The internet domain name service is a counter example. Major companies contribute to the small funding required to run the non-profit that keeps the internet free in a somewhat altruistic fashion. That is one of the possible stated end goals for Bluesky.
Honestly the only way to get that is to pay for it. “Free” platforms rely on ads and selling user data and almost by definition have to become shittier over time to keep chasing that outside money.
I’d gladly pay for Bluesky if they kept up with content moderation and kept the bad actors out.
I think Reddit or Boardgamegeek are good examples. Perhaps not in the exact definition of 'social media' but they are platforms where users can meet and discuss with decent moderation and/or mutual respect.
Considering their dev claimed they weren't collecting/selling data (except for some retail stores...but okay) and then their privacy policy proved otherwise in black and white, I think that's generous.
Also, its videos have suspect ad interaction, but that's murkier.
Not even mentioning stuff like the Amazon affiliate link bot, whose lack of disclosure falls, IMO, to Hanlon's Razor moreso than malice (as does most of this, really).
Why do people generally believe that BGG is the Marquis of Fantailler? Free social media sites are inevitably data merchants.
Mastodon was an interesting experiment it just didn't flourish due to expecteding the users to be technical.
I just keep thinking that Bluesky is going to tick down and have to start advertising again and apparently tons of dark money will pour into this system.
I'd be happy to pay for a platform that remains ad free but most folks expect this to somehow remain free. Which it never will be they just aren't paying the bills.
I think the only way would be some extreme form of shared ownership. Probably not feasible to share among all users, but perhaps if individual ownership was capped at a (fraction of a) very small percentage.
Or tax funded and non-profit controlled (which is its own can of worms).
It really depends on what you want out of the platform. I think most users aren't willing to pay for a big public chatroom. So they'll have to find other revenue streams. And any revenue depends on user volume/activity meaning algos and/or ads and keeping it a free-to-play platform.
I think there are a few reasons mastodon was a no fly for folks like me... but the technical element is a big one for sure.
I dunno - maybe it's cuz of what I do but I'm not inherently anti-ad. But there's no reason to trust Bsky will implement ads in a reasonable and safe manner.
Maybe you know more than I do, but I also see no reason to inherently distrust that they'll implement ads (or whatever financial sustainability model) irresponsibly. Am I missing something?
I just look at things like how they handled the Jesse Singal situation... and I know the history of how they treated the concerns of Black folks here (even after marginalized people did massive work to build this place up). It demonstrates their real priorities.
Platforms grow expensive quickly based on use. If you want the nice "network effects" from having a large user base, but also the content moderation that keeps them a nice place to be, you have to be willing to spend a fair amount of money on hardware and moderation.
10 years ago, I would have said "make it an encrypted protocol, make it distributed" but the older I've gotten, the more I think there's just a natural tension between what people say they want (fun nice times, chatting with friends) and the reality of social media (dunks, doxxing, fighting, hate)
I think a lot of the behaviors we see that people talk about as net-negatives around social media are simply just the nature of the system that is Social Media when they get past a certain threshold of users. Even with Bsky, a lot of those same frictions on the other site are showing up more here
Guilty, though I think this moment is more libertarian. We can't have a successful society without a place to freely exchange ideas. If we are going to reduce the news to a corporate mouth piece we need another place to talk freely without someone using it to protect their own interests.
Comments
The only real way to do it is to have advertising 🤬 or expect users to pay.
I for one would happily pay for a service that keeps-out much of the filth that inhabits the other places.
Reddit and discord have sub-communities that are moderated by members rather than hired staff, but this has its own issues.
And ultimately they're still centralized. But you also need everyone in one place to catch on.
I’d gladly pay for Bluesky if they kept up with content moderation and kept the bad actors out.
I think of BGG as social media, people come to discuss all sorts of things.
Also, its videos have suspect ad interaction, but that's murkier.
How is it clear to you?
Why do people generally believe that BGG is the Marquis of Fantailler? Free social media sites are inevitably data merchants.
I just keep thinking that Bluesky is going to tick down and have to start advertising again and apparently tons of dark money will pour into this system.
Or tax funded and non-profit controlled (which is its own can of worms).
I dunno - maybe it's cuz of what I do but I'm not inherently anti-ad. But there's no reason to trust Bsky will implement ads in a reasonable and safe manner.
Maybe you know more than I do, but I also see no reason to inherently distrust that they'll implement ads (or whatever financial sustainability model) irresponsibly. Am I missing something?
It's just how the world is now.