Social Lattedreckskerl
Lattepunk
Social Media was supposed to make us more..."social". Why does the next move seem to focus on the "media" part of it?
I have a confession to make reader...I'm not a social media user. ¡Gasp in Spanish! I know, shocking. Don't make it weird. Some of my friends would tell you it's cause I'm trying to hide from the government or something. If I wanted to hide from the government, would I set up an entire website with my legal name and use my government name in my email? Hell, I pay taxes and use my passport regualarly! I can't hide! The truth? I found the algorithms pushing me to care about things I ultimately didn't care about. It was a waste of my time.
I know I'm the weirdo here. It also hasn't escaped me that I now have a website, and shoot out an email, anytime I have an opinion that I want to share. Quite silly actually. But think about how you interact with the words I type. Would you stop the endless swiping to read my wild rants? Would I want to do this in a video format where I need to hook you in the first 4 seconds before you swipe away? I doubt it. This lands in your inbox (or rss feed!) and you put time aside to read it. At least I hope that's what you do.
That's normal for me, but not for the majority. Our social media is fighting for your attention. Got to sell that attention to advertisers you know? What would I have posted? I ran a half marathon in 2 hours and 23 minutes. You would have seen a before and after picture. Maybe would have dropped my time as proof:
I mean, I was in Germany. Granted I was being, you know, social! I probably would have posted a picture of beer. Myself in a lederhosen. A castle or two. But is that in itself interesting? Look for yourself:
Hell, I would have posted a crazy story about how I woke up early on random Wednesday to get to Oktoberfest. I would have ran my ass off to try to get into a tent. But in that story telling I would have told you that my plans got slightly altered for me.
Would my post even catch your eye? Between all your other friends and your favorite influencers, all the booty shaking and political arguing, it would get drowned out. Makes sense though. My posts would be so boring! Low engagement. Not unique. I'm sure you see it on your own feeds. It's a problem for the companies as well. How do we keep entertaining the users? That was something that dominated my reading while riding the train in Germany.
A.I. to the rescue?
OpenAI, of ChatGPT fame, has decided to drop a new app. Imagine TikTok but everything posted is A.I. generated. Nothing is real. Sounds...amazing...right? Well, that's the app. It's called Sora. What's impressive is that it's currently iOS only and invite only, yet it still climbed to the top of the App Store.
I'm going to safely assume that all those downloads are on the novelty. But don't be fooled by thinking this is some random one off. Consider yourself a YouTube enjoyer? Google is created tools for their content creaters. Are you like, "I'm more of a Instagram girly", fear not! Meta is doing this as well. This is entering into your feeds. If you haven't noticed it already, it's going to be harder and harder to spot as the technology gets better.
It's entertaining, sure. For how long? It's already hard to discern what is real and fake. We really want more of this? In person we wouldn't do anything this, but this seems to be the trend online. Infinite content = infinite scrolling = more places to show you ads.
Less humans are better?
Would my writing be better if a large language model wrote it. That's what I ask myself. Honestly, maybe. But it wouldn't capture my voice. It can't be dumb enough to think like me. Hence I wouldn't want to read it. I think the same applies to the arts as well. Generated art can be cool, but I like it more knowing someone envisioned it then proceeded to create it. If I asked ChatGPT to spit out a Last Supper painting in the style of Andy Warhol, it could probably do it in a matter of seconds and come out just fine. Would it be better than the real thing? I think not.
I'm concerned that instead of trying to be creative, we'll outsource it for the sake of laziness. I'm not the only one concerned. The biggest creator on YouTube is too. I make zero dollars when I get the urge to be creative. I can't imagine if I depended on my creativity to pay my bills, and this is what the platforms I used was trending towards.
This is the part where I end it saying something inspirational to send you on your way. I know I'll try to be the change I want to see. But I already know what you are thinking reader: How many lattes did you have in Germany? sighs Zwei reader...Zwei.
things i read
One Vigilante, 22 Cell Towers, and a World of Conspiracies | Brenden I Koerner for WIRED
Multimillion-Dollar Hacking Spree: Scattered Spider Teen’s Jailhouse Confessions | Margi Murphy for Bloomberg
MrBeast on His Quest to Turn YouTube Fame Into an Entertainment Empire | Lucas Shaw for Bloomberg
Tech Billionaires Already Captured the White House. They Still Want to Be Kings | Vittoria Elliott for WIRED
Tile Tracking Tags Can Be Exploited by Tech-Savvy Stalkers, Researchers Say | Kim Zetter for WIRED
Goodbye, $165,000 Tech Jobs. Student Coders Seek Work at Chipotle. | Natasha Singer for NY Times
Sports Betting Apps Have a Powerful New Tool to Keep Users Gambling | Jenny Vrentas for NY Times
A Journey Into the Heart of Labubu | Zeyi Yang for WIRED
Self-Taught Thieves Keep Blowing Up ATMs—And Walking Away With Millions | Tom Lamont for GQ
things i heard
The Wall Street Journal had this great 4 episode podcast series about a stand your ground case in South Carolina. I was hooked.
Would you follow me on social media? Would you follow me in real life? What about an AI version of me? Let me know at blog@lattepunk.com.