4 ms·

Because I don't think the problem has to do with who owns the platform, but rather its that the platform's design relies on infrastructure that can be owned in

Because I don't think the problem has to do with who owns the platform, but rather its that the platform's design relies on infrastructure that can be owned in the first place. The people who run existing social media didn't start out evil, being in a powerful position made them that way. I'll be rooting for this user owned thing to stay true to its goals, but if it's shaped like the other ones in all ways but its ownership structure, then I won't be expecting it to do so.

swed420 5mo ago
I believe that threat could be prevented with the suggestions in the article. > The people who run existing social media didn't start out evil Um, not all of them: > On July 6 instant messages by a 19-year Zuck appeared on Twitter, along with a link to a 2010 Business Insider story about an exchange that took place shortly after the Facebook founder launched the social-media phenomenon in his dorm room. > “Yeah so if you ever need info about anyone at Harvard just me. I have over 4,000 emails, pictures, addresses, SNS,” Zuckerberg’s message says. > “What? How’d you manage that one?” a friend asks. > “People just submitted it,” Zuckerberg responds. “I don’t know why they 'trust me.' Dumb fucks.”
- __MatrixMan__ 5mo ago
  Touche re: Zuck, but I still think that even had he started a saint, he'd be a sinner by now.
  - swed420 5mo ago
    True, which is why you'd need well defined safeguards in place from the very beginning, with high visibility into the organization that you normally wouldn't find in a closed, for-profit business.
    - __MatrixMan__ 5mo ago
      You mean like OpenAI back when it was a nonprofit?
      - swed420 5mo ago
        So figure out what they did wrong. It's going to have to be more original than the easily subverted traditional "nonprofit" model.
        __MatrixMan__ 5mo ago
        Maybe the right lawyer is out there for that challenge. But legal code is running on compromised infrastructure these days so I think we should plan to operate as if the law is against us.

swed420 5mo ago

I believe that threat could be prevented with the suggestions in the article. > The people who run existing social media didn't start out evil Um, not all of them: > On July 6 instant messages by a 19-year Zuck appeared on Twitter, along with a link to a 2010 Business Insider story about an exchange that took place shortly after the Facebook founder launched the social-media phenomenon in his dorm room. > “Yeah so if you ever need info about anyone at Harvard just me. I have over 4,000 emails, pictures, addresses, SNS,” Zuckerberg’s message says. > “What? How’d you manage that one?” a friend asks. > “People just submitted it,” Zuckerberg responds. “I don’t know why they 'trust me.' Dumb fucks.”

__MatrixMan__ 5mo ago
Touche re: Zuck, but I still think that even had he started a saint, he'd be a sinner by now.
- swed420 5mo ago
  True, which is why you'd need well defined safeguards in place from the very beginning, with high visibility into the organization that you normally wouldn't find in a closed, for-profit business.
  - __MatrixMan__ 5mo ago
    You mean like OpenAI back when it was a nonprofit?
    - swed420 5mo ago
      So figure out what they did wrong. It's going to have to be more original than the easily subverted traditional "nonprofit" model.
      - __MatrixMan__ 5mo ago
        Maybe the right lawyer is out there for that challenge. But legal code is running on compromised infrastructure these days so I think we should plan to operate as if the law is against us.