Live data from Hacker News

Nobody knows what's happening online anymore

theatlantic.com

81–90 of 537 posts

Re: Nobody knows what's happening online anymore

#81
post #50

Regarding "Is that trend really viral?", I also think some people have stopped assigning value to things that go viral. It's not just a question of whether or not something went viral, but whether or not I should care even if it did. People are starting to understand that engagement for the sake of it isn't necessarily desirable. The virality of something doesn't indicate its importance, just that it went viral. In s…

[flagged]

Re: Nobody knows what's happening online anymore

#82

Maybe that's a good thing? I remember a few years ago when journalists were outsourcing their reporting to Twitter and we had headlines like "The Internet is Freaking Out About X" when it was really a dozen nobodies on Twitter. The death of Twitter and the re-fragmentation of the internet sounds like a breath of fresh air compared to the purple haze of the last decade's centralized web.

"Death of Twitter" why are people so deluded and so eager for Twitter to fail? You were a big fan of the previous regime's censorship?

I've never been a Twitter user, never have and never will, so I can't comment on whatever the previous regime was doing, but I see people talking about Twitter much less than they did a year ago, which is kind of what the headline article is about.

Re: Nobody knows what's happening online anymore

#83
post #28

The paywall on the article is ironic since the collapse of free reputable news is likely another aspect of that. I keep hoping the Fediverse will win. After what's happened to Twitter and Reddit and Facebook, it seems self-evident that our main means of public discourse needs to be something decentralized. But the Fediverse is struggling. UX is a disaster, every instance admin is holding on by their fingernails to st…

Why would reputable news be free? Would you expect anyone reputable to just give away their product? I have no doubt propaganda will remain free at least.

When did I say I expected it to be free? Obviously, it's paywalled because that's their only economically viable option now that advertising revenues have lowered too far for them.

I'm just stating reality: reputable news sources used to have free access to their articles on their websites. Now they do not.

Re: Nobody knows what's happening online anymore

#84

Maybe that's a good thing? I remember a few years ago when journalists were outsourcing their reporting to Twitter and we had headlines like "The Internet is Freaking Out About X" when it was really a dozen nobodies on Twitter. The death of Twitter and the re-fragmentation of the internet sounds like a breath of fresh air compared to the purple haze of the last decade's centralized web.

"Death of Twitter" why are people so deluded and so eager for Twitter to fail? You were a big fan of the previous regime's censorship?

I'm eager for Twitter to fail because I think it's been a net negative influence on the world almost since its inception, but it has not seemed realistic to hope that it could go away until now. Certainly, it will be replaced by something, and that thing may be just as bad, but I'm happy for the possibility that it might be better too.

Re: Nobody knows what's happening online anymore

#85
I think we never knew. There was just an illsuion of knowing with trending tags and such. You could maybe know what some subset of people were doing in a particular community. But there are just so many communities, platforms, and languages out there. We never had, and still don’t have, the capability to know.

Re: Nobody knows what's happening online anymore

#86
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That implies government requests were the sole source of Twitter's censorship.

Yes indeed. It's only "censorship" when the government demands it. Engaging in voluntary moderation is not censorship in a meaningful sense. It is, in fact, an aspect of freedom of speech that people should not be compelled to engage in speech that they don't want to engage in.

I don't agree with your definition of censorship. A government doesn't have to be involved to qualify. Moderation is a subset of censorship.

Re: Nobody knows what's happening online anymore

#87
And some part of this is intentional, such as:

- paywalls like in this website

- e-commerce searches (i.e. amazon) increasingly omitting some brands and some other filters

- google, youtube, facebook (i.e. events) searches being crippled

The knowledge is being limited for the sake of advertisers and marketing

Re: Nobody knows what's happening online anymore

#88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

X isn't dead, nor is it dying. Elon Musk took away a bunch of people's status, people who thought they were important somebodies because some nerds in an office met them in person and/or they paid some money to get a verification mark. That's what happened. It's the election of Donald Trump all over again. One of the few people who actually understood what happened in the 2016 election - and was able to articulate it…

I feel like you may be overvaluing the importance of the blue checkmark icon.

To the extent people were bothered by the change, I think it was mostly because the blue check is primarily a benefit to Twitter to make it easier to spot people impersonating folks who are worth impersonating. Making it pay-to-play defeated the whole reason for its existence.

Re: Nobody knows what's happening online anymore

#89

Maybe that's a good thing? I remember a few years ago when journalists were outsourcing their reporting to Twitter and we had headlines like "The Internet is Freaking Out About X" when it was really a dozen nobodies on Twitter. The death of Twitter and the re-fragmentation of the internet sounds like a breath of fresh air compared to the purple haze of the last decade's centralized web.

I think this is a bad thing for the way it was implemented.

Twitter for a brief moment used to work like a Global Broadcast Radio, where everyone could hang out to get a sense of What Is Going On, even if results skewed towards the interests of terminally online people.

Current siloed content feels more like hyper-personalized newspaper. The content is there, but there is limited opportunity or common ground to share and discuss it with friends.

That siloing, along with Instagram's discouragement of user generated content, appears to suggest that Big Tech don't want to deal with opposing users (or any user at all) interacting with each other. IMHO.

Post reply on HN