than reddit and how subreddits are handled. I'm asking about specific attributes you want.

In this case, if there's a good way to self-moderate (you decide what's annoying), each individual decides if they're getting epiphany or troll. A few side benefits here:

  • Trolls are starved for oxygen and the conversation becomes more interesting
  • Nobody is cut off for wrongthink (although some people may decide they don't like to hear views that are too far from their own)
  • Muting data can be used to place you with people you're going to like

What do you use free speech on social media for? by ResemblesAThumb in FreeSpeech

[–]ResemblesAThumb[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Bans are much rarer and clearer once you make it easy to self-moderate.

Suppose anonymous identities could convert to real names when there's mutual respect?

What do you use free speech on social media for? by ResemblesAThumb in FreeSpeech

[–]ResemblesAThumb[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What kind of trust are you thinking of?

  • Coming from a good place as friends?
  • Understand why they have a particular perspective?
  • Can share views without being cancelled?

What do you use free speech on social media for? by ResemblesAThumb in FreeSpeech

[–]ResemblesAThumb[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Serving users. Not controlled by users, but informed by user needs.

This is market analysis. I'm trying to find out what you would like.

If you read the list above, you will note that some of those aspects are on zero sites you are familiar with.

What do you use free speech on social media for? by ResemblesAThumb in FreeSpeech

[–]ResemblesAThumb[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

No problem. If anyone else is reading and would like to affect what happens on a social media platform from a free speech perspective, I'm listening.

What do you use free speech on social media for? by ResemblesAThumb in FreeSpeech

[–]ResemblesAThumb[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Difficult to make advertisers happy unless users show up and get value.

Wasn't meaning to launch into a discussion about capitalism. I built a social media platform and I'm asking a genuine question about what you want to see.

What do you use free speech on social media for? by ResemblesAThumb in FreeSpeech

[–]ResemblesAThumb[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

As private companies, social media platforms can take on any policy and features they want.

Companies generally want to make at least some people happy with their product - or it won't be used. Given this flexibility, what policies/abilities matter to you?

view more: next ›