I feel like things on Lemmy were pretty chill several months ago, and that’s started to change.

People used to talk each other like they would talk to a neighbor. Now I get the sense that people have become quick to be negative, attack, and not be constructive.

Am I crazy in feeling like the vibe has changed?

  • Vanth@reddthat.comEnglish
    48·
    10 months ago

    More exposure in news and media. More asylum seekers from reddit. I haven’t noticed too much change within the communities I’m subscribed to, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s been some change across all of Lemmy. It is a super niche platform that is getting more attention and drawing more general users.

    If someone were doing a school project with large dataset analysis and modeling, it would be cool to compare quantitatively the amount of positive vs negative comments a year ago compared to now.

    • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
      361·
      10 months ago

      More exposure in news and media. More asylum seekers from reddit.

      Definitely. A few months ago, there basically weren’t any crytpo-bros on Lemmy. Now any time I say anything negative about crypto, about six of them jump out of the woodwork to give their big long spiel on “the useful use-cases for NFTs” which I just roll my eyes harder every fucking time over.

      It’s mainly you just have more trolls and aggressive people because we’re beyond the initial group who was actually looking for more community. Admins/mods do a pretty good job of banning trolls, but not until after they’ve shitted up the place for a bit, usually.

      Also, the nature of Lemmy means that someone who gets banned for spamming an article just goes and makes an account on a different instance and then just goes and makes the same post in the same communities literally minutes later.

      Popularity is rising, the bad actors are coming. Oh well.

        • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
          171·
          10 months ago

          It’s a quality video, but I bowed out about halfway because I was already familiar with about 90% of the stuff he was discussing.

          Great source for anyone looking for a good breakdown of the whole situation.

          I usually just point to this quote from NFT co-creator Anil Dash:

          https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/04/nfts-werent-supposed-end-like/618488/

          But the NFT prototype we created in a one-night hackathon had some shortcomings. You couldn’t store the actual digital artwork in a blockchain; because of technical limits, records in most blockchains are too small to hold an entire image. Many people suggested that rather than trying to shoehorn the whole artwork into the blockchain, one could just include the web address of an image, or perhaps a mathematical compression of the work, and use it to reference the artwork elsewhere.

          We took that shortcut because we were running out of time. Seven years later, all of today’s popular NFT platforms still use the same shortcut. This means that when someone buys an NFT, they’re not buying the actual digital artwork; they’re buying a link to it. And worse, they’re buying a link that, in many cases, lives on the website of a new start-up that’s likely to fail within a few years. Decades from now, how will anyone verify whether the linked artwork is the original?

          All common NFT platforms today share some of these weaknesses. They still depend on one company staying in business to verify your art. They still depend on the old-fashioned pre-blockchain internet, where an artwork would suddenly vanish if someone forgot to renew a domain name. “Right now NFTs are built on an absolute house of cards constructed by the people selling them,” the software engineer Jonty Wareing recently wrote on Twitter.

          Meanwhile, most of the start-ups and platforms used to sell NFTs today are no more innovative than any random website selling posters. Many of the works being sold as NFTs aren’t digital artworks at all; they’re just digital pictures of works created in conventional media.

          The limited number of bits in the blockchain is a massive limitation on doing anything functional outside of bookkeeping with the crypto on the blockchain. It’s the most fundamental aspects of NFTs and it has been broken since Day One.

      • Omega_Haxors@lemmy.mlEnglish
        31·
        10 months ago

        Man one of them was trying to bring their crypto bullshit here and I fucking ripped their ass a new one. It’s probably still sore to this day.

      • HerrBeter@lemmy.world
        11·
        10 months ago

        What are you on about? If anyone is interested, read my comment history

        Edit: if we store the shitty pictures on blockchain, literally nothing changes, except a big and bulky blockchain. “I can just save the picture lmao” will still be the answer… Are we supposed to store every software on blockchain too? I don’t think it’s viable

        This article too is flawed