Wikipedia co-founder slams the ‘appalling’ internet • Hacker News Board

Re: Wikipedia co-founder slams the ‘appalling’ internet

#51

Post by braythwayt » Fri, Jul 05, 2019, 3:45 PM UTC

rabidrat wrote: post #26

rolha-capoeira wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hear you. But this teeters dangerously close to gatekeeping, elitism, or something along those lines. I'm sure you didn't mean it that way, but I think how others feel after reading our comments does matter. Better put, because everyone is on the internet now, the real world's problems are now the internet's problems. It used to serve as an escape, true. It has made the world a smaller place, where problems from a…

Gatekeeping is the only way communities can keep themselves healthy. There is no such thing as a universal 'community'. From day one, life has been about letting in certain elements, and keeping out others. Without this selection, development and differentiation are impossible. Similarly we don't (and shouldn't) let every person into our homes, or our countries, or our servers. Why is it seen as an obvious truth that…

There is a fundamental difference between "Everyone should be allowed on the Internet," and, "Everyone should be allowed onto every social media site." Or, "Everyone on a social media site should be encouraged to interact with everyone else."

For example, maybe everybody should be able to read the President's tweets.

But should Twitter necessarily be such that everybody can reply to the President's tweets? At this point in time, replies to the President, or to journalists, &c seem to be used to engage with other people reading the President's tweets, not with the President.

As a result, Twitter's design is that everybody can interact with each other, whether they like it or not.

I think there are many middle grounds between "Everybody can access the Internet," and, "Only some people can access the Internet." One such middle ground is, "Everybody can access the Internet, but not everybody has near-frictionless ability to engage with strangers."

Re: Wikipedia co-founder slams the ‘appalling’ internet

#52

Post by oco101 » Fri, Jul 05, 2019, 3:46 PM UTC

werber wrote: post #14

I find these rants about social media patronizing, people are aware, they just don't care. It's not whistle blowing, it's self congratulatory yipping at this point. If you want to make a better solution that happens to be decentralized and works with just as little effort, then do it if you actually care rant over

Well, he did it is called Everipedia witch is a decentralized version of Wikipedia, it is a work in progress still but it getting better by the day.

Re: Wikipedia co-founder slams the ‘appalling’ internet

#53

Post by flokie » Fri, Jul 05, 2019, 3:48 PM UTC

everdrive wrote: post #12

The internet was much nicer before most people were using it. We usually focus on the technology problems here at HN: filter bubbles, skinner box addictive UIs and content feeds, algorithmic and centralized control. Has anyone simply wondered if the problem with the internet is fundamentally that everyone's on it? It used to be an escape from the problems of the real world. Now it's just a new way for the problems of…

to be fair, only about half of us are online (3.9ish B people). Still massive opportunity to shape the experience for the rest.

Re: Wikipedia co-founder slams the ‘appalling’ internet

#54

Post by ravenstine » Fri, Jul 05, 2019, 3:51 PM UTC

everdrive wrote: post #12

The internet was much nicer before most people were using it. We usually focus on the technology problems here at HN: filter bubbles, skinner box addictive UIs and content feeds, algorithmic and centralized control. Has anyone simply wondered if the problem with the internet is fundamentally that everyone's on it? It used to be an escape from the problems of the real world. Now it's just a new way for the problems of…

The internet is the way it is right now for the same reason that you don't just let anyone and everyone into a club. When you destroy the barrier to entry, you get a bunch of totally uncool people who kill the mood, talk about really lame shit, start fights, get blackout/piss-pants drunk, and vandalize property. Indeed, the internet once was a lot more like a club; even in the late 90's and early 2000s when I began using the web, I would sometimes run into the same people on different sites and chat rooms.

Re: Wikipedia co-founder slams the ‘appalling’ internet

#55

Post by jamesb93 » Fri, Jul 05, 2019, 3:54 PM UTC

everdrive wrote: post #12

The internet was much nicer before most people were using it. We usually focus on the technology problems here at HN: filter bubbles, skinner box addictive UIs and content feeds, algorithmic and centralized control. Has anyone simply wondered if the problem with the internet is fundamentally that everyone's on it? It used to be an escape from the problems of the real world. Now it's just a new way for the problems of…

I don't get this. You don't have to do anything you don't want to on the internet. Seems like the previous utopia you are referring to people were making the programs/features/facilities to do more stuff. I go on my computer and do what I want. It brings me joy. Why is that so hard?

Re: Wikipedia co-founder slams the ‘appalling’ internet

#56

Post by kabwj » Fri, Jul 05, 2019, 3:57 PM UTC

qwsxyh wrote: post #49

I like twitter. I'm in the minority here, but I genuinely do. I keep my timeline curated, I am very very liberal with blocks and mutes of anyone who vaguely annoys me, and I enjoy using it.

I liked Twitter before it was popular. Being liberal with blocks works but eventually you realise you are spending more time curating your experience than actually enjoying the website.

Re: Wikipedia co-founder slams the ‘appalling’ internet

#57

Post by qwsxyh » Fri, Jul 05, 2019, 4:00 PM UTC

kabwj wrote: post #56

qwsxyh wrote: post #49

I like twitter. I'm in the minority here, but I genuinely do. I keep my timeline curated, I am very very liberal with blocks and mutes of anyone who vaguely annoys me, and I enjoy using it.

I liked Twitter before it was popular. Being liberal with blocks works but eventually you realise you are spending more time curating your experience than actually enjoying the website.

Hardly. I only follow ~50ish people, of which I only interact regularly with ~9ish. I only block a few people a day max.

Re: Wikipedia co-founder slams the ‘appalling’ internet

#58

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Jul 05, 2019, 4:02 PM UTC

ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #48

rabidrat wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gatekeeping is the only way communities can keep themselves healthy. There is no such thing as a universal 'community'. From day one, life has been about letting in certain elements, and keeping out others. Without this selection, development and differentiation are impossible. Similarly we don't (and shouldn't) let every person into our homes, or our countries, or our servers. Why is it seen as an obvious truth that…

> Why is it seen as an obvious truth that we should allow every single person onto the Internet, without ever being able to remove them? All very well and good until one day society decides you are one of the people that needs to be removed.

[deleted]

Re: Wikipedia co-founder slams the ‘appalling’ internet

#59

Post by krapp » Fri, Jul 05, 2019, 4:03 PM UTC

braythwayt wrote: post #51

rabidrat wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gatekeeping is the only way communities can keep themselves healthy. There is no such thing as a universal 'community'. From day one, life has been about letting in certain elements, and keeping out others. Without this selection, development and differentiation are impossible. Similarly we don't (and shouldn't) let every person into our homes, or our countries, or our servers. Why is it seen as an obvious truth that…

There is a fundamental difference between "Everyone should be allowed on the Internet," and, "Everyone should be allowed onto every social media site." Or, "Everyone on a social media site should be encouraged to interact with everyone else." For example, maybe everybody should be able to read the President's tweets. But should Twitter necessarily be such that everybody can reply to the President's tweets? At this po…

>But should Twitter necessarily be such that everybody can reply to the President's tweets?

The ability to directly and freely communicate with leaders (and for them to communicate with one another) is incredibly revolutionary. It is unfortunate that Twitter, of all places, a site whose entire purpose is top-of-mind contextless microblogging, is where this revolution is taking place, and that the President in question is basically a shitposting troll, but I suppose beggars can't be choosers.

I still kind of love that the President of the United States can say something stupid on Twitter, and a million people, including other world leaders, can respond with scathing criticism, rebuttals and stupid memes, and no one gets sent to the camps, or gets a nuke dropped on them.

> "Everybody can access the Internet, but not everybody has near-frictionless ability to engage with strangers."

That's something to be implemented by any particular site as it sees fit, not the entire platform. As far as the internet is concerned, everybody should have near-frictionless access to everything and everyone if they want it, and if someone provides a platform for it. Universality of access, both to ideas and to people, is kind of the entire point.

Re: Wikipedia co-founder slams the ‘appalling’ internet

#60

Post by brighter2morrow » Fri, Jul 05, 2019, 4:06 PM UTC

CharlesW wrote: post #37

skribbj wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Forking Wikipedia articles based on partisanship is actually a super interesting idea.

Like Conservapedia? https://www.conservapedia.com/

Rationalwiki for those for whom Wikipedia isn't leftwing enough.