this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2025
235 points (96.1% liked)

Ask Lemmy

32673 readers
1253 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected]. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected] or [email protected]


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The emergence of social media has destroyed all the small communities to standardize communication and information.

It's a bit of a digital version of rural exodus. And since 2017/2018, I've noticed that everything that, in my opinion, represented the internet has disappeared.

I've known Lemmy for a few hours and I feel like I'm back in the early spirit of the internet.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 hour ago

Its not so much social media that ruined it, as capitalism and centralization.

Forums themselves are a form of social media, and they're (mostly) great. For Reddit and Lemmy, debatably the best part is the social elements, like the comments sections. The problem isn't the interaction or the "social" nature of it. Its that these platforms have turned into psudo-monopolies intent on controlling people and/or wringing them for every penny.

Thats not to say toxicity and capitalistic exploitation didn't exist before either. The term "flame war" is older than a lot of adults today. Unlike today though, platforms were both more decentralized meaning they were easier to manage and users could switch platform, and were less alorithmic meaning that users could more easily avoid large, bad-faith actors. You'll notice the Fediverse have both these qualities, which is part of why its done so well.

IMO, the best fix to this, would be twofold. A) break up the big monopolies and possibly the psudo-monopolies. Monopolies bad, simple enough. B) Much more difficult, but I believe that what content a site promotes, including algorithmically, should be regulated. Thats not to say sorting algorithms should be banned, but I think we need to regulate how they're used and implemented. For example, regulations could include things like requiring alternative algorithms be offered to users, banning "black box" algorithms, requiring the algorithns be publicly published, and/or banning algorithms that change based on an individual's engagement. Ideally, this would give the user more agency over their experience and would reduce the odds of ignorant users being pushed into cult-like rabbit-holes.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 53 minutes ago

I don't blame social media at all. The Internet was, and still is, a communications platform. Some form of "social media" has always existed on the internet even if they were not called that back then.

I blame doing shit for the sole purpose of making money to be what has fucked up the internet. At least it's only fucked on the surface. The real Internet still exists, it's just not right out in the open where any random normie can find it.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 hour ago

Most people aren't made for the internet.

Most people can't handle the type of information. Most people fall for rage-bait, hate-inducing, right-wing propaganda.

We need to find a way to make the internet a thing where there's only people on it who actually want to use the internet in a healthy way.

One way to do this is to say no to commercialized parts of the internet. Say no to all commercial platforms selling ads or selling your data. These are full of rage-bait and only attract the worst in humans.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 28 minutes ago

Throughout history, every village had one idiot, two max. And maybe one psycho.

Today thanks to the power of the internet these idiots and those psychos can unite and create big communities and represent a strong unified force in the world.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 hour ago

Algorithm curated content driven by engagement doesn't deserve to be called social media any more. The Feed, seems apropriate, malnourishing as it is.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 33 minutes ago* (last edited 32 minutes ago)

I fucking hate anyone on the internet who starts with "am I the only one..." Its so tired, lazy, lacks creativity, and has a touch of narcissism or inability to be self-aware.

But this!

Holy shit. For anyone to truly think they are the only ones to have considered social media to be such a bad thing with 7-8 billion of us and social media for 20 fucking years.

Absolute garbage. Get a mirror and do some reflection OP. Holy fucking shit.

And for the record.... NOBODY is the only one for anything. Pick a different I tro for once. Holy god damned shit.

I can only hope some twatwaffle responds to me merely saying "This."

[–] [email protected] 24 points 3 hours ago (6 children)

Whenever I get overwhelmed by the modern web, I go to http://wiby.me/ and click "surprise me..."

It's a search engine that only spits out "real" webpages that were made by people like you and me. Very refreshing.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 hour ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 17 minutes ago

Saved, thanks for sharing. I just learned how geologists date rocks 😎

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

If I had a lot of money I would fund the creation of a new search engine. It would operate entirely on a white list model. And every website on it would be reviewed by people, for people. No posts from any social media site would be allowed; only small webpages. To be featured in the engine, sites would have to have verifiable human origins. So personal blogs made by real people or small businesses with actual physical addresses that can be fully verified in the real world. In order to get your business featured, you would have to apply, and someone would physically have to visit you in order to verify your authenticity. Oh, and any website that uses AI in any form would simply be ineligible to appear on the search engine.

Yes, this would result in a drastically reduced pool of potential sites, but what remains would be absolute gold.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 30 minutes ago (1 children)

I love the idea, but wouldn't it be one of those old web indices (like a site or book that was just a list of other sites) with a keyword search function? Like a centralized webring with user submissions?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 26 minutes ago

Yeah, I'm basically envisioning something like that. An old school web index composed entirely of human-curated human-made content. How to actually fund such an effort? I have no idea. That's why I started with the the premise that I somehow had millions to throw at the project. It would invariably be very labor intensive.

It would probably have to be subscription funded. Maybe there's a way to pull it off, but getting people to pay for subscriptions for services like this has long been fraught. Surveillance capitalism was built because donations don't cut it, and no one wanted to spend a few bucks a month for Google or Facebook access.

[–] Showroom7561 5 points 2 hours ago

That's my you for sharing. It's painful to realize in hindsight that those websites were peak internet.

They lack polish, but they were all a labour of love. No enshittification, no selling things, no corporate influence, no shit posting.

Everything had a purpose, every post took effort, and it was all about sharing experiences or knowledge.

I really miss that internet.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 hours ago

Needs moar webrings.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 hours ago

It's not destroyed, it's just no longer dominant.

[–] SplashJackson 2 points 2 hours ago

I guarentee you're not the only one

[–] [email protected] 21 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

It's not social media per se. It's capitalism. The Internet was this vast frontier, where you could meet anyone. Little communities formed, we all just talked, and self-regulated any bad behavior. It was a gift economy, we all freely shared knowledge, files, culture.

In the past 20 or so years, economies of scale took over. Corporations bought up the server space and aggressively shut down small communities. Community is discouraged, keep scrolling and click on the ads! Marketing killed the internet.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Came here to say exactly this. Capitalism breeds consumerism - and consumerism destroys everything.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 27 minutes ago

I predicted back in 2000 that the net would become a big complex system of cable channels, you pay for every site you visit. It's sure AF going that way.

Something wonderful is gone forever. Thanks America.

[–] [email protected] 67 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

The early Internet was social media, but it wasn't so corporatized to the point of being ruined.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 3 hours ago

Social media, at it's heart, is inevitable. We will always find a way to share pictures, information, videos, etc. with each other. It's such basic functionality when you really think about it. We're social creatures and this is the most important thing we would do with technology.

The issue is specifically with platforms; how they consolidate power and who owns them.

I don't know what to do about it, it's one of the biggest problems we are going to continue to face in our time. I can't really armchair solutions for it now, but I think it's of the utmost importance that we recognize it and discuss it.

Social media is not inherently bad, it's the platforms.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 4 hours ago

To expand on that, all media with a negligible barrier to entry is social media. Which describes the internet as a whole. The commodification of such media is both unnecessary and parasitic. The only thing "social media" adds is accessibility.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 hours ago

Yes. I'm a big fan of lemmy. I hope peertube gets going I feel it will be like the original YouTube

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 hours ago

Yeah. Yeah it's just you my dude. There's no way I've ever heard that sentiment before on websites or other posts.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

Not the only one, but it's the walled garden platform approach.

The idea (from around 2010ish) was that every platform is an app and every app is everything. A company buys up other smaller companies until you have a payment system, a marketplace, a VOIP system, advertising, job posting boards, 4 different waya to share media, etc. etc.

While the tech world sold this as, and actually viewed this as, some organic online super village, it wasn't. It was a series of shit stripmalls adjacent to a Walmart in a shitberg town on a big freeway linking other shiberg towns with Walmarts. Sterile, restrictive, one size fits all dipshits kind of garbage. There's a kind of person that thrives in the parking lots of Walmarts and stripmalls in shitberg towns, and they thrive on social media, too.

Lemmy reminds me more of early internet as well, but also refined by the common language of those platforms as a common starting point. It's a niche, and it's not for everyone. But it is for you, welcome.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago

The idea (from around 2010ish) was that every platform is an app and every app is everything. A company buys up other smaller companies until you have a payment system, a marketplace, a VOIP system, advertising, job posting boards, 4 different waya to share media, etc. etc.

You're describing AOL. This is nothing new. And just as AOL failed and faded, so will the social media giants.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

There's a kind of person that thrives in the parking lots of Walmarts and stripmalls in shitberg towns, and they thrive on social media, too.

Well put. I'm old school Tripod days (if anyone remembers what that was). I've seen social media go from "A/S/L?" to "like & subscribe" and everything in between. It was never that clean, and the lot lizards were always lurking.

[–] [email protected] 35 points 5 hours ago

No, not the only one -

The internet is just a microcosm of social media’s destruction of our entire social fabric

[–] [email protected] 14 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

Social media back then was making stuff you thought was cool and having friends and other weirdos across the Internet also enjoying the same things as you.

Social media today is juicing the algorithm to generate the most views, regardless of whether you like the content you're producing or not.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 hours ago

Social media back then were also referred to as social NETWORKS. A network implies collaboration and interactivity, media are more linear, having a sender and a recipient.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 hours ago

The algorithm(s) and "For You" pages I think have done more damage to my ideal internet than anything else ever has.

I have a feeling that someday in the future we'll also see that the algorithm was also responsible for damage to the human mind and society as well.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

What “represented the internet” in your opinion?

“Small communities” still exist all over the internet, in far greater numbers than before. They exist on the giant social media platforms too. Discord, WhatsApp, facebook, reddit, etc all have millions of “small communities” on them.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 hours ago

OP is asking about where to find cute, locally owned retailers & you are telling them they can find the same shit at the mall.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 4 hours ago (8 children)

The internet has always been a collection of social media platforms: bulletin boards, Usenet, IRC, people hosting little personal sites and making contact with each other via email, etc. It got bad when big money arrived and brought in the general public. First is was platforms like AOL's chat rooms and forums, and later things like Facebook and Twitter. We are all living in eternal September now.

Exhibit A: this t-shirt from 1994

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

Everyone clustered on like 4 websites for convenience, and then browsing the internet started to feel like wandering around different sections of the same department store: sterile, corporate, advertiser-safe, and everything's transactional. Plus, it made it incredibly easy for any party that wants to astroturf public opinion, because now they only have to set up shop on a few sites: botting comments, infiltrating moderator positions, abusing the algorithms.

We desperately need to break the internet's monoculture, and I think federated social media like this is a great start.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

The real problem - how do you deal with bots? Sure, we could start a new nerd movement to say, revive web rings and personal websites. But with LLMS and other AIs, how do you keep that whole ecosystem from just being flooded with AI content?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago

I honestly don't know. It's going to be a big problem. LLMs are capable of having this exact convo we're having without giving away the game.

Some sort of personal vouching system? Ever changing "human tests"? I'm not sure it'll be enough.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

Not social media per sé, but definitely "the algorithm" that was introduced around ~2014 and has been tweaked by the likes of Cambridge Analytica to now provide us with endless ragebait.

MySpace was social media and had none of the toxicity.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

MySpace was social media and had none of the toxicity.

Usenet was Social Media and it had allllll the toxicity.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 hours ago

Randall published this on February 20, 2008.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Exactly. The algorithm is literally designed to stop people from thinking about what they actually care about. Of course that has caused deterioration of every aspect of human society to some degree.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago

Truth. We need to massively regulate social media. If I had my way, I would prohibit any large social media site from offering any kind of content stream algorithmically targeted to a single user.

This wouldn't be a restriction on speech. You could still have your website and publish whatever you wanted. You could still have sites where people can upload user content. But something like YouTube would look far different. YouTube could have one main page of content they show everyone, but they couldn't have individual feeds for individual users. If you wanted to find content not on the main page, you would have to find it yourself. You would have to find channels, subscribe to them, share recommendations with friends, etc. If people want to create their own curated content feed, that's fine. But they have to be the ones that do it.

We don't even need to ban social media. What we need to completely ban is individually-targeted algorithmic content. That's what's lead us to the insanity we are currently experiencing. And this should apply to everyone, not just kids. If anything adults need this more than kids do.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

I’ve known Lemmy for a few hours and I feel like I’m back in the early spirit of the internet.

Welcome :)

It’s a bit of a digital version of rural exodus. And since 2017/2018, I’ve noticed that everything that, in my opinion, represented the internet has disappeared.

This a very interesting metaphor, real spot on.

But I would say a lot of that rural Internet has not disappeared, not yet. It's still there, very much alive. People are simply not visiting it anymore. They don't dare go outside the pretty walled-gardens they're used to.

But those people wanting to stay parked in their corporate-owned gardens, or silos, doesn't make that small and more humane web go away. And would they chose to, they could still come visit it freely, they could still easily interact with their creators. They could even create and tend to their very own part of it, making that small Web a richer place.

They just don't do it. Most of the time because they can't be bothered with doing the actual work, or because they're afraid to try and to fail. They want to be fed easy to eat content, not learn to cook it themselves.

They want the a Web that is like those shitty fast-food serving standardized and over-processed industrial food. Something ready to eat that is barely food at all but that will stuff their belly and, more importantly, that will never surprise them. Alas, this food is as much a poison for their head as it is for their body. They will realize that too late. It probably already is.

Too bad, because the alternative is still a thing, not that far away.

The small web is still a thing. Many blogs still exist that only share content their author sincerely care about or is interested in, that are ads and tracking free, that respect their readers... But the majority of people have quit visiting them, they simply don't go outside of, say, YT, X, Facebook, Reddit, Instagram, TikTok or whatever where they can all stay together parked like the cattle they have not yet realized they have become.

Back to your original metaphor. Digital rurality is still there and many could easily own a small part of it and make it exwactly like they want it to be, and be happy with it. But they prefer staying in the large over-crowed cities, in small overpriced apartments like most their friends are doing.

Lemmy is a great alternative to reddit but it could relatively easily become another silos—just plural and not corporate-owned but silos nonetheless. It's up to us to keep it open to the alternatives. I mean, sometimes I feel sad to see little posts & comments inviting people to go read/watch something they liked that is not already hosted on some corporate-owned platform. Heck, sharing personal content feels so much like a lost cause to me that I seldom share a link to my own blog posts: why bother? I also publish a lot less often than I used to, here again: why bother?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 5 hours ago

I like very much the comparison you made of a rural exodus; inspiring!

load more comments
view more: next ›