3 ms·
> …to consider the knowledge it delivers as a basic, common necessity, and as such, one that requires a democratically-empowered quality control. Knowledge det
by tikhonj 11y ago
> …to consider the knowledge it delivers as a basic, common necessity, and as such, one that requires a democratically-empowered quality control.
Knowledge determined by popular fiat. Sounds lovely.
I mean, even now, popularity determines what we get, but at least it's implicit—results are based on how people act, not how they say they should act.
Unlike the article, I'm not willing to assume that the latter is better than the former, much less that it should be forced on us. Then again, I'm the sort of person who's content eating donuts and would hate being forced onto a kale diet.
More importantly, the former provides a more granular system: different people can get different things based on what they want or how they act. A democratic system, on the other hand, would pretty much force a consensus on everyone. Centralization simply doesn't have the capability to let everyone have their own way.
- eevilspock 11y ago> More importantly, the former provides a more granular system: different people can get different things based on what they want or how they act. I disagree. The web is the way it is, flooded with click-bait, ads masquerading as editorial, opinion and political agenda masquerading as journalism, viral power masquerading as truth, because of the "free"[1] junk food consuming habits that most people are prone too most of the time. This utterly and fundamentally transforms the web for everyone, because there is little air left for alternatives to breathe, leaving them stunted if not still-born. The same damage that the article explains as happening to journalism is happening to all other important things on the web. - [1] That ads give us the web for free is utter bullshit: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8585237 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8585237