While “social” is often generalized as a single monolithic category, there’s actually a ton of variance in today’s landscape of social apps. An axis on which I like to analyze social networks is how much they appeal to users’ desire for love vs. fame
I'm a crypto skeptic, but I do think the 'ownership' part is perhaps the key component for love-based social networks. The little town I grew up in in some ways operated as a love-based social network; for instance, the town has a library because people saw a community need, raised money and built a library that improves the community. Nobody got famous for this, or made any money, and yet they feel a sense of ownership of this that is greater than if, say, Jeff Bezos had just built a library there. The challenge is, honestly, how do you create a crypto-based social network where people who don't know each other and are unlikely to ever even meet are motivated to help each other and build something that improves their shared space?
Good read. It's interesting to know Love vs. Fame framework and their characteristic, especially about monetization.
Also, good to know "proof-of-first" concept. "A new type of status game that crypto could offer, with lower barriers to entry, is “proof-of-first”: who first did something, discovered someone, or minted something first, based on on-chain activities."
The framing of social networks within the dichotomy of Love vs. Fame, as presented in the blog, provides a useful lens for understanding the current landscape of social media. However, this framework may indeed be quite limiting, as it overlooks the nuanced ways in which individuals engage with these platforms. A more encompassing perspective might be gained by considering the spectrum of Deep Relationships vs. Superficial Relationships.
Firstly, the Love vs. Fame axis primarily emphasizes the motivation behind users' engagement on social platforms—seeking meaningful connections on one end and fame or broader reach on the other. While insightful, this perspective simplifies the complex nature of social interactions online. It suggests a binary motivation that doesn't fully capture the varied reasons people use social networks, such as seeking information, entertainment, or even support for mental health issues.
By considering a spectrum of Deep Relationships vs. Superficial Relationships, we can better appreciate the quality and depth of interactions that these platforms facilitate. This perspective acknowledges that the value derived from social networks isn't solely about the end goals of love or fame but also about the nature of the connections themselves. For instance, platforms like Facebook or Instagram can host deep, meaningful interactions among close friends and family, while also serving as spaces for more superficial engagements with acquaintances or followers.
Moreover, this alternative spectrum allows us to consider how design and algorithmic choices influence the depth of relationships fostered by a platform. For example, the shift in Instagram's focus from personal photo sharing to a more content discovery-based model (emphasizing Reels and suggested posts) can be seen as a move towards encouraging more superficial relationships, despite the platform's potential for deep, personal connections.
Additionally, the emergence of new platforms and features aiming to foster deeper connections, as mentioned in the blog, can be better understood through this lens. Apps like BeReal or features like Close Friends on Instagram attempt to carve out spaces for more authentic and meaningful interactions amidst the broader trend towards superficial engagement driven by algorithms optimized for content discovery and virality.
In conclusion, while the Love vs. Fame framework sheds light on important aspects of social networking, expanding our analysis to consider the spectrum of Deep Relationships vs. Superficial Relationships offers a more nuanced understanding. It highlights the importance of the quality of connections and how social media platforms can serve as facilitators of both meaningful and more casual interactions. This perspective underscores the need for a critical examination of how platform designs and algorithms influence the depth and nature of social relationships in the digital age.
I'm a crypto skeptic, but I do think the 'ownership' part is perhaps the key component for love-based social networks. The little town I grew up in in some ways operated as a love-based social network; for instance, the town has a library because people saw a community need, raised money and built a library that improves the community. Nobody got famous for this, or made any money, and yet they feel a sense of ownership of this that is greater than if, say, Jeff Bezos had just built a library there. The challenge is, honestly, how do you create a crypto-based social network where people who don't know each other and are unlikely to ever even meet are motivated to help each other and build something that improves their shared space?
Good read. It's interesting to know Love vs. Fame framework and their characteristic, especially about monetization.
Also, good to know "proof-of-first" concept. "A new type of status game that crypto could offer, with lower barriers to entry, is “proof-of-first”: who first did something, discovered someone, or minted something first, based on on-chain activities."
Memo to myself: https://share.glasp.co/kei/?p=v2FTehv4Kpjuyj7L4tsS
great piece as always, Li
Fascinating how shared ownership connects people and builds deeper relationships.
which makes me think of Gallery latest move 👉 https://gallery.mirror.xyz/HNEYLQJ6vtTYqqotGjZG7pFFn8IE71_rbZkCU0R-MSk
Interested
The framing of social networks within the dichotomy of Love vs. Fame, as presented in the blog, provides a useful lens for understanding the current landscape of social media. However, this framework may indeed be quite limiting, as it overlooks the nuanced ways in which individuals engage with these platforms. A more encompassing perspective might be gained by considering the spectrum of Deep Relationships vs. Superficial Relationships.
Firstly, the Love vs. Fame axis primarily emphasizes the motivation behind users' engagement on social platforms—seeking meaningful connections on one end and fame or broader reach on the other. While insightful, this perspective simplifies the complex nature of social interactions online. It suggests a binary motivation that doesn't fully capture the varied reasons people use social networks, such as seeking information, entertainment, or even support for mental health issues.
By considering a spectrum of Deep Relationships vs. Superficial Relationships, we can better appreciate the quality and depth of interactions that these platforms facilitate. This perspective acknowledges that the value derived from social networks isn't solely about the end goals of love or fame but also about the nature of the connections themselves. For instance, platforms like Facebook or Instagram can host deep, meaningful interactions among close friends and family, while also serving as spaces for more superficial engagements with acquaintances or followers.
Moreover, this alternative spectrum allows us to consider how design and algorithmic choices influence the depth of relationships fostered by a platform. For example, the shift in Instagram's focus from personal photo sharing to a more content discovery-based model (emphasizing Reels and suggested posts) can be seen as a move towards encouraging more superficial relationships, despite the platform's potential for deep, personal connections.
Additionally, the emergence of new platforms and features aiming to foster deeper connections, as mentioned in the blog, can be better understood through this lens. Apps like BeReal or features like Close Friends on Instagram attempt to carve out spaces for more authentic and meaningful interactions amidst the broader trend towards superficial engagement driven by algorithms optimized for content discovery and virality.
In conclusion, while the Love vs. Fame framework sheds light on important aspects of social networking, expanding our analysis to consider the spectrum of Deep Relationships vs. Superficial Relationships offers a more nuanced understanding. It highlights the importance of the quality of connections and how social media platforms can serve as facilitators of both meaningful and more casual interactions. This perspective underscores the need for a critical examination of how platform designs and algorithms influence the depth and nature of social relationships in the digital age.