4 ms·

For starters, what's "social media"? It's kind of a undefinable phrase. Obviously Facebook and Instagram are agreed to be "social media".But is Youtube social m

For starters, what's "social media"? It's kind of a undefinable phrase. Obviously Facebook and Instagram are agreed to be "social media".But is Youtube social media? How about HN? Or any website with a comment section?

neutronicus 3mo ago
I’d start with “platform on which it’s possible to become an Influencer” and work backwards.
- krapp 3mo ago
  So all platforms. Unless you have a definition of "influencer" more rigid than "person with some degree of influence." Because that includes Hacker News.
roundabout-host 3mo ago
Or WhatsApp? Or Matrix? Or SMS? Or the telephone network? Or email? Or Google Docs?
achenet 3mo ago
I'd argue that generally speaking, the problematic social media tend to be ad-supported websites that focus on user-generated content. so Facebook, Instagram, YouTube and Reddit are all social-media, because all are ad-supported, and all are focused on user-generated content. HN is focused on user-generated content, but not ad-supported (okay, technically HN is 'advertising for YC', but in practice, the site isn't optimized to get you doom-scrolling so you click on more ads), and a website with a comment section, if it's like a blog or something where the majority of the content is generated by the website owner, isn't focused on user-generated content. The combination of user-generated content + advertising, however, seems to create websites that will try to get their users addicted to the site, which can harm the lives of their users.
- nekusar 3mo ago
  The problem is capitalist companies using heavily gamified psychology to prey on people. Mastodon doesn't have this problem. Pixelfed doesn't have this problem. Lemmy doesn't have this problem. Peertube doesn't have this problem. But "social media laws" would hit all of these as well.
  - darkwater 3mo ago
    They are fundamentally different because they are not centralized and, if they are going to be centralized at some point, they will need to find a revenue stream because giving access for free to the whole world, literally, is technically impossible.
    - nekusar 3mo ago
      You basically restated that its all about profit, and centralization. > giving access for free to the whole world, literally, is technically impossible. Again, this is what Mastodon is doing. This is also how email works. And its not technically impossible. Its impossible when you have investors who demand 30x growth at all costs. Its a capitalism issue, with game theory pushing worse and worse solutions to extract smaller percentages of profit.
      - darkwater 3mo ago
        But email is not centralized, and it grew when Internet was really different. Mastodon - which was born in this new Internet - is used by a very small fraction of Twitter/IG/TikTok/Facebook users. I mean, TikTok and Mastodon started both in 2016 and see the difference now...
        nekusar 3mo ago
        > But email is not centralized, and it grew when Internet was really different. Mastodon - which was born in this new Internet - is used by a very small fraction of Twitter/IG/TikTok/Facebook users. I mean, TikTok and Mastodon started both in 2016 and see the difference now... Email and mastodon and pixelfed and peertube are all federated. Everyone can run their own server, pay others, or join others. Federated services can still work today. And yes Tiktok started in 2016 along with Mastodon. Ok. Mastodon's success isnt bound up in venture capitalism or hockeystick growth or 100x returns. Its completely organic growth that doesnt have anything to do with money. People share and talk about stuff all the time, and there's no profit motive in nearly anything. No advertisements, no upsells. And enshittification and extractive "growth" applies strongly to Tiktok, and that smell pervades everything about it. Advertisements, making usage worse, worse payouts to user/advertiser/influencer. Everyones there for the views and the quick dollars. But they attract more people BECAUSE of the predatory pirahna-dollar water, and the hopes of making it big.
GuB-42 3mo ago
When I had to fill up the ESTA form to enter the US, this is what was in the "social media" drop down list: - ASKfm - Facebook - Flickr - GitHub - Google+ - Instagram - JustPaste.it - LinkedIn - Tumblr - Twitter - Vine - VKontakte (VK) - YouTube This is obviously outdated but it can give an idea.
- jhbadger 3mo ago
  That's interesting - Github as social media? That's an idea of would never have thought of in a million years. Personally, I'd be glad if a child of mine hung out there - not at all like something like Instagram or Facebook.
  - GuB-42 3mo ago
    I was also surprised, but it makes sense. It is based on user-generated content, it has a comment system, followers and stars (similar to "likes"). There is even an attention economy, and some gamification. Social media doesn't have to be bad, it just needs to be social.
    - blt 3mo ago
      github's original tagline was "Social Coding".

neutronicus 3mo ago

I’d start with “platform on which it’s possible to become an Influencer” and work backwards.

krapp 3mo ago
So all platforms. Unless you have a definition of "influencer" more rigid than "person with some degree of influence." Because that includes Hacker News.

roundabout-host 3mo ago

Or WhatsApp? Or Matrix? Or SMS? Or the telephone network? Or email? Or Google Docs?

achenet 3mo ago

I'd argue that generally speaking, the problematic social media tend to be ad-supported websites that focus on user-generated content. so Facebook, Instagram, YouTube and Reddit are all social-media, because all are ad-supported, and all are focused on user-generated content. HN is focused on user-generated content, but not ad-supported (okay, technically HN is 'advertising for YC', but in practice, the site isn't optimized to get you doom-scrolling so you click on more ads), and a website with a comment section, if it's like a blog or something where the majority of the content is generated by the website owner, isn't focused on user-generated content. The combination of user-generated content + advertising, however, seems to create websites that will try to get their users addicted to the site, which can harm the lives of their users.

nekusar 3mo ago
The problem is capitalist companies using heavily gamified psychology to prey on people. Mastodon doesn't have this problem. Pixelfed doesn't have this problem. Lemmy doesn't have this problem. Peertube doesn't have this problem. But "social media laws" would hit all of these as well.
- darkwater 3mo ago
  They are fundamentally different because they are not centralized and, if they are going to be centralized at some point, they will need to find a revenue stream because giving access for free to the whole world, literally, is technically impossible.
  - nekusar 3mo ago
    You basically restated that its all about profit, and centralization. > giving access for free to the whole world, literally, is technically impossible. Again, this is what Mastodon is doing. This is also how email works. And its not technically impossible. Its impossible when you have investors who demand 30x growth at all costs. Its a capitalism issue, with game theory pushing worse and worse solutions to extract smaller percentages of profit.
    - darkwater 3mo ago
      But email is not centralized, and it grew when Internet was really different. Mastodon - which was born in this new Internet - is used by a very small fraction of Twitter/IG/TikTok/Facebook users. I mean, TikTok and Mastodon started both in 2016 and see the difference now...
      - nekusar 3mo ago
        > But email is not centralized, and it grew when Internet was really different. Mastodon - which was born in this new Internet - is used by a very small fraction of Twitter/IG/TikTok/Facebook users. I mean, TikTok and Mastodon started both in 2016 and see the difference now... Email and mastodon and pixelfed and peertube are all federated. Everyone can run their own server, pay others, or join others. Federated services can still work today. And yes Tiktok started in 2016 along with Mastodon. Ok. Mastodon's success isnt bound up in venture capitalism or hockeystick growth or 100x returns. Its completely organic growth that doesnt have anything to do with money. People share and talk about stuff all the time, and there's no profit motive in nearly anything. No advertisements, no upsells. And enshittification and extractive "growth" applies strongly to Tiktok, and that smell pervades everything about it. Advertisements, making usage worse, worse payouts to user/advertiser/influencer. Everyones there for the views and the quick dollars. But they attract more people BECAUSE of the predatory pirahna-dollar water, and the hopes of making it big.

GuB-42 3mo ago

When I had to fill up the ESTA form to enter the US, this is what was in the "social media" drop down list: - ASKfm - Facebook - Flickr - GitHub - Google+ - Instagram - JustPaste.it - LinkedIn - Tumblr - Twitter - Vine - VKontakte (VK) - YouTube This is obviously outdated but it can give an idea.

jhbadger 3mo ago
That's interesting - Github as social media? That's an idea of would never have thought of in a million years. Personally, I'd be glad if a child of mine hung out there - not at all like something like Instagram or Facebook.
- GuB-42 3mo ago
  I was also surprised, but it makes sense. It is based on user-generated content, it has a comment system, followers and stars (similar to "likes"). There is even an attention economy, and some gamification. Social media doesn't have to be bad, it just needs to be social.
  - blt 3mo ago
    github's original tagline was "Social Coding".