Is #mastodon becoming an echo chamber?
-
@scottjenson @dalias @pmdj I dunno who's in your bubble, very few of the fedizens I follow are old white guys.
-
@danirabbit @scottjenson you are asking for an echo chamber. You are asking for this roundly hated bullshit that is being violently imposed on us to be prioritized by the individual poor bastards - like myself - running elephant network instances in the same manner as it is on fascist shitholes like Twitter
@danirabbit @scottjenson you are demanding your ideology to be prioritized at the expense of everyone else
-
As this conversation is spiraling a bit I want to make a few things clear:
1. I'd like Mastodon to be MORE inclusive and bring in more voices
2. Some people don't seem to want that
3. This is core problem to solve: How do we let more in, but not "pollute" your feed?
4. The solution is NOT "gatekeeping", revelling in the fact that AI journalists aren't welcome
5. This is the same reason we lost "Black Twitter" when it came over in 2022Yes, a lot of you don't want AI posts in your feed (or pick any other topic) but the solution isn't to keep "AI People" from joining Mastodon, any more than it is keeping marginalized communities off of Mastodon.
@scottjenson The "problem" is that e.g. AI enthusiasts, right-wing loons, fascists, &c. &c. fundamentally just aren't very popular people. In polite society they end up shutting up. It's the algorithms on commercial sites that make them seem popular (aka divisive and engagement-generating). If you judge mastodon against these engagement-generating sites then you're judging against a skewed idea of what "normal" looks like.
-
@nikclayton I'm not arguing with that logic. I'm not saying you HAVE to like him. I'm trying to understand why people can't just ignore him.
@scottjenson @nikclayton I don’t see how you reached the conclusion that people aren’t ALSO ignoring him? Or are you saying you wish more people ignored him instead of replying? If so, I don’t see how that would be better for anyone.
-
@scottjenson @Gargron why do you feel that AI as a product has any special "too important to fail" property such that people who choose to invest in it are entitled to systemic protections that guarantee their product visibility and success in a place where most people do not want it? This is not gatekeeping a person, this is choosing not to buy a product. I like Obasanjo's writing just fine but making articles about a topic that I do not want to read is his choice as a professional.
@elrohir @scottjenson @Gargron
I am a tech journalist, a tech writer and a software developer. Sometimes I work with AI stuff, sometimes I write about it on fedi. Reactions have been mixed, mostly on the negative side. I understand why, because AI cannot simply be seen as a neutral tech. There's too much around it, and honest tech and journalism people cannot - and should not - pretend otherwise. It's multidimensional chess.
Most people are against all things AI on fedi, yes - at least on the fedi I know. I see this as freedom of thinking and expression, provided it does not become digital violence and harassment. But I see nothing stopping anyone who wants to write about AI. I suppose that there are enough people tooting about AI to make conversations, on some instances more than on others.
But people have the right to dislike and actively avoid (block) those conversations. Ultimately, I think people have the right to have their own safe digital spaces. Avoiding specific stuff is a part of this safety.
On the other hand, if the issue here is "tech people want to talk about their favourite stuff but do not get the same traction as on [whatever]", I personally - very personally - think it's the same issue we've been talking about from Masto Day 1. Here it's different: it's about conversations, not algorithmically growing audiences. But that's why we're here, in the end.
That said, peace and love y'all. We agree to disagree and so on. -
@scottjenson I also want to be clear, as I'm sure you've had a Bad Time over this - I'm not outraged; you're trying to improve things. You have very little to do with any historic issues of Mastodon's development, nor is history a thing we can change. I know you want well; we all do.
What I *am* trying to do is focus on what is *actually* a problem & how that is addressable. Providing moderation tools that have long been requested - precisely *because* they benefit everyone.
@mattwilcox
That was a very helpful reply thank you. Let's start with obvious agreements: we need more moderator tools. Could not agree more. They can't come fast enough.As to my second bullet point, I'm not putting words in peoples mouths. I'm a bit tired to collect the URLs by I got several comments that literally said "We don't want more tolerance" which was shocking to me. I truly hope they are in the minority.
I likely shouldn't have leaned on AI, it's just too radioactive a topic. But it did show off the pure vehemence (there are some scary people out there) The more mild form was "yeah, we want tolerance for X, but Y can fuck right off to hell" which isn't exact tolerance...
In the end, I'll be clear, I fucked this up. I had a noble idea and I said it in a vague radioactive way where the reactions actually proved my points but I certainly didn't win any hearts. I have to own that.
@sfabel -
@scottjenson It would help if you answer the question what precisely is for your bigger tent? What consists more welcoming Mastodon? Because your first post suggest boosts, and favorite. Then you mention people writing more or less "I don't want you here" (most people here don't do this anyway). So what do you really want? Specifics, please.
@szczurtorebkowy My point was vague I'll admit. Thank you for asking. My initial point was more curiosity. Why is it that this person (whatever their topic) was getting so much more traction elsewhere?
Clearly masto HATES AI (in any form). I got caught in the crossfire and people seemed to think I wanted people to AI more (no) or that some people deserved "engagement" or more interaction (again no)
I've talked to so many people that tried Mastodon and left, mostly due to reply guys getting in the face. It's a problem. There is a also very complex problem the Black Twitter migration and how they didn't feel safe.
So I'm "kicking the tires" trying to understand where this unwelcomeness is coming from, what form it takes. Do people actively chase AI people? I doubt it. Most people are live and let live. But so many people came out in my replies and said "throw the bastards out" I was a bit shocked.
The topic grew as the intolerance became blatent.
-
@elrohir @scottjenson @Gargron
I am a tech journalist, a tech writer and a software developer. Sometimes I work with AI stuff, sometimes I write about it on fedi. Reactions have been mixed, mostly on the negative side. I understand why, because AI cannot simply be seen as a neutral tech. There's too much around it, and honest tech and journalism people cannot - and should not - pretend otherwise. It's multidimensional chess.
Most people are against all things AI on fedi, yes - at least on the fedi I know. I see this as freedom of thinking and expression, provided it does not become digital violence and harassment. But I see nothing stopping anyone who wants to write about AI. I suppose that there are enough people tooting about AI to make conversations, on some instances more than on others.
But people have the right to dislike and actively avoid (block) those conversations. Ultimately, I think people have the right to have their own safe digital spaces. Avoiding specific stuff is a part of this safety.
On the other hand, if the issue here is "tech people want to talk about their favourite stuff but do not get the same traction as on [whatever]", I personally - very personally - think it's the same issue we've been talking about from Masto Day 1. Here it's different: it's about conversations, not algorithmically growing audiences. But that's why we're here, in the end.
That said, peace and love y'all. We agree to disagree and so on. -
@scottjenson @CptSuperlative @kcarruthers @RealGene
Black people, trans people, marginalized groups have been saying for ages: no, the tooling doesn't cover the bases, using individual/server-based ignore/mute/kick/ban is still a priviledged action that is enforcing marginalization by putting the work on the victim rather than perpetrators or would-be allies.
No one cares about people with dissenting opinions when they open their own instances. It's the reach they have by default (they can say anything to anyone) and the manual, sisyphean efforts to reduce it that is problematic.
I fear this is the crux of the problem: we want to believe that humans are good by default and only a thin margin is problematic, can be handled individually. In practice the inverse is truer for most people: racist, sexist, ableist subtext is the norm, and the abundance of messages with this subtext is sickening. Where do marginalized communities thrive ? In (semi-)closed communities, with self-made tools and rules, because marginalized people realize that non-marginalized people who hold power and don't question their own bias ultimately don't really care about anyone that doesn't look like them. However good people in power think they are.
The signal you get from people you want to see is engagement: it's a bad signal in itself (people engage with what they want, not because they have to be nice) but let's set that aside for a minute. There are a ton of people who just can't exist on a platform that is so blind to their lives it doesn't know how harmful it is to them. Start with the engagement people have between each other in here already. If black people feel safer on other platforms, it's not because they don't see engagement on the fediverse.@rakoo
and I totally agree with you! -
@Gargron That is a personal choice and one which I totally respect. But I do think Mastodon should be big enough, and open enough, to allow an "AI community" to form, even thrive.
Too many people in my replies don't seem to agree with that.
@scottjenson @Gargron who is preventing an AI community from forming? They can just as easily spin up their own instances and talk and boost each other. The only thing they can't do is force the rest of us to interact with them.
-
I can’t think of any journalists I’ve blocked so I’m probably not your target audience.
That said, I do have a few quixotic axes to grind where my days are better if I’m not seeing certain posts. But I don’t think I generally block for mere disagreement.
So, is this the crux of things?:
- Too many folks on mastodon are hasty blockers such that safe, sane people (or as close as can be expected on mastodon) are essentially excluded for innocuous disagreements.
If this is your argument, I think I would like to hear more about how this is a real problem for a lot of people.
(I’m probably very far outside the loop and some infamous mastodon stuff just went down that I’m completely ignorant of.)
@CptSuperlative
This topic has spiraled into something that I can't even track. It started out as a curiosity: why was there more engagement on other platforms? What was different? Part of the motivation is that I've spoken to lots of folks that have tried and left the fediverse, mostly because of reply guys or generally feeling unsafe.What I've noticed is that the "Fedi-way" is to block and ignore which I think most people do. Anyone can join! If we don't like you we'll ignore (or ban) you. I actually agree with that.
But what I've noticed is that some topics, like content warnings, Alt text, and yes, AI seem different. They aren't ignored, they are actively policed. They form part of the culture that is heavily defended.
Somehow related (sorta?) are journalists. There is this undercurrent than anyone 'promoting' their work is wrong. It's not a huge problem, I'm just noticing it in comments.
-
@scrottie
Also, no one is denying anyone the right to set up their own cryptofascist or ai-shilling server. Just no-one can be forced to federate with it. There is free speech, but listening is also optional
@JoBlakely @xgranade @danirabbit @scottjenson@Valent @scrottie @JoBlakely @xgranade @danirabbit @scottjenson I mean. Isn't truth social just mastodon with federation turned off? Anyone can do this. They (truth social) at least had enough sense (surprising!) to preemptively defederate themselves from everyone else.
-
@Gargron That is a personal choice and one which I totally respect. But I do think Mastodon should be big enough, and open enough, to allow an "AI community" to form, even thrive.
Too many people in my replies don't seem to agree with that.
@scottjenson @Gargron yeah, count me as one who disagrees. Let’s do more to keep people out who are using tech that destroys the environment, sucks, is based on theft, and disempowers workers. To any AI enthusiasts reading this, fuck off.
-
@mattwilcox
That was a very helpful reply thank you. Let's start with obvious agreements: we need more moderator tools. Could not agree more. They can't come fast enough.As to my second bullet point, I'm not putting words in peoples mouths. I'm a bit tired to collect the URLs by I got several comments that literally said "We don't want more tolerance" which was shocking to me. I truly hope they are in the minority.
I likely shouldn't have leaned on AI, it's just too radioactive a topic. But it did show off the pure vehemence (there are some scary people out there) The more mild form was "yeah, we want tolerance for X, but Y can fuck right off to hell" which isn't exact tolerance...
In the end, I'll be clear, I fucked this up. I had a noble idea and I said it in a vague radioactive way where the reactions actually proved my points but I certainly didn't win any hearts. I have to own that.
@sfabel@scottjenson It's hard not to step on landmines when the field is so large. And I'm sorry you're seeing toxic asshats, though I suppose I shouldn't be surprised. I'm lucky in I rarely see that sort of thing on "my" Mastodon. I'm also sorry if I added to that, it wasn't my intent, but I know things don't always come across as intended.
In the long run, IMO, communities here self-organise. They *aren't* a mono-culture, we just see our own sphere and believe it's "everything".
Thanks for caring.
-
@CptSuperlative
This topic has spiraled into something that I can't even track. It started out as a curiosity: why was there more engagement on other platforms? What was different? Part of the motivation is that I've spoken to lots of folks that have tried and left the fediverse, mostly because of reply guys or generally feeling unsafe.What I've noticed is that the "Fedi-way" is to block and ignore which I think most people do. Anyone can join! If we don't like you we'll ignore (or ban) you. I actually agree with that.
But what I've noticed is that some topics, like content warnings, Alt text, and yes, AI seem different. They aren't ignored, they are actively policed. They form part of the culture that is heavily defended.
Somehow related (sorta?) are journalists. There is this undercurrent than anyone 'promoting' their work is wrong. It's not a huge problem, I'm just noticing it in comments.
I have noticed some of these cultural traits as well.
Basically every woman I follow here has repeatedly expressed frustration about mastodon reply-guys. I’ve definitely heard several of them talk about how much they hate it here and constantly think about leaving.
I know that people who like LLMs have shown up in my comments and I politely disagree or leave it alone but I never block for that reason.
However, I don’t go looking for their pro-LLM content either and so I don’t know what their comments are like. I can imagine people policing the way they did around CWs (which I received very little of but I’m a cishet white guy and seem to get that privilege even when my profile is a painting of Van Gogh as a teddy bear).
-
Is #mastodon becoming an echo chamber? This post from @carnage4life has me questioning our community. The Mastodon team is finally getting some traction, the product improvements are increasing, The #UX is improving, yet people posting on multiple platforms are making comments like this. It's confusing.
I *know* people here don't want this to be a classic social media-clone but we'd *like* journalists to be here right? They aren't coming with examples like this!
There are two different issues here getting conflated; not engaging with things you don't like, and driving away things you don't like.
The latter I kind of hate about Mastodon. I just made a post about the stupid idea that this is a "community" and people who try to drive out anyone that doesn't fit their community, like this is a small bulletin board. Delusional.
At the same time I'm going to block things I don't want to see, and that is the proper response.
-
There are two different issues here getting conflated; not engaging with things you don't like, and driving away things you don't like.
The latter I kind of hate about Mastodon. I just made a post about the stupid idea that this is a "community" and people who try to drive out anyone that doesn't fit their community, like this is a small bulletin board. Delusional.
At the same time I'm going to block things I don't want to see, and that is the proper response.
I might tell people their ideas suck, or they're stupid, but telling them "we don't want you here"? Who the fuck is "we"?
Super weird.
-
Is #mastodon becoming an echo chamber? This post from @carnage4life has me questioning our community. The Mastodon team is finally getting some traction, the product improvements are increasing, The #UX is improving, yet people posting on multiple platforms are making comments like this. It's confusing.
I *know* people here don't want this to be a classic social media-clone but we'd *like* journalists to be here right? They aren't coming with examples like this!
@scottjenson @carnage4life the person you quote says that his engagement is from shitposters and that otherwise people hate what he reports about. Are you sure this shows what you want it to show? because when he says people don't want to see something and thus people are not seeing it then it works as intended
-
@scottjenson @carnage4life the person you quote says that his engagement is from shitposters and that otherwise people hate what he reports about. Are you sure this shows what you want it to show? because when he says people don't want to see something and thus people are not seeing it then it works as intended
@scottjenson @carnage4life he further writes that tech topics on mastodon get interactions while on the other platforms it's all about shitposting and politics.
I feel like this is really bad evidence for whatever you want to show
-
@Azuaron @scottjenson wait, threads is mastodon?!?!
@jupiter @Azuaron @scottjenson it's not. it can federate with Fediverse (if not blocked by fedi instances), but it's a separate thing, which as far as I know isn't based on Mastodon's code. Truth Social and Gab are more Mastodon than Threads.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login