It's a bad tool. I always think of the Bill Bur joke talking about Netflix going from 1-5 stars to thumbs up/down. "It's like.. stubbed my toe.. thumbs down. Hitler.. thumbs down. There's too big of a gap in 'thumbs down.'"
Any mode of communication that depends on advertising for funding will over time t monotonically approach total BullShit Grifting as t increases.
As a reminder, a glimpse at X's front page a few weeks ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46504404
I think it's very telling how you went to Reddit first when complaining about politics on social media, one of the only big ones that still hasn't been completely invaded by MAGA sycophants. Just admit you have no issues about politics on social media, you just want them to align with your views.
> If you write the words “cis” or “cisgender” on X, you might be served this full-screen message: “This post contains language that may be considered a slur by X and could be used in a harmful manner in violation of our rules,” the warning says. You can continue to publish the post or delete it.
Margret Atwood, the Handmaids Tale.
Looooong list at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_by_Twitter.
Like when they banned posting the word Substack or linking to websites in your profile under Musk for a while. And @elonjet is still banned, despite an explicit promise not to.
Claiming Twitter has free speech (as in absolutist, as in you can say what you want and won't get banned) means you've drunk the kool-aid / accepted the propaganda.
Everyone saw the Facebook model and adopted it. It's why Reddit has the valuation it does (and why it's still insane to me people intentionally use it as a recommendation or information tool).
[1] https://www.theregister.com/2010/05/14/facebook_trust_dumb/
What I want from Facebook is to see what original words, images, or videos my friends and family thought was worth sharing with the world today, and I want to see clearly when I've reached the end of that. I probably don't need to spend more than ten minutes once a day on that.
It's profitable for Facebook to show me as many ads as possible. If I wasn't an aggressive adblock user, the thing I want would have much less potential profit than all the third-party content they want to show me.
I think I'm almost at the point of letting it go already. If AI becomes more egregious / apparent, I'm out. I was caught by one already - scrolled for too long, came across some manufacturing video (I love those), but as it went on it became less and less realistic. By the end I was like "huh, TIL robots can make jeans out of banana fiber end to end", but that wasn't true.
I think we need to recognize that social media of 2026 is not the same as what we had in 2006. AI generated content, regardless of if it is image, video, or text, is here to stay. And it will only get better and more convincing as the technology improves.
What people really need to ask is this - what do they want to get out of social media? Is it personal relationships and status updates? Is it entertainment? Is it something in between?
The harsh truth is most people at this point use social media for entertainment, and AI content is entertaining, or at least engaging, to most people. Remember that 54% of USA adults read below a 6th grade reading level [1]. It is not perfect, but it is convincing enough that a large enough number of people are beginning to accept it as "real".
[1]: https://www.nu.edu/blog/49-adult-literacy-statistics-and-fac...