5 ms·

So the internet didn’t turn out the way we hoped

24 points by ajay-d 7y ago

haolez 7y ago
I think I’ve acquired “New York Times fatigue”. When reading a headline, I can always tell if it’s from NYT before checking the source. The headlines are usually clickbait and the subjects play with your fears and concerns. It’s really tiring.
- helpPeople 7y ago
  And needing to give them personal information to read their articles... Why are independent blogs bad again?
earthboundkid 7y ago
Well, better luck next time, dear.
CoolGuySteve 7y ago
10 or 15 years ago, you'd click on a political link on Slashdot, early reddit/digg or whatever and the top comment would usually be pulling apart all the oversights and bullshit in excruciating detail. It was good, the internet was a 'cold medium' in Marshal McLuhan terms. If the internet of that time replaced the 'hot medium' of television, things could only get better I thought. I was a fool! I never conceived that outrageous bullshit like antivax or God Emporer memes could get so much traction.
- Nasrudith 7y ago
  Reminds me of the SMAC "Evil lurks in the datalinks as it lurked in the streets but it never was the streets that were evil." The stupidity and evil is coming from humanity - merely destroying the current bridge it is crossing won't remove it and will hinder everyone else more.
jotm 7y ago
It's exactly as we hoped, wtf. Not the Internet's fault most people are dumb as a brick. It's still possible for anyone to run their own stuff. And it's still a massive repository of all human knowledge, if you take into account all sources, legal or illegal. What do we do from here? Stop being dumb and trying to change into subscription TV, for starters. Fringe believers need actual education, not more control over the sources of their misinformation.
- beatgammit 7y ago
  I think we just need a few people to show how things ought to work and get that to be popular. If we all hate ads enough and tracking, how about we invent a convenient way to pay for content across sites anonymously? I really like the design behind GNU Taler, which is a simple centralized cryptocurrency without the mining BS, so it can be used as a simple standin for currency, like PayPal. All we need to do is make a few popular content creation services use it, tipping small amounts for gratis content and larger amounts for access to pay restricted content. The only cookies that need to exist are proof of payment, cryptographically tied to the transaction. I don't want to sign up for $10/month or whatever to access an article or view a video, I just want to access some given content. I do want to subscribe to content that I consume consistently to get a bulk discount, and I'd rather pay a little bit than see ads. That being said, every payment system so far is more work than it's worth to send a dollar or less, and the fees on top remove a lot of the value. I'd rather put $X into an account each month and click a button to send a small part of that to the content creator with little to no fees involved (maybe a one time load fee if anything). The internet is only broken because the current solutions are insufficient and we've turned to legislation instead of innovation to solve the problem.
contravariant 7y ago
Having a cookie policy popup take up half the screenspace while trying to read the article certainly makes for a compelling argument.
replicatorblog 7y ago
One of my favorite hypothetical questions is "Would you take a deal where you could 10X your salary, but you'd have to live the rest of your days starting in 1979." Imagine all the same tech is available at the same periods in time, but produced by different companies so you can't do the "Back to the Future Sports Almanac" thing. Imagine you're 40 today. Would you rather have 10X as much money, but know you won't get Aol until your 55? No smartphones until you qualify for Social Security? Maybe 10X is worth it, but 5X? 2X? It helps put the value we get from the web in perspective. Just once, I'd love to read a story about tech in a major pub from the perspective of someone 35-55-ish who remembers the pre-internet world — and can't stop raving about how much better everything is now. I get that it might not be a majority position, but it's not insignificant, but it's almost entirely invisible in the NYT's tech coverage. Moreover, I find it crazy how every misstep of American tech companies portends the end of democracy, but they have the gall to write: "In China, a whole new internet is flowering."
- Nasrudith 7y ago
  Really it isn't crazy but low level dickery of "they are competing with us stop that". If you replace "end democracy" as "end our company's influence on it beyond one vote per person" you'll get a way more accurate picture of what all vested interest are saying. The harsh truth is that they still sucked before the internet if not worse. It is just that a middle or high school student could prove them woefully inaccurate with low level basics with an internet connection. Hell any teenager could ask them how goddamn dumb do they think they are about the moral panics flat out made up by them or credelously accepted like rainbow parties. Even the cool dude would gotten have bullshit claimed about getting seven different girls with color coordinated lipstick to blow him. And this isn't a purposely absurd rhetorical anecdote - these are real claims! Nobody is flawless here - I believe the proper model is freedom of the press and calling out when the press is total fucking bullshit and letting it go out of business on its own.
- gerbilly 7y ago
  > "Would you take a deal where you could 10X your salary, but you'd have to live the rest of your days starting in 1979." Dude yes, and I'd do it for free. First thing I'd do is go see the clash live.

24 points by ajay-d 7y ago

I think I’ve acquired “New York Times fatigue”. When reading a headline, I can always tell if it’s from NYT before checking the source. The headlines are usually clickbait and the subjects play with your fears and concerns. It’s really tiring.

helpPeople 7y ago
And needing to give them personal information to read their articles... Why are independent blogs bad again?

earthboundkid 7y ago

Well, better luck next time, dear.

CoolGuySteve 7y ago

10 or 15 years ago, you'd click on a political link on Slashdot, early reddit/digg or whatever and the top comment would usually be pulling apart all the oversights and bullshit in excruciating detail. It was good, the internet was a 'cold medium' in Marshal McLuhan terms. If the internet of that time replaced the 'hot medium' of television, things could only get better I thought. I was a fool! I never conceived that outrageous bullshit like antivax or God Emporer memes could get so much traction.

Nasrudith 7y ago
Reminds me of the SMAC "Evil lurks in the datalinks as it lurked in the streets but it never was the streets that were evil." The stupidity and evil is coming from humanity - merely destroying the current bridge it is crossing won't remove it and will hinder everyone else more.

jotm 7y ago

It's exactly as we hoped, wtf. Not the Internet's fault most people are dumb as a brick. It's still possible for anyone to run their own stuff. And it's still a massive repository of all human knowledge, if you take into account all sources, legal or illegal. What do we do from here? Stop being dumb and trying to change into subscription TV, for starters. Fringe believers need actual education, not more control over the sources of their misinformation.

beatgammit 7y ago
I think we just need a few people to show how things ought to work and get that to be popular. If we all hate ads enough and tracking, how about we invent a convenient way to pay for content across sites anonymously? I really like the design behind GNU Taler, which is a simple centralized cryptocurrency without the mining BS, so it can be used as a simple standin for currency, like PayPal. All we need to do is make a few popular content creation services use it, tipping small amounts for gratis content and larger amounts for access to pay restricted content. The only cookies that need to exist are proof of payment, cryptographically tied to the transaction. I don't want to sign up for $10/month or whatever to access an article or view a video, I just want to access some given content. I do want to subscribe to content that I consume consistently to get a bulk discount, and I'd rather pay a little bit than see ads. That being said, every payment system so far is more work than it's worth to send a dollar or less, and the fees on top remove a lot of the value. I'd rather put $X into an account each month and click a button to send a small part of that to the content creator with little to no fees involved (maybe a one time load fee if anything). The internet is only broken because the current solutions are insufficient and we've turned to legislation instead of innovation to solve the problem.

contravariant 7y ago

Having a cookie policy popup take up half the screenspace while trying to read the article certainly makes for a compelling argument.

replicatorblog 7y ago

One of my favorite hypothetical questions is "Would you take a deal where you could 10X your salary, but you'd have to live the rest of your days starting in 1979." Imagine all the same tech is available at the same periods in time, but produced by different companies so you can't do the "Back to the Future Sports Almanac" thing. Imagine you're 40 today. Would you rather have 10X as much money, but know you won't get Aol until your 55? No smartphones until you qualify for Social Security? Maybe 10X is worth it, but 5X? 2X? It helps put the value we get from the web in perspective. Just once, I'd love to read a story about tech in a major pub from the perspective of someone 35-55-ish who remembers the pre-internet world — and can't stop raving about how much better everything is now. I get that it might not be a majority position, but it's not insignificant, but it's almost entirely invisible in the NYT's tech coverage. Moreover, I find it crazy how every misstep of American tech companies portends the end of democracy, but they have the gall to write: "In China, a whole new internet is flowering."

Nasrudith 7y ago
Really it isn't crazy but low level dickery of "they are competing with us stop that". If you replace "end democracy" as "end our company's influence on it beyond one vote per person" you'll get a way more accurate picture of what all vested interest are saying. The harsh truth is that they still sucked before the internet if not worse. It is just that a middle or high school student could prove them woefully inaccurate with low level basics with an internet connection. Hell any teenager could ask them how goddamn dumb do they think they are about the moral panics flat out made up by them or credelously accepted like rainbow parties. Even the cool dude would gotten have bullshit claimed about getting seven different girls with color coordinated lipstick to blow him. And this isn't a purposely absurd rhetorical anecdote - these are real claims! Nobody is flawless here - I believe the proper model is freedom of the press and calling out when the press is total fucking bullshit and letting it go out of business on its own.
gerbilly 7y ago
> "Would you take a deal where you could 10X your salary, but you'd have to live the rest of your days starting in 1979." Dude yes, and I'd do it for free. First thing I'd do is go see the clash live.