4 ms·
Imagine the article rewritten as "The Death of the Internet." All the premises are the same, and largely true: there's no strong central control, it's basicall
by brownbat 11y ago
Imagine the article rewritten as "The Death of the Internet."
All the premises are the same, and largely true: there's no strong central control, it's basically run by volunteers who have conflicting interests, and there's some abhorrent stuff out there.
The conclusion, that it's a failed experiment, doesn't seem to follow.
Reddit may die someday. Could happen, aggregators die, but I don't think a scandal means it's at death's door.
Even though I disagree with the conclusion, especially its forcefulness, the article has a fantastic collection of links. The links would be a great first place to catch the journalistic zeitgeist.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- smacktoward 11y agoExcept that nobody's trying to operate "The Internet, Inc.", a centralized, for-profit business encompassing the whole of the network. That's what Reddit-the-company has been trying to do with Reddit-the-community, and it doesn't work very well.
- brownbat 11y agoFair. And to that point, Digg's making money and Youtube is struggling. Maybe all our success stories need another look... [1] http://blog.digg.com/post/109580738071/digg-by-the-numbers-2015-edition http://blog.digg.com/post/109580738071/digg-by-the-numbers-2... (well, "consistent revenue"... couldn't find precise financials since 2008 or so) [2] http://www.wsj.com/articles/viewers-dont-add-up-to-profit-for-youtube-1424897967 http://www.wsj.com/articles/viewers-dont-add-up-to-profit-fo...