Live data from Hacker News

We need to rewild the internet

noemamag.com

231–240 of 273 posts

Re: We need to rewild the internet

#231

Before we can rewild the Internet, we need to stop employers from firing people over Internet posts. That starts in the USA with enforcing the 1st Amendment. If you work for the Government or if your employer accepts Government money in any form, then you can not censor your employees in their private lives. I can post the most repugnant thing you have ever read, and the 1st Amendment says you can not even discuss it…

The First Amendment overrules US Law.

The First Amendment overrules State Law.

The First Amendment overrules company policy.

Re: We need to rewild the internet

#232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reinforcement learning algorithm of facebook, instagram, youtube, tik-tok needs to move at the edge for that to happen. Nowadays, this seems much more probable than any other time in history, i.e last 15 years. Personal recommendation algorithms using RL, are certainly possible, because RL is the least computationally intensive training, compared to supervised, unsupervised etc. They also require some kind of soc…

Can you tell me more about it . I am interest to attempt it on a small scale even though i have no experince in ai or rl . Do you have any resource for beginners ?

In my experience, medium has a lot of resources about Deep Learning written by different users, and they implemented as a company a recommendation algorithm for their articles, which i liked it very much.

With just a google search i did, medium + recommendation algorithm this article appeared [1].

Also if you haven't tried medium's recommendation engine, i strongly suggest making an account and ticking a box somewhere for email recommendations.

[1] https://utsavdesai26.medium.com/recommendation-systems-expla...

Re: We need to rewild the internet

#233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This didn’t have to be the case. It was purpose built around these megalithic designs by these large companies. Now advertising and culture curation ensure it’s always displayed in a positive light. Google, Apple, MS, all know to use angelic white light in their branding (slight hazy, blurry, seems to penetrate where it shouldn’t be). Apple stores even mimic a church design. It’s not that people don’t want to. They d…

> This didn’t have to be the case. It was purpose built around these megalithic designs by these large companies. I agree, because it was the easiest way to solve the problem of providing value to users. Redundancy and coupling of unrelated implementations is expensive. In the extreme, its O(N^2) expensive if you're going to bridge every separate system. Far easier to just build it once. > Having to do more work woul…

> I agree, because it was the easiest way to solve the problem of providing value to users. Redundancy and coupling of unrelated implementations is expensive. In the extreme, it’s O(N^2) expensive if you're going to bridge every separate system. Far easier to just build it once.

Of course it’s cheaper when you have the government’s backing and tax benefits to help you. The real question is.. cheaper compared to what? There are no other options now.

> Sure, but rephrasing that would be "if companies did more work at no direct benefit to themselves, it would be easier for people to not use their software." Where is the benefit to them? And if this were easy to do, why hasn't the open source community done it? The only thing stopping them is when they build it, nobody (modulo the rounding error of dyed-in-the-wool computer fans) actually wants to use it.

It’s not a fair fight at this point. Google won’t rank those projects higher than they’re legally required to, so not many people see it. They don’t have the propag.. er.. media reach, so they remain an unknown to fear. The big guys release a press snippet and get 90% user coverage. Good will has value, but large companies lose that value proposition once they reach critical mass and can remove “Don’t be evil” from their manifesto. This is a scale and control problem.

> I used to believe this. I have come around to the thinking that after spending decades telling people what they should want, maybe I'm wrong and people know what they want better than me. Mastodon is free and (relatively) easy to install and maintain. Why do people stay on Twitter? It's not because Elon Musk is tricking them. I think you make a point regarding Big Brother, but it underestimates the benefits of staying in the maintained channels. If someone steals my money out of my bank account, the FDIC makes me whole. Who makes me whole when someone steals my Bitcoin? If Facebook did something illegal to me, they're a big enough target for the FBI to intervene. Who intervenes if my Mastodon admin uses my PII against me? They're judgment-proof, and criminal investigation doesn't enforce on small potataoes like that. Larger, consolidated firms are bigger targets and easier to keep in line. A lot of crime happens in the ecosystem of small communities not in the spotlight.

Mastodon kind of sucks right now, to be fair. It’s slow, barely knows what to show, and then switches around posts randomly. Twitter has users, and that has value. It’s easier to setup a centralized posting platform than something community driven. People generally want what is fastest and works. A marginally better platform isn’t worth switching to for most people. People generally want the bare minimum to meet their criteria. The problem is that these are “free” services where the true cost is amortized over time. They know what they want, but they have nothing to gauge with anymore. It’s not like you can compare sticker prices. The price is well hidden. Another issue with safety is that you need a lawyer for digital crime, not a police officer. That’s the barrier. We don’t have well defined law. It’s the slightly less wild west.

> People have all the tools to change out of corporate systems right now; they don't because it would make their lives worse, materially. They're not waiting for a savior to walk them off the plantation; they had the option to wander off in the wildnerness and they chose to live (virtually) where people are.

They’re trained from a young age to admire brands and creators. Few question the sphere they live in; fewer still take action. The tools to leave are inaccessible when you have no free time left after work and family duties. Interop is key to competition now that the reactor is pumping. We don’t have real competition without it. They’re not waiting for a savior because they don’t feel the effects daily beyond a few ads. It’s a slow process that hides the true outcome.

Re: We need to rewild the internet

#234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This didn’t have to be the case. It was purpose built around these megalithic designs by these large companies. I agree, because it was the easiest way to solve the problem of providing value to users. Redundancy and coupling of unrelated implementations is expensive. In the extreme, its O(N^2) expensive if you're going to bridge every separate system. Far easier to just build it once. > Having to do more work woul…

> I agree, because it was the easiest way to solve the problem of providing value to users. Redundancy and coupling of unrelated implementations is expensive. In the extreme, it’s O(N^2) expensive if you're going to bridge every separate system. Far easier to just build it once. Of course it’s cheaper when you have the government’s backing and tax benefits to help you. The real question is.. cheaper compared to what?…

> There are no other options now.

XMPP never went away. Nor did IRC. Nor did USENET.

The entire old Internet is still there, protocol-wise. It is unused because users don't want it; it's clunky, it requires manual maintenance, it just plain doesn't work as well.

> Google won’t rank those projects higher than they’re legally required to, so not many people see it

You don't have to invoke a conspiracy to explain why these projects rank low. Google bases its rankings (primarily) on "interest to users" signals. And they just don't have the interest. It is a chicken-egg problem, but the egg smells. When Facebook has 2 billion daily active users and Mastodon just topped 1.8 million, the naive assumption is that Google 2,000 times as likely to guess if you're talking about "social network," you mean Facebook.

And it's not about propaganda. No amount of propaganda is going to make my mom comfortable running her own Mastodon node, or help her find my grandfather's posts when he's on a different node. Users don't want the complexity. The web used to be more complex and we moved away from that as people.

> Mastodon kind of sucks right now

... and is pretty much the best thing outside the walled gardens.

That's the issue. The wildnerness is full of tigers.

> They’re not waiting for a savior because they don’t feel the effects daily beyond a few ads. It’s a slow process that hides the true outcome.

I think we agree on this but I don't know what you mean by "true outcome." The true outcome is people use the Internet for what they want and then get on with their lives.

Re: We need to rewild the internet

#235
post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but (gen-pop) search itself has been degraded / hijacked beyond recognition compared to two decades ago, and walled gardens heavily discourage linking. Factor in that most people access internet from devices designed to consume in very specific ways from a controlled list of sources and we may as well be lamenting that nobody's finding the one physical copy of your book that's sitting on a shelf in a brick and…

Mhh dunno, I don't think it helps to think about the unfortunates stuck to their media feed at this stage. Might as well make the dweb about something us nerds want. It's gonna be good... and then it'll be about keeping the parasites out that live off that cultural capital. Something durable, censorship-resistant, network-agnostic, optionally trust-based. Maybe a bit of IPFS + i2p + content-adressable, composable, cr…

The closest thing I'm aware of to what you're describing is Nostr. I don't think it uses an overlay network though, just plain old p2p.

Re: We need to rewild the internet

#236
post #2

More people should be tending their "digital gardens" just to have something to curate and share. Bring back the weird, the odd, the deep-dives into topics you never imagined having such detail, bring back the strange animated GIFS, the websites always "under construction", give me your weird, give me your odd, this should be everyone's place to be free.

You know what, I'm gonna go find an "under construction" animated gif to add to my website now. Thank you.

Here you go: http://www.textfiles.com/underconstruction/

Re: We need to rewild the internet

#237

"Whatever we do, the internet isn't returning to old-school then-common interfaces like FTP and Gopher, or each organization running its own mail server, rather than operating off G-Suite." It does not need to "return" to FTP because FTP is still in use. Periodically I am submitting examples of FTP servers to HN that are still operated today that are often critical to software developers and so-called "tech" companie…

FTP support has been removed from Firefox and Chrome. It's a lot harder to browse now.

Re: We need to rewild the internet

#238
post #2

More people should be tending their "digital gardens" just to have something to curate and share. Bring back the weird, the odd, the deep-dives into topics you never imagined having such detail, bring back the strange animated GIFS, the websites always "under construction", give me your weird, give me your odd, this should be everyone's place to be free.

If you haven't checked out the "Surpise me" button on https://wiby.me I strongly suggest you do. These digital gardens are still out there even if sadly stuck in time.

Yes I have and I love it!

Re: We need to rewild the internet

#239

"Whatever we do, the internet isn't returning to old-school then-common interfaces like FTP and Gopher, or each organization running its own mail server, rather than operating off G-Suite." It does not need to "return" to FTP because FTP is still in use. Periodically I am submitting examples of FTP servers to HN that are still operated today that are often critical to software developers and so-called "tech" companie…

NB. When I submit examples of FTP servers to HN I submit the HTTPS mirror, so even people using popular web browsers that have removed FTP support can still access the files. I prefer using a dedicated FTP client myself but it's good to have an HTTPS mirrors, too.

Re: We need to rewild the internet

#240
post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We cannot tell all people below certain IQ to just stop using the internet What, why not? It couldn't be that hard to trick them.

Start an ssh-only bbs.

I think Tor has done an amazing job at keeping those away who don't want to put effort into niche web-surfing, and those easily scared and/or duped into not discovering less-charted territories. Not to mention, it costs a LOT of money to mirror clearweb material on the deep web - and it's a grueling process. I wouldn't be surprised if the Internet was re-wilded in the context of Onion routing and Tor relays.
Post reply on HN