green

joined 1 month ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] green@feddit.nl 4 points 1 week ago

I agree that we need solid alternatives, but this doesn't really tackle the tyranny of the majority problem. We need people to use the platforms for communication, otherwise it has not solved the problem.

For example, if you use Signal but every single one of your friends use WhatsApp and refuses to switch (which is common), then you are forced to use WhatsApp. This is why it is tyranny.

EU can facilitate thousands of platforms, but if the masses don't use them it's pointless.

Federated-platforms are kind of a step in the right direction, but they're extremely weak to internal bad actors. If lemmy.world gets one million normie users, then cuts off the entire federation - then Lemmy has effectively been hijacked and set back 10 years.

[–] green@feddit.nl 9 points 1 week ago (2 children)

It's frustrating but true.

To use an extreme example, if I saw someone just spamming the hard-R I would want their comment immediately removed. The rhetoric makes the space becomes completely unserious; just not a good environment.

The funniest part is that this mirrors real life. If someone did that IRL, I would just leave.

I am not going to argue in terms of right/wrong because I'm just not equipped to. But in terms of platform result, I do not want to participate on a 4Chan clone - because it always leads to unserious discussion, bad faith, and death.

[–] green@feddit.nl 3 points 1 week ago

"All that is old becomes new"

[–] green@feddit.nl 5 points 1 week ago (2 children)

It's not about the car, but what it symbolizes.

I really couldn't give a shit for your kids if you're essentially okay with mine being sent to prisons in El Salvador. This is known as tit-for-tat (or eye-for-an-eye) and is actually the optimal negotiation strategy.

[–] green@feddit.nl 32 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (23 children)

I think this is an XY problem.

People keep trying to bring back the old internet ; This is an broken and outdated solution.

The root problem (in my opinion) is that we need to share critical information to the masses, but the masses introduce "tyranny of the majority". It's a really tricky problem to figure out, and I really really really want mathematicians working on this.

If you live in the states, the Electoral College exists because they were looking for a practical solution to this problem. Considering the outcomes, it did not work - but there is no shame in this, as I think this is actually a really hard problem to solve.

The only known solution is to not share information to the masses (a.k.a keeping the normies out). In essence, this is what the old internet was - and a large part of what made it great. But this is not correct as it does not meet the criteria of the problem. Nor does it translate well, since your neighbors are apart of the masses.

If anyone has any thoughts on this, please share. If you do math for a living, please gather your friends and make an open-thesis about this.


EDIT

After some discussion in the comments, I have a general hypothesis:

  • One platform, one name.

People must be able to distinguish the resource they are accessing - highly recommended this process be easy. This provides consistent "edges".

  • Open protocols only.

Looking at "tyranny of the majority" from a different perspective, one answer is to standardize how people communicate. This means no closed ecosystems nor convoluted protocols. This provides "standard weight" while preventing "infinite weight".

  • Server-wide censorship cannot be allowed.

This eliminates every platform I know of. Servers should not be given any tools to prevent incoming nor outgoing data. People should handle moderation individually - sane UI can of course be made available (BlueSky block filters could be inspiration?). Blocking should only be handled by the "nodes", this also prevents "infinite weight".

I find it really funny that this conclusion kind of alludes to the early internet in a lot of ways. Maybe it wasn't the internet-forums, but the internet itself that has changed.

[–] green@feddit.nl 2 points 1 week ago

freedom means freedom to be able to fail without destroying your life.

Well said.

The unfortunate reality is that part of economic model is combating bad actors. A society that where the people truly believe in this can be built in a lifetime, and it will torn down by the worst among us in a decade. That is simply not a good investment.

Even in Europe, there are significant strides in tearing down what makes the people there happy and succeed (see the AfD in Germany).

This is an incentives problem through-and-through. These types of people should not, and cannot, exist in a functioning society - yet they do. The problem is that we have not figured out a good incentive-model to stop these people from gaining a foothold, so we must individually punish them for attempting to destroy the community.

This is the same exact problem with advertisers. And in the same way, we have not figured out a good way to stop them.

[–] green@feddit.nl 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I'll leave the privacy policy here and let people decide for themselves.

They keep two types of logs. An identifiable one which is deleted in 24-48 hours (dns0 and quad9 also do this) and an anonymized one. There is no mention of "business partners"; and it also says explicitly that the information is not used to target ads.

As the privacy policy and service reads, it is not a honeypot. However, Google generally does not act in good faith, so there's no telling if they have 100% adhered to the policy.

No matter, to make calculated and informed decisions, we should have all the facts in order.

[–] green@feddit.nl 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I would like to avoid going on a rant, so I'll just say this - capitalism does not work. The phenomena you are describing (... now people have too low standards) is called "tyranny of the majority" and capitalism does not have an answer for this. Hence why we really need to figure something out.

As a side note, I do not think communism nor socialism are the answer either! Despite what many are led to believe, we live in primitive times and have not figured out a sustainable economic model.

[–] green@feddit.nl 34 points 1 week ago (7 children)

Wouldn't you just use AFS, CEPH, NFS, or 9p?

I really don't want to be that guy, but isn't SSHFS (FUSE) actually a terrible option when compared to an actual file-system? MacOS isn't really missing out on much there.

The most painful part of MacOS (which makes it downright unbearable for me) is that system configuration files are XML. It's an absolute nightmare.

[–] green@feddit.nl 1 points 1 week ago

People moved from Facebook to Reddit in the past because it was seen as the more community-centric platform.

This has taken a wild shift over the last 5 years; no one who moved over was hoping for Reddit becoming an ad-centric platform.

Decentralization is not a silver bullet. If lemmy.world hits 1 million users, and then a large corporation buys it, lemmy will be set back 10 years. This is an incentive problem, and no amount of workarounds is going to fix it.

[–] green@feddit.nl 3 points 1 week ago (6 children)

We agree here, but this will not necessarily stop the rot. Companies will just approach these communities and offer the leaders massive buyouts, and then flood it with ads (see Twitch).

Communities themselves need mechanisms to punish or vandalize advertisements.

[–] green@feddit.nl 4 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Like I said prior, there is nuance to be had here.

We agree that Google products are generally a honeypot (good products that lure you in), but which products are honeypots are important.

You very likely want to avoid Chrome, Gemini, and Google Search - but 8.8.8.8 is not a honeypot, it is a loss-leader. You will be lured in from 8.8.8.8 if you say "huh. this is a great service. is there anymore?", but 8.8.8.8 itself is not a malignant service.

view more: ‹ prev next ›