|
Top-level
 The move to decentralization and self-hosting is going to kill a lot of big companies. This always happens when there's a big shift in technology. For example, Kodak couldn't survive the shift to digital cameras. Sun Microsystems couldn't survive the shift to LAMP stacks. Nokia couldn't survive the shift to smartphones. The same will happen during this next technological shift. The first casualty will probably be Twitter -- but I suspect Meta won't be able to survive either. 52 comments
 @atomicpoet While Nokia didn’t survive, I’m pretty sure their phones did. Those things are the cockroaches of tech. They’d survive a nuke. 😂 I point out Kodak, Sun, and Nokia because they all have stuff in common: they were killed by a technology they pioneered. * Kodak invented digital cameras Each of these companies saw the future but they could not adapt. Now what I find fascinating about Wave 5 of social media (decentralization) is that Twitter saw it coming. Bluesky was spun out from Twitter in 2019. In fact, Bluesky's first (maybe current?) CTO was Parag Agrawal -- who later became Twitter's CEO prior to Elon Musk's acquisition. Nevertheless -- just like Kodak, Sun, and Nokia before it -- Twitter will not survive the next technology shift. Why is this? Right now, Twitter is making the same mistake that Kodak, Sun, and Nokia made. Elon Musk is chasing after what he believes is "high value customers" with what he believes is a superior product. This is why he's charging $42,000/month for access to Twitter's API. For now, Twitter might be a superior product to Mastodon. Maybe -- that's arguable. But the tech that underlies Mastodon has been iterated, and now it's beginning to go toe-to-toe with Twitter. @atomicpoet do you see Bluesky ever picking up? To me it feels like when a team who made a classic video game moves on to form a new studio, and people whole that their new game will fill the nostalgic void in their souls. But it’s never the same and others are trying to build similar games at the same time. @Jbquinn It could happen, but it's been slow to market, and now momentum is with ActivityPub. When it comes to Wave 5 of social media, here's the crux of Twitter (and Meta's) problem: 1 They must manage a big, unwieldy centralized infrastructure 2. They must keep current "high value customers" happy 3. By pivoting to decentralized social media, they must make the deliberate decision to kill their current cash cows Can they pivot? That's possible. Apple pivoted from iPod to iPhone -- killing their cash cow in the process. But it's extremely unlikely.   @atomicpoet Twitter is a carcass, Facebook is what people use to catch up on their cousins.  @atomicpoet Apple could afford to take that chance because the iPhone was an iPod… but better and still their own ecosystem. Meta/Twitter going decentralized provides none of that practical or corporate security. One thing I will say about decentralized social media is that we don't know where it will end up. For example, when the first smartphones came out, they came with physical QWERTY keyboards. Now they're input with touchscreens. Right now, decentralized social networks look like Twitter duplicated across multiple servers. But it will evolve into something substantially different in time. The problem with chasing after "high value customers" is that they know what they want. Concurrently, they don't know what hasn't been invented yet -- they're not considering future innovations. Back in the 19th century, if you asked someone what they wanted in terms of better transportation, most of them would have said "a faster horse". Elon Musk's focus is on people who are paying for Twitter. Who are Twitter's "high value customers"? Advertisers. What advertisers want is a better advertising system. They don't give a damn about decentralized social media because there's no centralized system that feeds people ads. Mastodon can't help them. Twitter advertisers are like folks in the 19th century who are demanding a faster horse. Guess what? The proverbial horse will soon be put to pasture. @atomicpoet that is a good analogy and correct nice thread @atomicpoet If you have to advertize your product it must not be very good. (This is also why I'm skeptical about Meta's move into the Fediverse. It could work if Meta is willing to kill Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp -- as they presently exist. I don't think they can.) One final thought. The conceit amongst social media incumbents is that the Fediverse has no customers. But this perception happens because the Fediverse's current customers are perceived as "low value". They're deemed so low value that people don't even acknowledge they exist 🙂  @atomicpoet Plus, it's only low value to the corps who are looking to game SM to their benefit. It's starkly opposite for the rest of us. @atomicpoet I really don't want to be a customer, "high-value" or otherwise. @dominick Nevertheless, people are paying for the Fediverse right as we speak. Maybe you’re not. But I assure you that the admin of your instance is doing just that thing. @atomicpoet maybe I'm missing the point, but I think there's a distinction between money changing hands, and being a customer. When I contribute to my instance, I feel as though I'm supporting a public good (e.g. offsetting the cost for people who can't pay). Moreover, I don't feel as though there are the same profit incentives that might lead my instance to sell my data, track me, etc. That's different than the way I feel when I'm somebody's customer. Maybe I'm naïve?  @atomicpoet: You've read too little dystopian SciFi. Can't you see that with the advance of parroting machines, Facebook will be able to dynamically rewrite people's posts in real time, to achieve product placement for $$$, or remove mentions of products who don't pay $$$, as long as the posts in question flow through Facebook?  @atomicpoet @atomicpoet: What's your evidence that Melon is doing anything that might attract high-value advertisers? @atomicpoet I continue to wait for the advertising bubble to burst. It’s pretty simple: Either people do the ask, or they don’t. If fewer than 50% of impressions convert to sales, you’re underperforming random chance.  @atomicpoet My rebuttal to the advertisers: https://thecanadian.online/?p=287   Great posts today 🙏 Time for the story of the Zen master and the little boy… #SocialMedia  @atomicpoet (FWIW I still would like a smartphone with a keyboard; there are a few models around but you few) @atomicpoet @mike The touchscreen keyboard isn’t a great example of technology evolution. There was one big change away from physical keys with the first iPhone, but what came next was a long period of near stagnation—or worse. I get complaints all the time about how autocorrection is worse now than it used to be… and of course, I can’t do anything about it anymore. I’m not sure how keyboards might tell the future of decentralized social media, but be careful what you wish for. @atomicpoet iPod -> iPhone worked because iPhone IS an iPod (touch), just also with a phone function. It's literally just a feature add. I think the big companies can pull this off, but it'll have to be transparent to their big customers. @atomicpoet Strongly urge people to deactivate their birdsite accounts. I did and don’t miss it at all! @atomicpoet I don’t think that’s entirely accurate: mySpace pivoted and still exists, and that was popular decades ago. Nothing is stopping Twitter from pivoting, except maybe greedy shareholders. @atomicpoet LOL, Jack thought Bluesky would be his chair when the music stopped. So far it hasn't even moved the needle outside of the tech community.  @atomicpoet If you think about it, they also were first or nearly so to shareable social verticle video - Vine - that they then shut down.... only to see TikTok explode with the same core offering shortly after.... @atomicpoet d I'd take issue with the Sun example. You have to be very brave to step away from a successful existing business model.   @atomicpoet Nokia’s reliance on Symbian OS played a big part in their particular downfall. Sad. They made some of the first and best cameraphones @atomicpoet The downfall of Nokia is complex. But one important factor was that their main OS, Symbian, was device centered while the new competition was software centered. It not only made development slower, but Nokia never really got into the app market. A plausible parallel to for example Twitter is “platforms vs. protocols”. Nokia might not have survived the shift to smartphones, but the Nokia 3310 will forever be indestructible! @atomicpoet I sure hope so and that this is true, unfortunately it will probably just usher in new hegemony in different forms. |
Gregory's Server
@atomicpoet Future generations wont believe an algo can really be addictive and wonder why there are laws on the books preventing their use on children