I suggest watching the video, https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QkC1aK7jfLo but the article has an OK summary.
Also a Mastodon shout-out in the video.
She was a great guest - and it was really cool to hear the “mastadonverse” shoutout haha.
While not 100% her final point, one of the greatest disappointments of the Internet has been watching rot and crumble into just 5 websites, each just posting screenshots/videos from the other four.
I’m doing my part!
I never used Twitter in the first place, so I guess I’m not in the “addicted” category, but I did have an account, in November of 2024 I did actively cancel that X account. Google pushes me X links in my “news feed” I consistently tell Google “No more stories from ____ on X” (they won’t let you block all of X, I wonder why…)
Seriously, folks, how hard is it to just walk away? I was on BlueSky for about 3-4 months, got a little invested/addicted to the platform and took a hard look at what value I was getting from it - on balance: negative. Cold turkey, do I miss it? No.
Facebook holds a (solitary) users group I occasionally want to talk with captive, they acknowledge it’s a terrible platform but they’re too lazy to leave, so I log in when I need to talk with them and that’s it. Anybody “in there” I care about? Long distance phone calls are free these days, e-mail works, why should I be sharing stuff with people I don’t know just to communicate with people I do know?
Seriously, folks, how hard is it to just walk away?
Respectfully, walk away from Google.
walk away from Google.
I can quit, any time I want to… (yeah, they’ve got their hooks deep). But, you’ve gotta carry a phone - right?
The average American feels an unmet need for connection. Social media immediately fills that need, exactly like a drug. For a few minutes anyway. You don’t get the benefits of a real connection, just the dopamine. Pretty soon you feel worse, and the best way to stop feeling bad is to hit refresh or keep scrolling. I’m glad we’re finally looking at the consequences of social media for kids, then we can look at what it does to adults.
Social media immediately fills that need, exactly like a drug.
In the late 1980s crack cocaine swept into Miami at bargain prices - but “real” cocaine was already all over the place… show some refinement/self-respect people, don’t smoke the crack. In terms of social media, maybe actually socialize instead of “smoking the crack” of Facebook? Yeah, Facebook is cheaper than meeting people for an activity (any activity) - but get your fat ass up and do something real, it’s better for you.
in other news, water is wet.
I’ve been telling people this for over 15 years.
I hope one day people finally do it, but I won’t waste my breath anymore on insufferable people who are willing to sell out their freedom for convenience.
There was a similar post recently about Cambridge leaving twitter, and it got me thinking that universities are really the ideal organizations to host lemmy servers. They have a vested interest in truth and community building. They have a decent enough sense of free speech to stay federated with most other instances. They have pre-existing communities on topic ranging from clubs to technical subjects. Users can confirm their identities by association with the universities, which will keep things civil. Obviously I don’t think they should be the only instances - anonymity has it’s place and value - but I really think universities should be hosting instances.
Im surprised there aren’t student clubs or something hosting instances now that you mention it. That would be a great student project for any CS or even journalism schools.
Right! Plus, it’d be an ideal route to solicit donations to the university - people are more attached to their social media than sports ball teams. Not hosting lemmy and mastadon instances is practically throwing away money!
Depends on the university. Some of them are still like that, some of them are totally ideologically captured such that they have encoded being anti-free speech into their conduct codes, and/or they simple would not want to deal with the fallout of bad actors would/could do to their servers.
A lot of university’s slide towards authoritarian centralizing of power post COVID along with internalizing their student bodies. Sadly. They themselves aren’t the bastions of freedom and truth they once were, because those things don’t make the bottom line go up. Many also closed off spaces and programs that were previous open to the public to further isolate themselves from the rest of the world. MIT had libraries and other facilities anyone could use, and now they shut them all off from public access post COVID.
Turns out getting your news from entities that financially support fascism is a bad idea.
Too little too late. They’re right tho
People still use them? Why?
probably sunk cost (time invested, followers gained, networking) + real addiction (meta and x will try to trigger any emotion from you so you are invested in the platform) + accessibility (free or cheap access on mobile data with big providers)
Marketplace killed Craigslist because they’re actually halfway decent at detecting and removing scams. Basically the only redeeming feature
Craigslist is still limping along, it’s a smaller group of buyers but still has traction in some markets.
Gee, wonder Fediverse users, how is that even possible? /s
EFF supporter for years. Have so many of their t-shirts (amazing designs, btw). Cindy Cohn is the real deal. Anyone online should go pay attention to them.
Droppin the link to the EFF website save you the search
The only way to make money on the internet is by spying on everyone.’ So that’s the good news.”
You can watch the full “Daily Show” segment yourself in the video above.
Ironic how the video is in Youtube and requires a login to watch with VPN
I watched it on a VPN without logging in?
Interesting, do you mind sharing which provider you use?
I agree with @wesker@lemmy.sdf.org in their comment. No one in real life is on twitter. Twitter is place that seems real because people on media convince themselves its real and give it substance.
No materially meaningful thing happens on twitter, and its perceived importance is a byproduct of media hyping it up.
Now meta… thats an altogether different beast. FB market place captured most of what used to happen on craiglist. Its how entire families organize and keep together.
In terms of analysis, I’m annoyed at Cohn here. This isn’t something we as individuals have control of. Her saying people individually have to make the difference is like saying you individually have to make the difference regarding climate change by making different choices, like recycling.
So Cohn did mention comprehensive privacy laws and the ability to leave platforms. These are absolutely things that need to happen.
However as an individual there are still things you can do. Cohn mentions Bluesky because it has no algorithm (except the “Discovery” feed). Cohn also mentions (in the video) Mastodon. And the truth is you don’t need to switch fully, just don’t only slurp down the concentrated hate machine(s).
Look at Lemmy. Reddit decided to be pricks and a bunch of individuals jumped over here to create what I think is a pretty good community. That doesn’t mean the problem is solved. That doesn’t mean Reddit isn’t still a problem. That doesn’t mean Lemmy is perfect. But that is a win and something individuals can do.
Additionally, those are things you can do now. You don’t need to wait for some law to be passed to fix things. You can make the move now. (While still advocating for laws to fix things.)
The point of the critique is that individuals have no power to make Twitter less important, or at least, not the audience of this show. Who she should be bringing that critique to is someone like Jon Stewart himself, not to Jon Stewart’s audience. And actually, Jon is a great example of someone who did exactly this, with his Crossfire video.
Jon didn’t go on Crossfire and tell Crossfire’s audience to stop engaging with the content. He went on Crossfire and told the people in power to stop. Broadly, if you are ever doing something where you are shifting responsibility from those in power, to those out of power, you are doing the job of the oppressor.
Literally, Lemmy does not matter whatsoever to reddit, and likewise, Mastodon does not matter whatsoever to Twitter. Those things do not matter. Moving to lemmy or mastadon might make you feel better, but it has made not one iota of difference to those platforms.
Regulation, changes from those in positions of power, those can make a meaningful difference. But its utterly disingenuous to put things that require systemic reform as “collective reform”. Its utterly bonkers, and shields those in power, who can make different decisions, from needing to do so.
Individuals can make accounts on the fediverse meaning they no longer exclusively rely on meta/twitter meaning meta/twitter becomes less important.
I get that a lot of people have all their family on facebook/twitter or whatever, or business page etc. but just make an account on mastodon too, now the fediverse becomes a more attractive place for everyone else.
The “Gee thanks I’m cured” theory of social change.
I think it would be a mistake to paint those two courses of action as mutually exclusive categories.
Yes, governments need to regulate businesses and industry if we want to have a meaningful impact on climate change. Blaming the consumer and putting all the impetus for change on them is misguided at best and deliberate obfuscation in many cases. But that doesn’t mean consumers should feel no responsibility at all. If two companies offer different options, we should as consumers choose to support the company with the more ethical business practices.
Likewise, governments need to regulate big tech companies. But users switching to the fediverse are choosing to be part of the solution rather than the problem, and the more it grows the more it looks like a viable alternative for others who don’t care about the ethics of the platforms they’re supporting. And when FOSS platforms reach a critical mass, it will eat into the corporations’ bottom lines.
Governments need to hold corporations accountable and meaningfully regulate them, but effectively giving consumers license to do whatever they want even if that means supporting corporate tech, and pretending it ultimately doesn’t matter, is kind of defeatist. It’s like saying “Why should the workers go on strike? That’s the union’s job.”
I think we can manage to advance on both fronts at the same time if we really try, but if for a time we can only advance on one front, then we should hold the other on as best we can while we advance on the one we can. Cause the time may come when we have to hold that front, but are able to advance on the other.
In terms of analysis, I’m annoyed at Cohn here. This isn’t something we as individuals have control of. Her saying people individually have to make the difference is like saying you individually have to make the difference regarding climate change by making different choices, like recycling.
I understood her differently. I understood that she advocated into making it possible to leave platforms, saying that it currently isn’t. She said the people are the victims here and often don’t have a choice.
People cannot leave platforms because each platform is like an isle, and leaving it means losing connections to other people. It that sense they are locked-in, by social pressure.
This is is a natural monopoly which, gives social media companies so much power and prevents newcomers (like the fediverse) from joining the market.
Making the current social media companies less important, for instance via privacy laws, means people can connect and stay connected to other people via other means. It makes it easier to just leave twitter or meta, if they don’t like it there. Instead of being peer pressured into right extreme politics, because the algorithm decided that it gets more engagement when surrounding thrm with nazis.
She made it clear that replacing an dictator with another dictator that censors differently is bad, so she made a point against bluesky and for Mastodon and the fediverse.
(Sadly ehe wasn’t given the opportunity to fully complete her arguments though.)
The only way I can see forward is regulation. Antitrust laws have been suspended for too long. They have to be enforced, and interoperable standards must be fiercely enforced, without loopholes, without exceptions. If leaving Facebook for another social media platform does not have to mean you’ll lose all your connections, thanks to interoperable standards, it will be easier for people to ditch them and harder for them to become monopolies.
Cut em out like
