3 ms·

What can be done to reverse this trend? Or to create something altogether different from the current "internet"?

by fumar 13y ago

Havoc 13y ago
Personally I think it can't be reversed. Its too profitable and there are too many sheeple out there. As for something "altogether different". I don't see it happening. There are just too many powerful vested interest at work. e.g. We can't even get a HTML standard pushed through without DRM. This might sound cynical, but personally I feel its the end of an era. The internet used to be the wild west where anything is possible. Now its become a commercial turkey shoot via dark patterns, micro-transactions, data mining and a dozen other buzzwords.
- a3n 13y ago
  > Personally I think it can't be reversed. Its too profitable and there are too many sheeple out there. The "internet," i.e. TCP/IP, is still there pretty much as it always was. Google's interface is almost all web on top of the internet, Facebook too. Anyone is free to use anything else implemented on the internet. Fastmail makes a handy living at implementing smtp and imap on top of TCP/IP; their value is excellent implementation along with service. It's always possible to sell good service. You don't have to use the DRM parts. And I agree, it is the end of an era, a really good era. But it's not the end.
  - Havoc 13y ago
    Its a pity that fastmail is US based...I was actually looking for a Gmail replacement that can support own domains.
  - Havoc 13y ago
    > The "internet," i.e. TCP/IP, is still there pretty much as it always was. That might be true to you & me, but to the masses the internet is google, facebook, twitter etc. Yes you can build anything on it, but can you compete against an opponent that is bigger, more powerful, has networking effects on its side and is more willing to use questionable tactics? Service goes a long way, but it doesn't scale well and its not enough against those odds (imo). >Anyone is free to use anything else implemented on the internet. Are they? Its not really about what you are free to use, but more about what you can skip. See the author in the article...does he sound like he is free to not use G+? Plus there are powerful networking effects at play...I never wanted a FB account but my friends kept bugging me about it. In a practical scenario users have very little freedom to do what they want & it only gets worse if they're technically illiterate.
lmm 13y ago
Start paying for what you want. The whole point of app.net was to create a social-network-type thing that served its users, because they were the ones paying for it. But it seems that most people prefer free stuff to non-evil.
- fumar 13y ago
  I paid for app.net for several months. But, all my friends are on twitter.

What can be done to reverse this trend? Or to create something altogether different from the current "internet"?

by fumar 13y ago

What can be done to reverse this trend? Or to create something altogether different from the current "internet"?

Havoc 13y ago

Personally I think it can't be reversed. Its too profitable and there are too many sheeple out there. As for something "altogether different". I don't see it happening. There are just too many powerful vested interest at work. e.g. We can't even get a HTML standard pushed through without DRM. This might sound cynical, but personally I feel its the end of an era. The internet used to be the wild west where anything is possible. Now its become a commercial turkey shoot via dark patterns, micro-transactions, data mining and a dozen other buzzwords.

a3n 13y ago
> Personally I think it can't be reversed. Its too profitable and there are too many sheeple out there. The "internet," i.e. TCP/IP, is still there pretty much as it always was. Google's interface is almost all web on top of the internet, Facebook too. Anyone is free to use anything else implemented on the internet. Fastmail makes a handy living at implementing smtp and imap on top of TCP/IP; their value is excellent implementation along with service. It's always possible to sell good service. You don't have to use the DRM parts. And I agree, it is the end of an era, a really good era. But it's not the end.
- Havoc 13y ago
  Its a pity that fastmail is US based...I was actually looking for a Gmail replacement that can support own domains.
- Havoc 13y ago
  > The "internet," i.e. TCP/IP, is still there pretty much as it always was. That might be true to you & me, but to the masses the internet is google, facebook, twitter etc. Yes you can build anything on it, but can you compete against an opponent that is bigger, more powerful, has networking effects on its side and is more willing to use questionable tactics? Service goes a long way, but it doesn't scale well and its not enough against those odds (imo). >Anyone is free to use anything else implemented on the internet. Are they? Its not really about what you are free to use, but more about what you can skip. See the author in the article...does he sound like he is free to not use G+? Plus there are powerful networking effects at play...I never wanted a FB account but my friends kept bugging me about it. In a practical scenario users have very little freedom to do what they want & it only gets worse if they're technically illiterate.

lmm 13y ago

Start paying for what you want. The whole point of app.net was to create a social-network-type thing that served its users, because they were the ones paying for it. But it seems that most people prefer free stuff to non-evil.

fumar 13y ago
I paid for app.net for several months. But, all my friends are on twitter.