this post was submitted on 23 Mar 2024
922 points (97.4% liked)

Technology

60584 readers
6406 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 content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  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, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Data from two research firms and figures published by Musk and X suggest a deteriorating situation for X by some metrics. Musk has marketed it as the world’s “town square,” but in number of users it continues to lag far behind social media rivals that focus on video, such as Instagram and TikTok. 

In February, X had 27 million daily active users of its mobile app in the U.S., down 18% from a year earlier, according to Sensor Tower, a market intelligence firm based in San Francisco. The U.S. user base has been flat or down every month since November 2022, the first full month of Musk’s owning the app, and in total it’s down 23% since then, Sensor Tower said.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 85 points 10 months ago (6 children)

I'm actually glad to see what's been happening to Twitter because as much as it was started with good intentions and used to be a positive force for tech, it was also fundamentally flawed social media model. The basic problem was that only positive reactions were allowed - like, retweet, follow. This is NOT the town square, where you can get any reaction. It's more akin to a dictator's rally, where you're only allowed to clap and booing is not allowed. So it's no surprise that over time, it led to filter bubbles and the spread of mass delusions. Because you could say the craziest or most depraved thing, and all you'd hear is applause.

[–] [email protected] 35 points 10 months ago (2 children)

The basic problem was that only positive reactions were allowed - like, retweet, follow

Idk if I would call retweeting positive reaction, especially when that retweet is 'look at this fucking moron'.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Yeah I think if anything twitter is a lesson in how even if you try to give users only positive ways to interact they will find ways to use them to interact negatively. Whether that be quote retweeting or ratioing.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 10 months ago

what a save!
what a save! what a save!

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago (3 children)
[–] JungleJim 14 points 10 months ago

When a piece of content that doesn't allow downvotes, like a tweet, has lots more reposts than it does likes, the "ratio" is seen as proof the opinion was disagreed with, proportionally to the "ratio" itself.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago

When a reply to a tweet gets more engagement than the tweet itself.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I've seen it used to describe when a post has more comments than it has likes.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Makes sense thanks

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago

Yup. That’s actually a problem when people dog pile on someone with a valid point.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 10 months ago

I would say that the "positive vibes only" trait is part of it, but the far bigger problem was the character limit. Even when it was double from 140 to 280, that still doesn't not leave room for nuanced opinions. And then, the least nuanced opinions also become the most easily spreadable. Both traits really reward our worst instincts.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Downvoting and disliking can have their own issues too.

On Lemmy, downvoting isn't really that bad, especially compared to Reddit, and that's likely because of the federated model where instance admins can't trust the authenticity of votes. On Lemmy, voting effects the score on the post and that's it, as opposed to Reddit where taking on too many downvotes will shadow ban or lock your account, even if you still have thousands of karma in the subreddit where it happened. Those restrictions also apply site wide. Lemmy users also don't have a global karma count, which removes most temptation to delete posts that go negative and self censor. Of course there are probably many people out there who would delete a post with a 10:1 negative score ratio. Then again if it's that bad then it might not be a bad thing to delete it.

Both models have their place and pros and cons. I understand the nefarious intent behind this change on Youtube, but I feel like hiding negative feedback so that only the poster can see it has potential. It could deter bandwagon downvote brigading. Dislikes are really only relevant to the algorithm and the user who posted the content.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago

In Lemmy you can also disable the visualization of the voting system instance-side and client-side. I disable it, then, after writing my piece, it's out there. If people don't like it and they don't reply, well, deal with it.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago

Well said, I think that is the best explanation I have ever heard on the sites flaws.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

I'm not sure which platform (fb, Twitter, YouTube???) it was, but it did count "unfollow" or "block user/block channel/block post" as negative feedback, limiting future reach of this person's posts to other users of the platform.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Yeah I've always thought of it as a "build your own cult" toolkit. On Twitter you too can try your hand at being a cult leader with followers that agree with everything you say.