The Rise and Fall of Popular Chat App "Houseparty" and its Battle with Facebook

The Rise and Fall of Popular Chat App "Houseparty" and its Battle with Facebook

In September 2017, Houseparty announced that it had 20 million users who spend an average of 51 minutes on the app each day. Their mission was to introduce empathy into online communication, something they believed was lacking in the current environment. It led them to question the essence of social networks. Social networks should not simply become a result of the transformation of social networks; they should be a place where people connect with those who are important to them. Houseparty prioritizes human connections over content, focusing on actions that occur simultaneously rather than individual actions that happen at different times, like likes, comments, or retweets.

Today, Houseparty's audience consists mostly of young people, with 60% of their audience being 24 years old or younger. This youth-centric approach has contributed to their success.

In a similar vein, in 1962, Michael Noll created a piece of digital art called "Quadratic Gaussian." He attempted to copyright and exhibit the artwork, facing challenges due to the fact that a machine had generated it. However, Noll argued that a human had written the program that incorporated randomness and order. He emphasized that while the numbers generated by the program appeared random to humans, the algorithm itself was perfectly mathematical and not random at all. Eventually, in 1965, "Quadratic Gaussian" was registered by the copyright office of the US. This case highlights the ongoing issues of personal originality and uniqueness in art.

Furthermore, Bell Labs, where Noll worked, had considered applying corporate ownership to generative art. However, they ultimately supported Noll's copyright application, allowing him to regain full ownership of the generated work. This resonates with the current situation in AI art, where the generator of the artwork is acknowledged as the "author" due to the potential issues of public accountability associated with AI-generated art.

If an AI-generated artwork like midjourney or stablediffusion had emerged in the 1960s, it would have astounded the emerging community of digital artists. However, it would not have fundamentally challenged their views on authorship and art-making. The generation process itself has become more complex with the collective memory of major artworks, making the assignment of authorship even more challenging.

In light of these insights, here are three actionable pieces of advice for creators and developers in the digital art and social media space:

1. Prioritize human connections: When developing social media platforms or digital art, focus on facilitating meaningful connections between users. Emphasize simultaneous actions and interactions that bring people closer together.

2. Advocate for ownership rights: As the field of AI-generated art expands, continue to advocate for the recognition of the generator as the "author" and ensure that ownership rights are protected. This will help establish accountability and maintain the integrity of AI-generated works.

3. Consider the implications of collective memory: Take into account the vast body of existing art when creating new works. Dilute the influence of influential authors and artworks in prompts to avoid complications in assigning authorship.

In conclusion, Houseparty's success in prioritizing human connections and simultaneous actions highlights the importance of empathy in online communication. Meanwhile, the challenges faced by Michael Noll in copyrighting his AI-generated artwork shed light on ongoing debates surrounding personal originality and uniqueness in art. By incorporating these insights and following the actionable advice provided, creators and developers can navigate the complexities of the digital art and social media landscape more effectively.