4 ms·

> stolen out from under us. Who is "us"? The internet is available to more people in more countries than ever before. There's more content on the internet tha

> stolen out from under us. Who is "us"? The internet is available to more people in more countries than ever before. There's more content on the internet than ever before. It's a part of every day life for nearly everyone in the world. That's what's happening to the internet. It's no longer a corner where quirky tinkerers were the only ones who could access it. And the promise of the internet was never to be just that. It was meant to be a vehicle for humanity (along with all it's warts). That's what you're seeing. The rest of humanity coming on-line. The attitude of "this isn't what it was meant to be" presumes that it was meant to be anything at all. Similar to a kid that doesn't want to share their legos with the rest of the class.

foxhop 7y ago
They can have my last two Legos, these blocks are no longer useful to me. They already have most of the blocks under their control anyways.
brianshaler 7y ago
I think the sentiment was regarding the democratization of knowledge and access, which is shifting more toward an oligarchy. True, more of humanity is coming online. However, they can only participate if they can be monetized and controlled by those with all the wealth and power.
- roenxi 7y ago
  The internet was and remains the most democratic knowledge dissemination engine in several thousand years of recorded history. It is substantially more democratic than it was in the 90s and 2000s because there are more people accessing it now. It isn't shifting towards an oligopoly unless you count things like Wikipedia as a monopoly. Which it isn't, Wikipedia is probably about as close to an ideal democracy as any human project ever attempted.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - brianshaler 7y ago
    Wikipedia is a great example of a web site that has resisted the trend! It is a pretty ideal democracy for those of us whose ISP or nation-state[0] doesn't prohibit us from viewing it. There was a project similar to Wikipedia, but for semantic data. It lasted for a little while before being swallowed up by Google and shut down[1]. Granted there are some alternatives, but after investing some time working with freebase data, I should be allowed to hold a grudge. Google played a key role in muzzling more widespread usage of RSS[2], along with Twitter and Facebook discontinuing support for it. Similarly, jabber[3], XMPP[4]. These days it's risky to even host your own mail server, since most people you correspond with are likely to use one particular email service that may arbitrarily block messages from lesser-known mail services[5]. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_of_Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_of_Wikipedia [1] https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/freebase-discuss/WEnyO8f7xOQ https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/freebase-discuss/WEn... [2] https://www.fastcompany.com/3013890/reader-may-have-died-to-feed-googles-apis https://www.fastcompany.com/3013890/reader-may-have-died-to-... [3] https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/a/2006/use-twitter-by-instant-message.html https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/a/2006/use-twitter-by-instant... (couldn't easily find press of the discontinuation of this service) [4] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9266769 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9266769 [5] https://www.tablix.org/~avian/blog/archives/2019/04/google_is_eating_our_mail/ https://www.tablix.org/~avian/blog/archives/2019/04/google_i...
    - esotericn 7y ago
      And Wikipedia is hosted on... a .org. Great! Why not shake them down for those sweet donations?
    - bawolff 7y ago
      And now we have https://wikidata.org https://wikidata.org Im saddened by the death of rss too, but i think its a lot to blame that soley on google. If the rss ecosystem was so weak, that shutting down a single rss client killed it, it couldn't have been long for this world anyways.
      - foxhop 7y ago
  - blondin 7y ago
    > Wikipedia is probably about as close to an ideal democracy as any human project ever attempted. wikipedia has their own drama. it has contributors who shape the content into what they want the world to see instead of staying objective on certain topics. often articles on simple topics are so complex because they are written by enthusiasts and aren't trying to inform beginners or curious. we need better!
edoceo 7y ago
I'm not sure about the internet but...one MUST share Lego with any and all who want to play.
PhasmaFelis 7y ago
> Similar to a kid that doesn't want to share their legos with the rest of the class. You're being disingenuous and needlessly insulting. We wanted to bring the freedom and egalitarianism of the early internet to everyone. Instead we got the jaded, corporate internet, but at least it's available to everyone. The GP is obviously mourning the quality, not the exclusivity.
- foxhop 7y ago
  Thank you for this comment.

foxhop 7y ago

They can have my last two Legos, these blocks are no longer useful to me. They already have most of the blocks under their control anyways.

brianshaler 7y ago

I think the sentiment was regarding the democratization of knowledge and access, which is shifting more toward an oligarchy. True, more of humanity is coming online. However, they can only participate if they can be monetized and controlled by those with all the wealth and power.

roenxi 7y ago
The internet was and remains the most democratic knowledge dissemination engine in several thousand years of recorded history. It is substantially more democratic than it was in the 90s and 2000s because there are more people accessing it now. It isn't shifting towards an oligopoly unless you count things like Wikipedia as a monopoly. Which it isn't, Wikipedia is probably about as close to an ideal democracy as any human project ever attempted.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- brianshaler 7y ago
  Wikipedia is a great example of a web site that has resisted the trend! It is a pretty ideal democracy for those of us whose ISP or nation-state[0] doesn't prohibit us from viewing it. There was a project similar to Wikipedia, but for semantic data. It lasted for a little while before being swallowed up by Google and shut down[1]. Granted there are some alternatives, but after investing some time working with freebase data, I should be allowed to hold a grudge. Google played a key role in muzzling more widespread usage of RSS[2], along with Twitter and Facebook discontinuing support for it. Similarly, jabber[3], XMPP[4]. These days it's risky to even host your own mail server, since most people you correspond with are likely to use one particular email service that may arbitrarily block messages from lesser-known mail services[5]. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_of_Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_of_Wikipedia [1] https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/freebase-discuss/WEnyO8f7xOQ https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/freebase-discuss/WEn... [2] https://www.fastcompany.com/3013890/reader-may-have-died-to-feed-googles-apis https://www.fastcompany.com/3013890/reader-may-have-died-to-... [3] https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/a/2006/use-twitter-by-instant-message.html https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/a/2006/use-twitter-by-instant... (couldn't easily find press of the discontinuation of this service) [4] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9266769 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9266769 [5] https://www.tablix.org/~avian/blog/archives/2019/04/google_is_eating_our_mail/ https://www.tablix.org/~avian/blog/archives/2019/04/google_i...
  - esotericn 7y ago
    And Wikipedia is hosted on... a .org. Great! Why not shake them down for those sweet donations?
  - bawolff 7y ago
    And now we have https://wikidata.org https://wikidata.org Im saddened by the death of rss too, but i think its a lot to blame that soley on google. If the rss ecosystem was so weak, that shutting down a single rss client killed it, it couldn't have been long for this world anyways.
    - foxhop 7y ago
- blondin 7y ago
  > Wikipedia is probably about as close to an ideal democracy as any human project ever attempted. wikipedia has their own drama. it has contributors who shape the content into what they want the world to see instead of staying objective on certain topics. often articles on simple topics are so complex because they are written by enthusiasts and aren't trying to inform beginners or curious. we need better!

edoceo 7y ago

I'm not sure about the internet but...one MUST share Lego with any and all who want to play.

PhasmaFelis 7y ago

> Similar to a kid that doesn't want to share their legos with the rest of the class. You're being disingenuous and needlessly insulting. We wanted to bring the freedom and egalitarianism of the early internet to everyone. Instead we got the jaded, corporate internet, but at least it's available to everyone. The GP is obviously mourning the quality, not the exclusivity.

foxhop 7y ago
Thank you for this comment.