Live data from Hacker News

How the internet became shit

herman.bearblog.dev

21–30 of 99 posts

Re: How the internet became shit

#21
post #12
post #11

You ever drive down a main drag of any town or city pretty much anywhere that has a fairly unregulated capitalist system? Advertising everywhere. Signage. People dressed as hotdogs paid a few bucks an hour to wave a sign shaped like a ketchup bottle. The mystery to me is why this group of early web pioneers thought it could be any different. Enshitification isn't new, it's not even different from "making money and ma…

Except this was all triggered with the end of ZIRP...this all happened relatively recently. High interest rates forced corporations to actually get serious about profitability. Layoffs, price hikes, charging more for less is all related to that.

Is 34+ years recently?

Re: How the internet became shit

#22
I'll tell you why the internet became shit: the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

No, seriously. There's no one big thing or even a bunch of big things. Instead it is a ton of little things that accumulate over decades. While this video is about voting[0], it is better we recognize that voting is actually about social choice. The crazy thing is that we can continually attempt to maximize our own objectives and because we live in a many player system this strategy can lead to a worse setting than where we began.

I want that to sink in. Because, we like to paint people to be evil (there's definitely clear cases) but most of the time there's no conspiracy and it is just the nature of a chaotic system and our strategies. Our world is complex enough that we can no longer employ strategies where we only consider the optimization objectives of us and our immediate allies. To optimize our objectives we need to actually consider those far from (i.e. people we disagree with) us and actually work with them in some capacity.

The article brings up Reddit, so I'll use it as an example (and goes for HN too). Lots of people even try to be helpful and will write comments (maybe this is for themselves too), but you'll often see a long chain of nearly identical comments/replies that aren't done in a joke. They're simply done because people didn't read the other replies before replying themselves (sometimes there are collisions), and the more this happens the more likely people are not going to read all the replies. Momentum is one hell of a force.

You'll also see naive and wrong comments float to the top while detailed correct comments are lost in the sea (I'm not saying my conjecture is correct, but you can see this phenomena on any subreddit in your domain expertise unless it is very niche). Just because people are trying to be helpful, might stroke their own ego because they presume correctness, and others reading can validate because it sounds reasonable. I mean how often do we hear for calls of debate? Debate isn't a means to get to objective truths, though it can be useful in matters that have no objective truths (e.g. this meta discussion itself). Truth has a lower bound in complexity, but we don't like complexity and we don't like chaos. We like conspiracies because we fear the chaos so much, because it is better to have evil men in charge than no one at the wheel. But I'm claiming a significant part of enshitification is due to the latter. That we can reduce it if we coordinate better by not just looking for our own/local gains.

Yeah, you could say that I'm even doing it as I'm writing here. Hard to tell. But I'll also welcome disagreement to my comments and we can discuss. I think things will always be noisy but it's working through and with that noise that gets us further. There are no global optimas in large solution spaces like these, so there'll always be critiques and trade-offs. Which we could say is damning, or we can see as a blessing as it gives more spice to life and allow us to adapt to the dynamic state of things where the importance of those differences is ever changing.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=goQ4ii-zBMw

Re: How the internet became shit

#23
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It makes me wonder if a sort of "basic income for Internet creators" would work. Instead of individuals trying to optimize their content for maximum income, it would instead work like this: if the group determines that you make great content, you get a small stipend monthly. There are no other expectations or optimization requirements, merely that you continue making the content I think you invented Patreon.

Yeah, but Patreon is still beholden to the individual-market optimizer model. I'm talking about a group, a collective, that deliberately funds stuff that is merely good content. Maybe a collective Patreon-like "guild" would be a starting point.

The politics of who does vs doesn't make the cut sounds difficult to manage.

I think an individualist model makes sense, or barring that, a group Patreon (i.e. a music label instead of an individual band).

Re: How the internet became shit

#24

When lamenting the "old Internet", a lot of people forget that the vast majority of the people creating content on it were gainfully employed with strong career security. Meaning that they didn't need to make money from their hobbyist online projects, so they didn't need to monetize it. This is a lot different from today, where any sort of journalist/writer/artist/filmmaker is basically dependent on making content th…

Exactly. Seeing a lot of articles on HN reminiscing the old internet and it's getting tiring.

Re: How the internet became shit

#25
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It makes me wonder if a sort of "basic income for Internet creators" would work. Instead of individuals trying to optimize their content for maximum income, it would instead work like this: if the group determines that you make great content, you get a small stipend monthly. There are no other expectations or optimization requirements, merely that you continue making the content I think you invented Patreon.

Yeah, but Patreon is still beholden to the individual-market optimizer model. I'm talking about a group, a collective, that deliberately funds stuff that is merely good content. Maybe a collective Patreon-like "guild" would be a starting point.

Either you're inventing reddit-but-each-upvote-is-worth-a-fraction-of-a-cent, or there is some sort of select professional board who is responsible for deciding what is "good content" on behalf of the public. Sort of like national public arts grants, or maybe public broadcasters like the BBC.

Right? Or are you imagining some third model

Re: How the internet became shit

#26
post #14
post #4

I feel like this applies to more than just the internet. New construction houses are crap quality. Restaurant food quality seems like it's gotten worse and much more expensive. But yes Google is probably the best example of this...type in any shopping term and Google search basically turns into a more cluttered Amazon search result page.

>New construction houses are crap quality This is called survivorship bias. Plenty of hold houses were total shit. They're not around any longer. There is also a second bias of the depletion of natural materials older houses were made of, massive increases in population, and massively changed consumer tastes/requirements. >Restaurant food quality seems like it's gotten worse and much more expensive. This is a mix of…

> But anything that has turned into a franchize is no longer about selling a product

Yeah. Sadly the infinite growth mentality has destroyed many a franchise. Most of the franchises are simply rebranded sysco foods reheated in the microwave.

I pretty much just don't eat at old franchise locations anymore as a result. Why get fettuccine from olive garden when it's basically exactly the same as a frozen stouffers meal at triple the price. So a "chef" can heat it in the microwave for me? No thanks.

Re: How the internet became shit

#27

Enshittification isn't just when things turn crappy, it's a 3-step process. Corner the market by providing good service to business users and consumers. Abuse your users because there aren't many other choices. Abuse your business users.

Typically you'll need some form of monopoly, close monopoly, or collusion between competing entities. For websites this can be the 'network-effect' cost. You use that site because everyone else you know uses that site.

The web itself is an environment ripe for abuse because, again typically, your end user doesn't pay directly for the services (they are the product). This is pretty much why every large social media site is an advertizer. About the only way to make money pushing web pages is by selling your users to advertisers.

Re: How the internet became shit

#28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, but Patreon is still beholden to the individual-market optimizer model. I'm talking about a group, a collective, that deliberately funds stuff that is merely good content. Maybe a collective Patreon-like "guild" would be a starting point.

The politics of who does vs doesn't make the cut sounds difficult to manage. I think an individualist model makes sense, or barring that, a group Patreon (i.e. a music label instead of an individual band).

It would be difficult to manage, but not impossible. Certainly if you have a strong organizational culture and know what your org values. Like universities, for example. At least in the past.

Otherwise you’re just dependent on the popularity of the market, which I don’t think is a great thing all of the time. There are a lot of things I’d enjoy reading or writing that have zero monetary value and thus are strongly incentivized against existing.

Re: How the internet became shit

#29
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It makes me wonder if a sort of "basic income for Internet creators" would work. Instead of individuals trying to optimize their content for maximum income, it would instead work like this: if the group determines that you make great content, you get a small stipend monthly. There are no other expectations or optimization requirements, merely that you continue making the content I think you invented Patreon.

Yeah, but Patreon is still beholden to the individual-market optimizer model. I'm talking about a group, a collective, that deliberately funds stuff that is merely good content. Maybe a collective Patreon-like "guild" would be a starting point.

There are groups you can fund on Patreon that have a bunch of creators under them. Second Wind which is spin off old Escapist staff is one.

The issue with these groups if there is a popular person in them, they will generally leave the group and start their own thing because they can get more money. So you will still have issues where top tier creators want all money and don't want to "subsidize" smaller creators.

Re: How the internet became shit

#30
post #14
post #4

I feel like this applies to more than just the internet. New construction houses are crap quality. Restaurant food quality seems like it's gotten worse and much more expensive. But yes Google is probably the best example of this...type in any shopping term and Google search basically turns into a more cluttered Amazon search result page.

>New construction houses are crap quality This is called survivorship bias. Plenty of hold houses were total shit. They're not around any longer. There is also a second bias of the depletion of natural materials older houses were made of, massive increases in population, and massively changed consumer tastes/requirements. >Restaurant food quality seems like it's gotten worse and much more expensive. This is a mix of…

There's a difference between survivorship bias and just straight up reducing the quantity/quality of materials for cost savings.

I lived in a (rental) house that was built incredibly cheaply. The handle on the sliding glass door broke, and I just ordered a replacement handle. It was the same brand as the original handle on the door, cost me about $30 for the whole replacement handle assembly. The replacement handle had about twice as much steel in it as the original one. They clearly still make the old part, they just sell the cheap ass easy to break one for cost savings.

Post reply on HN