More disturbingly bad pop psychology misdiagnosis of the "social media" problem ...

> "The mainstream social internet is so big; everyone is connected to everyone, over a billion on Facebook alone. The consequences of connection — fake news, radicalization, massive targeted harassment campaigns, algorithmically-generated psychological torment, inane bullshit — were not part of what we were sold."
theverge.com/2017/12/28/167950

I agree all these things are bad, but they're not new, and they're definitely not "consequences of connection", but the consequences of corporate-owned media, ad-based revenue model, and political bitterness caused by rising inequality. We migrated to the net in the 90s because the same perfect storm had hopelessly warped TV, and we naively thought the net might be different.

All the pearl-clutching and hand-wringing over weird YT kids videos makes we wonder if any of these people ever saw kids TV? I well remember the terrifyingly weird psy-op tactics advertisers used to prime kids to use "pester power", both in the "programs" themselves (remember Transformers and Masters of the Universe toys and their "TV shows") as well as in the ad breaks between them.

The good news is, it's still much cheaper and easier to set up a webserver or any other kind of internet server for ourselves, individually or as a community, than it has ever been to set up a micro-radio ("pirate radio") or micro-TV ("pirate TV") broadcast. I helped set up some micro-radio stations in early 2000s, so I'm speaking from experience here. Plus, servers can do a much greater range of things, and any webserver has much greater potential reach than local radio or TV (cool as they are)

Imagine a federated platform like #PeerTube that replace #iTunes for distributing podcasts. It would have all the benefits of pirate radio (or #HackerPublicRadio); diverse voices, a plurality of sources, decentralized production and consumption, plus all the benefits of iTunes; any podcaster can potentially heard by anyone in a global audience, and without the downsides of a platform controlled by a single gatekeeper like Apple corporation.

@strypey podcasts are already decentralized. Apple doesn't host a single one of them, iTunes only does the indexing and searching.

Build a distributed search engine designed for podcasts, and you have replaced iTunes.

@edsu @strypey if it's federated and GPL licensed (like Mastodon), then there's nothing to sell ;)

@edsu @strypey the federated part is a guard against that.

By having hundreds of independant servers, no one server has all the data. And if one server is found to sell data, at least parts of the network are going to block/shun it, so it gets less data.

@edsu @zatnosk startups like Pop Up Archive are created to be sold to companies like Apple. The goal is not to run an independent business, but to get #acquiHired, or get a lump sum to invest as venture capital in other startups. Doug Rushkoff lays out the whole life cycle pretty accurately in his 'Throwing Rocks ...' book.

@strypey @zatnosk actually, it was started up to support non-profit libraries, museums and archives.

@edsu @zatnosk nobody says publicly that their goal is to sell as quickly as possible. There's always another stated goal that gives the asset some nominal value. If their goal was really serving non-profits, why not organize as a consortium of them instead of a start-up?

Sign in to participate in the conversation
social.coop

social.coop is a cooperatively-run corner of the Fediverse. The instance is democratically governed by its members, who generally share an interest in the co-op model, but topics of discussion range widely.

If you are interested in joining our community, please review our Bylaws and Code of Conduct. If you agree with them, you may apply for membership on our instance via this link

Our instance is supported by sliding scale contributions of $1-10/mo made via Open Collective. You must have an active Open Collective account to apply for membership; you may set one up here