4 ms·

This is a reply to myself... but does anyone have ideas about how this can go away? Have we lost the internet to eternal marketing and data-mining arms races? I

This is a reply to myself... but does anyone have ideas about how this can go away? Have we lost the internet to eternal marketing and data-mining arms races? Is this why people are flocking to search-opaque places like Discord? Sometimes I feel like that internet isn't for me anymore, and that's a little distressing.

jdgoesmarching 5y ago
This is the consequence of arranging a society around infinite financial corporate growth; everything is optimized to squeeze out every dollar for the balance sheet. Ironically we’re watching this play out now with products and techs that market themselves as “decentralized.” Maybe after this phase the tech community will consider this isn’t something we can tech our way out of.
- systemBuilder 5y ago
  No. It's Google squeezing money out of search to subsidize the CEO's flavor of the month money-losing AI project, that's what it is ... Ex-Search-Engineer
  - ichydkrsrnae 5y ago
    I think so too. Recent results are clearly ML garbage. The reason Google isn't explaining it is because they can't explain it. They don't know why the ML is returning the results it's returning. And whatever it's doing in that black box, it's making gobs of money—Google's sole purpose since Ruth Porat started squeezing every dime out of every orifice–so just keep on keeping on.
- astrange 5y ago
  Tech companies like G/FB don't have to care about infinite growth. It's nice to see your RSUs go up, but the shareholders don't have voting rights.
majkinetor 5y ago
We need a new protocol that will not allow that, such as gemini, which is not that good IMO and severely limited (you can't even add pics ffs). And of course, new search engine, something distributed and in the GNU domain.
- throwawayboise 5y ago
  You can link to images in gemtext. It's up to the browser whether to display them inline.
  - majkinetor 5y ago
    Terrible UX. What if I just want to give links without wanting to have them as images? Besides, all that can be done with img HTML tag (browsers do have 'disable images' thing already).
throwawayboise 5y ago
Yeah the internet has been turned into cable TV. You're paying for access, but the objective of 90% of the content is to get you to watch ads.
elliekelly 5y ago
The more I think about it the more I just don’t think it’s possible to have an internet that is supported by ad-revenue and isn’t user-hostile. The incentives are diametrically opposed. We need a PBS/NPR of search engines.
- clukic 5y ago
  I wonder if an argument could be made that this would actually pay for itself. Given that productive use of search is at odds with commercial use of search, maybe a publicly funded search engine could increase GWP by 0.01% which would be about $87B a year.
- no-s 5y ago
  > We need a PBS/NPR of search engines. PBS/NPR like solutions would be subject to co-opting forces as with other search engines. Look at wikipedia, touted as a “social good” but undermined by collective activism edits in the name of various ideologies claiming pure intentions of “social good”.
flenserboy 5y ago
The Eternal September always wins.
- micromacrofoot 5y ago
  I get it, I almost included eternal september in my own post, but this feels like a reductive way to overlook an actual problem.
  - ichydkrsrnae 5y ago
    Google actually found a result for Eternal September. Call me amazed! I didn't even have to use quotes. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September
njharman 5y ago
profit optimized is the inevitable result of any system that has profit motivation banning advertising would help for awhile, but other profit streams would be optimised and expand to fill void, such as data collection/mining
- Volker_W 5y ago
  If ads would be banned, data collection would be unprofitable.
  - astrange 5y ago
    It's already not that profitable. Twitter's ad targeting is useless and they have tons of data on you. If surveillance capitalism is super-profitable, "making cell phones" capitalism must be even better since Apple is bigger than those companies.
- collaborative 5y ago
  I have thought about one way of changing the rules: banning large compannies from showing ads. I am not sure I understand the fallout this would cause, but: - ad revenue would drammatically decrease - buying ads would actually be affordable by local sellers - the market would self regulate against monopolies
sharikous 5y ago
I think so, actually. New environments are refreshing until power structures form - and that's what happened with the internet. But it is still not so dire. I went back to bookmarks, reading lists and keeping note of writers I check out. It's not bad at all as long as I keep in my interest bubble. Google or not, I still would prefer today's internet world to the decades before the internet.

jdgoesmarching 5y ago

This is the consequence of arranging a society around infinite financial corporate growth; everything is optimized to squeeze out every dollar for the balance sheet. Ironically we’re watching this play out now with products and techs that market themselves as “decentralized.” Maybe after this phase the tech community will consider this isn’t something we can tech our way out of.

systemBuilder 5y ago
No. It's Google squeezing money out of search to subsidize the CEO's flavor of the month money-losing AI project, that's what it is ... Ex-Search-Engineer
- ichydkrsrnae 5y ago
  I think so too. Recent results are clearly ML garbage. The reason Google isn't explaining it is because they can't explain it. They don't know why the ML is returning the results it's returning. And whatever it's doing in that black box, it's making gobs of money—Google's sole purpose since Ruth Porat started squeezing every dime out of every orifice–so just keep on keeping on.
astrange 5y ago
Tech companies like G/FB don't have to care about infinite growth. It's nice to see your RSUs go up, but the shareholders don't have voting rights.

majkinetor 5y ago

We need a new protocol that will not allow that, such as gemini, which is not that good IMO and severely limited (you can't even add pics ffs). And of course, new search engine, something distributed and in the GNU domain.

throwawayboise 5y ago
You can link to images in gemtext. It's up to the browser whether to display them inline.
- majkinetor 5y ago
  Terrible UX. What if I just want to give links without wanting to have them as images? Besides, all that can be done with img HTML tag (browsers do have 'disable images' thing already).

throwawayboise 5y ago

Yeah the internet has been turned into cable TV. You're paying for access, but the objective of 90% of the content is to get you to watch ads.

elliekelly 5y ago

The more I think about it the more I just don’t think it’s possible to have an internet that is supported by ad-revenue and isn’t user-hostile. The incentives are diametrically opposed. We need a PBS/NPR of search engines.

clukic 5y ago
I wonder if an argument could be made that this would actually pay for itself. Given that productive use of search is at odds with commercial use of search, maybe a publicly funded search engine could increase GWP by 0.01% which would be about $87B a year.
no-s 5y ago
> We need a PBS/NPR of search engines. PBS/NPR like solutions would be subject to co-opting forces as with other search engines. Look at wikipedia, touted as a “social good” but undermined by collective activism edits in the name of various ideologies claiming pure intentions of “social good”.

flenserboy 5y ago

The Eternal September always wins.

micromacrofoot 5y ago
I get it, I almost included eternal september in my own post, but this feels like a reductive way to overlook an actual problem.
- ichydkrsrnae 5y ago
  Google actually found a result for Eternal September. Call me amazed! I didn't even have to use quotes. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September

njharman 5y ago

profit optimized is the inevitable result of any system that has profit motivation banning advertising would help for awhile, but other profit streams would be optimised and expand to fill void, such as data collection/mining

Volker_W 5y ago
If ads would be banned, data collection would be unprofitable.
- astrange 5y ago
  It's already not that profitable. Twitter's ad targeting is useless and they have tons of data on you. If surveillance capitalism is super-profitable, "making cell phones" capitalism must be even better since Apple is bigger than those companies.
collaborative 5y ago
I have thought about one way of changing the rules: banning large compannies from showing ads. I am not sure I understand the fallout this would cause, but: - ad revenue would drammatically decrease - buying ads would actually be affordable by local sellers - the market would self regulate against monopolies

sharikous 5y ago

I think so, actually. New environments are refreshing until power structures form - and that's what happened with the internet. But it is still not so dire. I went back to bookmarks, reading lists and keeping note of writers I check out. It's not bad at all as long as I keep in my interest bubble. Google or not, I still would prefer today's internet world to the decades before the internet.