5 ms·

People like Paul are tied to twitter because they are addicted to popularity. I bet you don't have that same problem, so you just leave. Just stop going there o

People like Paul are tied to twitter because they are addicted to popularity. I bet you don't have that same problem, so you just leave. Just stop going there one day, and keep doing that every day. You'll notice that, although it felt really important, your life will not change at all.

bigpeopleareold 3y ago
I started to read a book on a summary of Norse myths. In the introduction, it suggested that since in pre-Christian Scandinavia there was no strong or even existing belief in a timeless afterlife, people, particularly of the Viking stock, would seek their fame as a way to live on after their own death. I thought this was interesting in that it could be profound in the minds of public individuals, whether conscious or not, particularly if they share a lack of an eternal life.
- chambers 3y ago
  Neat. What's the name of the book?
  - bigpeopleareold 3y ago
    The Penguin Book of Norse Myths :)
- eis 3y ago
  But the Vikings did have believes in afterlife. Later records of Valhalla or Folkvangr speak of that very clearly. There is also the fact that items were added to burried bodies which usually is done with the believe that these items would be useful for the deceased person in the afterlife.
  - jacquesm 3y ago
    > in pre-Christian Scandinavia there was no strong or even existing belief in a timeless afterlife Pre-Christian Scandinavia is a rather long span of time.
    - eis 3y ago
      Well he mentioned Norse mythology and particularily the Vikings. The whole Pre-Christian Scandinavia of course is a way too wide a time span with very spotty historic records the further back we go.
  - bigpeopleareold 3y ago
    I was careful in using the book's words: "not a timeless afterlife" or suggesting at least "not eternal". Because we know what happens in the end :)
    - eis 3y ago
      While it's true that the afterlife was not eternal (Ragnarök) the same goes for the fame or legacy because the whole world is pretty much rebooted in their belief and with that the legacy vanishes.
- stareatgoats 3y ago
  Tangentially related: the story of Herostratus, whose name it was forbidden to mention since he destroyed the temple of Artemis simply in order to have his name remembered. The ban didn't work out; he is now one of the more famous ancient Greeks, but had his name not been banned he would surely have been forgotten. Tangentially related to that: the urge to "be someone" is likely shared by all, but the "being" that follows from having your name in the paper (or on Twitter) seems likely a surrogate for one's impression of being remembered and appreciated by people that knows you well, or something that can compensate for a lack thereof. Point in case: the large proportion of of petty criminals and social outcasts among terrorists and the like. At least they get to be in the paper (and/or on TV/Twitter/Facebook/Threads/Youtube/Mastodon). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herostratus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herostratus
  - projektfu 3y ago
    Ironically, after watching "The Emperor's Club", Shutruk-Nahunte is the only Elamite leader I'm aware of, and I had to look up the name of the film to write this comment. For those who haven't seen it, the main character starts the film making a big point about how Nahunte is largely forgotten despite his efforts to be remembered, because he contributed nothing of value.
- latexr 3y ago
  > I started to read a book on a summary of Norse myths. When you mention an interesting book/movie/any piece of media in a post, please include its name. There will always be someone interested in checking it out. I am.
yodsanklai 3y ago
> I bet you don't have that same problem, so you just leave. I believe lots of Twitter users have the same problem. As long as they see a bit of engagement on their tweets/comments, even if they have 10 followers.
- ImaCake 3y ago
  I get more engagement on Mastodon than I did on Twitter. New twitter accounts are essentially shadow banned by default whereas that is not the case on Mastodon.
coldtea 3y ago
Besides, most people announcing they are leaving or pondering it loudly are doing it exactly for popularity ("I hear that 'Twitter is now awful' is the latest trend! Acknowledge me as a cool person that flies the outrage flag of the day"). People who actually care for decentralization and the like over popularity, have long gone.
- ImaCake 3y ago
  I did post that I was leaving as doing so did genuinely interrupt some nascent friendships I had developed on Twitter. I am sad I lost those, but staying there seemed worse at the time.
madeofpalk 3y ago
I left twitter because I was addicted to popularity. I said the absolutely worst shit all in the name of driving engagement. I spoiled secret product announcements for Big Company because I loved the high of getting 1000s of likes on a tweet. I moved to a different platform, left behind that community, and I feel a whole lot better for it. Barely anyone likes my posts any more, and I barely post. I feel great. Non-commercial platforms have less pressure to drive engagement to pump DAUs, so I think they will always inherently start from a healthier base. Even if they do have algorthmic timelines, I think they can be done healthier because there's less incentive to send you engagement-bait and can instead just focus on sending you think you'll genuinely be interested in.
tambourine_man 3y ago
It did change for the better
dsign 3y ago
I don't understand that mentality. I'm a nobody-have-nothing and I dread the day somebody would link some of my Internet pseudonyms to my real-life identity. If I had a few billions stashed somewhere and it was of public knowledge, how could I ever know who is earnest and honest when interacting with me?
RamenJunkie_ 3y ago
All this microblogging drama lately has really shown just how addicted manybpeople are to the popularity and attention engine. Its kind of sad. There were a lot of people saying they would leave when Musk took over. I have not been there since then, but several of my friends have gone back, and its a bit disappointing.

bigpeopleareold 3y ago

I started to read a book on a summary of Norse myths. In the introduction, it suggested that since in pre-Christian Scandinavia there was no strong or even existing belief in a timeless afterlife, people, particularly of the Viking stock, would seek their fame as a way to live on after their own death. I thought this was interesting in that it could be profound in the minds of public individuals, whether conscious or not, particularly if they share a lack of an eternal life.

chambers 3y ago
Neat. What's the name of the book?
- bigpeopleareold 3y ago
  The Penguin Book of Norse Myths :)
eis 3y ago
But the Vikings did have believes in afterlife. Later records of Valhalla or Folkvangr speak of that very clearly. There is also the fact that items were added to burried bodies which usually is done with the believe that these items would be useful for the deceased person in the afterlife.
- jacquesm 3y ago
  > in pre-Christian Scandinavia there was no strong or even existing belief in a timeless afterlife Pre-Christian Scandinavia is a rather long span of time.
  - eis 3y ago
    Well he mentioned Norse mythology and particularily the Vikings. The whole Pre-Christian Scandinavia of course is a way too wide a time span with very spotty historic records the further back we go.
- bigpeopleareold 3y ago
  I was careful in using the book's words: "not a timeless afterlife" or suggesting at least "not eternal". Because we know what happens in the end :)
  - eis 3y ago
    While it's true that the afterlife was not eternal (Ragnarök) the same goes for the fame or legacy because the whole world is pretty much rebooted in their belief and with that the legacy vanishes.
stareatgoats 3y ago
Tangentially related: the story of Herostratus, whose name it was forbidden to mention since he destroyed the temple of Artemis simply in order to have his name remembered. The ban didn't work out; he is now one of the more famous ancient Greeks, but had his name not been banned he would surely have been forgotten. Tangentially related to that: the urge to "be someone" is likely shared by all, but the "being" that follows from having your name in the paper (or on Twitter) seems likely a surrogate for one's impression of being remembered and appreciated by people that knows you well, or something that can compensate for a lack thereof. Point in case: the large proportion of of petty criminals and social outcasts among terrorists and the like. At least they get to be in the paper (and/or on TV/Twitter/Facebook/Threads/Youtube/Mastodon). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herostratus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herostratus
- projektfu 3y ago
  Ironically, after watching "The Emperor's Club", Shutruk-Nahunte is the only Elamite leader I'm aware of, and I had to look up the name of the film to write this comment. For those who haven't seen it, the main character starts the film making a big point about how Nahunte is largely forgotten despite his efforts to be remembered, because he contributed nothing of value.
latexr 3y ago
> I started to read a book on a summary of Norse myths. When you mention an interesting book/movie/any piece of media in a post, please include its name. There will always be someone interested in checking it out. I am.

yodsanklai 3y ago

> I bet you don't have that same problem, so you just leave. I believe lots of Twitter users have the same problem. As long as they see a bit of engagement on their tweets/comments, even if they have 10 followers.

ImaCake 3y ago
I get more engagement on Mastodon than I did on Twitter. New twitter accounts are essentially shadow banned by default whereas that is not the case on Mastodon.

coldtea 3y ago

Besides, most people announcing they are leaving or pondering it loudly are doing it exactly for popularity ("I hear that 'Twitter is now awful' is the latest trend! Acknowledge me as a cool person that flies the outrage flag of the day"). People who actually care for decentralization and the like over popularity, have long gone.

ImaCake 3y ago
I did post that I was leaving as doing so did genuinely interrupt some nascent friendships I had developed on Twitter. I am sad I lost those, but staying there seemed worse at the time.

madeofpalk 3y ago

I left twitter because I was addicted to popularity. I said the absolutely worst shit all in the name of driving engagement. I spoiled secret product announcements for Big Company because I loved the high of getting 1000s of likes on a tweet. I moved to a different platform, left behind that community, and I feel a whole lot better for it. Barely anyone likes my posts any more, and I barely post. I feel great. Non-commercial platforms have less pressure to drive engagement to pump DAUs, so I think they will always inherently start from a healthier base. Even if they do have algorthmic timelines, I think they can be done healthier because there's less incentive to send you engagement-bait and can instead just focus on sending you think you'll genuinely be interested in.

tambourine_man 3y ago

It did change for the better

dsign 3y ago

I don't understand that mentality. I'm a nobody-have-nothing and I dread the day somebody would link some of my Internet pseudonyms to my real-life identity. If I had a few billions stashed somewhere and it was of public knowledge, how could I ever know who is earnest and honest when interacting with me?

RamenJunkie_ 3y ago

All this microblogging drama lately has really shown just how addicted manybpeople are to the popularity and attention engine. Its kind of sad. There were a lot of people saying they would leave when Musk took over. I have not been there since then, but several of my friends have gone back, and its a bit disappointing.