[ajkjk]

I feel like the dream solution is more like tree-based content: you see content that is vouched for by people you vouch for; if someone's account is compromised then their vouches get updated to not matter anymore, cutting their whole tree off at the root to make it invisible. Spammers should end up in largely disconnected components of the trees.

[lgcmo]

Pretty much what xwitter / bsky is on the following page. The algorithm layer atop twitter was pretty good connecting me with people/content before daddy elon came along. And this algorithm layer is actually needed (in my view) to make the social network thing work, otherwise there is no critical mass

Thankfully bsky is not that good, so I don't get hooked by it at all. But i miss it

[anigbrowl]

How does new content or content from new accounts get seen by anyone?

[rastrojero2000]

People search for a thing, find said thing, then share it themselves under their own name. You know, like how conversations work in real life

[anigbrowl]

They won't find it if it's so new/fringe that it's deprioritized in search results. You didn't really think this through.

[rastrojero2000]

There's a chance pointing a firehose of bullshit at users hoping some of it sticks is the key problem with social media today.

Actual users actually curating cool things they found is a way more sustainable manner of interaction with your fellow humans.

[ajkjk]

A feww options:

1. get some people who trust you to vouch for you when you join (similar to requiring an invite to join but maybe more flexible?)

2. some kind of induction process, maybe the algorithm surfaces your stuff and gets feedback, like the 'new' queue on HN

3. same as before but the AI tries to do it (scary though)

4. use the same account as on other sites, or otherwise tie it to a global reputation or something you had to invest a fair amount to build. Not great for privacy but I think it has to happen eventually; otherwise new accounts are too cheap to make.

Regardless, once you're in the system your credibility is only as good as your contributions, so you should be filtered out again if you're nefarious.

[xg15]

I think the deeper problem is: How would legitimate new person with no reputation and no contacts be able to get a foothold at all if there are masses of bots pretending to be exactly such a person?

A system which looks more at the content that is posted (probably using AI) and tries to decide whether it is spam feels fairer to me than effectively pulling up the ladder on new users.

[ajkjk]

I mean.. Get someone to vouch for you.

If people are distinguishable from bots then you should be able to easily distinguish yourself. If they're not, then you need personal vouching to establish who the people are anyway.

[awesome_dude]

Same tree that gave them credentials gives them weight that is used to spread their content.

New User problem has been around for a minute though - wikipedia and stack overflow both faced it, as does every social media platform nowadays.

Reality is, though, new visitors are getting the same blast radius as early adopters got when they started, just that the early adopters now have blast radiuses that are much bigger

[j-bos]

iykyk rules

[HDBaseT]

This is what private trackers do, but you end up with ego moderators and weird trust issues.