I love to see the diversity of software increase. Once we clone all the major ones we can start innovating to the point where you have something completely new and bespoke and that will be really exciting
This quote has me reflecting on the diversity of software, especially in the realm of open source social media platforms. It seems like many of them are just clones of popular ones, lacking true innovation. Why is this the case? Are there any open source social media platforms that are genuinely innovative and offer something unique?
social media platforms seem so similar to each other, because they all implement the same mathematical constructs.
there’s users, and there’s topics, as the fundamental way to organize your platform.
- if you focus on users, you end up with something like Xitter or Mastodon where you can follow user accounts.
- if you follow topics, you either end up with hashtags, or you end up with communities like on lemmy/reddit which focus on one topic each.
There’s not a lot of fundamental ways i see that you could change that. If you can think of one, name it.
You could always augment your platform with nice tools, such as image upload, image conversion, link preview, AI tools, and such, but it’s just addons around the same basic structure.
You are coming with a consumer driven way of identifying innovation. This is not it. Innovation comes when you try solving problems. It’s not a shiny product. What you’re looking for is marketability.
Can you actually explain what is the same, please? Don’t just say “text and pictures and hyperlinks”. Please have something more precise than that. Please.
They’re all just ways of facilitating various forms of communication between people. Until we invent new ways of communication, new forms of media, etc, what could social media possibly innovate?
Most social media that got popular took something that people were already doing and brought it to a wider audience. Here are some examples:
Myspace
In the late 1990s and early 2000s, it was common for people, especially teenagers to make personal sites introducing themselves and linking to a few of their friends. Sometimes they would add life updates to the sites, but often linked to a blog hosted elsewhere (e.g. Livejournal). Myspace just institutionalized that.
Facebook
At first, it was pretty much Myspace for adults, then it integrated something a lot like an internal RSS reader.
Flickr
As digital cameras became popular, people started putting photo albums on their personal sites. Flickr made it easy.
Twitter
A blog and feed reader combination you could post to by SMS at a time when most phones didn’t have internet.
Instagram
Image-focused Twitter designed to be used from a smartphone.
Reddit
A then-popular social bookmarking site called Delicious had a “popular” section for links many people bookmarked. Instead of people having to find the links independently, Reddit added vote arrows. Eventually they added comments and it became a forum, which is also a thing people were doing already.
Youtube
This is the exception. Hosting videos was ridiculously expensive in 2005 so people weren’t doing it much. Youtube set VC money on fire until Google bought it and set Google money on fire for a decade or so until it finally started to be profitable.
reddit goes way back. reddit, digg, slashdot. Its basically newsgroups which were part of the four basic things of the pre www internet. email, chat, newsgroups, and gopher for search.
That’s true, but for the first few months, Reddit was not like Usenet, mailing lists, or message boards at all. There were no text-only posts (and certainly no image or video posts), nor were there comments. It was purely designed to share links to other websites.
What needs to be innovated on?
I’d say have a standard that everyone can use should be the goal. If people want to customize their own setups, that’s on them.
In general, open source is really good at copying a concept from closed source software rather than generating one from scratch.
At the end of the day, it’s all just more or less forums and chat.
There’s only so many different ways you can accomplish “people can post things for other people to see and respond to”.
It’s cheaper to just copy what someone else has done, provided they make it easy to copy it.
There are new ones being made, they just don’t have as easy of a time catching on as an alternative to a popular thing that already caught on. It is a lot easier to get traction when people are familiar with the concept.
It is like how tons of songs and movies and art gets made, but the popular stuff tends to lead to similar stuff also becoming popular.
What? The fediverse is the only place you will find a variety of social media implementations all cooperating while also innovating in unique ways. There are dozens of different projects on the network, each with their own strengths and weaknesses. There’s nothing else that compares to it when it comes to diversity of software.
For example, it may interest you to learn that I am not using lemmy right now.
How is the fediverse software innovating? Lemmy feels just like Reddit and Mastodon seems like Twitter but it doesn’t have algorithms so in practice it feels more like a chat.
but there is not only lemmy and mastodon
here you can find probably all relevant ones: https://github.com/emilebosch/awesome-fediverseSaying that lemmy is just a copy of reddit is like saying that reddit is just a copy of Usenet. There are fundamental differences, but they have some obvious things in common. Even if mastodon is just twitter to you, then what exactly do you think misskey is? I’m posting from mbin here which is not quite like anything else.
I mean mbin is just Reddit + Twitter
Sure, sure, and Facebook is just Geocities + phpBB + surveillance capitalism. Nothing is new since 1995.
Facebook is not at all comparable to Geocities, displays the contents of every thread of a “section”, and then invented Social Media by adding Feeds. Even disregarding the lattes, I don’t see how Mbin is at all comparable.
“invented Social Media” — bwahahahaha. You can’t actually be serious? I was a social media addict since 1989.
No, you’re probably thinking of Social Networks. I’m talking about an algorithmically-filtered homepage of recent updates anywhere, creating your filter bubble.
The social media that exist today do so because of pretty extreme evolutionary pressure in competition with many other similar and dissimilar platforms.
The core premise formula of these corpo social medias is often not actually bad in a vacuum.
If you think about legacy social media:
Facebook is about sharing and following microblogs from your friends and acquaintances and staying in touch. YouTube is about sharing videos. Tumblr is about niche interest full-fat blogs. Reddit is about making it easy to create a forums.
MySpace is for uhm uhh something like Facebook and Tumblr mixed together, which just doesn’t hold the appeal because those crowds are almost completely separate. IMO it actually works well, but VK (back in the day) did it better IYKYK.
Then your second gen ones:
Instagram is about sharing photos. Twitter is for news commentary and opinion microblogs. Google+ is uhhh like Facebook, Twitter and Instagram in one.
Ofc you also have Vine which just failed to monetize but was actually a good concept that people loved.
Then you have your third gen ones like:
Snapchat is like Instagram but for messages. TikTok is like YouTube but short and for phones.
YikYak is like Facebook but uhhh.
You can even trace it back to wacky dot-com bubble ideas with some sort of funnyshoesfordogs.com that has a gimmick but no longevity and then the more refined but rough sites of the mid-aughts competing with each other for new users and for early adopters against the then dominant petty dictatorships of various forums.
So copying existing platforms is not a bad idea to start with. Perhaps out of this we can see a new demand and meet it with a federated structure to get ahead of the corpos as well.
Research the CIA’s plan on data mining.
You can describe all social media as people posting stuff then other people subscribing to see that stuff either by person, by topic or indirectly by what other stuff you do (via recommendation algorithms) and commenting or voting on it.
If something doesn’t meet that description it’s not really social media.
Given that, there’s only really a finite number of ways you can display content with votes and comments.
