4 ms·

I'll say what I think you're saying in a different way: The "internet" (really, the World-Wide Web) has been co-opted from its original purpose of information d

I'll say what I think you're saying in a different way: The "internet" (really, the World-Wide Web) has been co-opted from its original purpose of information dissemination. The WWW's new purpose is now monetization of its users' time and data. Unfortunately, a combination of corporations and users themselves have made this reality. We as a species seem unable to wean ourselves from sweet social nectar (Facebook, Instagram, etc.)

DanielBMarkham 8y ago
Agreed. We are getting what we want...good and hard. Looking at it from the outside, I wonder just how large the gap can become between what we need the net for -- and what we're getting. What these companies seem to be doing isn't delivering value as much as it is preying on the ignorance of the average computer user. Even the innocuous-sounding "you get this for free, and all you have to do is see a commercial now and then, isn't that cool?" turns out to be a tracking system undreamed-of by any dystopian writer in the history of fiction. Perhaps that situation of customer ignorance will change over time.
xg15 8y ago
> Unfortunately, a combination of corporations _and_ users themselves have made this reality. This is technically true, but in the same sense that "humans and cattle are responsible for climate change and deforestation" or "drug cartels and addicts are responsible for drug epidemics" are technically true as well. It ignores the enormous power imbalances between the participating actors - more precisely that we have hierarchical, goal-driven organizations with clear objectives and vast resources in infrastructure, knowledge, manpower and money on the one hand and mostly clueless individuals on the other hand. > We as a species seem unable to wean ourselves from sweet social nectar (Facebook, Instagram, etc.) Nope, sorry. I've seen the excuse too often. If some Fortune-500 managers realize there is an enormous amount of money to be made by exploiting attention, that's not "we as a species".

DanielBMarkham 8y ago

Agreed. We are getting what we want...good and hard. Looking at it from the outside, I wonder just how large the gap can become between what we need the net for -- and what we're getting. What these companies seem to be doing isn't delivering value as much as it is preying on the ignorance of the average computer user. Even the innocuous-sounding "you get this for free, and all you have to do is see a commercial now and then, isn't that cool?" turns out to be a tracking system undreamed-of by any dystopian writer in the history of fiction. Perhaps that situation of customer ignorance will change over time.

xg15 8y ago

> Unfortunately, a combination of corporations _and_ users themselves have made this reality. This is technically true, but in the same sense that "humans and cattle are responsible for climate change and deforestation" or "drug cartels and addicts are responsible for drug epidemics" are technically true as well. It ignores the enormous power imbalances between the participating actors - more precisely that we have hierarchical, goal-driven organizations with clear objectives and vast resources in infrastructure, knowledge, manpower and money on the one hand and mostly clueless individuals on the other hand. > We as a species seem unable to wean ourselves from sweet social nectar (Facebook, Instagram, etc.) Nope, sorry. I've seen the excuse too often. If some Fortune-500 managers realize there is an enormous amount of money to be made by exploiting attention, that's not "we as a species".