10 ms·

Canter may have been seeking a quick marketing win, but he ended up shaping the internet's commercial landscape in a way that's still being debated so many year

Canter may have been seeking a quick marketing win, but he ended up shaping the internet's commercial landscape in a way that's still being debated so many years later. It's definitely a cautionary tale of how a single action can ripple through an ecosystem.

asddubs 3y ago
It was probably inevitable. It's like regular mail, except sending it is virtually free, so as the internet inched closer to the mainstream over time, this was always going to happen, I think.
- 082349872349872 3y ago
  what may not be apparent now, with hindsight, is that we had not expected that the internet was inching towards the mainstream; much of the bushy-tailed optimism/youthful folly of the times was that many of us had thought the mainstream would approach the internet as it inched online. (did anyone celebrate 30 years of Eternal September last month?)
- autoexec 3y ago
  It was certainly not inevitable in the sense that nobody ever had a choice to do anything other than send spam. It was (and is) always a choice, and the choice of "Don't harass countless others for a chance at your own personal gain" was always on the table. It was only inevitable in the sense that given enough time some percentage of parasitic assholes will exist who will be willing to do anything to benefit themselves no matter what the consequences of their actions are for others. There's a world of difference between "this was always going to happen" because of the natural laws of the universe and "this was always going to happen" because some people actively choose to be dicks, and I think people like Laurence Canter believe their actions are somewhat excused because of the "inevitability" of what was always just their own selfish choices.
  - asddubs 3y ago
    I agree with that, it's inevitable because of people acting selfishly. You could even argue that it might not have happened under other economic systems which do not follow the principle of the profit motive.
    - autoexec 3y ago
      Or even one where the profit motive exists, but doesn't supersede our responsibility to care for each other and the environment we share.
      - mistrial9 3y ago
        psychologically and in fact, biologically.. the lowest-simplest-most virulent forms of life simply eat whatever, take whatever, shit where-ever.. To know this and distinguish that among other life forms, IMO is basic to self-reflective intelligence. Those individuals without critical thinking skills, on the co-dependent super-highway, that take kindness to mean "anything goes" .. are the support group for this obviously ill behavior. Incredibly fast computers and networks are the enabler.
        autoexec 3y ago
        I'd agree that there's a strong link between the selfish and the lowest, simplest, forms of life. After billions of years of evolution we really should be better.
    - Plasmoid 3y ago
      All societies have an attention economy and spam is a "great" way of getting it. It's incorrect to assume other economic systems would not have this problem.
      - asddubs 3y ago
        It's easy to say that, but it makes me wonder to what extent that's just projecting our culture onto all other possible realities due to a failure of imagination/taking aspects of our culture as immutable laws of nature.
- WalterBright 3y ago
  The same thing has happened to phones. Spam on my iphone got so bad I set it to block all calls on on my contact list. My land line has become useless as all I get on it is spam calls. Don't the phone companies realize their users are going to hang up on them unless the spam problem is dealt with?
  - Ylpertnodi 3y ago
    Wow! When i had a landline - many, many years ago - i got maybe 5 spam calls a year. I have had c20 in 15 years of mobile ownership. 1. EU? Possibly. 2. Do not hang up. A dead line costs them money...you'll soon be taken off the lists.
convolvatron 3y ago
Carter himself posted in reply to some of the outrage at the time saying "don't look at me, this is clearly an opportunity to reach customers, and its going to be exploited, stupid non-commercial rules or not". its not clear how much that one post affected the eventual outcome
- mistrial9 3y ago
  game developers who do not recognize this opportunity are f**ing stupid.. I heard recently.. sounds familiar. It seems like some kind of internal cesspool overflow, where reason and empathy are pushed aside with force of self-serving actions, and social pressures associated with "succeed or FAIL"
neilv 3y ago
I think you're being too generous. People used to talk about rules against commercial use, netiquette about Usenet posting, etc. And we knew why. When along comes someone who doesn't care. That person isn't "shaping", like some influential philosopher, visionary, or noteworthy historical figure. That person just happened to be the first total piece of fecal matter to come along, and do the obvious thing that everyone said was obvious, and with obvious outcomes.
- Yeul 3y ago
  Back then there was no regulation. At least we have moved beyond the "Silicon Valley tech bros are good guy hippies" phase. No wonder libertarians hate the government it's the only thing that can stop them.

asddubs 3y ago

It was probably inevitable. It's like regular mail, except sending it is virtually free, so as the internet inched closer to the mainstream over time, this was always going to happen, I think.

082349872349872 3y ago
what may not be apparent now, with hindsight, is that we had not expected that the internet was inching towards the mainstream; much of the bushy-tailed optimism/youthful folly of the times was that many of us had thought the mainstream would approach the internet as it inched online. (did anyone celebrate 30 years of Eternal September last month?)
autoexec 3y ago
It was certainly not inevitable in the sense that nobody ever had a choice to do anything other than send spam. It was (and is) always a choice, and the choice of "Don't harass countless others for a chance at your own personal gain" was always on the table. It was only inevitable in the sense that given enough time some percentage of parasitic assholes will exist who will be willing to do anything to benefit themselves no matter what the consequences of their actions are for others. There's a world of difference between "this was always going to happen" because of the natural laws of the universe and "this was always going to happen" because some people actively choose to be dicks, and I think people like Laurence Canter believe their actions are somewhat excused because of the "inevitability" of what was always just their own selfish choices.
- asddubs 3y ago
  I agree with that, it's inevitable because of people acting selfishly. You could even argue that it might not have happened under other economic systems which do not follow the principle of the profit motive.
  - autoexec 3y ago
    Or even one where the profit motive exists, but doesn't supersede our responsibility to care for each other and the environment we share.
    - mistrial9 3y ago
      psychologically and in fact, biologically.. the lowest-simplest-most virulent forms of life simply eat whatever, take whatever, shit where-ever.. To know this and distinguish that among other life forms, IMO is basic to self-reflective intelligence. Those individuals without critical thinking skills, on the co-dependent super-highway, that take kindness to mean "anything goes" .. are the support group for this obviously ill behavior. Incredibly fast computers and networks are the enabler.
      - autoexec 3y ago
        I'd agree that there's a strong link between the selfish and the lowest, simplest, forms of life. After billions of years of evolution we really should be better.
  - Plasmoid 3y ago
    All societies have an attention economy and spam is a "great" way of getting it. It's incorrect to assume other economic systems would not have this problem.
    - asddubs 3y ago
      It's easy to say that, but it makes me wonder to what extent that's just projecting our culture onto all other possible realities due to a failure of imagination/taking aspects of our culture as immutable laws of nature.
WalterBright 3y ago
The same thing has happened to phones. Spam on my iphone got so bad I set it to block all calls on on my contact list. My land line has become useless as all I get on it is spam calls. Don't the phone companies realize their users are going to hang up on them unless the spam problem is dealt with?
- Ylpertnodi 3y ago
  Wow! When i had a landline - many, many years ago - i got maybe 5 spam calls a year. I have had c20 in 15 years of mobile ownership. 1. EU? Possibly. 2. Do not hang up. A dead line costs them money...you'll soon be taken off the lists.

convolvatron 3y ago

Carter himself posted in reply to some of the outrage at the time saying "don't look at me, this is clearly an opportunity to reach customers, and its going to be exploited, stupid non-commercial rules or not". its not clear how much that one post affected the eventual outcome

mistrial9 3y ago
game developers who do not recognize this opportunity are f**ing stupid.. I heard recently.. sounds familiar. It seems like some kind of internal cesspool overflow, where reason and empathy are pushed aside with force of self-serving actions, and social pressures associated with "succeed or FAIL"

neilv 3y ago

I think you're being too generous. People used to talk about rules against commercial use, netiquette about Usenet posting, etc. And we knew why. When along comes someone who doesn't care. That person isn't "shaping", like some influential philosopher, visionary, or noteworthy historical figure. That person just happened to be the first total piece of fecal matter to come along, and do the obvious thing that everyone said was obvious, and with obvious outcomes.

Yeul 3y ago
Back then there was no regulation. At least we have moved beyond the "Silicon Valley tech bros are good guy hippies" phase. No wonder libertarians hate the government it's the only thing that can stop them.