The fact that Bluesky has some form of content moderation and has occasionally banned users for things like using racial slurs in their usernames.
Actually, Jack Dorsey may be the problem. Good to see him shift focus to that "free speech", pro-cryptocurrency platform Nostr. I see it like a containment zone for the worst people.
I think that it's hard to find a level of content control that everyone is happy with. I'd favor fewer restrictions.
But that's one thing that's nice about the Threadiverse model -- it's federated. You can have one set of restrictions on one instance, and another on another.
Beehaw has pretty good conversation. I enjoy my discussions on their communities. They have a pretty upbeat mood. It also has an extremely low bar for defederation -- it's defederated with even lemmy.world. I don't like that, would not use that as my home instance.
My home instance is lemmy.today. The admin there is aiming for not defederating with anyone. I like that. But...not everyone wants that.
Point is, there can be multiple levels of content moderation on the Threadiverse, both at the instance and community level, and people who have different preferences can have the level of moderation that they want. Some people take a free-speech-absolutist position. Others want a safe space. Some people don't want pornography on their forums. Some people only want certain types of pornography. Some people take issue with certain types of political radicalism. Some people want to associate with Threads users, and others do not.
I think that that's maybe the best of all worlds.
Beehaw has pretty good conversation. I enjoy my discussions on their communities. It also has an extremely low bar for defederation – it’s defederated with even lemmy.world. I don’t like that, would not use that as my home instance.
Haha that's an instance I haven't heard about in a while... I personally blocked it because ~~I want to talk to everyone on lemmy, not just half the population~~ when I have a conversation on lemmy I don't want to respond to a post that less than half the lemmy population can see, and they've defederated from the largest instances.
And i guess that's the good thing about the lemmyverse - you decide what level of control you want.
I personally blocked it because I want to talk to everyone on lemmy
Genius
didn't phrase that well, what I meant was when I have a conversation on lemmy I don't want to respond to a beehaw post that less than half the lemmy population can see.
I had fully understood what you wanted to mean, even though phrased badly. However the reason I quoted it is because of how contradictory is your thought process.
i mean, my phrasing sounded contradictory but the thought process is logical lol
Jack Dorsey looks like Rasputin
Lover of the Russian queen?
"I lit another fire and it also burned!" -Jack
Not coincidentally, Dorsey still has about $1 billion of his personal wealth invested in the company now known as X
HAD. Had a billion dollars...
Maybe he started with 5 or 10 billion dollars left in the company!
How to become a billionaire: Start with 5 billion.
Bluesky saw this exodus of people from Twitter show up, and it was a very, very common crowd. … But little by little, they started asking Jay and the team for moderation tools, and to kick people off. And unfortunately they followed through with it. That was the second moment I thought, uh, nope. This is literally repeating all the mistakes we made as a company.”
This is the same problem that all these "free speech platforms" keep running into. Some people will abuse free speech - if nothing else, I think everyone can agree spam is a type of abusive speech. But the difference between abusive speech and ordinary speech isn't a sharp line, and the definitions of "abuse" will vary. So there needs to be some mechanism or rules for deciding what that line is. But all the people that create these platforms instead wanna pretend that line doesn't exist, so they don't create a means of determining it. So then "abuse" becomes whatever the users demand and/or the decisionmakers decide it is. Which is exactly the same as having no free speech to begin with.
Which is why I applaud Bluesky’s innovative approach to moderation. It’s truly decentralized and decoupled from the server you’re signed up to.
what
Bluesky has moderation accounts you can follow like regular accounts that basically flag or hide posts according to how you configure them. This differs from the Fedi model where your chosen instance dictates what you see. There is the standard account that every user follows by default, but even that can be configured to your liking. And if you don’t want it on, you can disable it and follow a different account that moderates content to your liking.
I, for once, don’t like seeing insects, something that shouldn’t be moderated because there are valid reasons for posting pictures of insects. On Bluesky, I can follow a moderation account for phobias and have it hide any pictures I wouldn’t wanna see.
Thanks to that, Bluesky is more flexible IMO and requires me to do less for more. Unlike the fediverse where I have to maintain my own filter lists which don’t always work when pictures get posted without alt text or keywords found in the filter list.
That...actually sounds cool? So why is this considered a mistake?
So why is this considered a mistake?
I imagine that much granularity fucks with their efforts to introduce ads.
Because Jack Dorsey is obsessed with the same "free speech absolutism" that Elon Musk is, and he's butter that people don't want to be shown Nazi propaganda, hate speech, and all that other shit on his platforms.
Dorsey is an idiot, just like Musk. Don't let their money fool you.
I don’t know, don’t ask me. People always find stupid shit to be outraged about, but this one is really not it tbh. I personally love it and hope the Fediverse adopts something similar to it or even just reuses the same open source code for these labeling accounts (as they’re called over there), albeit adapted to the ActivityPub protocol.
ah interesting. can i check to see how many blacklists ive ended up on
They've designed their platform so that you can outsource different aspects to different servers. So you can choose a moderator who curates your experience and that's a different person from who hosts your data, which may be different to who sorts and determines the 'top posts'.
Biggest mistake he made was allow Twitter to be sold to an idiot
He looks like if Peter Dinklage had a baby with John Krasinski
Honestly the short form content incentivizing formats should be dropped altogether. Short form content has pretty clearly fried people's attention spans and burnt a lot of their fuse to boot.
The incentive to be smug snappy and smarmy to own people for internet points is too much, nevermind the algorithms that more or less act as a match finder for mass shouting contests as opposed to organic socialization where people who aren't psychopaths tend to have the good sense to just ignore each other if they encounter irreconcilable differences of ethical and political values.
That's right, the echo chamber was invented by the social media companies to gaslight you for not being happy they basically play rage tinder with your feed.
I have a feeling that the only short-term solution is heavy content curation by the users themselves. Nobody is incentivized to do it for us. It takes time and effort but the only thing that has made any kind of difference is blocking everything you don't want to see. And I mean ruthlessly doing so. Someone replied with a clown emoji to this thread and they're now blocked. That's how petty I'm about it nowdays. The vast majority of users on social media just add to the noise and it's this group of people I'm trying to get rid of.
The way I think about it is by imagining a room with 100 random people. Do I want to talk with all of them? No. I'd rather talk with the couple most interesting ones among them and ignore the rest. I don't have the time and energy to pay attention to the constant feed of meaningless nonsense.
Block subs you're not interested in. Block users that dont bring any value. Add content filters for topics you're sick of reading about etc. You're not going to miss out on anything. You're not going to run out of content. You'll hardly notice any difference but after some time the signal does start to get stronger and the noise does quiet down a bit.
I don't think there's actually any evidence that short-form content reduces people's attention spans.
I think short form video specifically is pretty bad (in high volume)
https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1298361/full
It looks like that study checked the effects of short-form content addiction, rather than short-form content in general. Addiction can be caused by underlying factors, such as stress or depression, which are shown to reduce attention span so I don't think it really shows a direct causal connection. In fact, I think it's more accurate to say short attention spans cause short-form content rather than the other way around.
That said, excessive social media consumption can make stress and depression worse, I just think we're focussing on the wrong aspect of social media's effect on our mental health.
I think it's clear it does. Students in schools switch their attentions so incredibly quickly that it preempts any immersion in the material. Seriously, talk to any teacher they will explain it better than me, I just deal with student computers.
Ok but you are commenting that in a short-form reply to a short-form social media post. Just saying…
pretty sure they mean like the 120/240 character definition of short.
🤡
Well that’s a TL;dr if I ever saw one
Wasn’t this guy hired to be some kind of poster-boy CEO because he has a highschool masturbation related injury that causes one of his arms to constantly ache? Why is he giving everyone business advice now?
Pretty much every failed social network out there failed because it had poor moderation tools, and this genius thinks the biggest mistake Bluesky has made is having any moderation tools at all.
Wait, people hate him now. I remember people loving him in the Twitter years. What happened?
He went mask off and everyone realized he's a fascist
Bluesky is pretty fun and I'm glad he's not there shitting it up anymore. I've only seen one nutsack on there so far.
Bluesky hasn't been hyper-commoditized yet. I don't see ads everywhere. I don't have bots jamming ׺°”˜”°º× 🎀 𝒫𝓊𝓈𝓈𝓎 𝐼𝓃 𝐵𝒾♡ 🎀 ׺°”˜”°º× into my feed. I'm not being spammed with "We noticed you haven't joined our premium service yet, but for $8/mo we'll stop showing you this message!" annoyance marketing.
But I've got no doubt its coming. It just hasn't hit that Twitter-level critical mass of users, such that enshittification turns a profit rather than curbing adoption.
It just hasn’t hit that Twitter-level critical mass of users
Twitter used to be bigger than it is now and it also used to have less spam. So clearly size isn't the problem.
The problem with twitter is Musk fired all the people who spent their day figuring out how to hide (or just delete) shitty content.
Between threads mastadon and bluesky, which one do you think will be the biggest in the next year? Or are they gonna all keep living in the shadow of Twitter
Given the inertia of moving social platforms and the spoiler effect of fragmentation, I assume ex-Twitter will remain the leading platform for a while still unless Musk manages to run it into the ground at record speed.
I don't have any hard numbers on the rest, unfortunately. I personally favour Mastodon, and I believe some national governments have officially adopted it and are running their own instances, which might tip the scales a little if people see that as endorsement.
Bluesky overall seems to have the advantage in terms of marketing (probably because they have the advantage of money too). I have no idea about Threads, but being from the same company as Facebook, Instagram and Whatsapp may give them an advantage in terms of existing users for those services. I would expect they try to intermesh these services at one point or another.
It's hard to predict, given that many people might just follow whatever their favourite personalities choose, and once enough users have gone there, other popular people may choose that platform too for its larger userbase, drawing more people in... It can snowball either way.
There's also the ongoing debate about interfacing the other options with Mastodon. I'm not going to take a stance on that here, but it might be a solution to the split "some of my favourite people have gone here, the others there, but I want to keep up with both in a single app". I think there would have to be a user-level option in Mastodon to block entire instances to allow people to choose not to get shown content from those services.
As an aside, I think that would be a good idea anyway, for Lemmy too. If I want to be able to browse All without seeing specific instances, I don't want to have to look for an instance with that exact list of defeds.
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
