• @TheOneWithTheHair@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    So change means “dying”? So every time a tadpole evolves into a frog, a tadpole dies? Should we have protest signs that read, “FROGS KILL TADPOLES! DOWN WITH FROGS”?

    • @SuperSaiyanSwag@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      27 months ago

      No, that is not what I was talking about. In the current environment it is completely possible for some people to only have interactions with bots online, without even knowing. This may get worse and worse in the future. THAT is what “dead” internet implies, lifeless online interactions essentially.

      • @TheOneWithTheHair@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        I suspect there will still be online interactions with humans, just more interactions with bots. Unfortunately, it’s we humans behind the mess. Even if we pass laws to stop it (or even forced labels of “I’m a bot” on bot accounts), some people won’t play by the rules. So the change is going to happen. We can try to persuade the public, but we know how well that works:

        A parody of the piracy ad from the 1980s 'home taping is killing music and it's illegal' cassette tape with crossbones. The words read 'online bots are killing social media and it sucks'.

        So what do you propose be done about it?

    • @blusterydayve26@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      27 months ago

      But what if I wanted to communicate with humans instead of propaganda-bots? Then yes, that Internet is dead, and there’s no real fucking reason to be on most of those sites.