Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Death of the Cyberflâneur

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 70 posts

Re: The Death of the Cyberflâneur

#41

Post by kazinator »

> While not deliberately concealing his identity, the flâneur preferred to stroll incognito.

...

> However, anyone entertaining such dreams of the Internet as a refuge for the bohemian, the hedonistic and the idiosyncratic probably didn’t know the reasons behind the disappearance of the original flâneur.

If the flâneur is operating incognito ... how the hell can you be sure he is actually gone? Maybe he just upped his flâneurism game and dropped off your flâneuradar.

People do still just surf the web instead of trying to only get stuff done---that's how we get interesting submissions on HN and why we are here to rummage through them.

Twenty years ago I might have surfed the web for fun, but picked up the phone to get stuff done; now I can just use the Internet for most of that latter thing too.

Re: The Death of the Cyberflâneur

#42

Post by gcr »

Analemma_ wrote: post #15
IsaacL wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's a collection of jumping-off points to curious communities I've spent many a happy hour exploring: http://ribbonfarm.com https://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Sequences http://thearchdruidreport.blogspot.co.uk/ http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.co.uk/ http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/ https://meaningness.com/ http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/ Enjoy :)

We need a DARE program to warn unsuspecting children about people like you ;) LessWrong is a rabbit hole you'll never find your way out of. Oh it starts off harmless. "I'll just read a couple", you say. But a year later you're mainlining SSC and pissing off all your friends talking about "virtue signaling". And then a year after that you're living in Berkeley, dating five people, and giving a third of your income to…

Rationalist fiction is also tons of fun. Here's a great sample story from this community if you have an hour or so free: http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/06/02/and-i-show-you-how-deep...

Re: The Death of the Cyberflâneur

#43

Post by yummyfajitas »

Karrot_Kream wrote: post #36
greenshackle wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, dating five people if you're (mostly hetero) female; dating one or two people, who are each dating five people, if you're (mostly hetero) male. Edit: Arguably, this is a better outcome than monogamy in a highly gender-skewed community (e.g. 1 in 2 het men dateless).

Source? (I'm not being argumentative, just genuinely curious if this is anything but anecdote.)

http://lesswrong.com/lw/lhg/2014_survey_results/

50% monogamous, 15% poly.

Every lesswrong group I've visited - in the US, Europe and India - had multiple polyamorous people present and discussing polyamory, so I'd be surprised if this poll is way off.

Re: The Death of the Cyberflâneur

#44

Post by busterarm »

jack_rabbit wrote: post #31

The article is totally wrong. The internet is now more than ever a good place for this kind of thing. > Hardly anyone “surfs” the Web anymore. Doesn't the whole click-bait "industry" specifically because people are surfing? What's more, even on social media, things like "Weird Facebook" come into existence. Huge groups form with no clear purpose other than seemingly to be exactly the kind of internet "arcades" that t…

I'm not sure I agree. I think the whole idea of a flâneur or "surfing" the web is that you choose where you go. There's an illusion of control.

The whole click-bait industry depends on you browsing within walled gardens (facebook, reddit) and being on the conveyor belt of places your attention has to go.

A flâneur or surfer can just go somewhere else. There's only so much physical real estate you can own. There isn't exactly another facebook or reddit to go to...and if there is, BuzzFeed is all over that shit too.

Basically, the internet has driven the minimum cost of advertising/branding down to bit-transmission prices. Anybody basically can afford to throw shit everywhere and see what sticks.

It's messy out there...

Re: The Death of the Cyberflâneur

#45

Post by [deleted] »

alva wrote: post #3

The joys of the world wild west are still out there for curious surfers. Admittedly it does require a lot more effort, especially for a younger generation who may not remember what the early web is like and how you would traverse it. I still get a thrill finding 'hidden' communities on the internet.

[deleted]

Re: The Death of the Cyberflâneur

#47

Post by unimpressive »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #43
Karrot_Kream wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Source? (I'm not being argumentative, just genuinely curious if this is anything but anecdote.)

http://lesswrong.com/lw/lhg/2014_survey_results/ 50% monogamous, 15% poly. Every lesswrong group I've visited - in the US, Europe and India - had multiple polyamorous people present and discussing polyamory, so I'd be surprised if this poll is way off.

Oh look at that, a perfect opportunity for me to plug that I ran the 2016 survey with updated results:

http://lesswrong.com/r/discussion/lw/nmk/2016_lesswrong_dias...

http://lesswrong.com/r/discussion/lw/nor/2016_lesswrong_dias...

http://lesswrong.com/r/discussion/lw/nqa/2016_lesswrong_dias...

http://lesswrong.com/lw/nx2/2016_lesswrong_diaspora_survey_a...

The one that concerns you is that LessWrong is now 18.2% polyamorous. This might just be an effect of increased scope of survey respondents though.

Re: The Death of the Cyberflâneur

#48

Post by pavel_lishin »

busterarm wrote: post #44
jack_rabbit wrote: post #31

The article is totally wrong. The internet is now more than ever a good place for this kind of thing. > Hardly anyone “surfs” the Web anymore. Doesn't the whole click-bait "industry" specifically because people are surfing? What's more, even on social media, things like "Weird Facebook" come into existence. Huge groups form with no clear purpose other than seemingly to be exactly the kind of internet "arcades" that t…

I'm not sure I agree. I think the whole idea of a flâneur or "surfing" the web is that you choose where you go. There's an illusion of control. The whole click-bait industry depends on you browsing within walled gardens (facebook, reddit) and being on the conveyor belt of places your attention has to go. A flâneur or surfer can just go somewhere else. There's only so much physical real estate you can own. There isn't…

What about things like reddit, especially - as mentioned before, things like Weird Facebook?

Sure, it's curated, but so were the arcades of the original flaneurs. And you can always follow links.

(I do think that webrings were really well suited for this, though, and that's something reddit, etc. can't quite replicate.)

Re: The Death of the Cyberflâneur

#49

Post by pavel_lishin »

bbctol wrote: post #18
alva wrote: post #3

The joys of the world wild west are still out there for curious surfers. Admittedly it does require a lot more effort, especially for a younger generation who may not remember what the early web is like and how you would traverse it. I still get a thrill finding 'hidden' communities on the internet.

I've started collecting my weirdest links, though I'm not sure what to do with them yet. Hundreds of watercolors featuring Nazi war criminal Reynard Heidrich transforming into a female bird, a studio producing sexy anthropomorphized American warships that's started shifting towards Trump propaganda, a network of alt-right teenage girls' tumblrs, mostly based out of Nebraska, subreddits for conspiracy theorists focusi…

You're sitting on about 100k worth of Reddit karma.
Post reply on HN