Yeah I remember saying this when all online communities seemed to be going to discord and people seemed to mainly laugh at me in response at the time.
-
Ie. The equivalent of sending the output of your wiki to /dev/null
Yeah that’s a good analogy.
-
Newest iteration of "this meeting could have been an email" has become "this Discord could have been a wiki".
wiki + ai search = discord reddit + google was once good, nowadays I click on the other results since the reddit reply is its already been answered use google
-
Yeah anything ephemeral is fine like chats and what not. But this idea of using it as support platform is just dumb. You end up with people asking the same question over and over and it either doesn’t get answered because no one is around to answer it or likely because they’re annoyed at the same questions over and over. There is no organization and no institutional knowledge. It’s like it ends up being set up by people who think it’s what the cool kids want. And these giant communities just exacerbate this issue. Everything ends up being noise. It’s the reason I usually ended up turning off the world or general channels in WoW. It just ended up being annoying and distracting.
When I’m trying resolve a situation that I need some sort of support I wanna be able to search if others have had the same issue and see discussion around that topic. I don’t need synchronous communication for that. I don’t care if it was 3 months ago someone had the problem if they figured out how to fix it. The way to do that is forums, Reddit (well before the enshittification), or even Lemmy.
yep its horrible really should start suggesting discord servers move to lemmy, self host their own, a lot of them would be better off with a forum like structure, but lemmy isnt easily crawlable either, everyone hates being searchable
-
Fun is always great to capture the masses!
thats why I want misskey the emoji reactions to anything are always more fun than just likes
-
In my head Discord = toxicity. Not sure how it got that rep for me but it has gotten it. Thus, wont lose sleep if it dies out. Perhaps I am wrong. Reviewing rationality of this prejudice is on my ToDo List after a million other things...
No worries! The only reason to evaluate (or re-evaluate) a piece of software is if you have a need or desire the software might fulfill. And if you don't have either, it literally doesn't matter, lol.
-
I despise discord from a user interface and business practice perspective. What a piece of shit
This is exactly what I was gonna say: I'm amazed that so many millions of people can tolerate its atrocious UI. Even now, the amount of notifications I get from the constant text channels across "servers" (which is such a misnomer for merely "communities") is so ridiculous that I ignore 99.9% of it.
-
Element needs to be better. Discord is awesome with the way it auto-plays looping videos/gifs and has animated emojis.
Seriously: That's all they'd need to do. The element devs need to focus on fun.
Also, people forget that Discord's streaming capability is, unfortunately, absolutely top-notch; no other community-screensharing platform has fewer issues, and my friends and I like to watch each other play games often.
-
Isn't there any solution for that yet?
None of which I know...
-
online communities seemed to be going to discord
That can also be seen as "nature healing itself" in context of giant AI botnets scraping the whole internet every second. It's only natural to go private nowadays.
No, it isn't.
Make no mistake a primary monetization vector for Discord is to scrape the shit out of everything said on its chats.
By suggesting Discord for privacy you are effectively only giving corporations the benefit of a commons while denying that to the people.
Discord is NOT private, it is a corporation and your data is valuable.
-
And someone (on the Far-Right) is always trying to buy Wikipedia, monetise it, X-ify it, or take it down. I think Wikipedia is abusive - exploits volunteer unpaid labour - should have been created by an NGO like UN and kept safe for mankind like our Library of Alexandria. But it is what it is. Preppers download the whole site regularly in order to have that knowledge under their control in case is ever gets taken down or spoilt and they are rebuilding civilisation post-Armageddon. I keep meaning to download it myself (note to self: do that soon you lazy b. no more excuses!)
-
But many people don’t want to have everything completely public
This isn't true at all. Most people do not care about privacy; those that do are an extreme minority. You (presumably) and I are part of that minority yet even we still comment here, in a public space. The issue with forums has never been about privacy because most are content with pseudonymity. It is a big mistake to think we need to cater to the extreme minority in the privacy space when tackling big issues that involve a majority who do not care.
Yeah, I don't post private shit on forums, I discuss things publically so I can collectively have a conversation with countless other people.
If you want to have a private personal conversation sure use a private chat room, but I need that public space to discuss and learn, active publically accessible forums / lemmy / other equivalent communities are goldmines of information that benefits all.
-
No, it isn't.
Make no mistake a primary monetization vector for Discord is to scrape the shit out of everything said on its chats.
By suggesting Discord for privacy you are effectively only giving corporations the benefit of a commons while denying that to the people.
Discord is NOT private, it is a corporation and your data is valuable.
I agree that Discord shouldn't be trusted and might turn out to be a bad actor some day. Anyway, the more general tendency of moving away from public spaces is a right and natural thing. So it's best to do the same as with Discord but without Discord. In the upcoming era of AI hiding knowledge is a good thing to do, and I'm personally not used to this yet.
-
I agree that Discord shouldn't be trusted and might turn out to be a bad actor some day. Anyway, the more general tendency of moving away from public spaces is a right and natural thing. So it's best to do the same as with Discord but without Discord. In the upcoming era of AI hiding knowledge is a good thing to do, and I'm personally not used to this yet.
Anyway, the more general tendency of moving away from public spaces is a right and natural thing.
Let me emphatically say that NO it isn't.
If you need to anonymize or disguise your identity because you feel threatened, I never want to make you feel like you shouldn't take whatever steps of protecting your privacy that you feel you need to.
That being said, no, I fundamentally consider societal progress to be roughly equatable to how open the systems are in a society both in the material and ideological realm. Public forums are progress because they allow anybody with an internet connection to read through conversations, learn and eventually participate and add to a general collective benefit and community. This is the power of the internet.
-
Anyway, the more general tendency of moving away from public spaces is a right and natural thing.
Let me emphatically say that NO it isn't.
If you need to anonymize or disguise your identity because you feel threatened, I never want to make you feel like you shouldn't take whatever steps of protecting your privacy that you feel you need to.
That being said, no, I fundamentally consider societal progress to be roughly equatable to how open the systems are in a society both in the material and ideological realm. Public forums are progress because they allow anybody with an internet connection to read through conversations, learn and eventually participate and add to a general collective benefit and community. This is the power of the internet.
I think your point of view would be more relatable before AI happened. I don't see how it addresses AI problem anyhow. "Societal progress" isn't something that has self-worth. I see that as a tool of improving QoL, but if it's not only stopped improving QoL but actually started making it worse, than it's not something to pursue, and actually something to actively sabotage.
-
But many people don’t want to have everything completely public
This isn't true at all. Most people do not care about privacy; those that do are an extreme minority. You (presumably) and I are part of that minority yet even we still comment here, in a public space. The issue with forums has never been about privacy because most are content with pseudonymity. It is a big mistake to think we need to cater to the extreme minority in the privacy space when tackling big issues that involve a majority who do not care.
That's why I specifically wrote "completely public" not "private".
I think most people know that a discord server with a few hundred or thousand members can hardly be considered private. But I can imagine that there are people who don't want to put it directly online for everybody to find on Google. Not that I like that.
-
I think your point of view would be more relatable before AI happened. I don't see how it addresses AI problem anyhow. "Societal progress" isn't something that has self-worth. I see that as a tool of improving QoL, but if it's not only stopped improving QoL but actually started making it worse, than it's not something to pursue, and actually something to actively sabotage.
Well let me state this explicitly then, I don't consider AI to be some kind of existential threat in terms of becoming sentient, or stealing all of our information and hoarding it away.
LLMs are powerful and have lots of use cases, but right now we are going through a really tiresome scifi novel delusion about mistaking the current wave of LLM innovations as being somehow able to transport us to the singularity or whatever boring tech bros are calling it these days.
yawn
::: spoiler longish response, no pressure to read
What scares me is the massive energy use of AI, it also doesn't make money.
If some AI scrapes all my stuff on the fediverse, ok that sucks but honestly that LLM they train off my posts is going to constantly complaining about corporations, AI bullshit hype and centralization of corporate power.... yeah you can sanitize the data, they can profile me... yeah I know.
I feel like that is already a threat enough and there is a tsunami like power that comes from reaching a public consensus through discussing things in public forums and putting our beliefs out there as a form of vulnerability. The more of us that do this, the more that people who disagree or agree can learn, the more we can establish conensus of shared values, the more we can build trust.
The metaphor for our current late stage capitalist society on the afterburners of surveillance capitalism/mass dragnet surveillane and censorhsip is clearly the panopitcon
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panopticon
If you suspect you are in a panopticon, or in an environment that is threatening to collapse into an authoritarian panopticon type situation, than the best defense, because lets be honest if you are in this position you don't have much power realistically do you? is to publically have conversations, share opinions, discuss honestly with people in a way that floods whatever commons that are left, whatever equivalent of yelling chants out of the prison bars to other prisoners... however you want to map the metaphor here....
That is how we defend ourselves.
The relevant question is whether you are in a situation where you can safely do that, if you can't than take care of yourself, hide. Adopt good digital hygeine and help others out in an unjudgemental way how to do so themselves.
If you feel at all that you can safely speak out, or honestly, if you feel like realistically you don't have much to lose (because at the end of the day that is the position we are all existentially in, it is just a matter of who will suffer first and thus who has the right to want to delay that suffering the most) then the best defense here is to make as much as you can public through art, through any kind of discussion, because no matter how sophisticated and supercharged the methods of the oppressors are and no matter how overbearing false-consensuses become...
...they still can't ever really win in a moment to moment interaction with any half decent artist, any half decent person who knows their worth, any person willing to be vulnerable and say it how it is, and indeed really anyone that is willing to extend solidarity to strangers not because of some emotional need or ideological sense of superiority, but because it is something they try to do out of principle (and of course are imperfect at it).
The nice thing is, we are talking about snowball effects here. One of the best drugs in life is doing a small good thing that ripples into a slightly bigger good thing all by itself, that takes a little life of its own. I don't claim to be any kind of altruist, or someone who constantly does selfless acts but that isn't the point. Most people feel a basic pleasure when it is easy to help, to help so long as it is simple and direct how to do so. Some don't, so what.
:::
-
I did ask. Why is it like pulling teeth to get answers? I don't use WhatsApp. Never got on that bandwagon. Something being free and open source doesn't mean it's good. Something being trustworthy from your standpoint doesn't explain why it's trustworthy to a layman who doesn't understand why you think FOSS = trustworthy or good. It's FOSS and you've looked at the code and found it to live up to its claims of being secure?
I'm not sure where the hostility is coming from here but I'm more pointing out that I can use a search engine to find out about matrix to some extent, but people who use the platform and have a better understanding of its pros and cons have valuable information to pass on. But when you ask them about it they're full of recommendations but those recommendations often don't have much in the way of information about what's good about the user experience or feature set or even the code. I'm trying to show that the particulars of why you like or prefer something matter.
Something being free and open source doesn't mean it's good
True. But it's verifiable.
It's FOSS and you've looked at the code and found it to live up to its claims of being secure?
Popular FOSS projects get audited all the time. Heck, there is even automated software to detect anomalies in code changes.
Auditability is the only reason why you can only really trust open source but not closed source. With proprietary software you'll always have to trust the developers to not do something shady and are competent enough. With open source you can simply verify it.
Also being open source is what usually makes popular FOSS more stable and secure than most closed counterparts. A LOT of people donate their work and since it's completely public, most want their contributions to be in good shape. If only a few or no other people see your code, you are tempted to write bad code a lot more. This of course is not always the case but more often than not.
Also in most developed countries it's illegal to purposefully introduce manipulated code. And I don't think most people would risk punishment for that if literally anybody could find it.
I'm trying to show that the particulars of why you like or prefer something matter.
Sure. But most people don't care about the details, unfortunately. In the case of messaging they just want to communicate. And if someone asks me, which platform I'd recommend I will always start with the most secure and private.
-
Well let me state this explicitly then, I don't consider AI to be some kind of existential threat in terms of becoming sentient, or stealing all of our information and hoarding it away.
LLMs are powerful and have lots of use cases, but right now we are going through a really tiresome scifi novel delusion about mistaking the current wave of LLM innovations as being somehow able to transport us to the singularity or whatever boring tech bros are calling it these days.
yawn
::: spoiler longish response, no pressure to read
What scares me is the massive energy use of AI, it also doesn't make money.
If some AI scrapes all my stuff on the fediverse, ok that sucks but honestly that LLM they train off my posts is going to constantly complaining about corporations, AI bullshit hype and centralization of corporate power.... yeah you can sanitize the data, they can profile me... yeah I know.
I feel like that is already a threat enough and there is a tsunami like power that comes from reaching a public consensus through discussing things in public forums and putting our beliefs out there as a form of vulnerability. The more of us that do this, the more that people who disagree or agree can learn, the more we can establish conensus of shared values, the more we can build trust.
The metaphor for our current late stage capitalist society on the afterburners of surveillance capitalism/mass dragnet surveillane and censorhsip is clearly the panopitcon
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panopticon
If you suspect you are in a panopticon, or in an environment that is threatening to collapse into an authoritarian panopticon type situation, than the best defense, because lets be honest if you are in this position you don't have much power realistically do you? is to publically have conversations, share opinions, discuss honestly with people in a way that floods whatever commons that are left, whatever equivalent of yelling chants out of the prison bars to other prisoners... however you want to map the metaphor here....
That is how we defend ourselves.
The relevant question is whether you are in a situation where you can safely do that, if you can't than take care of yourself, hide. Adopt good digital hygeine and help others out in an unjudgemental way how to do so themselves.
If you feel at all that you can safely speak out, or honestly, if you feel like realistically you don't have much to lose (because at the end of the day that is the position we are all existentially in, it is just a matter of who will suffer first and thus who has the right to want to delay that suffering the most) then the best defense here is to make as much as you can public through art, through any kind of discussion, because no matter how sophisticated and supercharged the methods of the oppressors are and no matter how overbearing false-consensuses become...
...they still can't ever really win in a moment to moment interaction with any half decent artist, any half decent person who knows their worth, any person willing to be vulnerable and say it how it is, and indeed really anyone that is willing to extend solidarity to strangers not because of some emotional need or ideological sense of superiority, but because it is something they try to do out of principle (and of course are imperfect at it).
The nice thing is, we are talking about snowball effects here. One of the best drugs in life is doing a small good thing that ripples into a slightly bigger good thing all by itself, that takes a little life of its own. I don't claim to be any kind of altruist, or someone who constantly does selfless acts but that isn't the point. Most people feel a basic pleasure when it is easy to help, to help so long as it is simple and direct how to do so. Some don't, so what.
:::
While I agree with many of these takes, I believe there is more to this. For example, your point about defense from falling into panopticon by speaking publicly about things doesn't actually require publicly speaking about anything other than politics. I mean, you can still hide all professional, creative or fun talk and still have the benefits you listed covered by only ever publicly talking about political issues. Another issue, is that publicity and interconnectedness of all discourses we have nowadays, increases a homogenuity of thinking patterns, in other words it hurts the diversity of the ways of thinking, that is also something that can be improved by more people going private and having closed interest groups in chats invisible to public web.
-
This is exactly what I was gonna say: I'm amazed that so many millions of people can tolerate its atrocious UI. Even now, the amount of notifications I get from the constant text channels across "servers" (which is such a misnomer for merely "communities") is so ridiculous that I ignore 99.9% of it.
I think that naming was fully on purpose. People argumented with me that they had their own "servers" so that was good, right?
Grrr.
-
While I agree with many of these takes, I believe there is more to this. For example, your point about defense from falling into panopticon by speaking publicly about things doesn't actually require publicly speaking about anything other than politics. I mean, you can still hide all professional, creative or fun talk and still have the benefits you listed covered by only ever publicly talking about political issues. Another issue, is that publicity and interconnectedness of all discourses we have nowadays, increases a homogenuity of thinking patterns, in other words it hurts the diversity of the ways of thinking, that is also something that can be improved by more people going private and having closed interest groups in chats invisible to public web.
Another issue, is that publicity and interconnectedness of all discourses we have nowadays, increases a homogenuity of thinking patterns, in other words it hurts the diversity of the ways of thinking, that is also something that can be improved by more people going private and having closed interest groups in chats invisible to public web.
Where is your evidence of this?
