3 ms·

What is the author suggesting? That instead of "social" networks, people will rush to building their own online presence from first principles? I can't see tha

What is the author suggesting? That instead of "social" networks, people will rush to building their own online presence from first principles? I can't see that working, for so many reasons: - most people are passive consumers of content, maybe interact a little, enough to tweak their feeds - a small minority creates content on the large networks / aggregators, and (I think) a large portion of that is spurred on by monetization - the "internet" and all the devices that access it have become so "user friendly" that the people who have come online in the last decade or so are effectively technically illiterate; you cannot count on them building anything from scratch, only to arrange the big duplo pieces already provided

multicast 3y ago
You have just highlighted the main fact about the www that so many technical skilled people are missing to see. Most consumers have little to no knowledge about anything technical, which is not bad at all since there is no reason why they should care. Now imagine telling those people that everyone should have their own website instead of a social media account. What a horrible and illogical thought in my opinion. Digital consumers only change behavior if something is 10x better. So from a consumer perspective, who cares about things like decentralized networks? Or Duckduckgo.com for example is probably for 99% of the www users some chinese russian inbreed virus. People started using ChatGPT besides google because it is simply 10x better for many cases, and not because it promoted with more privacy feature and less ads than google.