Even if the numbers don’t carry elsewhere in a meaningful way, seeing the high positive number next to your post still means that other people agreed with/liked what you said on that particular post/comment. And that alone can give a mild dopamine hit.
Less useful for bots trying to farm rep for nefarious reasons, more useful for real people who can feel the joy of a moment.
Factory worker. Not tech illiterate but also not exactly an expert in any respect.
Have been abnormal though, Internet-wise. I only have a twitter to post crap from Switch to lazily import screenshots to computer. When Facebook asked for my real name I said fuck you and never looked back.
Reddit was the only social media that I actually used as social media.
Hm. Good question, and I can’t say I have a great answer.
I like the starfish one too, the ocean one is just better for my mindset.
I guess accountability? The starfish story appeals more to personal ego (not using the term ego as a bad thing here), where as the ocean one feels more like accountability to me.
Starfish is saying that the little thing you do can help someone, even if it doesn’t solve the problem. Ocean one is saying that everyone is responsible, even if only a tiny bit in the grand scheme.
I kind of pair it with a mindset of if every drop thinks that they don’t make a difference, that adds up. One person can’t save the planet, but every person thinking they can’t save the planet means that you have that ocean of people all thinking that they don’t matter. And that’s a big problem.
Like I said, probably not the best answer. Just rambling what came to mind.
It’s a really good way to get rid of the mentality of one person can’t make a difference. Because everyone is a drop, and without so many drops, there is no ocean. Maybe one individual drop doesn’t truly make a difference alone. But what if every drop was gone?
It helps me feel that, even if the difference I make isn’t big enough to make an impact, an impact only exists BECAUSE of all the drops.
That goes for both positive and negative things. A thousand bad drops are needed to make a bad thing. A thousand good drops to make a good one.
What they are farming in all that land is feed for livestock.
So yes, even though they’re growing plants there, those plants are being grown to feed the animals instead of feeding humans directly. Which thanks to trophic levels is a massive waste.
The amount of feed needed to rear one animal to kill for food is not even CLOSE to equivalent to how much we would get if we didn’t add the extra step in of feeding animals and just grew plants for ourselves instead.
The meat industry is a massive contributor to global warming, and we could drastically reduce our effects on climate change if we just stopped eating animals.
My gut reaction is defensiveness that the fediverse has a different motive, but no. The motive IS the same. Both are fueled by self-preservation.
There IS a difference in circumstance, however. The fediverse has to measure potential gain vs potential risk of working with a greedy rich billionaire.
Twitter is already a giant that’s been going through a lot of abuse and bleeding users. It stands to gain nothing from Meta’ new copycat, only lose even more.
So, Yes. Same motivation for blocking/defederating. The difference between the two is what thy stand to gain vs what they risk losing.
There are niche reddit communities I might still interact with.
But I have a combo of NoScript/adblock/ublock origin hard mode and a cancelled premium making sure they don’t get a penny from me, and I’ll prefer to post any useful info on Lemmy instead.
“Threads” is a new thing and allegedly he intends to have it link to the fediverse.
The thing to worry about is that it is an attempt to get rid of the Fediverse via Embrace, Extend, Extinguish.
Since Threads is directly tied to Instagram, it may be an attempt to have the majority of fediverse users use Threads, because only Threads is also tied to Instagram. Once having the majority, defederate and keep the majority of the users that couldn’t otherwise be bought.
This is hearsay mind you. I am repeating what I have read. Please feel free to seek more accurate info.
The Tl;dr: Zuck is scared of unbuyable competition and we should NOT welcome his product in.
Side note: I can’t see the word “Threads” like I can Facebook or Twitter. Threads already exist as a term for a certain format, not a social networking service.
I’d argue you still can get that dopamine hit.
Even if the numbers don’t carry elsewhere in a meaningful way, seeing the high positive number next to your post still means that other people agreed with/liked what you said on that particular post/comment. And that alone can give a mild dopamine hit.
Less useful for bots trying to farm rep for nefarious reasons, more useful for real people who can feel the joy of a moment.