6 ms·

I was thinking about this the other day, a decentralized social network where it's own users govern and moderate it sounds like a plausible way to make this...

I was thinking about this the other day, a decentralized social network where it's own users govern and moderate it sounds like a plausible way to make this... dApps still on it's infancy, but it might come... Not sure if anyone will use it though, like the rest of the blockchains, lol

partomniscient 5y ago
>a decentralized social network where it's own users govern and moderate it sounds like a plausible way to make this... That's what the entire internet was like in its early days.
- agustif 5y ago
  I actually think the future of the internet might look like this but with micro-payment-transactions enabled by blockchain everywhere... Ads killed the web
- abecedarius 5y ago
  The big potential difference is that the early decentralized systems like Usenet and Relay treated costs and spam and paying their developers as out-of-band concerns. Whatever else you think of the newer stuff around blockchains, etc., it changes the game in just this way. If you want an online world not under the thumbs of Google/Facebook/Twitter/etc., you need a thesis about how the same takeover won't happen.
isbvhodnvemrwvn 5y ago
What makes you think that user-moderated content won't be as toxic as algo-driven one? Look at reddit for example - the vast majority of content out there is posted to cause outrage, and people parrot it across the rest of the site.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- trompetenaccoun 5y ago
  Reddit isn't decentralized. The "moderators" play enforcers for the admins, to push their agenda and cleanse the site of any content the management doesn't want to see. Outrage is their business model, it leads to increased interactions between users (i.e. flame wars) and so they spend more time on the site. Any community or mod that doesn't play along is removed, thus in the major subs you can think of them as directly working for the company, although unpaid. The users are NOT in charge, there is a crazy amount of political censorship on reddit. In the end that leaves the echo chamber it is now. Your example demonstrates how the authoritarian style of managing social media suppresses free speech but does nothing to reign in toxicity. Facebook and Twitter are similar toxic echo chambers. On an actually decentralized platform the radicals would still be there, but so would many other voices. Where users can't be banned for "wrongthink", communities must convince their audience with arguments or fear losing supporters. The chilling effect would be gone. A truly decentralized site would have plenty of communities the individual user doesn't agree with - just like in real life. And just like in real life users can deal with it by staying away.
  - belltaco 5y ago
    >Any community or mod that doesn't play along is removed This makes no sense and is completely wrong. Can you give some examples?
    - willhslade 5y ago
      Fat people hate and the Donald both fit his narrative.
      - belltaco 5y ago
        No, both of them caused a lot of outrage and gave Reddit a huge number of views, read GP comment again. So those are counter-examples.
    - morpheos137 5y ago
      Removing the_donald sub was ridiculous especially when compared to equally if not more objectionable rhetoric on main subs like /r/politics. Additionally if you want to get rival subs banned on reddit you just post and report objectionable material icognito. Reddit is a dumpster fire of juvenile , woke idiocy now and I rarelt visit anymore. That said some of the content on the_donald was just as idiotic but if you are going to allow one you have to allow the other.
phone8675309 5y ago
> a decentralized social network where it's own users govern and moderate it Were you ever on Usenet?
- agustif 5y ago
  I think I recall downloading some stuff from there in the early 2000, yeah! Usenet was rad!
- dredmorbius 5y ago
  Are you asking because you see Usenet as a solution or as a another nonviable approach? Usenet failed to scale past the first million or so users. Present social media platforms number in the 100s of millions to billions.
  - phone8675309 5y ago
    I ask because Usenet, before it became a distributed lossy datastore for media pirates, was "a decentralized social network where it's own users govern and moderate it", and it was a complete, well documented, shitshow.
    - dredmorbius 5y ago
      Fair enough. I agree on both points. I've argued for several other reasons in addition for which Usenet died: https://old.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/3c3xyu/why_usenet_died/ https://old.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/3c3xyu/why_use...

partomniscient 5y ago

>a decentralized social network where it's own users govern and moderate it sounds like a plausible way to make this... That's what the entire internet was like in its early days.

agustif 5y ago
I actually think the future of the internet might look like this but with micro-payment-transactions enabled by blockchain everywhere... Ads killed the web
abecedarius 5y ago
The big potential difference is that the early decentralized systems like Usenet and Relay treated costs and spam and paying their developers as out-of-band concerns. Whatever else you think of the newer stuff around blockchains, etc., it changes the game in just this way. If you want an online world not under the thumbs of Google/Facebook/Twitter/etc., you need a thesis about how the same takeover won't happen.

isbvhodnvemrwvn 5y ago

What makes you think that user-moderated content won't be as toxic as algo-driven one? Look at reddit for example - the vast majority of content out there is posted to cause outrage, and people parrot it across the rest of the site.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
trompetenaccoun 5y ago
Reddit isn't decentralized. The "moderators" play enforcers for the admins, to push their agenda and cleanse the site of any content the management doesn't want to see. Outrage is their business model, it leads to increased interactions between users (i.e. flame wars) and so they spend more time on the site. Any community or mod that doesn't play along is removed, thus in the major subs you can think of them as directly working for the company, although unpaid. The users are NOT in charge, there is a crazy amount of political censorship on reddit. In the end that leaves the echo chamber it is now. Your example demonstrates how the authoritarian style of managing social media suppresses free speech but does nothing to reign in toxicity. Facebook and Twitter are similar toxic echo chambers. On an actually decentralized platform the radicals would still be there, but so would many other voices. Where users can't be banned for "wrongthink", communities must convince their audience with arguments or fear losing supporters. The chilling effect would be gone. A truly decentralized site would have plenty of communities the individual user doesn't agree with - just like in real life. And just like in real life users can deal with it by staying away.
- belltaco 5y ago
  >Any community or mod that doesn't play along is removed This makes no sense and is completely wrong. Can you give some examples?
  - willhslade 5y ago
    Fat people hate and the Donald both fit his narrative.
    - belltaco 5y ago
      No, both of them caused a lot of outrage and gave Reddit a huge number of views, read GP comment again. So those are counter-examples.
  - morpheos137 5y ago
    Removing the_donald sub was ridiculous especially when compared to equally if not more objectionable rhetoric on main subs like /r/politics. Additionally if you want to get rival subs banned on reddit you just post and report objectionable material icognito. Reddit is a dumpster fire of juvenile , woke idiocy now and I rarelt visit anymore. That said some of the content on the_donald was just as idiotic but if you are going to allow one you have to allow the other.

phone8675309 5y ago

> a decentralized social network where it's own users govern and moderate it Were you ever on Usenet?

agustif 5y ago
I think I recall downloading some stuff from there in the early 2000, yeah! Usenet was rad!
dredmorbius 5y ago
Are you asking because you see Usenet as a solution or as a another nonviable approach? Usenet failed to scale past the first million or so users. Present social media platforms number in the 100s of millions to billions.
- phone8675309 5y ago
  I ask because Usenet, before it became a distributed lossy datastore for media pirates, was "a decentralized social network where it's own users govern and moderate it", and it was a complete, well documented, shitshow.
  - dredmorbius 5y ago
    Fair enough. I agree on both points. I've argued for several other reasons in addition for which Usenet died: https://old.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/3c3xyu/why_usenet_died/ https://old.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/3c3xyu/why_use...