4 ms·

If you can't communicate with anyone you can't make the world a better place.

by jf22 2y ago

diggan 2y ago
Maybe that's why OP is looking for an alternative to use for communication and organization?
latexr 2y ago
Tell that to Jadav Payeng, who planted a forest by himself. He accomplished, on his own, more for the good of the world than most communities on Facebook ever will. https://interestingengineering.com/science/jadav-payeng-the-man-who-planted-an-entire-forest-by-himself https://interestingengineering.com/science/jadav-payeng-the-...
- zdragnar 2y ago
  Rural Facebook communities aren't trying to change the world. They're there for light conversation, gossip and organizing get-togethers. It's important to note that Jadav didn't get other people to change and join his crusade before it happened. He merely went out and did what he wanted. People were inspired by seeing it happen. People aren't going to be inspired by yet another social network touting federation and other technical mumbo-jumbo, because it doesn't help them do anything they weren't already doing on Facebook. This whole conversation is very strange to me indeed.
  - latexr 2y ago
    > This whole conversation is very strange to me indeed. Because you’re not engaging with the point? For starters, the original claim was to “make the world a better place”, not “change” it. Beyond that, the point of my reply was to show that it is indeed possible to make the world better without communicating with anyone else (contrary to the original claim). Anything else is your own addition.
- jf22 2y ago
  Eh, that's improvement, but the world didn't change because of a small forest.
  - latexr 2y ago
    You (and your parent comment) said “make the world a better place”, not “change” it. Very few things change the world meaningfully. And the point stands: what he did was more relevant than most (if not all) Facebook communities will ever accomplish.
    - jf22 2y ago
      Splitting hairs. If you use a platform nobody uses to try and change the world you won't change it just like if you tried to plant trees without using seeds.
      - latexr 2y ago
        The point is precisely that you don’t need a social networking platform to do something meaningful.
        jf22 2y ago
        I don't think the author was talking about isolated change like planting some seeds. Real change requires humans to collaborate and work together.
        latexr 2y ago
        > isolated The whole thread is about limited and well-defined communities, not the world. What the OP wants is specifically “isolated”. > like planting some seeds Spending thirty years planting a 550 hectare forest and restoring wildlife to it is not “planting some seeds”. Please don’t be reductive. > Real change https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman Change is change. You don’t get to define someone’s life work, which was more meaningful and impactful than most of us will ever achieve, not “real” to fit your narrow definition.
bee_rider 2y ago
We could communicate more effectively 20 or so years ago. Communication technology had already matured, but we didn’t have these engagement-driven social media platforms. The goal of these platforms isn’t to communicate, it is to sell ads and pick engaging posts to re-broadcast. What gets people engaged is stupid anger. Even stuff I agree with on some fundamental political level, the social media version is just stressed out, to the point of being ineffective and often wrong in detail. Centralized as driven social media can’t go out of business fast enough.
- jf22 2y ago
  Sure, but if nobody is on the platform or other end of the line, who cares?
- briandear 2y ago
  Communication was more effective 20 years ago? I remember using a Skypager when I was a Reuters journalist. I also remember processing film in bathrooms at news events then having to scan negatives using a suitcase-sized scanner and computer and it being 30-60 minutes to get photos onto the wire. Now it’s instant. Saying communications were more effective 20 years ago is highly debatable and certainly an argument tinged with nostalgia.
  - pixl97 2y ago
    >Saying communications were more effective 20 years ago Of course it's debatable because reality can be measured in multiple dimensions. Is it faster, yes. Is filtering out the massive amounts of bullshit communications easier? Not really, especially with content aware spambots than can be ran by the millions. It's easy to get crushed by bullshit asymmetry. For me this makes most communications less effective because I have to spend even more time figuring out the actual poster and their motivations.
- bko 2y ago
  I think you're mixing a few things here. There's social media (TikTok, Instagram, X, viral crap) and then there's social media (organize parties, facebook marketplace, Whatsapp, etc). They may share a technology platform, but they are not the same. If you have children you'll see social media (#2) is incredibly useful and facilitates greatly in communication. We're much more connected than our parents were thanks to these apps.

If you can't communicate with anyone you can't make the world a better place.

by jf22 2y ago

If you can't communicate with anyone you can't make the world a better place.

diggan 2y ago

Maybe that's why OP is looking for an alternative to use for communication and organization?

latexr 2y ago

Tell that to Jadav Payeng, who planted a forest by himself. He accomplished, on his own, more for the good of the world than most communities on Facebook ever will. https://interestingengineering.com/science/jadav-payeng-the-man-who-planted-an-entire-forest-by-himself https://interestingengineering.com/science/jadav-payeng-the-...

zdragnar 2y ago
Rural Facebook communities aren't trying to change the world. They're there for light conversation, gossip and organizing get-togethers. It's important to note that Jadav didn't get other people to change and join his crusade before it happened. He merely went out and did what he wanted. People were inspired by seeing it happen. People aren't going to be inspired by yet another social network touting federation and other technical mumbo-jumbo, because it doesn't help them do anything they weren't already doing on Facebook. This whole conversation is very strange to me indeed.
- latexr 2y ago
  > This whole conversation is very strange to me indeed. Because you’re not engaging with the point? For starters, the original claim was to “make the world a better place”, not “change” it. Beyond that, the point of my reply was to show that it is indeed possible to make the world better without communicating with anyone else (contrary to the original claim). Anything else is your own addition.
jf22 2y ago
Eh, that's improvement, but the world didn't change because of a small forest.
- latexr 2y ago
  You (and your parent comment) said “make the world a better place”, not “change” it. Very few things change the world meaningfully. And the point stands: what he did was more relevant than most (if not all) Facebook communities will ever accomplish.
  - jf22 2y ago
    Splitting hairs. If you use a platform nobody uses to try and change the world you won't change it just like if you tried to plant trees without using seeds.
    - latexr 2y ago
      The point is precisely that you don’t need a social networking platform to do something meaningful.
      - jf22 2y ago
        I don't think the author was talking about isolated change like planting some seeds. Real change requires humans to collaborate and work together.
        latexr 2y ago
        > isolated The whole thread is about limited and well-defined communities, not the world. What the OP wants is specifically “isolated”. > like planting some seeds Spending thirty years planting a 550 hectare forest and restoring wildlife to it is not “planting some seeds”. Please don’t be reductive. > Real change https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman Change is change. You don’t get to define someone’s life work, which was more meaningful and impactful than most of us will ever achieve, not “real” to fit your narrow definition.

bee_rider 2y ago

We could communicate more effectively 20 or so years ago. Communication technology had already matured, but we didn’t have these engagement-driven social media platforms. The goal of these platforms isn’t to communicate, it is to sell ads and pick engaging posts to re-broadcast. What gets people engaged is stupid anger. Even stuff I agree with on some fundamental political level, the social media version is just stressed out, to the point of being ineffective and often wrong in detail. Centralized as driven social media can’t go out of business fast enough.

jf22 2y ago
Sure, but if nobody is on the platform or other end of the line, who cares?
briandear 2y ago
Communication was more effective 20 years ago? I remember using a Skypager when I was a Reuters journalist. I also remember processing film in bathrooms at news events then having to scan negatives using a suitcase-sized scanner and computer and it being 30-60 minutes to get photos onto the wire. Now it’s instant. Saying communications were more effective 20 years ago is highly debatable and certainly an argument tinged with nostalgia.
- pixl97 2y ago
  >Saying communications were more effective 20 years ago Of course it's debatable because reality can be measured in multiple dimensions. Is it faster, yes. Is filtering out the massive amounts of bullshit communications easier? Not really, especially with content aware spambots than can be ran by the millions. It's easy to get crushed by bullshit asymmetry. For me this makes most communications less effective because I have to spend even more time figuring out the actual poster and their motivations.
bko 2y ago
I think you're mixing a few things here. There's social media (TikTok, Instagram, X, viral crap) and then there's social media (organize parties, facebook marketplace, Whatsapp, etc). They may share a technology platform, but they are not the same. If you have children you'll see social media (#2) is incredibly useful and facilitates greatly in communication. We're much more connected than our parents were thanks to these apps.