Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Alive internet theory

alivetheory.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 86 posts

Re: Alive internet theory

#31

Post by imiric »

talkingtab wrote: post #20

Somehow, reading the comments made something CLICK for me about how passive and reactive we have all become in this culture. 1. The issue is real. Not sure it is articulated but I related to live vs dead internet. 2. The comments (only 10 as of now) are mostly critiques. (no javascript, call to action, style, theory is wrong) The CLICK: "Critiques kill". You want a live internet? Don't critique. If you want a no java…

Allow me to criticise your criticism...

> The CLICK: "Critiques kill". You want a live internet? Don't critique.

I don't see the connection. Critiques are also content.

The issue is not related to the type of content, but to what is producing it. Dead Internet is the (proven) idea that most content on the internet is produced and consumed by machines, not humans.

Re: Alive internet theory

#34

Post by ansc »

Uh, definitely NSFW. Did not expect to see porn and other questionable graphic material. I mean, that is what I remember from the "alive internet", so it's not wrong perhaps, but maybe should be flagged as such.

Re: Alive internet theory

#37

Post by [deleted] »

constantcrying wrote: post #24

Awful site, this is just a strawman. The dead Internet theory does not claim that real people do not upload things to the Internet, there was never any doubt about that. The site has absolutely no grasp on what "dead Internet theory" is or what it claims. >every image, video, song, and text uploaded by a real person on the web. Which is then followed by a barage of mostly historical photos. Which is very weird, since…

[deleted]

Re: Alive internet theory

#38

Post by strken »

talkingtab wrote: post #20

Somehow, reading the comments made something CLICK for me about how passive and reactive we have all become in this culture. 1. The issue is real. Not sure it is articulated but I related to live vs dead internet. 2. The comments (only 10 as of now) are mostly critiques. (no javascript, call to action, style, theory is wrong) The CLICK: "Critiques kill". You want a live internet? Don't critique. If you want a no java…

One interesting thing from the arts is that new works are often part of an ongoing generational argument. Two examples which come to mind are Notes from Underground and the hilarious Duchamp urinal.

I think this form of critique - active, costly, valuable in itself, and barely even a critique at all - is really nice.

Re: Alive internet theory

#40

Post by itsoktocry »

imiric wrote: post #31
talkingtab wrote: post #20

Somehow, reading the comments made something CLICK for me about how passive and reactive we have all become in this culture. 1. The issue is real. Not sure it is articulated but I related to live vs dead internet. 2. The comments (only 10 as of now) are mostly critiques. (no javascript, call to action, style, theory is wrong) The CLICK: "Critiques kill". You want a live internet? Don't critique. If you want a no java…

Allow me to criticise your criticism... > The CLICK: "Critiques kill". You want a live internet? Don't critique. I don't see the connection. Critiques are also content. The issue is not related to the type of content, but to what is producing it. Dead Internet is the (proven) idea that most content on the internet is produced and consumed by machines, not humans.

Yes.

Critiques, discourse, discussion..these are all things that make the internet "real".

Post reply on HN