Stacker News is social media. So what? \ stacker news ~meta

pull down to refresh

1915 sats \ 25 comments \ @StillStackinAfterAllTheseYears 12 Apr meta

Over in ~podcasts, there's a good post from @sebastix linking to a Cal Newport podcast talking about why creatives should get off social media. Newport's been against social media for a while, and makes some great points. The comments so far are generally in agreement.

Meanwhile, @cryotosensei posted in ~meta on Stacker News and parenting in which he notes that in a previous post, the advice he'd received included: Some Stackers suggested that since I was being put through the fire, I should reduce the amount of time I spend on social media, including Stacker News.

(Reader, he did not take that advice, at least in regard to SN, and I think we're all better off for it.)

Of course, no one in that first post is snarking at SN. But it's unquestionably social media. The important thing is that it's a good social media site.

As some of you know, I'm An Old. I've been online in some capacity since 1986. And I've seen a lot of social media. I'm still on mailing lists/listservs¹ I was on back then, I was on Usenet back when it was useful, was on Livejournal and Flickr and tried Myspace and a zillion other things before Facebook/Twitter came to dominate (of course "microblogging" is simply a subset of "social media"²). And SN is a forum where people have identities/aliases, interact with each other, and post content. Hell, they can even follow other users (or mute them).

That's social media, folks. The site we usually compare ourselves to positively (something with "Red" in it) is unquestionably social media, and even the site SN's name brings to mind fits into that bin.

(As an aside, Nostr is social media and also clearly in the same microblogging space as Twitter/FB.)

I definitely think there's a difference between doomscrolling social media (starting with Tumblr, but now clearly a part of FB/Twitter/Tiktok), and sites like SN that all you to consume how you want to. There's probably an argument that the comparative echo chamber helps make this place better as well, although I think that's one that's probably some strands to untangle, since there are lots of echo chamber sites that are awful (Gab), and awful sites that aren't echo chambers (Twitter). And I think there's potential for stagnation at a certain point.

I'd also guess that the V2V/Zapping here is a huge factor; spamming has an actual cost, and while commenting is cheap (fractions of a penny), it's still a small barrier.

I'm sure there are other factors. The tech in general is really good, and it can't be understated how much that helps. The lack of ads and algorithms means that it can't go through the enshittification that other sites do. Being open-source has to help.

So yeah, I'm not off social media because I'm on Stacker News³. I just spend my social media time on a good site.

If you don't know what a listserv is, fix that. One of them is crucial to Bitcoin history. ↩
"Microblogging" itself has shifted in meaning, as Twitter now lets people write 10000 work screeds if they give Elon the right amount of money. ↩
And Nostr. And one or two other sites. ↩

view all related items

211 sats \ 4 replies \ @ek 12 Apr

The lack of ads and algorithms

There are ads and algorithms though

31 sats \ 3 replies \ @StillStackinAfterAllTheseYears OP 12 Apr

I should have been more clear about the latter; while there's absolutely an algorithm, it's not one that explicitly prevents me from consuming content if I want to read the firehose in order. I can turn on wild west mode, or read a territory from newest to oldest, while FB and Twitter have evolved their algorithms to make this nearly impossible.

As far as ads go, other than the MSM sponsorship, I guess I'm not sure I've seen one here?

10 sats \ 1 reply \ @ek 12 Apr

As far as ads go, other than the MSM sponsorship, I guess I'm not sure I've seen one here?

We've run ads via @ad in the past. Last one was in November.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @StillStackinAfterAllTheseYears OP 12 Apr

Ah, that explains it -- before my time!

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @joelaw 13 Apr

Appreciate the control I feel I have on how I move through the SN content.

151 sats \ 2 replies \ @kepford 12 Apr

The important thing is that it's a good social media site.

This of course is subjective. I like SN. Most of us that use it a lot obviously do like it and think it is good but I suspect many that have came and left would disagree. That's OK. Its subjective.

I would agree that SN is social media in the broad sense and also... so what lol. It could be bad for some people and good for others. Its very hard for any of us to say. I think the most important thing to remember about all Internet comms especially social media/forums is that it isn't real. Ideas are real but these personas we all have here even if we try to be true to ourselves aren't real. They are never going to be real. Knowing someone in the real world is different. I try to remember this when I see some of the annoying and dumb behavior on SN. Don't take it to seriously. You don't know these people and this is likely not who they really are. Few write online in ways they would speak in person face to face.

76 sats \ 1 reply \ @StillStackinAfterAllTheseYears OP 12 Apr

Oh yeah, everyone's got an online persona, but I'm not sure I'd say they're not inherently "real." Our online presentations are distinct from our in-person presentations, but in general they tend to be consistent and reflections of us, just within a different context. Some things can be very different (there are plenty of online assholes who are a lot less aggro in real life), but things like core values still tend to shine through.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford 12 Apr

What I mean is real in the deep philosophical sense. Even in person most are not real. I really try to be authentic to myself and others but I know that I fail much of the time. The reasons are many and complex. I'm not just talking about people being a-holes. We are incentivized to present certain things and hide others. That's not real.

That's what I mean. I don't believe it is healthy to take what people post online as real. Not in the same way we trust people we know. I have my reasons for seeing things this way. It is mostly from experience.

110 sats \ 1 reply \ @sebastix 12 Apr

I would argue that SN is not a social media. It's a social network. Let me think out loud here..

These definitions I'm using more and more to point out the diff between a social media and a social network. Social media = a consuming-first digital place with people Social network = a interaction-first digital place with people

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford 12 Apr

Yeah, that makes sense. Very helpful to define terms. We don't do it enough. We can disagree on definitions but if I understand your definition then I am closer to understanding what you are saying. This gets skipped to often. We forget there are no rulers of language and meaning. We all define it or adopt them ourselves. We often assume others see words in the same ways we do. This leads to confusion.

163 sats \ 4 replies \ @Undisciplined 12 Apr

I think there's a useful distinction to make between a shared perspective and an echo chamber.

Obviously, there's an identifiable prevailing world view at Stacker News and I love finding a place where something like my views are prominent. Within that, though, there are lots of civil disagreements and discussions of different opinions here.

I think of an echo chamber as an environment that really doesn't tolerate any deviations from the approved narrative. That's not what I see here.

92 sats \ 1 reply \ @StillStackinAfterAllTheseYears OP 12 Apr

Good point. I've seen a few times when things have bordered on the latter, but for the most part, it's definitely the former. Consider this something I would have edited in if I hadn't taken the dog for a walk after posting.

129 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 12 Apr

I've seen a few times when things have bordered on the latter

There are certain opinions that will likely get you called a "shitcoining ass-milker" by certain stackers. So, you're right that there are a few areas where dissenting views are heavily stifled.

71 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford 12 Apr

Good distinction.

50 sats \ 0 replies \ @TNStacker 12 Apr

Correct! An echo chamber would not have the dissent- and dissonance-filled discussions.

142 sats \ 1 reply \ @0xbitcoiner 12 Apr

I see SN more as a forum for discussion than a social media platform.

37 sats \ 0 replies \ @StillStackinAfterAllTheseYears OP 12 Apr

I think the one eventually evolves into the other (see Reddit, or niche forums like Ravelry or various gaming sites). I think it's kind of when a place shifts from "place I go to ask questions or discuss a specific topic" to "place I hang out at virtually" (very much off the top of my head, and a distinction I need to think about more).

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @OriginalSize 12 Apr

I recognize a pattern with social media. When I'm scrolling, I feel a certain way. When I come to it with a goal I feel a totally different way which is much better. I'm just hanging out here but I figure one of these days I'll come here on a mission and start melting faces.

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @Coinsreporter 13 Apr freebie

I am not as old as you are, but I have had my share of using pre FB social medias. I don't know but for some reasons, I never like and enjoyed them. May be that I found them to be addictive and left them, because that's one of my life principles not to fall prey any addiction.

However, the case with SN, as I found out, is very different. Now, I'm in my third month with SN, I never felt that I am getting any addiction for it, instead I am grateful because I can learn a lot here and TBH can stack sats.

10 sats \ 0 replies \ @chairman_pretense 12 Apr

Social media is mind of a dumb phrase. It's as valid a description of the web as it is anything else.

What sucks isn't social media, it's surveillance media, that is media which requires hoovering up behavioural data to serve content and advertising explicitly to change behaviour. This is the central problem of the platforms: on the one hand they collect behaviour data to better target advertising, on the other they explicitly change behaviour through advertising. Feedback loops of hell ensue.

There's nothing wrong with social media. There's nothing wrong with advertising either (free market + free speech). The risk is when dragnet surveillance couples the two together into a single system which feeds itself.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @profullstack 26 Apr

is it possible to take over an archived territory?

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @cryotosensei 13 Apr

Stacker News helps provide beer money n enrich my mind. Enuff said xP

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @chungkingexpress 12 Apr

SN has better vibes than legacy social media.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @TheWildHustle 12 Apr

Funny, TheWildHustle didn’t really use social media prior to corn. He was living pretty contently in the fiat gulags.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @TNStacker 12 Apr

🧡⚡WE DIFFERENT! ⚡🧡

Footnotes