There are good aspects to modern life and, for all its flaws, technology is the reason we can have this exchange. But having said that, I'm afraid you're right: sometimes it feels as if everything is being designed to feed an algorithm.
….but the reason we’re having this conversation in the first place is because of the algorithm. Freedom of expression? Freedom of thought? Extinct, or very soon to be.
But I do appreciate what you’re doing, in spite of my scepticism, which is not aimed at you, but more at us in general. We’re just not smart enough to deal with these people, hence Brexit, Trump, and the deification of sociopaths-cum-wannabe psychopaths such as the techies taking their revenge for being bullied as kids.
Thanks for that run down Cristina. To paraphrase a rom-com 'We're just writers, looking at a platform, asking it to stay morally sound'...2025 is panning out to be exhausting. I think I need to find a cave.
Notting Hill is the rom-com that keeps on giving : ) Love that paraphrase and wish I didn't have to write about this. I came to Substack for the books, films, music and jokes not for more moral conundrums.
You're not wrong, in a very literal way, because having the ability to feel, and therefore like/dislike, and care/don't care, is not something algorithms can do. But the specific reason (that you just glazed right over) that 'algorithms' don't 'like' (shadowban) me is because of the idea I have. 'Algorithms' (their owners, our rulers, the gatekeepers, the narrative 'optimizers,' the deepstate and the pieces of shit American Warpig politicians and presidents) fucking hate my idea, and that's why I said what I said. 'Algorithms' (most of 'them') don't really care about anyone, but there are some ideas and narratives that they care very much about censoring and controlling. Hope this helps. Hope you'll actually check out my idea.
How interesting, thank you for the perspective. Digesting it all.
Whatever is happening with tech companies at the moment was already on my mind after watching Patrick CC's new video about Mark Zuckerberg, his "suspicious rebranding."
I feel like we need a whole new set of vocabulary to describe this all. The term "free speech" is so loaded with positive cultural baggage that it is (ironically) a great weapon to silence criticism. In the case of Substack, it means that you're against freedom to pose legitimate questions Substack's approach to business, duty of care, financial responsibility.
I've got a post publishing today going into more of my thoughts about this. One of the comparisons I make is with Substack's approach to free speech and gun rights advocates who want everyone to have a gun. Give everyone maximum to speech to say whatever they want, whenever they want, however they want to whomever they want -- and through some process of Darwinism, the world will become a freer place. Just like it's a safer place when anyone can shoot anyone with a gun.
I have a problem even talking about it as "free speech."
There so much that can go under that "free speech" umbrella, right? It should be common sense that it is not a free pass to spread hate or incite to violence on account of differences on political views, race, religion, etc. But as a friend of mine used to say "common sense is the least common of senses"
Today we were talking about AI in my French class and I made the point that it's important to read between the lines whenever we see headline with pro-innovation or free speech and ask ourselves what any of those really mean.
In line with what you mention about a new set of vocabulary for all this, you may be interested in this post by journalist Carole Cadwalladr - https://substack.com/home/post/p-156658598
Thank you, Monica. I realise I can be a bit too 'intense' but I think it's worth elaborating a bit especially for people who may not be very tecchie (like me!) so the big picture makes sense.
It's absolutely great, useful and informative! I am not inclined to read all the materials you linked to, but having this overall viewpoint and the connections between the stories and markets, it's absolutely fabulous! Thanks for putting in the time to do it!
Great piece! I fear you're right about the direction of travel. This platform is just another social medium run by just another group of American entrepreneurs, so I guess it's not surprising to see it ease on down the same road. We may be looking at the next Ello, which was a great platform too and so refreshingly full of great voices for the first couple of years. After that early period they either flounder, as Ello did, or get on the happy bus to engagement and profitability. No hard feelings, of course. One has to eat.
I've been on Friends Reunited, MySpace, Facebook, Twitter, SocialGo, WriteWords, Ello, LinkedIn, some I've probably forgotten and now Substack. I've quit all of them except this one. It's been fun, but already it's not the place it was fifteen months ago when I joined. Pity.
When I read the news about Substack founders aligning with Musk and Zuckerberg it didn't make sense to me. But then I started remembering old stuff I had already written about and the dots connected.
Like you say, platforms evolve and Substack is no exception. I agree that not that long ago this still felt a rather fresh space for those of us who came in search of something different and more nourishing than what traditional social media offered. But this is a business and it's not yet profitable so things have to change.
The worrying part is how they will change because this endorsement of two notoriously tech figures that have been trying to outdo each other to dominate the market and have openly turned to the right in name of profit and so-called free speech doesn't look great for the future of Substack.
Thanks, Cristina.
Modern life really is rubbish…
And there’s no escaping the algorithms for any of us now. Of that, I’m absolutely certain.
There are good aspects to modern life and, for all its flaws, technology is the reason we can have this exchange. But having said that, I'm afraid you're right: sometimes it feels as if everything is being designed to feed an algorithm.
….but the reason we’re having this conversation in the first place is because of the algorithm. Freedom of expression? Freedom of thought? Extinct, or very soon to be.
But I do appreciate what you’re doing, in spite of my scepticism, which is not aimed at you, but more at us in general. We’re just not smart enough to deal with these people, hence Brexit, Trump, and the deification of sociopaths-cum-wannabe psychopaths such as the techies taking their revenge for being bullied as kids.
No worries, I understand what you mean : ) When we put everything that's going on in the world at the moment it doesn't look like a great place to be.
No. It isn’t, Cristina.
Thanks for that run down Cristina. To paraphrase a rom-com 'We're just writers, looking at a platform, asking it to stay morally sound'...2025 is panning out to be exhausting. I think I need to find a cave.
Notting Hill is the rom-com that keeps on giving : ) Love that paraphrase and wish I didn't have to write about this. I came to Substack for the books, films, music and jokes not for more moral conundrums.
Algorithms really dislike (hate) me. I hope substack's algorithm isn't like the other algorithms. Here's why algorithms really really really dislike me: www.humbledeeds.com
If it's any consolation, the algorithm doesn't like anyone
You're not wrong, in a very literal way, because having the ability to feel, and therefore like/dislike, and care/don't care, is not something algorithms can do. But the specific reason (that you just glazed right over) that 'algorithms' don't 'like' (shadowban) me is because of the idea I have. 'Algorithms' (their owners, our rulers, the gatekeepers, the narrative 'optimizers,' the deepstate and the pieces of shit American Warpig politicians and presidents) fucking hate my idea, and that's why I said what I said. 'Algorithms' (most of 'them') don't really care about anyone, but there are some ideas and narratives that they care very much about censoring and controlling. Hope this helps. Hope you'll actually check out my idea.
How interesting, thank you for the perspective. Digesting it all.
Whatever is happening with tech companies at the moment was already on my mind after watching Patrick CC's new video about Mark Zuckerberg, his "suspicious rebranding."
https://youtu.be/GhUw-W0Amfs?si=hAYdGlKGxCdRG3P0
I feel like we need a whole new set of vocabulary to describe this all. The term "free speech" is so loaded with positive cultural baggage that it is (ironically) a great weapon to silence criticism. In the case of Substack, it means that you're against freedom to pose legitimate questions Substack's approach to business, duty of care, financial responsibility.
I've got a post publishing today going into more of my thoughts about this. One of the comparisons I make is with Substack's approach to free speech and gun rights advocates who want everyone to have a gun. Give everyone maximum to speech to say whatever they want, whenever they want, however they want to whomever they want -- and through some process of Darwinism, the world will become a freer place. Just like it's a safer place when anyone can shoot anyone with a gun.
I have a problem even talking about it as "free speech."
There so much that can go under that "free speech" umbrella, right? It should be common sense that it is not a free pass to spread hate or incite to violence on account of differences on political views, race, religion, etc. But as a friend of mine used to say "common sense is the least common of senses"
Today we were talking about AI in my French class and I made the point that it's important to read between the lines whenever we see headline with pro-innovation or free speech and ask ourselves what any of those really mean.
In line with what you mention about a new set of vocabulary for all this, you may be interested in this post by journalist Carole Cadwalladr - https://substack.com/home/post/p-156658598
What a fantastic roundup of information, sources, reading material and ultimately - a useful summary of this topic. Well worth the long read! 👏 👏
Thank you, Monica. I realise I can be a bit too 'intense' but I think it's worth elaborating a bit especially for people who may not be very tecchie (like me!) so the big picture makes sense.
It's absolutely great, useful and informative! I am not inclined to read all the materials you linked to, but having this overall viewpoint and the connections between the stories and markets, it's absolutely fabulous! Thanks for putting in the time to do it!
Really appreciate it! I'm trying to escape the tech talk and leave it behind but it runs faster 😅
Hehe don't escape it if you enjoy it. It adds tremendous value to those who will read it, for sure.
I do enjoy it, that's the thing. You're right: every now and then it can make an appearance here : )
Great piece! I fear you're right about the direction of travel. This platform is just another social medium run by just another group of American entrepreneurs, so I guess it's not surprising to see it ease on down the same road. We may be looking at the next Ello, which was a great platform too and so refreshingly full of great voices for the first couple of years. After that early period they either flounder, as Ello did, or get on the happy bus to engagement and profitability. No hard feelings, of course. One has to eat.
I've been on Friends Reunited, MySpace, Facebook, Twitter, SocialGo, WriteWords, Ello, LinkedIn, some I've probably forgotten and now Substack. I've quit all of them except this one. It's been fun, but already it's not the place it was fifteen months ago when I joined. Pity.
When I read the news about Substack founders aligning with Musk and Zuckerberg it didn't make sense to me. But then I started remembering old stuff I had already written about and the dots connected.
Like you say, platforms evolve and Substack is no exception. I agree that not that long ago this still felt a rather fresh space for those of us who came in search of something different and more nourishing than what traditional social media offered. But this is a business and it's not yet profitable so things have to change.
The worrying part is how they will change because this endorsement of two notoriously tech figures that have been trying to outdo each other to dominate the market and have openly turned to the right in name of profit and so-called free speech doesn't look great for the future of Substack.
I hope to be mistaken but time will tell.