4 ms·
I think the fact that there is a public conversation about what is healthy vs. what is not is a huge step in the right direction, even if human nature means we’
by haswell 4y ago
I think the fact that there is a public conversation about what is healthy vs. what is not is a huge step in the right direction, even if human nature means we’ll always be fighting.
I strongly believe that in a few decades (probably sooner), the traditional social media platforms will be seen as cigarettes. Some people will still partake, but no one has any misconception about the harm they cause.
Healthier alternatives will be important in the long run, even if there is no perfect technical solution.
I do like your theories about why certain networks have fared as they have, and hopefully Mozilla comes away with some insights that might lead to something that highlights the good parts.
- Llamamoe 4y agoCigarettes have never been a prerequisite to staying in touch in an increasingly disconnected world, though.
- haswell 4y agoAnd neither are the most toxic elements of the current big social media platforms. Even just a return to the basics would go a long way: Show me my friends' stuff, in order, and don't show me anything else. Let me stay up to date without getting roped into bullshit promoted on my feed. Highly manipulative algorithmic content promotion is not necessary to stay in touch. At worst, a less toxic iteration of a social media platform is the equivalent of e-cigarettes. Still addictive and not super healthy, still unknown how this mode of consumption will impact humans long term, but less likely to kill you from the obvious kinds of cancer.
- Llamamoe 4y agoSure, but the corporations have incentives to run things the way they're running them now, and users will aggregate to platforms others use, which will in turn be driven by addictiveness. And you're not going to quit a platform if it means losing touch with your friends and access to your data on it.