I feel like this is almost identical to the question of “why don’t people migrate to [insert social network/platform]?”.
I also wonder, provided that you got full consent or permission[1] from a certain number of Rationality Adjacent people, what otherwise is stopping you from setting up a scraper or bot to automate so that they don’t have to lift a finger and yet their content is still available elsewhere?
It may go without saying but: if someone has set their account to followers-only then I would presume that increases the likelihood of their reluctance to allow their content to be mirrored elsewhere. Even if whomever is administering the mirror is well meaning and trustworthy.
It would be an interesting exercise to see how many people would or wouldn’t consent to such a project since it promises that they wouldn’t need to lift a finger.
If I may express my preference, instead of copying every xeet individually, I would prefer to see weekly or monthly summaries. (Probably weekly for all rationalists together, or monthly for an individual.)
Mirroring selected authors (and hopefully supporting voting/searching/reply etc) seems to be very different from suggesting to migrate. I’d really like to see that. It’d be some form of curating. Linkposts are already possible, but that doesn’t scale to tweets. I imagine it to be more like the sync with some forums (the ones like Zvi’s and Jefftk’s posts that are shown to be linked to their sites).
Mirroring selected authors (and hopefully supporting voting/searching/reply etc) seems to be very different from suggesting to migrate.
I didn’t get that from when you asked: “Why is a significant amount of content by some rationality adjacent people only posted on X/Twitter?”
Which to me seems like you’re asking why those authors aren’t duplicating their content on multiple platforms. Which to me overwhelmingly overlaps with the question of why they don’t migrate because it still involves changing their browsing habits, or at the very least the time and energy of choosing a new platform, setting up an account, and then of course—ensuring cross-posting/resharing. Is that incorrect?
As you highlight, asking everyone to set up their own cross-posting solution is probably not viable. But if there was some service run by the LW team that had a simple guide for setting it up (e.g. go to your LW account, get your Twitter API key, copy it here, grant permission, done.) and it took ~5 minutes, that would lower the barrier to entry a lot and would be a huge step forward.
I feel like this is almost identical to the question of “why don’t people migrate to [insert social network/platform]?”.
I also wonder, provided that you got full consent or permission[1] from a certain number of Rationality Adjacent people, what otherwise is stopping you from setting up a scraper or bot to automate so that they don’t have to lift a finger and yet their content is still available elsewhere?
It may go without saying but: if someone has set their account to followers-only then I would presume that increases the likelihood of their reluctance to allow their content to be mirrored elsewhere. Even if whomever is administering the mirror is well meaning and trustworthy.
It would be an interesting exercise to see how many people would or wouldn’t consent to such a project since it promises that they wouldn’t need to lift a finger.
If I may express my preference, instead of copying every xeet individually, I would prefer to see weekly or monthly summaries. (Probably weekly for all rationalists together, or monthly for an individual.)
Mirroring selected authors (and hopefully supporting voting/searching/reply etc) seems to be very different from suggesting to migrate. I’d really like to see that. It’d be some form of curating. Linkposts are already possible, but that doesn’t scale to tweets. I imagine it to be more like the sync with some forums (the ones like Zvi’s and Jefftk’s posts that are shown to be linked to their sites).
I didn’t get that from when you asked: “Why is a significant amount of content by some rationality adjacent people only posted on X/Twitter?”
Which to me seems like you’re asking why those authors aren’t duplicating their content on multiple platforms. Which to me overwhelmingly overlaps with the question of why they don’t migrate because it still involves changing their browsing habits, or at the very least the time and energy of choosing a new platform, setting up an account, and then of course—ensuring cross-posting/resharing. Is that incorrect?
No? Curating means that LW moderators would curate and pull the feeds instead of the authors needing to take initiative.
Ah okay, I had the wrong assumptions about who would be doing what
As you highlight, asking everyone to set up their own cross-posting solution is probably not viable. But if there was some service run by the LW team that had a simple guide for setting it up (e.g. go to your LW account, get your Twitter API key, copy it here, grant permission, done.) and it took ~5 minutes, that would lower the barrier to entry a lot and would be a huge step forward.