2
submitted 2 weeks ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by hono4kami@pawb.social to c/fediverse@lemmy.world

Context: Technology Connections is a YouTuber https://www.youtube.com/@TechnologyConnections

This is his account on Mastodon https://mas.to/@TechConnectify

top 35 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old

The amount of negativity on that thread alone is enough for me to realise that bluesky is not for me. I enjoy the positivity I find on the fedi and decided I wouldn't use a platform that algorithmically rewards negativity when I was harassed off facebook. I am glad that others are finding it nicer than twitter but for me it seems much the same but without Elon Musk

Okay, that's his opinion. Like his opinions on many things, I feel entirely free to disagree with him.

[-] sundrei@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

When you compare Alec's recent videos with his early ones, it's pretty clear that the negativity he receives has been wearing him down. Like many YouTubers, even when he's sharing information about something he loves, he's very bitter and sarcastic about it. Like, half of each video is trying to pre-argue with his trolls.

I understand why popular content creators have to set boundaries because it seems like a pretty soul-destroying job to have. If Bluesky helps him do that, more power to him. But for a nobody like me, I prefer Mastodon, largely because I've made friends with people on my local instance, and interacting with other servers is merely a bonus feature.

[-] HEXN3T@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 1 week ago

How low do you have to be to criticise Alec? He's funny, informative, and I love the presentation of his videos. One of the last remaining great YouTubers. Apparently, being a pedophile is more acceptable on YouTube than being a good person. Now, why did I leave again..

[-] sundrei@lemmy.sdf.org 0 points 1 week ago

Agreed. Technology Connections is one of my favorite channels -- it's always a good day when Alec posts a new video. I wish people would treat him better, he certainly deserves it.

[-] BoxOfFeet@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago

Aww man, who is being mean to Alec? The guy is a YouTube gem.

[-] AusatKeyboardPremi@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

With so many opportunities presented to it, Mastodon still hasn’t found its footing with the mainstream audience.

I think its users should accept the platform will remain a niche for the foreseeable future.

[-] sith@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 week ago

Mastodon simply is a different thing than X/Bluesky. It's more like RSS/Blog/IRC. It will never go mainstream unless they add (opt out) algorithms and a better search functionality. But maybe that's just not worth it. Mastodon has already lost to Bluesky when it comes to being an open mainstream Twitter replacement.

I'm curious about if it's even technically possible to build something federated that feels like a Twitter replacement, using the ActivityPub protocol.

[-] farcaster@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

I unfollowed Alec on Fedi because every other post would be him complaining about his interactions on there. Reply guys. Trolls. Lack of algorithms which raise some of the better comments out of the drek. Insufficient moderation. Etc. This got boring and depressing to read about honestly.

However I think he's totally right. Mastodon/Fedi works well for certain kinds of people. People with limited engagement, people posting mostly uncontroversial things, and perhaps people who just don't give a shit. But for high-visibility folks like Alec the old-school unfiltered discourse seems really uncomfortable.

It has little to do with federation itself, I think. But if Mastodon ever added the choice for users to enable "modern social media algorithms" for their view of their feed I suspect it would work a lot better for many people.

[-] andrewrgross@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 week ago

I'm sorry he hasn't liked it, but critique is how we get better. Hope Mastodon keeps growing.

[-] hono4kami@pawb.social 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I agree!!!

Speaking of critique, this reply thread on Mastodon by him is probably worth reading (regardless whether you agree or not) https://mas.to/@TechConnectify/113056731556590285

[-] AusatKeyboardPremi@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago

The link isn’t operational.

[-] hono4kami@pawb.social 0 points 1 week ago
[-] AusatKeyboardPremi@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Thanks. This works. I fully agree with comments made. I still have not found Mastodon intuitive to use daily as I find Lemmy.

[-] Jesus_666@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Honestly, this suggests to me that the ability to defederate might be a bug rather than a feature.

If my instance doesn't talk to the instance at foobar.example, I might be unable to see (parts of) relevant discussions. This is worse for a microblog like Mastodon than it is in the threadiverse but it's still something to keep in mind even over here. And most non-enthusiasts don't want to have to do that.

Email is an example of a successful federated platform and it barely has defederation support. But in general all mail servers can talk to all other mail servers as long as they provide the right look-at-me-I'm-legitimate signaling. That makes email easy to use for regular people no matter if they use Gmail or their cousin's self-hosted mail server.

Perhaps that is how at least the non-threaded fediverse should work... However, that would also mean that some instance hosting heinous shit would keep being visible to everyone. It's a tricky problem.

[-] Draconic_NEO@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago

Couldn't disagree with you more, the thing about federation is that it isn't viewing the content on the server it was posted on, it is crossposting it to all other federated servers. That means you are when federating remote content you are literally platforming it. That also means you are liable for it if it's objectionable or illegal content. So being able to not accept those crossposts is important. Honestly defederation and limited federation are not as big of issues as you and others think they are, you can ignore the majority of the defederated servers and it'll be fine, the issue comes when people want the world and aren't entitles to have it, like I said in my other comment.

Email is an example of a successful federated platform and it barely has defederation support.

You are insanely naive for saying this. If you'd used non-corporate email servers, like the much smaller email providers out there (which are basically extinct at this point) you'd know just how wrong this actually is. Most smaller email providers out there are blocked or limited by the big ones and the ones that are blocked your mail will never reach the inboxes of people on the big servers, not even the spam folders on those servers. They won't bounce it back to you either, so it'll just go into the void.

Most email these days is used primarily by the all mighty trinity: Gmail, Outlook, and Yahoo, and a Few on Hotmail and AOL and while there are a few smaller companies out there like Proton, when it comes to something that isn't a company or is self-hosted you can expect a lot of problems with domains being blacklisted, IPs being blacklisted, or both. And it's actually much worse than defederation.

Perhaps that is how at least the non-threaded fediverse should work… However, that would also mean that some instance hosting heinous shit would keep being visible to everyone. It’s a tricky problem.

You're beginning to realize why the decision to limit spam and illegal shit was chosen over catering to the people who want the whole federated world instead of what they're allowed access to. Ultimately it is better for everyone if the depraved shit and spam gets blocked, than it is for the people who want the whole world to have their way. If you want the world, go to Nostr, you'll learn why most people do not want the world.

[-] Jesus_666@lemmy.world -1 points 1 week ago

You are insanely naive for saying this. If you'd used non-corporate email servers, like the much smaller email providers out there (which are basically extinct at this point) you'd know just how wrong this actually is. Most smaller email providers out there are blocked or limited by the big ones and the ones that are blocked your mail will never reach the inboxes of people on the big servers, not even the spam folders on those servers. They won't bounce it back to you either, so it'll just go into the void.

Most email these days is used primarily by the all mighty trinity: Gmail, Outlook, and Yahoo, and a Few on Hotmail and AOL and while there are a few smaller companies out there like Proton, when it comes to something that isn't a company or is self-hosted you can expect a lot of problems with domains being blacklisted, IPs being blacklisted, or both. And it's actually much worse than defederation.

I've been using a self-administered mail server (running on a root server at a major hosting provider) as my main email provider for well over a decade. I think I've encountered one website where that actually led to issues. Heck, the server once got on Spamhaus's bad side for a week and once we were off the list everything was back to normal.

Self-hosted mail works very well one you've jumped through all of the appropriate hoops (DKIM, SPF, etc.). Sure, running a mail server out of your bedroom probably won't work very well but if you're with any kind of reputable hosting provider you should be fine.

You're beginning to realize why the decision to limit spam and illegal shit was chosen over catering to the people who want the whole federated world instead of what they're allowed access to. Ultimately it is better for everyone if the depraved shit and spam gets blocked, than it is for the people who want the whole world to have their way. If you want the world, go to Nostr, you'll learn why most people do not want the world.

The problem is that defederation leads to confusing situations. Being told about a response to your post/comment/toot and then finding nothing when you look is bad UX. Better UX would be a notice that what you're looking for comes from a defederated instance and can't be viewed – but that's obviously impossible because your instance doesn't even know anything is there.

Not wanting all the content on your instance is perfectly reasonable. But the way defederation works exposes details of the underlying technology to the user in a way many users don't want to have to deal with, serving as an impediment to growing the fediverse.

It's not easy to keep unwanted stuff off your instance while also being user-friendly about it. That's why I called it tricky.

[-] Kichae@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago

It's frustrating, because a lot of the interesting people to follow and engage with on Mastodon have also jumped to Bluesky, and the fedi crowd continues to crow about algorithms and brain rot, when the biggest reason people bounce off of Mastodon is the other people on Mastodon.

There's a deep undercurrent of "angry, hostile nerd". When people started flooding Mastodon in 2022, you could see the binary reaction of "Finally, the recognition we deserve!" and also "you're in my house now, you fucking normie, and you'd better start acting like it".

Unsurprisingly, the "fucking normies" noped out, either immediately, or as soon as they had another option that satisfied their objections with Twitter.

But we're going to wring our hands and bitch about onboarding flows and the great sin of defederation, because it let's us ignore that we are the problem.

[-] lordnikon@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Honestly I feel the fediverse is like the 90s internet. It's like school clubs centered around different interests and it takes a little bit of work to find your peer group but once you do it's great. People that look to it as a replacement for Twitter are looking for a town square to shout at people and hock their wares. Anyone that makes money from engagement ether directly or indirectly are not looking for camaraderie but a market.

[-] leadore@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago

Mastodon is more for people who like to have interactions or conversations back and forth with other people, while the big platforms are for influencers/broadcasters and consumers/viewers-- any back and forth interactions there are more between commenters than with the influencer/broadcaster. Of course there is some overlap and exceptions to that characterization, but that's how it generally seems to me.

So IMO it's not a competition, there's plenty of room for both types of SM. Depending on a person's preference they may use just Masto, just big SM, or use both, each for different reasons. The problem is when people expect Mastodon to be just like xitter/bsky/threads and get upset that it isn't. Relax and use whichever platform(s) you like.

[-] ericjmorey@discuss.online 0 points 1 week ago

When I want to have back and forth between people on a regular basis, I choose chat apps. Mastodon feels like it's trying to be a poorly designed chat app.

[-] leadore@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Kind of a combination maybe? Since Mastodon lets you find new people with similar interests by browsing what's on your local timeline or hashtags of interest, and you can still follow people of interest without any chatting. I don't know much about chat apps but don't you have to already know the people beforehand, or come across them via a mutual acquaintance or invite to a chat room?

Of course, Mastodon can be and is used for broadcast/consume interactions, but not as much, since most broadcasters want a huge audience with little interaction, which means a big platform, while the ones on Mastodon are probably looking for a bit more interactive experience with a smaller audience.

[-] Zachariah@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

So, unfortunately when I go to Mastodon these days it's a bit of a ghost town. And I say unfortunately with sincerity - there are some things I really liked about the ethos behind it. However, the reason I'm posting this here is that I couldn't put it there without getting instant shit. 🧵…

[-] originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com 0 points 2 weeks ago

im confused. is it a ghost town, or is it full of people giving him instant 'shit'?

[-] haverholm@kbin.earth 0 points 2 weeks ago

"Ghost town" = Not driven to oversharing by algorithms.

"getting shit" = nobody wanting to listen to a youtuber's outrage bait.

It must be confusing to log into the fediverse straight off of Youtube, though. "Why aren't people compulsively clicking and subscribing to everything? How am I not being recommended radicalising posts by conspiracy theorists and terror organisations within five clicks?"

"Honey, this is Mastodon"

<switches to Blooskie>

"Ah, much better!"

[-] chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

This comment right here. This is what he's talking about.

[-] hono4kami@pawb.social 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Could be wrong, but possibly he's talking about this about "getting instant shit":

https://mas.to/@TechConnectify/112995177480955078

(look also at the reply)

[-] ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 week ago

I've gotten an extremely similar comment on a couple posts I've made here on lemmy, in a video community no less.

Personally I just said something's like "welp, sorry that's not your preferred format." and then just move on.

With how infrequent posts like that are, they don't effect me at all, but It'd probably suck more if I was consistently getting negative comments like that,

[-] sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 1 week ago

My gut instinct is to think, this is just a dumb person being mean on the Internet.

But upon reflection, no one would say this on yt, twitter, Facebook, etc. because people are sharing actual bullshit on there. You would be dunked on so hard for complaining about yt videos or just ignored. There would be no point in complaining.

On one hand it's nice that Mastodon doesn't have ads, and people usually don't share bullshit, but does that logically result in attracting users who shit on someone for sharing a YouTube video, because sometimes other videos on YouTube are bad?

I like that Mastodon has actual conversations but I don't like this guy being dumb.

[-] p03locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 week ago

On one hand it’s nice that Mastodon doesn’t have ads, and people usually don’t share bullshit, but does that logically result in attracting users who shit on someone for sharing a YouTube video, because sometimes other videos on YouTube are bad?

I have lost count the amount of times I've shared a YT video on Lemmy, and people bitch about the fact that they have to spend 15-60 minutes watching it, or immediately ask for some TL;DR about it. Like, I'm curating content for you, sharing a video I liked among the other videos that you probably didn't like, and people just want to universally shit on the format because of that one bad experience from two years ago when they dared to go to the web site for 5 minutes.

People love to shit on TikTok, but secretly, that's the length of content a majority of this audience wants, and it's dumb. If you don't want to devolve into a TikToker, then watch longer videos and don't bitch when somebody asks you to watch a video for 10 minutes. If you don't like it after a few minutes in, fine, go watch something else.

[-] lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org 0 points 1 week ago

Could be wrong, or just more domain-specific, bu my experience is people don't complain that the video is 15-30 minutes long, is that it's a video (and that long) when the information could have been more succintly and practically displayed in a text tutorial or a blog format. Basically "this could have been an e-mail".

Not to mention that way people avoid having to go to YT which is yet another cesspit community-wise.

You are right that people have shorter attention spans ofc, but then again when it comes to tackling it it's largely an issue of medium: in the world of coding you can convey easily copyable or testable instructions in text format maybe with attachments, that can be verified in up to 60 seconds... or you could post a 30 minutes long video plus ads. Why would anyone expect the Fediverse, with the kind of people who are naturally attracted to it, to prefer the latter, no idea.

[-] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 0 points 1 week ago

"You are right that people have shorter attention spans ofc"

Why do we all endlessly state this narrative as if it was a fact.

Like I get the feeling but there is very little good evidence for it.

Scientists don't even largely consider attention span a useful concept to understand the human brain.

[-] p03locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 week ago
[-] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

"Recognize that attention is task-specific. One reason it’s so difficult to definitively say whether or not attention spans are decreasing is that it depends on the task with which someone is engaged. We may be able to sit through an entire 2-hour, action-packed movie, but start to squirm within 10 minutes of a nature documentary. Infusing things with storytelling and interactivity are two evidence-backed ways of increasing the likelihood we’ll be able to sustain focus. "

The entire narrative about attention span hinges upon this fundamental distortion, you cannot separate your ability to pay attention to something into an abstract universal quantity, your capacity for attention is always intimately interwoven with the environment around you and the specific task at hand. Attention span is a pop culture concept, not a scientifically rigorous one making any science done about attention span unable to actually illuminate the unknown since the concept being studied simply comes undone with a tug on one of the founding assumptions. In popular culture attention span is defined axiomatically as decreasing because of technology, and discussion works backwards from there.

The references cited also don't really support the conclusions the article comes to ("Challenging the the six-minute myth of online videos"), or they are links to pop-science articles talking about the topic, not actual evidence on the topic. An amusing example of this is the repeatedly, endlessly cited "McSpadden, K. (2015, May 14). You Now Have a Shorter Attention Span Than a Goldfish. Time. https://time.com/3858309/attention-spans-goldfish/".

  1. Goldfish are specifically studied because they can be trained to remember things and focus on them, they do not have "short attention spans" so the entire metaphor is broken from the start.

  2. There actually isn't any hard evidence even in the original paper that popularized the idea.... it was a white paper from microsoft not a scientific publication by academics

See this article: https://www.forbes.com/sites/shanesnow/2023/01/16/science-shows-humans-have-massive-capacity-for-sustained-attention-and-storytelling-unlocks-it/

It is also pretty easy to poke holes in the narrative that our attention spans are decreasing, driving a car takes an insane amount of concentration, more than arguably almost any other human activity practiced by billions of people on earth. If our attention spans were decreasing, the very first place you would see it would be in a huge increase in traffic crashes and deaths. You also wouldn't see a vibrant world of longform youtube videos on niche topics that are made by some of the most perennially popular and watched video content makers. People wouldn't be listening and reading to books, listening to longform podcasts, or engaging in hobbies that take significant preparation.

Further, the industry of marketing, perhaps one of the entities with the most interest in how we actually pay attention to things vs. what the popular narratives are about our attention span isn't convinced our attention spans are decreasing either.

More things are competing for our attention, so we are more selective and discard things quicker in a fashion that is totally rational. Daily life has also become exhausting for most, if you notice you are unable to focus like you used to it is probably because you are more tired, stressed and have less free time than you did in the past. If our "attention spans" were decreasing the way everybody seems to believe they are, the impacts would be catastrophic and look like entire populations undergoing early onset dementia, and as someone who has spent years around people with dementia.. that is clearly not what is happening at all.

[-] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip -1 points 2 weeks ago

Not at all surprised.

I follow Alec on Mastodon and the vast majority of interactions over the past few months have been people aggressively "well ackshually"ing him or outright getting angry.

That isn't to say it is all shit (I would like to think a few conversations I had with him were mutually pleasant). But his entire ethos is that he approaches problems from a practical "midwesterner" perspective. And that REALLY angers all the ideological nutjobs who are angry if anyone even suggests something that won't advance their own pseudo-political goals.

And I've noticed it with a lot of other "celebrities" on Mastodon. The rest of us can have fun conversations while the shitheads stay to themselves. They are too high profile and the shitheads flock to them to make sure they understand why they are actually wrong and are a bad person for thinking something.

this post was submitted on 06 Dec 2024
2 points (100.0% liked)

Fediverse

28697 readers
104 users here now

A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).

If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!

Rules

Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration), Search Lemmy

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS