The horizon is not so far as we can see, but as far as we can imagine

Tag: twitter

AI & New Social Media Rules Are Strangling Independent Sites

This table is pretty typical:

Back in 2017 Google changed their algo to prioritize “reliable” sites: aka. mainstream sources like Wikipedia. The blogosphere, what was left of it got hit hard. Now everyone’s getting hit. AI scrapes whatever someone writes and presents the information without referring traffic to whoever created the actual information.

This has been a long trend. Google and Facebook from about 2004 on slowly strangled everyone, taking almost all the value for themselves and destroying the ad-networks which existed before them. The money dried up, the audiences dwindled and sites went under, including some very large ones. Places like mine survived only because they had enough legacy goodwill, but I certainly saw massive decreases in referral traffic, especially from 2017 on.

The Web which existed has been replaced by a bunch of walled gardens, all offering the same takes. Once the Web was amazing, full of weirdness, beauty and opinion diversity. Those days are gone, perhaps never to be seen again.

This is part of an endless drive in the West towards creating oligopolies with massive profit rates. “I’ll just take 80% of the value since people can’t find you without me.”

The end result is less and less real interesting content because it pays less and less, and even people who don’t care about that can’t get an audience.

If you decide to join the crowd and post on X, instagram, Facebook, Youtube or whatever, your account can be removed at any time, and there’s no recourse. Usually you can’t even find a human to to talk to, 99% of censorship and appeals are entirely automated.

All this before the various “real ID” stuff being justified by “protecting the children” and the buy-up of both old and new media by Zionist billionaires. It’s becoming much harder to find any non oligarch approved content on the web.

It’s sad, because the web used to be a marvelous place full of the oddest most interesting people. Now it’s just a mass surveillance and value extraction machine for half a dozen billionaires.

This site is only viable due to reader donations. If you value it and can, please subscribe or donate.

Why Twitter Has Been Marvelous

I try not to write about topics about which a lot of other people have said what I’d say, or, indeed, written it better than I would. Musk’s takeover of Twitter is one of those topics. There have been plenty of excellent articles about what it means and about how Musk could really screw up Twitter by destroying the feeling of safety which advertisers require and by misunderstanding that the users are the product, not the customers.

I’ve been on Twitter since August of 2008 (@iwelsh). I visit it almost every day, and for many years, I spent a lot of time there. Nowadays, it probably takes up 30 to 45 minutes of my day. My account isn’t huge; I have something like over four thousand followers, and I follow about thirteen-hundred. (Following too many people is a sign of disrespect and twitter-gaming, because it means you don’t actually read them.)

For me, Twitter takes the place of the email lists I was on in the 2000s and which collapsed near the end of the decade. “Townhouse,” which some people may have heard of, was one, but only one of them. Emails on these lists would often include links to articles of interest and discussion of important topics of the day.

Each list would have a primary topic; I was on lists that focused on domestic US politics, foreign affairs, the tech industry, and so on. The lists acted as both a filter and a way to read people discussing topics in which I was interested — often, very well-informed and smart people. Because the lists were semi-private, there was some additional value: People could be frank.

These lists collapsed near the end of the decade, in part because of a series of leaks. A lot of the value was that it was “off the record.”

Twitter, frankly, isn’t quite as good for quality of discussion about controversial topics, simply because it is public. You can’t “let your hair down” and everything you say can and probably will be used against you. But it is still a venue where everyone talks about everything, and if you curate who you follow, you can still connect with people interested in specific topics discuss them and share article links and so on.

I don’t just follow political types; I follow book-twitter, archeology-twitter, a bunch of artists, a fair chunk of the crypto-crowd, some pagans and hermeticists, classicists, and so on.

A lot of what passes in my Twitter-stream is chuff, especially from the political junkies, but a lot is smart and interesting and seeing what the people I have chosen to follow think is worth talking about is useful in itself.

Twitter is a curated experience, and if Musk doesn’t fuck it up (his idea of not showing non-blue checks content would destroy its value — most of the best accounts I follow don’t have a blue check), it will remain useful because you choose who  you follow. It’s just that simple. Turn the timeline to chronological so the algo doesn’t go all Facebook on you, and it’s much like early Facebook was before Zuckerberg screwed it up by trying to over-monetize it.

A timeline on Twitter is just people you chose to follow talking or re-tweeting something they like someone else wrote.

And frankly, at it’s base, that’s marvelous. If you don’t like your Twitter feed, well, you chose it, and you can change it.

This can easily be fucked up, of course. Facebook screwed this up with algos instead of just giving you a chronological timeline of people you chose to follow; Twitter has gone some way down that road, but it can still be made to work. Musk may screw that up, and if he does, I’ll leave. If he doesn’t, I’ll stay.

DONATE OR SUBSCRIBE

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén