this post was submitted on 13 Aug 2025
437 points (95.2% liked)

Technology

74055 readers
3542 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 5 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Social spaces aren't something that needs fixing.

We blame the problems caused by wealth inequality on technology as a way to not even discuss making the rich contribute to society

[–] nullpotential@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

they could still do with some fixing

[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

What's the issue that you think social media is causing?

I'm willing to bet that wealth redistribution would fix almost any of the issues people blame on social media.

[–] faceula@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

Ohh dude. That's a really interesting thought. Genuinely. I wonder if this could actually reap positive consequences. But also to be fair if your main aim is to proliferate through engagement (see shock), then there's no positive hope to have a good affect on the audience.

[–] bridgeenjoyer@sh.itjust.works 10 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

I also noticed something in my friend group. No one makes anything. Its all share share share. Im the only one taking original photos or videos or making jokes. Its kind of sad. And is not like their lives are boring either. They'd just rather consume others stuff.

Are most people like that?

[–] tempest@lemmy.ca 5 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

I've started asking people what they have created lately... They seem to take it as an insult when it isn't meant to be.

The reality is consuming is easier than producing. You can see it with the usage of phones and tablets vs laptops. It's hard to create on a touch screen but it's easy to consume.

[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 2 points 8 hours ago

Does making horrible horrible things in CK2 count as creation? If not I am simply creating a mess of my life.

[–] bridgeenjoyer@sh.itjust.works 1 points 8 hours ago

Yeah its sad computing is dying because of ipads. Lot of people.dont even have a computer.

[–] BlindFrog@lemmy.world 2 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

Yes.

Whatchu gonna do about it?
~(not asking specifically you, bridge, just didn't want to leave the thread at a circle jerk)~

[–] AI_toothbrush@lemmy.zip 10 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (13 children)

I mean lemmy is pretty fucking neat, i love it here, no need to fix anything.

[–] Krudler@lemmy.world 1 points 8 hours ago
load more comments (12 replies)
[–] Kissaki@feddit.org 2 points 12 hours ago

But what we find is that it's not just that this content spreads; it also shapes the network structures that are formed. So there's feedback between the effective emotional action of choosing to retweet something and the network structure that emerges. And then in turn, you have a network structure that feeds back what content you see, resulting in a toxic network. The definition of an online social network is that you have this kind of posting, reposting, and following dynamics. It's quite fundamental to it. That alone seems to be enough to drive these negative outcomes.

Trying to grasp it in my own words;

Because social networks are about interactions and networks (follows, communities, topics, instances), they inherently human nature establish toxic networks.

Even when not showing content through engagement-based hot or active metrics, interactions will push towards networking effects of central players/influencers and filter and trigger bubbles.

If there were no voting, no followable accounts or communities, it would not be a social network anymore (by their definition).

[–] bigbabybilly@lemmy.world 31 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Social media isn’t broken. It’s working exactly how it was meant to. We just need to break free of it.

[–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 1 day ago (8 children)

first of all, it's a broad overgeneralization to assume that all social media is created with the intention to manipulate people. there was honest people running social media, but it's long past. (in the corporate domain)

  • social media can be useful if it presents non-emotional, non-brigading content. rational discourse is one of the valuable options possible. throwing away the whole internet because Xitter sucks is throwing away the baby with the bathwater.

  • but yes, social media is the new Volksempfänger and manipulates people (social engineering)

[–] DSTGU@sopuli.xyz 6 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

No social media was created to manipulate people. (Most) social media is a business, optimised to make money. You make money by showing people ads. You can show more ads to people if they stay on the platform longer. You can make people stay longer by engaging them emotionally. End of conspiracy...

[–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

also propaganda is just political ads, and the way companies make money on the internet is by showing ads ..

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 1 points 12 hours ago

Facebook got their seed money from Peter Thiel. They also employ a lot of ex CIA. So not sure about the no conspiracy thing.

Also the millions they take in creating targeted political ads in order to manipulate their users and influence elections isn't a conspiracy. How they met with the President, kissed his ring, and then went all in on right wing content.

Yeah no conspiracy here, just keep walking

[–] stickly@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

But it's not possible to get unbiased content on the internet. Everything exists with an agenda behind it, for the sole reason that hosting anything is going to constantly cost money.

This wasn't a huge deal when individuals were paying to host and share content to a small audience, it was a small amount of money and you could see their motives clearly (a forum for a hobby, a passion project, an online store, etc...).

Social media is different because it presents itself as a public forum where anything can be shared and hosted (for free) to as many people as you want. But they're still footing a very large bill and the wide net of content makes their motives completely opaque. Nobody cares that much about the headaches of maintaining a free and open public forum, and any profit motive is just another way to sell manipulation.

yeah the commercialization of the internet is the problem, 100%. if it were hobby projects, it wouldn't suck so hard.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] moseschrute@lemmy.world 22 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] fyzzlefry@retrolemmy.com 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

As long as you know you're in an echo chamber there's nothing wrong with it. Everything is an echo chamber of varying sizes.

[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 1 points 20 hours ago

Or do everything within your reach to make everything an echo chamber, cough cough fandom gatekeepers being toxic to people they don't like and think are responsible to changes to their beloved media.

[–] imetators@lemmy.dbzer0.com 41 points 1 day ago (12 children)

The amount of comments thinking that Lemmy is totally not like a typical social media is absurd.

Guys, we only don't have major tracking of users here.That's it! Everything else is the fucking same shit you'd see on facebook. The moment Lemmy gets couple tens of millions of users, we gonna become 2nd facebook.

[–] hansolo@lemmy.today 17 points 1 day ago (7 children)

It's that there's no incentive to have 80 million bots manipulate everything. Our user base is too small, and likely too jaded about fake internet points to be a target for scammers, ai slop bots, or advertisers.

Or at least that's what I thought when I drink a refreshing Pepsi! hiss-crack! glugg glugg Aaaah!! PEPSI! The brown fizz that satisfies! Pepsi!

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
[–] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

No shit. Unless the Internet becomes democratised and publicly funded like other media in other countries like the BBC or France24, social media will always be toxic. They thrive in provocations and there are studies to prove it, and social media moguls know this. Hell, there are people who make a living triggering people to gain attention and maintain engagement, which leads to advertising revenue and promotions.

As long as profit motive exists, the social media as we know it can never truly be fixed.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mienshao@lemmy.world 185 points 2 days ago (9 children)

“Fixing” social media is like “fixing” capitalism. Any manmade system can be changed, destroyed, or rebuilt. It’s not an impossible task but will require a fundamental shift in the way we see/talk to/value each other as people.

The one thing I know for sure is that social media won’t ever improve if we all accept the narrative that it can’t be improved.

We live in capitalism. Its power seems inescapable. So did the divine right of kings. Any human power can be resisted and changed by human beings. Resistance and change often begin in art, and very often in our art, the art of words.

-Ursula K Le Guin

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] uberdroog@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago

Its performing as expected

[–] 3dcadmin@lemmy.relayeasy.com 7 points 1 day ago

Should just be people can't be fixed....

load more comments
view more: next ›