873

Internet forums are disappearing because now everything is Reddit and Discord. And that's worrying. (www-xataka-com.translate.goog)

submitted 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) by tfm@europe.pub to c/fediverse@lemmy.world

609 comments fedilink hide all child comments

What are we going to do about it?

Sorry for the Google Translate Link. An easy alternative is much appreciated.

Edit: thanks to @Xamrica@lemmy.dbzer0.com for this translation alternative: https://translate.kagi.com/translate/https://www.xataka.com/servicios/foros-internet-estan-desapareciendo-porque-ahora-todo-reddit-discord-eso-preocupante

(page 2) 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] SleafordMod@feddit.uk 10 points 3 weeks ago

Maybe Lemmy is a 2020s version of phpBB (the forum software, which is open source like Lemmy is). Lemmy and phpBB can both be hosted by anyone, but of course the interesting thing about Lemmy is that Lemmy servers can share their content with each other.

load more comments (3 replies)

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago

No, enshittified search engines are only catalogging those because they're in the AI bed with them.

Your Favorite Forum still rules.

[-] generic_computers@lemmy.zip 8 points 3 weeks ago

Don't forget random Telegram groups!

load more comments (2 replies)

[-] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 8 points 3 weeks ago

Not everything.

[-] UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml 8 points 3 weeks ago

Here is a chrome extension that copies all messeges and media from a discord server you're a part of.

In case the stuff on a server is what keeps you coming back.

[-] green@feddit.nl 8 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I think this is an XY problem.

People keep trying to bring back the old internet ; This is an broken and outdated solution.

The root problem (in my opinion) is that we need to share critical information to the masses, but the masses introduce "tyranny of the majority". It's a really tricky problem to figure out, and I really really really want mathematicians working on this.

If you live in the states, the Electoral College exists because they were looking for a practical solution to this problem. Considering the outcomes, it did not work - but there is no shame in this, as I think this is actually a really hard problem to solve.

The only known solution is to not share information to the masses (a.k.a keeping the normies out). In essence, this is what the old internet was - and a large part of what made it great. But this is not correct as it does not meet the criteria of the problem. Nor does it translate well, since your neighbors are apart of the masses.

If anyone has any thoughts on this, please share. If you do math for a living, please gather your friends and make an open-thesis about this.

EDIT

After some discussion in the comments, I have a general hypothesis:

One platform, one name.

People must be able to distinguish the resource they are accessing - highly recommended this process be easy. This provides consistent "edges".

Open protocols only.

Looking at "tyranny of the majority" from a different perspective, one answer is to standardize how people communicate. This means no closed ecosystems nor convoluted protocols. This provides "standard weight" while preventing "infinite weight".

Server-wide censorship cannot be allowed.

This eliminates every platform I know of. Servers should not be given any tools to prevent incoming nor outgoing data. People should handle moderation individually - sane UI can of course be made available (BlueSky block filters could be inspiration?). Blocking should only be handled by the "nodes", this also prevents "infinite weight".

I find it really funny that this conclusion kind of alludes to the early internet in a lot of ways. Maybe it wasn't the internet-forums, but the internet itself that has changed.

[-] RabbitBBQ@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago

This is an broken and outdated solution.

Only from the perspective of being able to monetize and control communications among large numbers of people.

For more than just angry X type reactions, the standard forum format is really a solved problem and has worked well for a long time. It's only when these companies want to control what you see and sell the ability to do that do we get the news feeds. Even Reddit limits your direct message counts until you pay money for it.

The old internet was so much better

[-] green@feddit.nl 6 points 3 weeks ago

The problem is engagement - which in turn means building a community.

If someone goes to your forum, hijacks your posts, and them puts them on Reddit; there is no incentive to use your platform, which stifles and dies since no one is communicating on it. This is also part of the tyranny, as people can figuratively walk into your house, eat all your food, and then expect you to restock.

On the old internet, this was not really an issue since there was a better culture. But if all your friends use Reddit, and all the content is reposted there, why use the internet forum?

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] naught101@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago

I don't think this is a maths problem. It's a social problem. Monkey brain combined with internet communications is still not a solved problem.

I think part of this is figuring out the values you want to express in the format of any given service (Marshal McLuhan style). You need to figure out what it is you're trying to build for, and then build systems and tools that optimise towards that. (Corporate social media is failing because it's only optimised towards profit, and that approach eats itself in the long run).

I posted an issue for mastodon on this recently. I think Lemmy should be asking the same questions.

load more comments (2 replies)

[-] arrakark@lemmy.ca 6 points 3 weeks ago

I would have thought this is already a solved problem.

If you model social networks like a graph, then you can measure certain properties. One property that's very important for social networks is the "small world index". The small world index is a ratio of (how many of your friends know about each other(clustering coefficient))/(how many people on average to connect with anyone in the world (average path length)). Basically, in tribal communities, it used to be that everyone knew one another, AND if you really needed to send a message to another community then it would take only a few intermediate people. The former gives you a sense of safety, and the latter gives you the sense of being able to change the world.

With the advent of social media and other things, the small world index has gone way down. The amount of your friends that your friends know on average is gone down, aka, everyone is very fragmented and the clustering index has gone down. This number has gone down faster than the average path length, because the average path length was surprisingly low to begin with. The net effect is that people feel less like they are part of a community.

Social networks always try to tune their algorithms to encourage interactions to raise the small world index in this direction, but it's very hard. For one, only few percent of users actually generate any content, the rest are lurkers. You can't have a high clustering if your "potential friends" never talk to each other, if you can call them that.

Another reason is that enabling small worlds inside social networks is sometimes at odds with revenue generation. In general, consuming content/having para-social interactions online is much easier than before the modern social networks. Thus, people have gotten much more picky with their time and interactions, and now the type of content that people expect to see online now must be of the highest quality. High quality content is easier to monetize, but it's also harder to create. So this puts an artificial floor on who creates content (only people who are in it for the money), and thus we have fewer people who spread/share ideas. This decreases the clustering coefficient. Thus, paid social networks are against small worlds.

Follow me for more crazy ramblings.

load more comments (3 replies)

load more comments (11 replies)

[-] Ledericas@lemm.ee 7 points 3 weeks ago

most of them, but alot of them for niche subjects are still there. theres one i go to where people were banned from reddit (tons of accounts used for linking, OF and advert) basiclaly they are reporting thier experiences the same way here as right there. medical forums is still alive though, as are "joining the military"ones.

load more comments (2 replies)

[-] nothingspecial@retrolemmy.com 6 points 3 weeks ago

Decentralized and smaller platforms definitely help preserve open discussion. But when it comes to company security culture and internal comms, even forums are giving way to automation. Tools like cyberupgrade.net show how even training and risk detection are now handled without Slack threads or forum debates.

[-] orcrist@lemm.ee 6 points 3 weeks ago

Doesn't that depend on the forums, though? For many organizations, those sites fit the needs perfectly fine. If you don't care about archiving and you would not be totally screwed if the forum disappeared tomorrow, you're going to opt for something simple like that.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments