J
- Status
blackforest
Well-known member
This is the approach I’d rather take. Stop complaining about FB and Twitter; boycott them already!
It’s not just Catholics and conservatives affected, though. I’m an anti-Biden progressive and have seen a lot of our stuff censored on social media.
A
Anesti33
Guest
I am not sure that I see a difference. Someone still has to provide the blogging and website publishing platform. For example, CloudFlare has taken over quite a bit of that on the backend. It’s not like censorship problems will magically disappear if we stop using walled gardens.
B
Beryllos
Guest
Indeed, in either case, the online host can exert censorship. The difference is that Facebook, Twitter, etc., have sophisticated algorithms that determine each user’s feed, which is the primary way that other users discover your posts, especially users who are not already following you.
The feed algorithms are designed and constantly tweaked to keep the user engaged, clicking, reading, responding, and viewing ads. As such, the feed tends to select what the user wants to see and suppress what the user wants to ignore.
The feed algorithm can also be used to suppress selected topics, simply by not feeding them to other users.
I don’t know if blogs have a similar feed mechanism, or if they rely entirely on user-to-user recommendations. Does anyone here happen to know?
Last edited:
P
phil19034
Guest
But it’s still 100% possible to host your own website and platform.
It’s not too difficult for an organization to create a web server and host a website on a PC in their office.
It’s just that the online platforms make it easy to create professional sites.
J
JerryZ
Guest
Well I agree that FB and Twitter should not be used by any one who believes in freedom of speech and thought. The question is; Which platform is available today that can fill the necessity we apparently have now days to communicate with each other.
It cannot be that difficult after all it was done before and the error made by “them” are known and should be used as a path NOT to follow.
Please post alternatives
Peace!
It cannot be that difficult after all it was done before and the error made by “them” are known and should be used as a path NOT to follow.
Please post alternatives
Peace!
Tis_Bearself
Patron
I never had a blog (except social media of the networked Facebook type pre-Facebook), a webpage, or a Twitter.
I don’t see why we all need to have some webpage telling the world every little thing we feel or making big statements about politics or whatever.
I have a Facebook for the sole purpose of keeping in touch with my friends and looking at pictures, mostly animal and a little Catholic and travel stuff, posted by others. A webpage of my own existing in isolation is a huge waste of time to me; I’m not selling anything and I don’t want strangers wandering around the web and looking at my page.
I’m frankly getting bored silly with everybody who thinks they need a platform to expand on all things Catholic and political. My response to 90 percent of that stuff is Who Cares. It’s like everybody thinks the world is waiting for their next opinion post. It’s not.
I don’t see why we all need to have some webpage telling the world every little thing we feel or making big statements about politics or whatever.
I have a Facebook for the sole purpose of keeping in touch with my friends and looking at pictures, mostly animal and a little Catholic and travel stuff, posted by others. A webpage of my own existing in isolation is a huge waste of time to me; I’m not selling anything and I don’t want strangers wandering around the web and looking at my page.
I’m frankly getting bored silly with everybody who thinks they need a platform to expand on all things Catholic and political. My response to 90 percent of that stuff is Who Cares. It’s like everybody thinks the world is waiting for their next opinion post. It’s not.
Last edited:
A
Anesti33
Guest
That organization still has a provider. That provider has an upstream. That upstream still has peering arrangements.Anesti33:
But it’s still 100% possible to host your own website and platform.
It’s not too difficult for an organization to create a web server and host a website on a PC in their office.
It’s just that the online platforms make it easy to create professional sites.
J
JanR
Guest
I agree one hundred percent! BIG TECH is getting too big for its britches. There are alternatives, and more folks should use them.
Last edited:
D
Dan123
Guest
That level of provider hasn’t yet chosen to exert control over content though, and since most sites switched to SSL even for normal traffic it would be harder to implement at that level. Deal with the issue that exists not the one that hypothetically could exist. Net Neutrality is also meant to protect such rights and maintain the level playing field for traffic that largely precludes monitoring.
U
Usagi
Guest
If you visit someone’s blog, you can read any or all of their posts, usually in reverse chronological order. If you are signed up to receive updates to their blog, or you maintain a “blogroll” of other people’s blogs and when they were last updated, you see all the updates. There’s no algorithm-mediated “feed” at all.
The blogger can still delete a post (or the entire blog), or forbid or delete comments, but that’s always been true.
A
Athanasiy
Guest
Now even some politicians speak only from Facebook, both in writing and on a video camera, there are no other platforms for them.
P
phil19034
Guest
Internet provider, yes. Hosting provider, not necessarily.phil19034:
That organization still has a provider. That provider has an upstream. That upstream still has peering arrangements.Anesti33:
But it’s still 100% possible to host your own website and platform.
It’s not too difficult for an organization to create a web server and host a website on a PC in their office.
It’s just that the online platforms make it easy to create professional sites.
B
BT3241
Guest
If you have social media accounts and they are all linked I believe a bunch of computers - thousands of them running complex algorithms decide what your feed is going to show. The internet people sells your attention not products they are the riches companies of the day they guarantee sales . The idea now is to keep you online as long as possible to manipulate you - nobodies feed is the same on Facebook and any other social media platform its decided by computers.
Last edited:
- Status