It’s a video about why the Internet and society itself is so divided nowadays.

  • FishFace@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    53
    ·
    1 year ago

    Damn this couldn’t have come at a better time for me. I’ve been thinking a lot over the past months how it used to be that when you disagreed with someone, you’d still have something shared with them. Not quite the same as the social media aspect, but when TV was all broadcast on a few channels, you’d probably find a show in common. When the only news was national newspapers and broadcasters, you might both be reading the same paper but disagreeing on the articles. My thinking was going down the lines of “this meant everyone had a shared truth” which is kind of like the social media bubble that the research seems to disagree with, but also down the lines of “this meant everyone had, to an extent, a shared identity” at least within a large group like a country, linguistic or ethnic subdivision.

    There was something special about the old internet. The idea that the acrimonious disagreements might have been less bitter due to their nature is tantalising. There’s also something to bear in mind for Lemmy: the old internet, as much as the interest groups it spawned, was united by a shared interest in the internet specifically - and technology in general. The internet wasn’t as necessary and ubiquitous, so most people there had to have some other motivation to be on it. That itself was a shared interest that allowed people to find commonality. Lemmy is the same: people here are a subsection of the internet, brought here because they’re drawn to openness not provided by unfederated platforms. That is its own commanlity, and it won’t exist if Lemmy outgrows those other platforms.

    • Deceptichum@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      26
      ·
      1 year ago

      Are you fucking kidding me? What rose-tinted crap is this.

      The Internet has not changed, we’ve been at each others throats violent disagreeing with each other since Usenet and dialing into a BBS.

      Flaming, trolling, etc. have been around from the start.

      The only difference now is algorithms, but we already split off into our own subgroups and communities long before they came along.

      • FishFace@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Are you fucking kidding me? What rose-tinted crap is this.

        Flaming, trolling, etc. have been around from the start.

        Maybe you have this impression because you have been doing the flaming? That’s an honest suggestion there - swearing at people just because you strongly disagree (and you even have a possible understanding of why, in your view, I might be wrong - “rose tinted spectacles”) is flaming for sure.

        And yes, flaming and trolling have existed since the beginning, but I don’t agree it was as bad as it is today. That is a not-unpopular view so I think just dismissing it is a bit much. There was far more willingness to engage with a disagreement and try to convince each other.

        • Deceptichum@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          26
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You actually think “are you fucking kidding me” is swearing at someone‽

          People haven’t magically changed as a species in 2 decades. We act just the same as we did before.

          • TimeSquirrel@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            29
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I’m not the person you replied to, but I don’t use “are you fucking kidding me” in normal everyday real life conversation with strangers when they have done nothing to deserve that kind of attitude. Maybe you and your circle do. But not everyone does. Realize that. The entire Internet isn’t 4chan. Some of us adults enjoy non-confrontational social interaction.

            I’m also more than four decades old, and I agree with the OP of this thread. I never got death threats for my opinions back in '98. I do now.

            • Deceptichum@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              26
              ·
              1 year ago

              Mate, it’s the most mundane comment ever. Why you’re getting at all worked up over it is beyond me but okay; everyone’s gotta have something in their life even if it’s being a miserable cunt on the Internet.

              Cool? I’ve never had death threats in the past or now, so rather than taking that as an indication of the state of internet users I’d rather be looking inward, no?

              • TimeSquirrel@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                18
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                even if it’s being a miserable cunt

                There you go again. You literally can’t stop. Your entire personality is based on putting others down and trying to feel superior over them.

              • FishFace@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                11
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Swearwords are categorised differently than ordinary words for a reason: it’s a tool that is useful to express things more forcefully than is otherwise possible. “More forceful” takes it beyond the realm of “mundane” never mind “most mundane ever” and, yes, makes it flaming, as is calling someone a “miserable cunt.”

                No-one here is actually getting worked up (maybe except you? I don’t call people “miserable cunts” unless I’m at least a bit annoyed) You’re imagining that people talking to you calmly are worked up, because you can’t imagine someone disagreeing with you on this calmly. That failure of imagination is far from the worst thing in the world, but it’s causing you to be unpleasant and, I think, to be blind to a change that has taken place over the last 20 years.

                I’ve never had death threats in the past or now, so rather than taking that as an indication of the state of internet users I’d rather be looking inward, no?

                One thing I know about death threats is that only a handful of people actually deserve them, but vast numbers of people receive them. Death threats therefore indicate more about the people who send them than the people who receive them. That in turn means if they have become more prevalent, something in [internet] society has changed. Telling someone to “look inward” over death threats is messed up.

                And from further down the thread:

                Mate, you’re the one trying to enforce some prudish seppo standards about language etiquette onto others. Why would I do anything but not consider that a miserable existence, and thus call it out?

                Nobody here is telling you that you have to not swear, so this is not accurate. But swearing at people is rude, and rudeness is on the rise online. More to the point, this is exactly the angry flaming that I thought I detected in your original comment. You are incapable of judging the prevalence of flaming online because to you it was always happening - because you were doing it!

                In the spirit of the post, let’s find something we both like to improve the atmosphere. I skipped through your comment history to find something I agree with and found: “Housing is a necessity, not an investment opportunity.” And hey, my country has been in a housing crisis for years and I wish it were not treated as an investment opportunity here - common ground :)