@TechConnectify@mas.to avatar

TechConnectify

@TechConnectify@mas.to

I'm that snarky, sometimes cranky YouTube person who told you about how dishwashers work.

I post many things which should not be taken too seriously (on account of the cranky snark thing). If you think I'm mad at you, I'm almost certainly not!

Friendly and helpful, if strongly opinionated.

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

TechConnectify, to random
@TechConnectify@mas.to avatar

I put my thoughts on the skeet place and I want to highlight this reply I got.

I think a large number of people who are active here specifically need to hear this perspective.

TechConnectify,
@TechConnectify@mas.to avatar

This is precisely what I meant earlier by "resist the urge to fill those holes"

Only subject-matter experts can see those holes in the first place. Many of your fellow humans do not have the skills or affordances to become the subject-matter expert you are. Remember that before you assume your voice is needed and you make an enemy for no reason.

TechConnectify,
@TechConnectify@mas.to avatar

@PHolder Deciding that it's acceptable to force people to compartmentalize in the ways you want is quite a choice.

Because yes, I am a people. I speak through my brand because it affords me a separation between my personal and online life and seems more ethical than parading around with alt accounts and hiding my influence. I'm aware of the influence I have but endeavor to use it for good and in ways I see fit.

You are welcome to disagree with my tactics and I take no offense.

TechConnectify,
@TechConnectify@mas.to avatar

@ADisorderlyFashion I haven't yet made any Technology Confections but you've given me a great idea for a spin-off baking channel...

TechConnectify,
@TechConnectify@mas.to avatar

@EppyNWS I would quibble with one thing here. Mastodon broadly seems to assume that highlighting misinterpretations is always done to shame.

I contend this is incorrect.

If approached from a place of superiority, that can be the case. But I don't operate like that. I want people to learn things, and when I see a misinterpretation I would very much like to highlight it in a distanced way and talk about why that misinterpretation may have happened. Not once do I wish to belittle anyone.

TechConnectify,
@TechConnectify@mas.to avatar

@EppyNWS If there's a mistake I believe Mastodon leadership has made, it's that quote posts can't be optimized for that middle-ground.

The easiest way to prevent abusive quote posts is to not have them be a thing - which is obvious. But the easy way isn't always correct. It denies that quote posts are often useful - or at the very least contends those useful scenarios are not worth having if they come at the expense of abuse.

I maintain a middle-ground exists but is not being sought.

TechConnectify,
@TechConnectify@mas.to avatar

@teotwaki Oh I strongly believe there's a UX issue but it's not from hastags:

I believe it's from Mastodon's almost total lack of tools for the wider audience to signal bad behavior.

There are technical ways this manifests (cross-instance weirdness), but even when all things are working as intended, new replies end up in the bottom. Which means people can be assholes to posters with nobody else seeing that occur to push back on it.

That seems to have gotten better but it's not gone.

TechConnectify,
@TechConnectify@mas.to avatar

@teotwaki Oh. Oh ho ho. This will be rich if you were following along when I was talking about the need for a filter.

Because YouTube has a filter and turns that sucker on once your channel starts getting big. With no action on my part, I went from getting pinged for every comment, then pinged just for replies, then pinged only when other large YouTube creators comment on my videos.

And that's just the notifications side. The comment algorithm also does a great job of keeping me sane.

TechConnectify,
@TechConnectify@mas.to avatar

@teotwaki There is only one place where YouTube sometimes forces me to see inane, awful comments: The main screen on the dashboard where the three most-recent comments on YOUR ENTIRE CHANNEL are always visible.

That can be particularly nasty when I'm between uploads. Because on those days, the main people commenting are new to my channel. And boy are they unkind.

TechConnectify,
@TechConnectify@mas.to avatar

@teotwaki And, not to put too fine a point on it, but when you approach the scale of a 2-million sub YouTube channel - algorithms simply are a must.

Mastodon leadership needs to engage with that fact if they want the platform to be usable for folks like me.

It's still alright for me at the moment, but I think that's purely down to how small Fedi remains at this point. I've got something of a reputation here when across all of YT the vast majority don't know who I am.

TechConnectify,
@TechConnectify@mas.to avatar

@teotwaki Oh, I very much like doing that!

You've highlighted something to consider (and I myself haven't really considered it). Unless I reply to every single person, then any reply left to me is entering something of a lottery. It's up to me what I engage with and to presume I need to engage with everything thrown my way is a very entitled presumption.

So... if there's an algorithm throwing another layer in that lottery, is that actually unfair? I ask that sincerely in a non-leading way.

TechConnectify,
@TechConnectify@mas.to avatar

@teotwaki The way that lottery worked on Twitter (and to this day on YouTube) was to quasi-randomly sort replies until they began receiving engagement. Popular replies were then moved up to make them more visible to me and others. Additionally, folks I've replied to in the past were given more weight (or larger accounts in the case of YT).

A case could be made that this is actually pretty fair. It gives new people a chance to "win" the lottery and maintains my connection to previous "winners"

TechConnectify,
@TechConnectify@mas.to avatar

@teotwaki I don't know. That's really what I'm trying to figure out, in the specific context of algorithms adjusting what you see.

The general position here seems to be one of complete abstinence which I think is misguided. Here I'm trying to make the case that at least in some aspects algorithms deciding what replies I see vs. me picking and choosing from the chronological feed is a distinction looking for a difference which I'm not sure is there.

ernie, to random
@ernie@writing.exchange avatar

Just made my Infowars debut

TechConnectify,
@TechConnectify@mas.to avatar

@ernie oh boy

TechConnectify, to random
@TechConnectify@mas.to avatar

In the latest edition of "complicated communication misfires I want to pick at," remember that your knowledge isn't always common.

People form simple opinions about complex issues. The mind you may find yourself arguing with doesn't necessarily have ANY awareness of the complexities and nuances of the thing they're arguing about. They may very well be parroting talking points which were fed to them.

If you're arguing presuming they know the roots of a systemic problem, you could be wrong.

TechConnectify,
@TechConnectify@mas.to avatar

And consider what that looks like from the other side:

"Suddenly this person is bringing up outside issues to muddy the conversation! The people I watch on the news warned me about this. They won't stay on topic because they're disingenuous and they know it."

We have to listen to each other and engage with the individual things we are wrong about. We have to be very careful about labeling an entire person as "wrong." That presumes they cannot change or improve themselves: a very dangerous idea

TechConnectify,
@TechConnectify@mas.to avatar

@hopeward you know, this is going to sound bizarre but I really think the reason my brain is being stirred in this way is that I have been watching Perry Mason.

Yes, it's television from the 1950s and there are things about it which are not true and never were true. But the fact that the stories are believable, stories featuring arguing parties address misunderstandings with a simple "I didn't say that" and they continue on in agreement, feels like a lost art we need to get back.

TechConnectify,
@TechConnectify@mas.to avatar

@ChemicalTribe I don't agree that it is.

I believe we've stopped looking for the harmless ways in which they are right. I mean that literally - we presume that their beliefs are well-informed and operate from that assumption. If that's where you start, then even if you correctly identify a harmless thing they believe is at play which you could agree with, you might be concerned that it's a deliberate trick to pull you into a debate you might lose so you just don't engage and continue as enemies

TechConnectify,
@TechConnectify@mas.to avatar

@rooneel I don't think I disagree - it sounds like a different way to describe what I'm getting at.

A thing that I've recently started to take to heart is that nearly all people you speak with don't intend to mislead. They believe they are speaking the truth, because they are. Their own truth may have faults which need to be corrected - and that's what you need to chip at. You can't discount them as "wrong," you should consider them misled and attempt to find out how so you can correct it.

TechConnectify,
@TechConnectify@mas.to avatar

@rooneel This movement we've made to discussing adversaries as a conscious collection of deliberate lies rather than a person we can persuade has caused us to look for things which are wrong and not consider whether they matter.

And I think this is the root cause of conversations between allies turning into petty arguments. If you've got an ally, it doesn't seem wise to concoct tests to determine whether their position comes from the same places yours does. You want the same things.

TechConnectify,
@TechConnectify@mas.to avatar

@SteveHeist Absolutely, but we can't take the existence of this to be reason to not engage with one another in good-faith. Because that only furthers what those troll farms want to achieve - a broad acceptance of their POV.

My balanced position would be the one that I think most people reasonably operate with: if the entity you're speaking with doesn't engage with your points but instead deflects at every turn, just bow out. Works for trolls just as well as genuine folks who can't be persuaded.

TechConnectify, to random
@TechConnectify@mas.to avatar

I'm gonna try and post more fun stuff here because more fun and less gestures broadly is really what I'd like to see out of this place.

But by golly ever since being enlightened to the term (and phenomenon) weak induction, it's been stuck in my craw like nothing else. I'm just seeing it happen over and over and over again.

And I'm starting to wonder how much the prevalence of that phenomenon might contribute to the political polarization we're experiencing. Maybe it's starting to crack.

TechConnectify,
@TechConnectify@mas.to avatar

@AdmSnackbar @ChemicalTribe and not for nothing, if your position is that "we fucked shit up, that's why they're coming" that can cede the point that immigration is a thing to be discouraged in the first place. You give credence to the idea that we should be opposed to letting more people into this country of immigrants.

I'd rather not bicker with that point and instead welcome them. They're asking for our help in the clearest and most desperate way by coming here. Don't distract from that.

TechConnectify,
@TechConnectify@mas.to avatar

@ChemicalTribe @AdmSnackbar highly opinionated, technical and intelligent people still need others to point out things they're doing wrong. Else they believe they can do no wrong.

And if I may be so bold? I believe you are presenting a false dichotomy. Absolutely we should help people in their own countries (or at the very least not harm them) so they don't feel they must resort to migration.

But we also mustn't deny that desperate people will resort to migration and they need our help.

TechConnectify,
@TechConnectify@mas.to avatar

@ChemicalTribe @AdmSnackbar this country got the credibility it had of being the beacon on the hill because we loudly rejected a "not my problem" attitude. That is enshrined on the Statue of Liberty after all, and we have a proud history of immigration. We used to think it's what made us great.

Implying that it's "better" to avoid the need for it may be broadly true - and if your context is framed exclusively by the bad shit we did, I'd agree. But not everyone is even aware of that context.

TechConnectify,
@TechConnectify@mas.to avatar

@ChemicalTribe @AdmSnackbar that's really what I want to press on.

Because nuance like that isn't universally known, you cannot presume to know the logic behind another's position. And I fear we end up legitimizing the worst beliefs of our opposition when we do this.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • megavids
  • InstantRegret
  • magazineikmin
  • thenastyranch
  • modclub
  • everett
  • rosin
  • Youngstown
  • slotface
  • ethstaker
  • mdbf
  • kavyap
  • osvaldo12
  • DreamBathrooms
  • anitta
  • Durango
  • ngwrru68w68
  • tester
  • khanakhh
  • love
  • tacticalgear
  • cubers
  • GTA5RPClips
  • Leos
  • normalnudes
  • provamag3
  • cisconetworking
  • JUstTest
  • All magazines
    •