I think you're on the right track, but not getting to what I view as the logical conclusion: publicly funded options, free at the point of service to everyone. I've also humored the idea of taking it one level of abstraction further: a publicly funded cloud computing infrastructure, access to which is free (up to a level of usage). People could then choose to use these cloud computing resources to host, say, federated instances of open social networks.
I mean, it will never happen, but I think it's a path that resolves a lot of problems, and therefore a fun thought experiment.
The Hacker News community feels like a particularly knowledgeable group of people that could provide good insight into what is happening. Discussion around it is clearly being tamped down, for political reasons.
Would you say the same about people joining picket lines and marches? Any sort of peaceful protest?
Also, you're projecting. You don't (and can't) know what a person's true goals are. Framing these actions as them communicating they are morally superior to someone (you?) is a thought in that other person's head, not the protestors. Maybe these straight people truly believe this form of protest (not getting married) will bring attention to a cause and maybe change some people's minds. Did it? Who knows. But good on them for at least trying.
Reading Paul Graham's musings on "wokeness" is a complete waste of time. Please find the words of other better informed people to read, who have an actual interest in addressing problems like racism and sexism.
Also, for all his complaining about people being performative, he commits the sin himself. He is doing the dance conservative fascists want him to. Paul, do us all a favor, and just skip to the ending we all know you're heading for: fall in line with Trump, lock arms with your fellow oligarchs, and take obvious active measures to suppress any threats your wealth and power.
This deluge of terrible things from Zuck over the past few days is so clearly 100% in deference to Trump. The fact that Zuck name-checked Twitter when explaining the change to Community Notes was also such an obvious tell. If he viewed Twitter as a competitor, he would have framed this shift in policy as something better than what Twitter does. But instead, "we're doing what they're doing" is a message that he is essentially collaborating with Musk on shared goals.
Gee, what goals might those be.
I had deleted Facebook years ago, but this has convinced to also delete my Instagram. Sincerely hoping an Instagram alternative starts to take shape, like what Bluesky is to Twitter.
I could call you small minded for thinking only of advances in rocket technology, and ignoring the negative aspects of advancing Musk's power and influence. Should I?
Full stack web software engineer with over 20 years of experience using various technologies, with a recent focus on Ruby on Rails and React. I have 15 years of experience in the education industry, and would love to continue my career with a company in the education space, or other mission-driven companies. I've worked at small companies my entire career, requiring me to consistently lean into skills beyond just engineering.
You're very much missing the visual artistry of the movie, and focusing too much on literal story telling. You can do that if you like, but the visual aspects are why this movie belongs on this list.
One way to approach film making is to see it as the art of moving objects in 3d space, then using a camera to transpose those objects onto a 2d plane. Take the resultant series of images, and splice / edit them into a feature film. Fury Road is a masterclass in this craft. Every frame a painting and all that. Every edit is perfect.
Something along these lines feels like a decent alternative to (but not a replacement of) social media that's privately owned and for profit, that could exist in parallel to what we have now. If we can build something on a platform whose goal isn't profit for shareholders, maybe we can avoid the inevitable enshittification.
It's also crossed my mind that the government could provide something that's one more layer of abstraction away from social media: a public cloud infrastructure, that people could use to spin up virtual servers to do whatever they want, e.g. running federated social media servers? This would absolve the government from the responsibility of moderating a social media platform, while still giving motivated people the resources for running one themselves.
I understand your point, but I think an assumption that a lot of internet users have, and a fundamental pitch of the internet, is that the internet is the tool you use to _find_ people to bowl with in the first place.
As opposed to recognizing these problems ahead of time, and instead creating a (public?) system for forming these social networks that doesn't need to monetize. One that wouldn't be corrupted by the needs for ever-increasing profits.
I don't mean for that system to necessarily be a full replacement for the social networks we have now, but I'd argue there's room for something like a public alternative to them.
I definitely agree, but I would also suggest that the need for social media companies to monetize on engagement incentivises them to exacerbate the issues you mention. Removing those incentives might improve political discussion.
I don't think it's a good idea to assume / hope that HN remains that way. Money is still an aspect of the existence of HN. It exists because pg has enough money to run it, and its existence aligns with his current desires. This community could just as easily dissappear in a way equivalent to what we're seeing with Twitter and Reddit, if pg wanted. And it could not be easily replaced, because its existence is dependent on pg's money...