Sup, one of those techno-optimists you mentioned here who uses the 'net as if it's still 2007. I must ask,
U wot m8?
The internet is already over
31–40 of 74 posts
Re: The internet is already over
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is true, trends are immense social forces but also very much absurd and chaotic. It works until it doesn't and there's another wave.
Punk is not dead !
Punk is bigger than it ever was, but its just one of 10 thousand genres, each as big as punk is. That's the real effect going on here.
Re: The internet is already over
#33Dear god. That was like trying to read a word salad stream of consciousness from a high grad student.
Re: The internet is already over
#34I was going to say the article is written in the style of Bill Hicks with some George Carlin, but then I remember that everyone is freaked out right now and "end of the world" themes are popular. No the internet is not going away, unless of course the world does. Some current concerns from an American point of view: - An ex President may be indicted soon, the first time in US history - The ex President threatens the…
That's great, it starts with an earthquake
Birds and snakes, and aeroplanes...
Re: The internet is already over
#35> There is simply nothing there online.
This isn't true. There is lots of fascinating stuff out there (including this article, which is well-written and enjoyable).
The problem is that it's hard to find, because it's covered over with a layer of SEO-optimised crap churned out by an entire industry of professionals who spend all day, every day, trying to smother anything good or interesting online with their bland, outsourced, uninteresting, joyless, "content". I don't think that's what they actually want to achieve, but that's the net effect, and they know it, so it might as well be.
Re: The internet is already over
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is true, trends are immense social forces but also very much absurd and chaotic. It works until it doesn't and there's another wave.
Punk is not dead !
Punk is absolutely dead. Punk is grandma music. Punk is an aesthetic you buy at Hot Topic. Punk isn't even anti-social anymore, much less dangerous.
Re: The internet is already over
#37The internet is fine. This is the sound of bubbles popping.
Re: The internet is already over
#38> There is simply nothing there online. This isn't true. There is lots of fascinating stuff out there (including this article, which is well-written and enjoyable). The problem is that it's hard to find, because it's covered over with a layer of SEO-optimised crap churned out by an entire industry of professionals who spend all day, every day, trying to smother anything good or interesting online with their bland, ou…
I agree. The internet still has wonderful things. It's just harder and harder to find. Google is apparently either a) unable to defend itself against SEO, or (more likely) b) makes more money from SEO. Either way, it is quickly losing relevance. I look forward to new engines with better, more human results, so I don't have to keep typing in "site:reddit.com" to the end of all my queries. It's getting absurd now.
If anyone is interested in alternatives, I recommend Kagi. If the subscription hits the pocket book too hard, consider Neeva and even Yandex.
Re: The internet is already over
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
Punk is not dead !
unfortunately the antibodies of capitalism are increasingly effective in eliminating punk anywhere it attempts to take root
I think the internet killed punk. It’s much harder to have a cohesive subculture when all information is available to anyone. In the 80s, one had to know the right record/book store to go to, the right college radio shows to tune into, and spend hours a week leafing through issues of Maximum rock and roll to have all the cultural information to glue the subculture together. Now it’s a few clicks.
For better or worse, it’s certain,, it’s certainly less gluey.
Re: The internet is already over
#40The author makes a lot of witty, erudite References – a method that has annoyingly become popular and is often mistaken as "good writing" – but I think he has missed a simple and obvious truth: culture is determined by fashion. Not fashion as in clothing, but fashion as in ideas and things that are trendy for a time then fade away, replaced by the next thing. The next thing is often an indirect reaction to the previo…
> The author makes a lot of witty, erudite References – a method that has annoyingly become popular and is often mistaken as "good writing" – but I think he has missed a simple and obvious truth: culture is determined by fashion.
If culture is determined by fashion, and our fashion is that lots of witty, erudite References is considered good writing, then does it not follow that our culture is that lots of witty, erudite References is considered good writing? And therefore that this article actually is good writing, in our culture?