All innovation is preceded by dissent on the status quo.
164Upvotes
1Downvote
9Reminds

More from Jack

Our problems with social media today really just come down to trust. We built systems that force us to trust a select few with everything from our identities to the distribution of information online. But how do you build it differently? One option is to put the trust in the community, and give them the responsibility of moderation and recommendations. The upside here is that it is more democratic and fair. The downside is that it can fall victim to mob rule, and it’s a lot of work. Crypto incentives can help with this, but building this in a way that cannot be manipulated is very challenging (as we have learned on minds). Another option is to trust only yourself. The upside here is that it means you are truly in full control. The downside is that it is a major responsibility and requires a lot of work that most people are unwilling to do (fighting spam, ranking feeds, finding relevant content or people). Also, the technology is far less mature and scalable to achieve this (for now). This is why people ultimately like Twitter and FB, they do the heavy lifting to maximize user experience (even if they do it wrong). The future might be a hybridization. One where certain aspects of your social network are owned solely by you (your identity, content, and connections), but you put your trust in others to handle things like recommendations, moderation, etc. As long as you own your foundation, then you should be able to move around to different networks with different policies without worrying about the network being able to delete your existence. What do you think? #musings
1.76k views ·

More from Jack

Our problems with social media today really just come down to trust. We built systems that force us to trust a select few with everything from our identities to the distribution of information online. But how do you build it differently? One option is to put the trust in the community, and give them the responsibility of moderation and recommendations. The upside here is that it is more democratic and fair. The downside is that it can fall victim to mob rule, and it’s a lot of work. Crypto incentives can help with this, but building this in a way that cannot be manipulated is very challenging (as we have learned on minds). Another option is to trust only yourself. The upside here is that it means you are truly in full control. The downside is that it is a major responsibility and requires a lot of work that most people are unwilling to do (fighting spam, ranking feeds, finding relevant content or people). Also, the technology is far less mature and scalable to achieve this (for now). This is why people ultimately like Twitter and FB, they do the heavy lifting to maximize user experience (even if they do it wrong). The future might be a hybridization. One where certain aspects of your social network are owned solely by you (your identity, content, and connections), but you put your trust in others to handle things like recommendations, moderation, etc. As long as you own your foundation, then you should be able to move around to different networks with different policies without worrying about the network being able to delete your existence. What do you think? #musings
1.76k views ·