The most disruptive part of Tiktok is how it managed to dramatically reduce the "rich gets richer" effect of entertainment platforms. If you upload a video, TikTok will show it to other users even if it's your first. This allows them to assess it and progressively grow its audience. On YouTube and Instagram you'd have to rely on search traffic or external sources to build up your audience and get recommended (except for the new Reels / YouTube Shorts that are mimicking TikTok's UI).<p>I've done an experiment on the new year and created a video on a new account trying to catch people's attention (relevant to the new year, funny, with something unusual). I've done i on Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube. On TikTok it gained over half a million views, with 0 views on YouTube and Instagram.<p>Another way to frame this is around the Gini Coefficient of these platform. TikTok has a much lower inequality measure, which increases the incentives to produce content and hence the quality of content.
Every video I have seen that managed to escape TikTok's confines and infiltrate my consciousness could be inserted into an episode of 'America's Funniest home Videos' and leave nobody the wiser.
I think the "each new member can enhance creativity of existing members" vibe can exist generally among "scenes", and scenes definitely can use technology that directly taps into this.<p>I like the "scenius" term for this from Brian Eno: <a href="https://youtu.be/0qATeJcL1XQ" rel="nofollow">https://youtu.be/0qATeJcL1XQ</a> (54:15 in that talk)
I don’t know why people are underestimating Instagram Reels. Instagram may be becoming more of an entertainment app like TikTok but it is still a social network. All content creators care about is engagement, and having the ability to push your short video into your Stories and your follower’s main feed increases your chances of it being seen instead of relying on an algorithm.
This comment is a slightly tangential shameless plug, but I just want to point out that I loved the structure of this essay. There were a lot of great little ideas that I don't think would have seen the light of day in a more traditional sort of blog post.<p>> All the points I wanted to cover seem hyperlinked in a sprawling loose tangle. This could easily have been several standalone posts. I've been stuck on how to structure it.<p>> This piece is long, but if you get bored in any one section, you can just scroll on the next one; they're separated by horizontal rules for easy visual scanning. You can also read them out of order. There are lots of cross-references, though, so if you skip some of the segments, others may not make complete sense. However, it’s ultimately not a big deal.<p>I've long wondered how many essays don't get published because the author struggles to generate a "through line." Sometimes organizing ideas is harder than coming up with them. This is certainly a problem I struggle with.<p>I've been working on software[1] that encourages you to publish ambitious online media even if it's a bit disjointed. Currently, only me and my friends and family are using it because it is <i>very</i> rough around the edges, but it is good enough that I personally use it every single day.<p>If this sounds interesting to any HN comment readers I'd love to give you a beta code or a live demo to hear your thoughts. Send me an email at jon@edifice.pub<p>[1] <a href="https://edifice.pub" rel="nofollow">https://edifice.pub</a>
The author is very incorrect.<p>> By network effects of creativity, I mean that every additional user on TikTok makes every other user more creative.<p>That is false.<p>TikTok isn't a creativity amplification network, it's a mimic network. The extreme majority of humans are mimics, they essentially never create or do anything creative or original. They are incapable of that (cue the outrage at such a statement, even though it's true). They play follow the leader across a lifetime. TikTok, like most social networks, represents that accurately. What TikTok does not represent, is a burst of individual creativity that is widespread.<p>It's a creativity distribution channel. The 0.01% that are originators distribute creativity to the drone mimics and they copy and share it.<p>That's exactly what the dance copying represents for example. There is no great creativity explosion going on there, quite the opposite. As with YouTube or any other distribution system, an exceptionally tiny percentage of people are originators, actually creative, the rest mimic and pander and try to scam their way to some views by copying or ripping off originators (you see this repeating trend represented in everything, eg content farms).