> To be online, many now admit, is to be endlessly manipulated and exploited. In December, Oxford University Press declared rage bait to be the word of the year, noting that use of the term had tripled over the previous 12 months. The lexical spike represented a heightened awareness that monetized social accounts churn out bad-faith takes and extremist content.
The nice thing about the internet is that people blame a good portion of websites, but you can happily live in the internet without visiting the web at all. The Gemini protocol is a good example. Fediverse is another.
People don't want to social dropout (neither physically nor in the internet), so it is a common thing to ask others to support the own decision (like a group social dropout). This obviously won't work on big scales because it never did. "The internet" will only decline if somebody invents "a better internet", which will most likely be some protocols based on the existing ones.
A side effect of rapid technological change is that there are now multiple generations who didn't experience the pre-monetized internet.
It's like we've hit a tipping point where enshittification etc. are allowed to thrive because there's no longer a critical mass of people who know from first-hand experience that things don't have to be this bad.
It's become easy to pacify young people with the meme that older people didnt really have a better internet, they're remembering the past as better than it actually was.
seems like the only way to do that is for the spaces and services we use to charge fees instead of relying on ads. but also they'd need to be non-profit and well governed or else they will enshittify.
not saying its not possible but people are pretty hooked on the internet being "free" (not realizing they are just the product)
it does seem like the time is right for something like the fediverse except that its like 20% too complicated for regular people to understand...
So like maybe something that is a verified humans only, publishing / sharing, social connection managing, community building platform that doesn't rely on huge cloud infra (you own your own data and host your own content) monstrosity, that you pay a nominal fee for so there is 0 ads allowed and a legal contract that forbids the company from selling your data ever.
no problem right? just sell it as real and "healthy" social web. (not social media dark patterns and infinite scrolling, actual human connection and community building.)
In another decade this headline would be "please let books die" or "please let tv die". Some people are biologically wired to process information in a maladaptive way (so much research about this), and the medium is irrelevant.
I say this that even simple text based sites like hacker news can be used inappropriately.
> To be online, many now admit, is to be endlessly manipulated and exploited. In December, Oxford University Press declared rage bait to be the word of the year, noting that use of the term had tripled over the previous 12 months. The lexical spike represented a heightened awareness that monetized social accounts churn out bad-faith takes and extremist content.
The irony.
The nice thing about the internet is that people blame a good portion of websites, but you can happily live in the internet without visiting the web at all. The Gemini protocol is a good example. Fediverse is another.
People don't want to social dropout (neither physically nor in the internet), so it is a common thing to ask others to support the own decision (like a group social dropout). This obviously won't work on big scales because it never did. "The internet" will only decline if somebody invents "a better internet", which will most likely be some protocols based on the existing ones.
Really, we need a non-monetized internet. The rest would fall into place. The fediverse honestly had the right ideas.
A side effect of rapid technological change is that there are now multiple generations who didn't experience the pre-monetized internet.
It's like we've hit a tipping point where enshittification etc. are allowed to thrive because there's no longer a critical mass of people who know from first-hand experience that things don't have to be this bad.
It's become easy to pacify young people with the meme that older people didnt really have a better internet, they're remembering the past as better than it actually was.
[dead]
seems like the only way to do that is for the spaces and services we use to charge fees instead of relying on ads. but also they'd need to be non-profit and well governed or else they will enshittify.
not saying its not possible but people are pretty hooked on the internet being "free" (not realizing they are just the product)
it does seem like the time is right for something like the fediverse except that its like 20% too complicated for regular people to understand...
So like maybe something that is a verified humans only, publishing / sharing, social connection managing, community building platform that doesn't rely on huge cloud infra (you own your own data and host your own content) monstrosity, that you pay a nominal fee for so there is 0 ads allowed and a legal contract that forbids the company from selling your data ever.
no problem right? just sell it as real and "healthy" social web. (not social media dark patterns and infinite scrolling, actual human connection and community building.)
https://archive.ph/hNDwh
In another decade this headline would be "please let books die" or "please let tv die". Some people are biologically wired to process information in a maladaptive way (so much research about this), and the medium is irrelevant.
I say this that even simple text based sites like hacker news can be used inappropriately.
Starting over won't address human urges which got us here.