Showerthoughts

30531 readers

918 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted, clever little truths, hidden in daily life.

Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts: 1

Rules

All posts must be showerthoughts
The entire showerthought must be in the title
No politics
- If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
- A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
- If you feel strongly that you want politics back, please volunteer as a mod.
Posts must be original/unique
Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct

If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.

Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report the message goes away and you never worry about it.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

vatlark

forkball

Thekingoflorda

500

Meta can rage farm Mastodon without controlling it (lemmy.ca)

submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by [email protected] to c/showerthoughts

97 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Meta can introduce their signature rage farming to the Fediverse. They don't need to control Mastodon. All they have to do is introduce it in their app. Show every Threads user algorithmically filtered content from the Fediverse precisely tailored for maximum rage. When the rage inducing content came from Mastodon, the enraged Thread users will flood that Mastodon threads with the familiar rage-filled Facebook comment section vomit. This in turn will enrage Mastodon users, driving them to engage, at least in the short to mid term. All the while Meta sells ads in-between posts. And that's how they rage farm the Fediverse without EEE-ing the technology. Meta can effectively EEE the userbase. The last E is something Meta may not intend but would likely happen. It consists of a subset of the Fediverse users leaving the network or segregating themselves in a small vomit-free bubble.

Some people asked what EEE is:

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] kava 1 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Either we have an open system or we don't.

It's sort of like open source encryption algorithms versus security by obscurity. One is totally open because it's foundation is strong. The other is hidden because it is actually weak.

Which are we going to be?

[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

This feels very close to the paradox of tolerance, honestly. To achieve maximum tolerance, you can not tolerate those who are intolerant themselves, or they will destroy you from within. I think something similar applies here. To achieve a maximally open system, be open by default, but only to those who actually share the goal to keep the system as open as possible, and defend vigorously against those who don't.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 years ago (1 children)

We are going to be open. Open to the idea that a bucket of shit does not have to be forced upon us. Open to using the tools to get rid of said bucket.

[–] kava 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

What I think is interesting about this is the decision to federate goes down to individual instances. So for example mastodon.social is the biggest - their decision is very important.

But on the smaller level, users will be able to choose instances that won't federated with Meta. And they will be able to choose the inverse.

What I see happening is that the ones that do choose to federated with Meta will grow larger and sort of suck up most of the userbase. At the end of the day, social media sites are only as valuable as the number of users and the interactions between those users.

[–] Rusticus 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

But to give power to the users we’ve got to solve the username problem. Usernames need to be global so there is no penalty to moving between instances.

[–] kava 3 points 2 years ago

Why not just do username@instance and then if you wanna transfer over to somewhere else you have to change your username?

I don't really view that as an issue. The real issue is allowing transfer in the first place, which I don't see anyone doing right now but I agree it would spark a lot of healthy competition between different sites on the Fediverse

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Encryption standards are open, but would you give your private keys to someone untrustworthy?

[–] kava 1 points 2 years ago

No, but I think that's more akin to giving Meta your instance admin password. Federating would be more like sharing your public key. Which, you know, is sort of the whole point.