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

61–70 of 86 posts

Re: Alive internet theory

#61

Post by Groxx »

plastic-enjoyer wrote: post #30
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…

> The CLICK: "Critiques kill". You want a live internet? Don't critique. If you want a no javascript version make one. If you have a better solution do it. If you have insight into the problem share it. Yes, and no. I think a problem is critique in the form of action. There are movements such as the indie web (e.g. Neocities, Nekoweb, Agoraroad) that long for the old web in their nostalgia and form a counter-movement…

some of this is simply that it is a counter-culture, because it's in the minority (by a significant margin).

that doesn't mean it's defined by that decision, or even that it made that decision in the first place - the majority have decided it for them. and you're letting the majority define it for you, whether it's even remotely accurate or not.

indie web generally wants personal control and ownership. that isn't cynicism or "pre web-2.0" or counter-culture-as-self-identity, it's personal control and ownership. almost everyone wants that. the fact that the majority have given it up doesn't make them cynical, if anything it makes the mega-corps denying those things cynical.

Re: Alive internet theory

#62

Post by al_borland »

quantummagic wrote: post #16
bryceneal wrote: post #14

I agree that "the internet will always be filled with real people: looking for each other". The question is will they be able to successfully find each other, and how can they be sure they have?

Presumably, the value in finding each other will be the key to determining you have found someone real. If you literally can't tell the difference, then what does it matter? But many of us believe that there are important differences, that do matter, and that the dead internet can never truly provide.

If the connection is real, one would think the people would eventually want to meet. We've all seen the stories of people being catfished and how devastating it is for some people. How long is an acceptable amount of time for someone to engage in an online relationship (of any kind, not necessarily romantic), before finding out it's been a chatbot the whole time?

I just met someone, I think last year, who I've known via forums and chat for over 20 years now. I was looking for a place to watch the eclipse and totality was going right through his backyard. Imagine if I drove down there it was just some random address that an AI gave me after 20 years of talking. I'd lose my mind.

Some people's only friends are people they know online, through games or forums. Imagine finding out your only friend in the world isn't even real. That's very dark.

This seems like something the bots should have to disclose upfront. I hate not knowing if I'm talking to a real person or not. Imagine spending hours in an online debate with what is ultimately a chatbot... what a waste. If I want to talk to a chatbot, I'd go to a chatbot. There is a reason we are here in the comments instead of just pasting the link into ChatGPT and going back and forth with it.

Re: Alive internet theory

#63

Post by spencerc99 »

hey everyone - creator here thanks for engaging with this project & all the feedback and thoughts!

i know this isn't the "solution" to dead internet theory but i felt compelled to make this piece in response. i wanted to feel "overwhelmed" with human content in the same way i feel overwhelmed by AI content these days. More thoughts in the precursor post linked on the site (https://news.spencer.place/p/alive-internet-theory). if this sparks new ideas for you on how to engage with this topic id love to see.

and sorry for the unexpected NSFW - i'll add a warning to the site

p.s. site should be working again! & you can also add it to your home screen as a PWA

Re: Alive internet theory

#64

Post by al_borland »

bilsbie wrote: post #47

Someone should just make a no bots forum. I’m against requiring ID but there must be a way to do it.

Digg is in the process of being relaunched. I still haven't received an invite, but the marketing around it seems to be positioning it as a human-first platform. I guess it remains to be seen how it plays out.

Re: Alive internet theory

#65

Post by superkuh »

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…

I did. I've been running my website(s) from home for 20+ years now. I am the change. And I participate in many non-corporate communities on IRC.

This site still looks dead to me because of the JS requiring captcha I cannot bypass. I therefore feel the critiques are relevant.

There are two webs. There's the HTTP/1.1+HTTPS HTML websites made of files by people that have no specific time of use required. Then there's constant wave of JUST POSTED NOW on the HTTPS-only HTTP/3 corporate web that only uses HTTP to deliver javascript applications. By choosing to use the later this site is contributing to my perception of dead corporate-only internet and not helping.

Re: Alive internet theory

#67

Post by schwartzworld »

koolala wrote: post #15
bryceneal wrote: post #14

I agree that "the internet will always be filled with real people: looking for each other". The question is will they be able to successfully find each other, and how can they be sure they have?

by using the internet or by using a website? if we included digital telephone would the answer be getting their phone number? i wish hosting a website was as easy as hosting a phone call.

Hosting a website might be easier now. Services like netlify make it pretty simple

Re: Alive internet theory

#68

Post by abetusk »

I've felt that people who espouse the dead internet theory have a much different experience of the internet than I do. For me, browsing the web, reading articles, watching YouTube videos, consuming Twitter/X/Bsky/Mastodon feeds, is all very active. There's interesting information that I engage with. I learn new things. I get to experience new art forms that I didn't think existed.

I think for people who gravitate to dead internet theory, the internet is more akin to flipping through thousands of channels on network TV, searching for a 5 minute segment of a show they like hidden in an ocean of ads, syndicated slop and reality TV. They use the internet in a passive way to entertain and so can't imagine anyone else would be consuming information in a different way.

It's nice to see people actively pushing back against what I consider a cynical attitude.

Re: Alive internet theory

#70

Post by tolerance »

al_borland wrote: post #57
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…

In the early days the barrier to comment was higher and there were no obvious points to score from doing so. If a blog had a post you had opinions on, you could write a response on your own blog, or email the author. These days we have sites (like this) where commenting is almost 0 effort, and people can rack up fake internet points for doing it. The best thing I've seen in recent years in on bearblog, where people w…

I’d suggest that today criticism has subsumed the act of “creating” and access to the arena Roosevelt envisioned is as narrow as it ever was since he first evoked its image.
Post reply on HN