The User Always Loses • Hacker News Board

Re: The User Always Loses

#21

Post by danlugo92 » Sat, Sep 05, 2020, 2:27 PM UTC

superkuh wrote: post #7

So don't be a user. Self host and federate. The internet of the 90s is still alive if you step outside the walled gardens. And when you use other's services, like, say, reading an article hosted at 'thenation.com', a site which attempts to block you from reading unless you run their javascript and CSS, use a browser with tools that allow you to toggle things like JS and CSS to read it anyway. Then re-share the articl…

Would archive.is archieve the same while maintaining some semblance of how the original site looks?

Re: The User Always Loses

#22

Post by DataWorker » Sat, Sep 05, 2020, 2:31 PM UTC

chris-orgmenta wrote: post #17

blfr wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The internet of the 90s is still alive if you step outside the walled gardens. It is and it isn't. Sure, you can run a website, forum, blog, whatever and host it yourself much easier than in the 90s. But people look for you and connect on the popular platforms they frequent: Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, TikTok, etc. Back in the day even normies would pick up some tech and talk to you on IRC or USENET. Nowadays, it's…

>But people look for you and connect on the popular platforms they frequent: Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, TikTok, etc. Back in the day even normies would pick up some tech and talk to you on IRC or USENET Is that true? Peak IRC users appears to be 10 million (2013) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet#Decline , Citation needed. Pretending that all IRC users were in the US... That's ~3% of the population. Usenet is…

You are counting 2 year olds in the denominator. IRC and Usenet were the internet. If you used a computer you used these. But yes, computers were less common then, especially amongst two year olds.

Re: The User Always Loses

#23

Post by katsume3 » Sat, Sep 05, 2020, 2:32 PM UTC

I find it ironic that this article talks about the user losing out to aggressive (and intrusive) advertising on the web, but presents me with an un-closeable modal window[0] asking me to subscribe to their blog. Note: I have JS disabled by default, and had to temporarily enable JS to view the article, but it's still intrusive and annoying for users.

[0] https://imgur.com/a/SQSHh0i

Re: The User Always Loses

#24

Post by techer » Sat, Sep 05, 2020, 2:36 PM UTC

astura wrote: post #14

jiofih wrote: post #2

> blogging take off as a shared response to the US invasion of Iraq Blogging took off because half the worlds population started having access to the internet in the early 2000s. That seems incredibly myopic and US centric.

Not only is myopic and US-centered, it's just plain non-factual, LiveJournal really took off pre-9/11. Around 2000-2001 literally everyone in my friend group were on LJ (except me), and not just passively/occasionally - regular active users and always talking about LJ stuff IRL. Even people who didn't have a computer at home! It seemed like it was just as much a social network as it was a publishing platform. Accordi…

Maybe vaguely referring to Salam Pax.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salam_Pax

Iraqi blogger.

Re: The User Always Loses

#25

Post by true_religion » Sat, Sep 05, 2020, 2:37 PM UTC

katsume3 wrote: post #23

I find it ironic that this article talks about the user losing out to aggressive (and intrusive) advertising on the web, but presents me with an un-closeable modal window[0] asking me to subscribe to their blog. Note: I have JS disabled by default, and had to temporarily enable JS to view the article, but it's still intrusive and annoying for users. [0] https://imgur.com/a/SQSHh0i

Is it an advertisement when it’s the same property that you are in? That’s like HBO advertising the next episode of a show you are watching.

Re: The User Always Loses

#26

Post by chris-orgmenta » Sat, Sep 05, 2020, 2:44 PM UTC

DataWorker wrote: post #22

chris-orgmenta wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>But people look for you and connect on the popular platforms they frequent: Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, TikTok, etc. Back in the day even normies would pick up some tech and talk to you on IRC or USENET Is that true? Peak IRC users appears to be 10 million (2013) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet#Decline , Citation needed. Pretending that all IRC users were in the US... That's ~3% of the population. Usenet is…

You are counting 2 year olds in the denominator. IRC and Usenet were the internet. If you used a computer you used these. But yes, computers were less common then, especially amongst two year olds.

Sure, I also pretended that IRC users were all US based... I could have taken a figure of 3b. instead of 3m.

Also was careful to state "stats are lazy and blunt"

Re: The User Always Loses

#27

Post by nkingsy » Sat, Sep 05, 2020, 2:45 PM UTC

benjaminjosephw wrote: post #16

The VC model for funding technology is the root cause of user hostile technology. The pressure of investments that expect high returns is a feature/bug that determines the course these companies are likely to take. It creates the need to occasionally tade end-user freedoms for opportunities to "capture value". Venture Capital also imports theories of scarcity and under-production that our entire open-source ecosystem…

Disruption requires inefficiencies/skirtable regulations in the existing system. In this case the system is capitalism itself.

As long as software development and user acquisition requires capital, software doesn’t seem all that different from other capital intensive activities.

IMO this will change when

1. Regulations and/or cultural norms inhibit user-hostile behavior.

Or

2. capitalism itself changes

Re: The User Always Loses

#28

Post by yerabotarry » Sat, Sep 05, 2020, 2:51 PM UTC

superkuh wrote: post #7

So don't be a user. Self host and federate. The internet of the 90s is still alive if you step outside the walled gardens. And when you use other's services, like, say, reading an article hosted at 'thenation.com', a site which attempts to block you from reading unless you run their javascript and CSS, use a browser with tools that allow you to toggle things like JS and CSS to read it anyway. Then re-share the articl…

>The internet of the 90s is still alive if you step outside the walled gardens.

Dont you see the bars on the windows and doors?

Re: The User Always Loses

#29

Post by superkuh » Sat, Sep 05, 2020, 2:52 PM UTC

tqi wrote: post #20

superkuh wrote: post #7

So don't be a user. Self host and federate. The internet of the 90s is still alive if you step outside the walled gardens. And when you use other's services, like, say, reading an article hosted at 'thenation.com', a site which attempts to block you from reading unless you run their javascript and CSS, use a browser with tools that allow you to toggle things like JS and CSS to read it anyway. Then re-share the articl…

But for many of the core criticisms of large tech platforms like Facebook/Google/Twitter self hosting and federation doesn't really address the problems (fake news, fomenting extremism or conspiracy theory, harassment, discrimination) so much as make it so that there is not a single entity to villify.

Those issues you addressed are problems when everyone centralizes in one place and then an attempt is made to find one set of rules/ethics for everyone.

Cut the gordian knot. Just don't all centralize in one place and you no longer all need to follow the same rules.

That said, if you're using those platforms for monetary reasons then you'll have to stay there. Network effect. But that's for the best: profit motive is eventually toxic to community.

Re: The User Always Loses

#30

Post by benjaminjosephw » Sat, Sep 05, 2020, 2:55 PM UTC

nkingsy wrote: post #27

benjaminjosephw wrote: post #16

The VC model for funding technology is the root cause of user hostile technology. The pressure of investments that expect high returns is a feature/bug that determines the course these companies are likely to take. It creates the need to occasionally tade end-user freedoms for opportunities to "capture value". Venture Capital also imports theories of scarcity and under-production that our entire open-source ecosystem…

Disruption requires inefficiencies/skirtable regulations in the existing system. In this case the system is capitalism itself. As long as software development and user acquisition requires capital, software doesn’t seem all that different from other capital intensive activities. IMO this will change when 1. Regulations and/or cultural norms inhibit user-hostile behavior. Or 2. capitalism itself changes

Venture Captital is not the same as capitalism. In fact, you could argue that the hyper-growth pro-monopoly attitudes of VC firms is decidedly anti-capitalist in as much as they are anticompetitive behaviours.

Arguing that the current system is the only one that will work, regardless of how broken it is, is a very dangerous position to advocate for and an anti-pattern that would eventually lead us away from a fair and equal marketplace. That's not capitalism.