3 ms·

It seems interesting if it's possible to do those things "offline" without them getting taken over by "hustle", but not online. Like, at a bar, club, or sporti

It seems interesting if it's possible to do those things "offline" without them getting taken over by "hustle", but not online. Like, at a bar, club, or sporting event in "real life", you might occasionally run into a finbro trying to talk to you about crypto, but it's not the dominant experience. But is there no way to do the equivalent things online (and there's no obvious reason there shouldn't be an online equivalent to a party or club or even sports league) without it being taken over by people who are there only to build their hustle?

munificent 4y ago
It's definitely possible to find the same thing online. Most of the online spaces I hang out in aren't like that: here, the various subreddits I joined, my fairly carefully culled Twitter feed, etc.
diputsmonro 4y ago
The reason it's so prevalent online is because those people are gaming the system to appear prevalent. They talk up themselves and their brand/product to get likes, follows, and "engagement", which the social media algorithms use to rank and display content. "Real life" doesn't have an algorithm that is so easily gamed, but there are still ways to "game" it. Going to popular locations (e.g. bars), looking presentable/knowledgeable, social engineering, buying advertisements, setting up seminars, etc. But in real life a lot of these are much easier to avoid because there's simply so much more to life that drowns them out. Real life doesn't have a front page that tells you what the most popular person said today -- that is the function of social media (or newspapers). Of course, social media platforms could be built that don't prioritize content this way, either by using more complicated algorithms that are less easily gameified, or simpler algorithms that cannot be gamified (e.g. simple chronological ranking), or letting the user have more control over the ranking algorithm. But there is currently no simple market incentive for doing so. That said, I could totally see that shifting even in the coming decade. I think people are getting tired of being advertised to, and transparently being treated as second-class citizen on these platforms. I could see a "premium" alternative to Facebook/Twitter becoming popular, with a small monthly subscription fee in exchange for much more user control and user-centric design. Of course, more user control means more opportunities for filter bubbles and cultural fragmentation, which as we've seen are pretty bad for democracy. I suppose there is no easy solution to anything.
cjblomqvist 4y ago
Have you ever played online team games? I've played both offline and online games quite a lot and at least here in Sweden I feel it's quite similar.
jakelazaroff 4y ago
Sure there is. There are probably millions of Discord servers used by small groups of people for a common purpose. Same thing with Mastodon instances and subreddits. You don't hear about them because they're not trying to take over the world or build some huge platform. They're just groups of people that want to hang out with each other.

munificent 4y ago

It's definitely possible to find the same thing online. Most of the online spaces I hang out in aren't like that: here, the various subreddits I joined, my fairly carefully culled Twitter feed, etc.

diputsmonro 4y ago

The reason it's so prevalent online is because those people are gaming the system to appear prevalent. They talk up themselves and their brand/product to get likes, follows, and "engagement", which the social media algorithms use to rank and display content. "Real life" doesn't have an algorithm that is so easily gamed, but there are still ways to "game" it. Going to popular locations (e.g. bars), looking presentable/knowledgeable, social engineering, buying advertisements, setting up seminars, etc. But in real life a lot of these are much easier to avoid because there's simply so much more to life that drowns them out. Real life doesn't have a front page that tells you what the most popular person said today -- that is the function of social media (or newspapers). Of course, social media platforms could be built that don't prioritize content this way, either by using more complicated algorithms that are less easily gameified, or simpler algorithms that cannot be gamified (e.g. simple chronological ranking), or letting the user have more control over the ranking algorithm. But there is currently no simple market incentive for doing so. That said, I could totally see that shifting even in the coming decade. I think people are getting tired of being advertised to, and transparently being treated as second-class citizen on these platforms. I could see a "premium" alternative to Facebook/Twitter becoming popular, with a small monthly subscription fee in exchange for much more user control and user-centric design. Of course, more user control means more opportunities for filter bubbles and cultural fragmentation, which as we've seen are pretty bad for democracy. I suppose there is no easy solution to anything.

cjblomqvist 4y ago

Have you ever played online team games? I've played both offline and online games quite a lot and at least here in Sweden I feel it's quite similar.

jakelazaroff 4y ago

Sure there is. There are probably millions of Discord servers used by small groups of people for a common purpose. Same thing with Mastodon instances and subreddits. You don't hear about them because they're not trying to take over the world or build some huge platform. They're just groups of people that want to hang out with each other.