Weirdly, indie creators have always relied on doing arbitrage on big platforms: attracting attention on Twitter, Instagram, FB, Google, YouTube, Hacker News, Medium, etc... We're "independent," but to attract an audience we need to capture attention on big platforms.

It makes sense for creators to be on platforms where there are lots of people. But it still feels weird to me that we rely on these megacorps for distribution. Time after time, we've been lured with the promise of distribution, only to have them shut down organic reach.

Creators have to play this weird game, where they chase algorithms developed by big corp interests. "Twitter threads attract a lot of attention; let's make those!" It's mutually beneficial for a time (the creator gets followers) but ultimately the benefit goes to the platform.

The creator/platform relationship is weird: - We give them free content - We drive people to the platform ("Watch me on YouTube," "Check out my Soundcloud") - Our content and reach are ultimately governed by algorithms designed to benefit the platform

There are a bunch of parts that feel "off" to me. One is the power differential. We're not talking about advertising in local newspapers anymore. These are global megacorps with sophisticated algorithms and deep pockets; accountable only to shareholders.

So much of the internet's innovation was based on open protocols (HTTP, SMTP, RSS, TCP/IP), but the one thing that's never been cracked is "non-centralized distribution." We haven't figured out how to do content discovery in an open, distributed way.

One example of "non-centralized content distribution" was torrents. The Pirate Bay was a centralized index, but it was easy to mirror (duplicate) the index on your own server. Hundreds of these proxy sites maintain a copy of the Pirate Bay index.

The problem with web3 is that the projects still rely on centralized indexes/distribution (OpenSea, Rarible, etc) for discoverability. The web3 world still hasn't figured out how to decentralize discoverability.

You’re right, but it’s a step in the right direction because atleast there is *less* platform lock in. If and when decentralised social media takes off (see @LensProtocol), your audience will also not be locked in. That’s the real game changer

What does decentralized discoverability look like?

The idea of mirroring an index, or having a distributed database (DNS), is really fascinating to me. Trying to think of other examples: DNS FidoNet UseNet Mastadon

I really don't see how this is different from practice. People go to the most used p2p trackers (they tend to have more seeds), and new/unused trackers are abandoned. The same issue again, big index/trackers end up having most of the traffic.

The difference is the index is public and can be mirrored. Sites like 1337x were born out of previously popular indexes (Kickass Torrents, h33t). It's dissimilar to when a GitHub fork becomes more popular than the original project. gitpop2.herokuapp.com/tobi/delayed_j…

SEO is still the magic in the end if you also build your own platform 10 years on, it's still the #1 source of traffic to SaaStr.com But all the other stuff is important, too

or @Livepeer?

I need to check those out.

The game is rigged against creators. We must exit that game by building and joining alternatives. Like @OdyseeTeam, we need many more!

Agreed. A crypto ecosystem would benefit creators directly. That’s why so many BigTech companies censor crypto, it can level the playing field. Even NFTs with all their issues have given fortunes to artists. This is the way forward. We just need BETTER HONEST DAPPs.

this is something @CarlosDiaz might want to change with @HelloUncut

Is there an alternative? I wonder if there will be any web3 platforms or technologies where creators are the owners. There is fake web3 ownership now, but it would be great to see something really shared and democratically owned.

And spend money on those platforms

How else would we do it?

How is this weird? “People advertise where people are already “ in other news

What's weird is networks effects × platforms purposefully built to benefit their owners It's not a small tribal square where everyone naturally gathers. It's deliberately made monsters luring everyone into their arms and then selling their attention for own profit.

Yeah, you need to sacrifice some control for distribution. I guess the key bit is capturing attention and converting to your own platform, like the hub and spoke model.

yes, most people are not going to visit someone’s personal website or go to their front door/studio to access creative material?! How is that weird

This part is weird: - We give them free content and seed their networks with our personal contacts - We drive people to the platforms ("Watch me on YouTube," "Check out my Soundcloud") - Our content and reach are ultimately governed by algorithms designed to benefit the platform

The big tech has been working hard on chaining everyone to their platforms, for their own benefit. People flock there as it's at least easy or sometimes even fun and useful. Indie creators sitting on their sites/newsletters just have to go fishing there. What else could we do?

Throw your computer out your window and go to a museum

This is a good one. Don't forget to do it in metaverse though 😁

I still see artists & creators in real life all the time! there are many gems who do not use online platforms to share their work, like this musician:

I don't get your point then. It's quite obvious that without the infinite distribution and possible virality on the internet it's hard to make a living if you teach or create. Yet alone from art.

yes!

That is just an amplified version of performing spoken word poetry at a coffee shop that can cut your mic off at any moment, where people buy coffee & pastries while seeing you

You're telling me "this is just the way it is, and it can't be changed." This tweet thread is more explorative: "what if there was an open, distributed way to do this?" I'm looking at the current state of affairs and asking: "what if it could be different?"

I think that was one of the arguments for the web3 movement : a decentralized web with content as nft (with an author and a date). Even though the actual solution to the need is very imperfect (especially on the energy consumption part), I like the theorical part

The “open way” is the internet. Social platforms are the coffee shops of the internet - someone else’s domain we gather in to connect with people that share our interests. We shouldn’t live in these places. We should bring our connections to spaces we own where we can go deeper.