I've been thinking about the lack of algorithmic* feeds in the #Fediverse and wondering how much that is hurting growth and retention. Big social media spend billions on getting and keeping eyeballs, and algorithmic timelines are a huge part of that.
I think it's right to avoid it, but I worry that will just forever stunt growth. The alternative is human curators, I think, but I have no idea how to make that happen.
*Yes, I know reverse chronological is an algorithm, algo-pedants.
John Conway
in reply to John Conway • • •no-no
in reply to John Conway • • •i feel like this sorta brings us back to the question of what social media is for. is it a place to make connections with people? is it a place to sell things? is it a word-of-mouth network? an entertainment site that should keep me stimulated like a tv?
i feel like the latter one sort of doesn't fit, even tho that's the direction corporate social media has gone. i dunno. does that actually help artists sell work? hard to know if even your followers will see your stuff
John Conway
in reply to no-no • • •@wolfteeth Well, I think it's innovation over forums is that it's all of those things. And in being all of those things it brought a huge number of people that artists can reach (and they do reach people, there's no denying it to popular artists)
Personally I actually prefer the forum format, and if I was just doing this for my own amusement/making connections, that's what I'd do.
no-no
in reply to John Conway • • •heheh, i do find myself thinking of setting up a forum from time to time, but i think, besides social media, discord has fully taken over the corner that used to be occupied by small forums. i sincerely like the microblog style of social media, though, so i am totally here for my own amusement 🤷
i still question the usefulness of "the algorithm" for reach. someone will probably write an app like that for fedi sooner or later, and it's not a bad idea. just not one that interests me much
John Conway
in reply to no-no • • •Bel Lion
in reply to John Conway • • •John Conway
in reply to Bel Lion • • •@bel_lion What sort of citation could I provide you with?
All the huge social networks use algorithmic feeds. You may say its so they can control the message, but I say the simpler explanation is that it keeps people engaged because they like it. TikTok is a case in point. Many people love the algorithm there.
I'm not saying this is the way to go, but I don't think that just assuming people don't like recommendation algorithms is the way forward either.
Bel Lion
in reply to John Conway • • •I certainly don't debate that the algorithms used by corporate social media keep people engaged with the platform. I simply am unsure that 'liking' it figures into the effect.
That's why I asked for a citation. All I have right now is my own observations, which seem to conflict with yours on this issue. I was hoping that you might have some research source I could read and perhaps understand your view better.
John Conway
in reply to Bel Lion • • •@bel_lion Well, if the fediverse can't do anything to improve growth, the question is completely irrelevant, because people will stay on Twitter/Instagram/TikTok.
What would you do or change about the current situation?
Bel Lion
in reply to John Conway • • •I think that getting friction issues like quote-toots, instance-based timeline search (not third party), and similar will do a great deal to retain new prospective users. Giving users the tools to control their own feed at the client level is great! If a client builds an algorithmic timeline feature local to the users cache, that's fine!
Where I perceive this being a problem is if such implementations happen at the instance level.
John Conway
in reply to Bel Lion • • •John Conway
Unknown parent • • •@Colman What's "empty" growth?
From my own selfish perspective, yes, the Fediverse is too small to support the number of creators on here. It needs to grow for that reason .
From a broader perspective, I'm afraid that hovering around a couple of million users isn't the kind of change in the internet landscape we needed. It's no where near enough to break the hold of the giants.
John Conway
Unknown parent • • •@artcollisions I want some societal change to come out of this, not just an okay place to hang out on the internet. The Fediverse has not yet done that.
Also, it's just not really big enough for creators to make a living.
John Conway
Unknown parent • • •John Conway
Unknown parent • • •John Conway
Unknown parent • • •John Conway
Unknown parent • • •John Conway
Unknown parent • • •@Colman Commercial instances are a near certainty if the Fediverse becomes reasonably successful. And I worry the effects are subtle. Not sure we'd recognise it for a long time.
On the other hand, at least it wouldn't be one or two billionaires deciding, and that would be a huge win in itself.
silverwizard
in reply to John Conway • •Honestly, I think algorithms aren't the issue. I think the issue is one of discoverability.
It's about being able to cross-server find accounts.
Meaning, of course, I think that cross-instance search is the best tool for this. Since it let's people build local feeds with exciting and regular content.
John Conway
in reply to silverwizard • • •Hypolite Petovan
in reply to John Conway • • •like this
Tio, Scifijunkie and Cătă like this.
Tio
in reply to Hypolite Petovan • • •silverwizard
in reply to Hypolite Petovan • •I think the larger point about people being able to build local networks on the Fediverse, which they can use to create.
I understand that creating on the internet is a major business thing these days, and I don't know if I think it's worth burning down a network for, but I think that it's something to consider.
Hypolite Petovan
in reply to silverwizard • • •silverwizard
in reply to Hypolite Petovan • •Sorry, yes, I wasn't saying the algo was good. I believe John's point is that algos drive critical mass of users, which is important for artists &c.
I think John is not fully correct, but I think the lack of stickiness slow things down
Hypolite Petovan likes this.
wakest ⁂
in reply to Hypolite Petovan • • •@hypolite I think it might be useful to have more nuance in the terms we use here. One type of growth that I think is important is people being able to keep their *social graph* and that requires a certain *critical mass*
I moved to the fediverse full time and tried for years to bring people here from facebook and the #1 complaint I got was "you are the only one I know that uses it"
a large portion of people use social media to interact with already existing friends not make new ones.
silverwizard likes this.
wakest ⁂
in reply to wakest ⁂ • • •John Conway
in reply to Hypolite Petovan • • •@hypolite In my opinion, there's little point to the whole thing if it doesn't grow to address the problems with current social media.
We may as well be hanging out on a big forum (which is fine if you want that, but that's not why I'm here).
Henry Meyers
in reply to John Conway • • •John Conway
in reply to Henry Meyers • • •Henry Meyers
in reply to John Conway • • •Mike Taylor 🦕
in reply to John Conway • • •John Conway
in reply to Mike Taylor 🦕 • • •Mike Taylor 🦕
in reply to John Conway • • •John Conway
in reply to Mike Taylor 🦕 • • •Mike Taylor 🦕
in reply to John Conway • • •John Conway
in reply to Mike Taylor 🦕 • • •Mike Taylor 🦕
in reply to John Conway • • •OK, you're talking here about a broadcast medium?
(Nothing wrong with wanting that, of course; but I think it's a mistake to want THIS to be THAT.)
John Conway
in reply to Mike Taylor 🦕 • • •Mike Taylor 🦕
in reply to John Conway • • •John Conway
in reply to Mike Taylor 🦕 • • •@mike Yes, Facebook added a specific mechanism for it (because Facebook was trying to be an everything app).
I'm not sure where in this conversation everyone got the idea that I was arguing that algorithmic timelines are a great idea – I explicitly say the opposite in the first post – my point is that Mastodon competes with big social networks, and algorithmic timelines are a competitive advantage for many, many people.
We need to give them something competitive.
Mike Taylor 🦕
in reply to John Conway • • •What, other than algorithmic timelines, would be competitive?
Also: why would algorithmic timelines delivery you more potential-customer eyeballs than chronological timelines?
John Conway
in reply to Mike Taylor 🦕 • • •@mike Algorithmic timelines are actually two things mashed together:
1. A filter, prioritising the most popular posts from the people you follow, which is meant to keep the entertainment value high
2. A recommendation engine, which is meant to aid in discovery
We can probably do without the first. The second gets to the huge discoverability problem on Mastodon. People don't know who to follow or how to find stuff that's interesting to them, and they often give up.
Mike Taylor 🦕
in reply to John Conway • • •I am certainly 100% in agreement that discovery is very poor.
I think the answer to that is search, but we've already discussed the short-sighted cultural factors that have so far prevented this.
John Conway
in reply to Mike Taylor 🦕 • • •Mike Taylor 🦕
in reply to John Conway • • •John Conway
in reply to Mike Taylor 🦕 • • •Mike Taylor 🦕
in reply to John Conway • • •John Conway
in reply to Mike Taylor 🦕 • • •silverwizard
in reply to John Conway • •dir.friendica.social
DannekRose
in reply to John Conway • • •John Conway
in reply to DannekRose • • •Mike Taylor 🦕
in reply to John Conway • • •