this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2025
647 points (95.2% liked)

Ask Lemmy

32861 readers
1758 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected]. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected] or [email protected]


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The emergence of social media has destroyed all the small communities to standardize communication and information.

It's a bit of a digital version of rural exodus. And since 2017/2018, I've noticed that everything that, in my opinion, represented the internet has disappeared.

I've known Lemmy for a few hours and I feel like I'm back in the early spirit of the internet.

(page 4) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago

Algorithm curated content driven by engagement doesn't deserve to be called social media any more. The Feed, seems apropriate, malnourishing as it is.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 week ago

Its not so much social media that ruined it, as capitalism and centralization.

Forums themselves are a form of social media, and they're (mostly) great. For Reddit and Lemmy, debatably the best part is the social elements, like the comments sections. The problem isn't the interaction or the "social" nature of it. Its that these platforms have turned into psudo-monopolies intent on controlling people and/or wringing them for every penny.

Thats not to say toxicity and capitalistic exploitation didn't exist before either. The term "flame war" is older than a lot of adults today. Unlike today though, platforms were both more decentralized meaning they were easier to manage and users could switch platform, and were less alorithmic meaning that users could more easily avoid large, bad-faith actors. You'll notice the Fediverse have both these qualities, which is part of why its done so well.

IMO, the best fix to this, would be twofold. A) break up the big monopolies and possibly the psudo-monopolies. Monopolies bad, simple enough. B) Much more difficult, but I believe that what content a site promotes, including algorithmically, should be regulated. Thats not to say sorting algorithms should be banned, but I think we need to regulate how they're used and implemented. For example, regulations could include things like requiring alternative algorithms be offered to users, banning "black box" algorithms, requiring the algorithns be publicly published, and/or banning algorithms that change based on an individual's engagement. Ideally, this would give the user more agency over their experience and would reduce the odds of ignorant users being pushed into cult-like rabbit-holes.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

Yeah. Yeah it's just you my dude. There's no way I've ever heard that sentiment before on websites or other posts.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago

It's not destroyed, it's just no longer dominant.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

What “represented the internet” in your opinion?

“Small communities” still exist all over the internet, in far greater numbers than before. They exist on the giant social media platforms too. Discord, WhatsApp, facebook, reddit, etc all have millions of “small communities” on them.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

OP is asking about where to find cute, locally owned retailers & you are telling them they can find the same shit at the mall.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago

Yes. I'm a big fan of lemmy. I hope peertube gets going I feel it will be like the original YouTube

[–] [email protected] 43 points 1 week ago (12 children)

Whenever I get overwhelmed by the modern web, I go to http://wiby.me/ and click "surprise me..."

It's a search engine that only spits out "real" webpages that were made by people like you and me. Very refreshing.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago (2 children)

If I had a lot of money I would fund the creation of a new search engine. It would operate entirely on a white list model. And every website on it would be reviewed by people, for people. No posts from any social media site would be allowed; only small webpages. To be featured in the engine, sites would have to have verifiable human origins. So personal blogs made by real people or small businesses with actual physical addresses that can be fully verified in the real world. In order to get your business featured, you would have to apply, and someone would physically have to visit you in order to verify your authenticity. Oh, and any website that uses AI in any form would simply be ineligible to appear on the search engine.

Yes, this would result in a drastically reduced pool of potential sites, but what remains would be absolute gold.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

Needs moar webrings.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Thank you for sharing. It's painful to realize in hindsight that those websites were peak internet.

They lack polish, but they were all a labour of love. No enshittification, no selling things, no corporate influence, no shit posting.

Everything had a purpose, every post took effort, and it was all about sharing experiences or knowledge.

I really miss that internet.

EDIT: correcting gibberish 🤭

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

There are still smaller communities out there. It can be discussed that Lemmy is a small community itself.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

More so, Internet has destroyed the spirit of conversation. When I was younger, people found me charming and intelligent when first meeting me after talking for a bit. Now, they can quickly "google" what I say and quickly learn that I am an ass, bullshitting and exaggerating what I don't know, but making it up to keep the conversation interesting.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I’ve known Lemmy for a few hours and I feel like I’m back in the early spirit of the internet.

Welcome :)

It’s a bit of a digital version of rural exodus. And since 2017/2018, I’ve noticed that everything that, in my opinion, represented the internet has disappeared.

This a very interesting metaphor, real spot on.

But I would say a lot of that rural Internet has not disappeared, not yet. It's still there, very much alive. People are simply not visiting it anymore. They don't dare go outside the pretty walled-gardens they're used to.

But those people wanting to stay parked in their corporate-owned gardens, or silos, doesn't make that small and more humane web go away. And would they chose to, they could still come visit it freely, they could still easily interact with their creators. They could even create and tend to their very own part of it, making that small Web a richer place.

They just don't do it. Most of the time because they can't be bothered with doing the actual work, or because they're afraid to try and to fail. They want to be fed easy to eat content, not learn to cook it themselves.

They want the a Web that is like those shitty fast-food serving standardized and over-processed industrial food. Something ready to eat that is barely food at all but that will stuff their belly and, more importantly, that will never surprise them. Alas, this food is as much a poison for their head as it is for their body. They will realize that too late. It probably already is.

Too bad, because the alternative is still a thing, not that far away.

The small web is still a thing. Many blogs still exist that only share content their author sincerely care about or is interested in, that are ads and tracking free, that respect their readers... But the majority of people have quit visiting them, they simply don't go outside of, say, YT, X, Facebook, Reddit, Instagram, TikTok or whatever where they can all stay together parked like the cattle they have not yet realized they have become.

Back to your original metaphor. Digital rurality is still there and many could easily own a small part of it and make it exwactly like they want it to be, and be happy with it. But they prefer staying in the large over-crowed cities, in small overpriced apartments like most their friends are doing.

Lemmy is a great alternative to reddit but it could relatively easily become another silos—just plural and not corporate-owned but silos nonetheless. It's up to us to keep it open to the alternatives. I mean, sometimes I feel sad to see little posts & comments inviting people to go read/watch something they liked that is not already hosted on some corporate-owned platform. Heck, sharing personal content feels so much like a lost cause to me that I seldom share a link to my own blog posts: why bother? I also publish a lot less often than I used to, here again: why bother?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago

I'm not old enough to have known the old internet, but the photo- and video-based social media never felt attractive to me. The only social media that I used was Reddit, but now I'm here. I appreciate the genuine people speaking their own mind for the sake of speaking around here, instead of the vapid, superficial and clout-chasing ""people"" (read: [fascist] bots) of other websites.

[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It's not social media per se. It's capitalism. The Internet was this vast frontier, where you could meet anyone. Little communities formed, we all just talked, and self-regulated any bad behavior. It was a gift economy, we all freely shared knowledge, files, culture.

In the past 20 or so years, economies of scale took over. Corporations bought up the server space and aggressively shut down small communities. Community is discouraged, keep scrolling and click on the ads! Marketing killed the internet.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Came here to say exactly this. Capitalism breeds consumerism - and consumerism destroys everything.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

Everything's too like, corporate nowadays on mainstream internet. Like less about being social with others and more trying to sell a product or a brand or something. Those big tech names have optimized everything to extract as much profit as possible from you and your time with ever decreasing benefit to you.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago
[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Not the only one, but it's the walled garden platform approach.

The idea (from around 2010ish) was that every platform is an app and every app is everything. A company buys up other smaller companies until you have a payment system, a marketplace, a VOIP system, advertising, job posting boards, 4 different waya to share media, etc. etc.

While the tech world sold this as, and actually viewed this as, some organic online super village, it wasn't. It was a series of shit stripmalls adjacent to a Walmart in a shitberg town on a big freeway linking other shiberg towns with Walmarts. Sterile, restrictive, one size fits all dipshits kind of garbage. There's a kind of person that thrives in the parking lots of Walmarts and stripmalls in shitberg towns, and they thrive on social media, too.

Lemmy reminds me more of early internet as well, but also refined by the common language of those platforms as a common starting point. It's a niche, and it's not for everyone. But it is for you, welcome.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The idea (from around 2010ish) was that every platform is an app and every app is everything. A company buys up other smaller companies until you have a payment system, a marketplace, a VOIP system, advertising, job posting boards, 4 different waya to share media, etc. etc.

You're describing AOL. This is nothing new. And just as AOL failed and faded, so will the social media giants.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

There's a kind of person that thrives in the parking lots of Walmarts and stripmalls in shitberg towns, and they thrive on social media, too.

Well put. I'm old school Tripod days (if anyone remembers what that was). I've seen social media go from "A/S/L?" to "like & subscribe" and everything in between. It was never that clean, and the lot lizards were always lurking.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I agree the internet feels a lot different than the eqrly 2000s, but breaking down what's different I can't pin anything concrete down.

There's pretty much no fundamental differences between how social media was and how it is now. People talk, share interests, get in arguments. What we feel is nostalgia for a wild west internet with less people and rules that will never exist again.

More people use the internet now so more people participate in the conversation. That's how it will be for the rest of human history probably.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

but breaking down what’s different I can’t pin anything concrete down.

One big difference is scale. The 2000s Internet was primarily centered around single(ish) interest forums with relatively low user counts. The entire Lemmy-verse, which is itself quite tiny in 2025, is still WAY larger than nearly any of the 2000s era forums ever were.

Another other big difference is why the user base is online. The majority of them aren't participating to discuss a shared interest anymore, they are doing it for general entertainment or to earn money.

Those two things explain nearly all of the change. Way more users congregated into a handful of websites with many of them, including the sites, attempting to get rich doing it.

The 2000s web was a much smaller number of users spread across a zillion websites / forums with nearly all of the users and site operators doing it without money as a motivator.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Social media back then was making stuff you thought was cool and having friends and other weirdos across the Internet also enjoying the same things as you.

Social media today is juicing the algorithm to generate the most views, regardless of whether you like the content you're producing or not.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Social media back then were also referred to as social NETWORKS. A network implies collaboration and interactivity, media are more linear, having a sender and a recipient.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 week ago

The algorithm(s) and "For You" pages I think have done more damage to my ideal internet than anything else ever has.

I have a feeling that someday in the future we'll also see that the algorithm was also responsible for damage to the human mind and society as well.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Everyone clustered on like 4 websites for convenience, and then browsing the internet started to feel like wandering around different sections of the same department store: sterile, corporate, advertiser-safe, and everything's transactional. Plus, it made it incredibly easy for any party that wants to astroturf public opinion, because now they only have to set up shop on a few sites: botting comments, infiltrating moderator positions, abusing the algorithms.

We desperately need to break the internet's monoculture, and I think federated social media like this is a great start.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The real problem - how do you deal with bots? Sure, we could start a new nerd movement to say, revive web rings and personal websites. But with LLMS and other AIs, how do you keep that whole ecosystem from just being flooded with AI content?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

I honestly don't know. It's going to be a big problem. LLMs are capable of having this exact convo we're having without giving away the game.

Some sort of personal vouching system? Ever changing "human tests"? I'm not sure it'll be enough.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago

I think you're confusing social media and late stage capitalism. Social media hasn't done anything to anyone, capitalism has used social media to further its own ends.

[–] [email protected] 133 points 1 week ago (4 children)

The early Internet was social media, but it wasn't so corporatized to the point of being ruined.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 week ago

Social media, at it's heart, is inevitable. We will always find a way to share pictures, information, videos, etc. with each other. It's such basic functionality when you really think about it. We're social creatures and this is the most important thing we would do with technology.

The issue is specifically with platforms; how they consolidate power and who owns them.

I don't know what to do about it, it's one of the biggest problems we are going to continue to face in our time. I can't really armchair solutions for it now, but I think it's of the utmost importance that we recognize it and discuss it.

Social media is not inherently bad, it's the platforms.

[–] [email protected] 35 points 1 week ago

To expand on that, all media with a negligible barrier to entry is social media. Which describes the internet as a whole. The commodification of such media is both unnecessary and parasitic. The only thing "social media" adds is accessibility.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Not social media per sé, but definitely "the algorithm" that was introduced around ~2014 and has been tweaked by the likes of Cambridge Analytica to now provide us with endless ragebait.

MySpace was social media and had none of the toxicity.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

MySpace was social media and had none of the toxicity.

Usenet was Social Media and it had allllll the toxicity.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Randall published this on February 20, 2008.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Exactly. The algorithm is literally designed to stop people from thinking about what they actually care about. Of course that has caused deterioration of every aspect of human society to some degree.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago

Truth. We need to massively regulate social media. If I had my way, I would prohibit any large social media site from offering any kind of content stream algorithmically targeted to a single user.

This wouldn't be a restriction on speech. You could still have your website and publish whatever you wanted. You could still have sites where people can upload user content. But something like YouTube would look far different. YouTube could have one main page of content they show everyone, but they couldn't have individual feeds for individual users. If you wanted to find content not on the main page, you would have to find it yourself. You would have to find channels, subscribe to them, share recommendations with friends, etc. If people want to create their own curated content feed, that's fine. But they have to be the ones that do it.

We don't even need to ban social media. What we need to completely ban is individually-targeted algorithmic content. That's what's lead us to the insanity we are currently experiencing. And this should apply to everyone, not just kids. If anything adults need this more than kids do.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago

You're probably not the only one.

However, the interest (on Lemmy-aligned circles at least) in self-hosting, reducing depedence on large tech companies, community building on smaller scale online and offline, has me excited again that the smaller counterculture can co-exist with the mainstream profit-motivated social media culture.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›