• Altima NEO
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1841 year ago

    Internet was better when it was a bunch of forums and personal web pages

          • Jamie
            link
            fedilink
            English
            61 year ago

            There have been examples that are effectively primitive shitposts found carved into walls in Pompeii. People never really change.

            • Flying Squid
              link
              fedilink
              English
              91 year ago

              Forget shitposts, there were legitimate flame wars in Pompeii graffiti:

              Successus textor amat coponiaes ancilla(m) nomine Hiredem quae quidem illum non curat sed ille rogat illa com(m)iseretur scribit rivalis vale

              Translates to:

              Successus the weaver is in love with the slave of the Innkeeper, whose name is Iris. She doesn’t care about him at all, but he asks that she take pity on him. A rival wrote this

              A response to this translates to:[6]

              You’re so jealous you’re bursting. Don’t tear down someone more handsome― a guy who could beat you up and who is good-looking.

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_graffiti

          • Cosmic Cleric
            link
            fedilink
            English
            1
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Cave paintings are overrated. Hand shadow puppets on the cave walls were always more dynamic.

      • @rwhitisissle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        101 year ago

        Honestly, the internet was at its best when it was the fever dream of stoned, sexually frustrated grad students at Berkley. Infinite potential - it could’ve been anything. Could’ve. But wouldn’t. The real thing, after it became fully saturated in everyday American life, was always going to be some mediocre, watered down corporate cesspool of lowest common denominator, hyper-sanitized garbage. Because that’s what people like. They like safe, familiar, predictable, and uncomplicated. Well, most people.

      • @HughJanus@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Sure we can but will we? No.

        Twitter has only lost ~10% of it’s userbase after repeatedly abusing its own users. Reddit probably less. After everything we’ve learned about Meta, tens of millions of people signed up on day 1 to join their new service, Threads. Google Chrome still has like 80% market share.

        Changing is honestly a trivial ask, but we won’t, because no one cares.

        • @bassomitron@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          01 year ago

          It’s not that no one cares, per se. We just live in a society where the majority of working adults are fucking exhausted. They have bills to pay, uncertain job security, seemingly constant climate crises/natural disasters in many geolocations (e.g. Canada and US West Coast wildfires, earthquakes, hurricanes, etc.), hyper polarized partisanship in many countries (yeah, it isn’t unique to the US), and on and on. That Google, Microsoft, or Amazon own the internet is such a low priority to the much more immediate, life threatening/living security concerns of the majority of people.

          I care, but I also understand why many people do not.

          • @Pat_Riot@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            01 year ago

            Man, I would love to run a Linux box and still be able to run the like 4 programs I use my computer for, but I don’t have any interest in running an OS I have to build and make work. I got Redhat working once (feels like a million years ago) and I am just not that interested in my PC anymore. It’s a tool. I want it to work without any fiddling on my part. It has exactly 5 programs it ever has to run. I touch it on the weekends. Windows it is.

            This is me agreeing with you in every way.

            • halva
              link
              fedilink
              English
              01 year ago

              Linux today is plug and play in almost all areas. Off the top of my head the ones that have problems are creativity (no Adobe and also wacky color management, though it’s getting a complete rework with Wayland setting it on par with macOS) and engineering (next to no support from big CADs).

                • Cosmic Cleric
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  -11 year ago

                  Many/most anti cheats are on Linux now too.

                  In fact just yesterday I installed EAC so that I could play New World, and all I did was to install it straight from Steam before also installing the game from Steam.

        • Cosmic Cleric
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -11 year ago

          The Fediverse is there, now.

          I use Lemmy and Mastodon, on a daily basis.

  • StrikerM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1141 year ago

    Yup. It definitely feels like over time the human element of the Internet has been replaced by a corporate one. The most blatant example I can think of is youtube. Nowadays it’s so obvious rigged in the favour of already established media and a select few content creators.

    • @UNWILLING_PARTICIPANT@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      291 year ago

      Yeah I’m feeling less like a participant, and more like a consumer on the “greater internet” (five big), compared to the early days when corporate presence was minimal, and not remotely slick or subtle. It was like dorky and obvious, and didn’t seem remotely like a threat.

      • @HipHoboHarold@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        81 year ago

        Feeling like a consumer is a great way to put it. It especially feels more and more like it when trying to do even the most mundane tasks. Like if you own a product but need to ask a question on Google about it, first you have to scroll past the links to pages trying to sell you the product you typed in, then you might get some reddit links, 2-3 from a smaller forum, and then more links trying to sell you the product. It will say there’s thousands of results, but it’s just the same 6 links to purchase the product over and over again. So now even basic web searches are mainly for buying stuff.

    • @RandomPancake@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      161 year ago

      I miss the day when you could search YouTube for something like “JFK skyclub” and actually get video of the Skyclub at JFK. Today you’ll get 15-minute videos that are 90% a guy talking about his thoughts on JFK, or Skyclub, or airlines, or whatever. If you’re really lucky, some of them may feature a few seconds of actual footage of Skyclub.

      It’s not just Skyclub or travel videos. If I search for “repair mr coffee” I want to see a howto, not someone’s SEO-optimized long winded lecture about whatever coffeemakers they’re selling.

      • DreamButt
        link
        fedilink
        English
        8
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        So the weird thing is you can still do this but only if YouTube thinks you’re the right audience for it. My grandfather looks up all kinds of old things on YouTube and almost always get exactly what he wants on the first hit. However if I do it it ends up more like your example. Interesting and annoying at the same time

        • @pirat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 year ago

          Sounds like it would actually make sense to have a handful of different accounts, each account optimized (through search/watch history or something) for a specific type of content you want to search for.

          Otherwise, 3rd-party search engines are often better than YouTubes own search for finding obscure/rare/unpopular/unlisted/demonetized videos.

      • @Auli@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11 year ago

        Yes but it is also way bigger then it was. The amount of data that YouTube has now is just insane. I wonder when they’ll start culling old videos.

    • @Daft_ish@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -5
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      But we act like youtube is something more then just a place to post videos. We can build a new youtube tomorrow if people weren’t so invested in it. If you have some content on YouTube you just can’t live without fine but for everything else lets migrate… sorry, got a little preachy.

      Edit: I get all you think everything’s impossible. I get it, I’m not going to be the one to make new youtube but obviously if it were to happen you are not the ones I would pitch to.

      • @Sestren@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        311 year ago

        Yeah, that’s completely untrue… The reason we can’t just create a new youtube is the same reason there aren’t more ISPs. The infrastructure cost is too high.

        You can’t just build a site that allows video uploads and playback, throw it on a Pi and release it to the world. You need scalability, and that costs money.

        Maybe the end solution is a distributed system, but that’s not something you can easily sell to the average Joe that doesn’t give a shit about the “how” or “why” with Youtube, and simply wants to watch videos.

        I’m not saying that Google isn’t the scum of the earth, but there is currently no feasible way to recreate what they’ve made/bought without an absolutely stupid amount of money.

        • @Hagels_Bagels@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          51 year ago

          Maybe the end solution is a distributed system

          I think this already exists and is called PeerTube. In my experience it doesn’t work very well.

        • @Chee_Koala@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          41 year ago

          YouTube itself is bound to implode because of the cost of all that infrastructure… sheesh. I recently reduced my YT time to the bare minimum, after being screwed out of premium (light), and found out about Peertube. It’s pretty bare bones, but viral videos can use P2P to offload the main server, which I thought was smart and fair. So, federated YouTube can be done I think. It won’t be easy though, or cheap.

      • I get your heart’s in the right place. But good luck finding investors to pay for the massive infrastructure costs to back your YouTube alternative (read competitor) without a plan to extract money from someone. Not even to break even, but to turn a profit.

        It would be nice if there was public money to create these alternatives - that was m way you wouldn’t have to worry about profit, just whether your solution is meeting the public need.

      • Dizzy Devil Ducky
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I don’t know how much it costs to run or how ads fully function on the service, but we do have Odysee. I have yet to have seen a single ad from my collection in the app outside of creators whose vid that’s also up on yt having a sponsored segment.

        Edit:

        Just booted up the app for the first time in a while and they have some minor things. Noticed a little bar at the top with a list of channels and scrolled down to find a featured section.

    • @sbg@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      161 year ago

      Fair point. I don’t mean to suggest that authors don’t deserve to be paid for their work. And while the article discusses Google and Amazon’s attempts to manipulate online behavior to drive up their profits, I remember a time when paywalls were a rare exception rather than the rule while reading articles online.

      • @Copernican@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        211 year ago

        That’s because there was a time when everyone had print subscriptions that were healthy, and the internet just gave them extra money for ads. When you start losing subscribers because everyone is looking at your shit online for free, you learn you need to charge for it.

        • Takatakatakatakatak
          link
          fedilink
          English
          31 year ago

          Is anyone actually paying for it though?

          Don’t get me wrong, actual journalists deserve a great wage. I just haven’t seen much of it worth paying for in recent years. Real journalists get locked up and it looks like the rest took that threat very seriously. I’m not going to pay money to read corporate puff pieces and controlled opposition.

          • @ReluctantMuskrat@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            21 year ago

            The Atlantic often does long, in-depth stories and has proven to be a very reliable source. Their journalists have proven themselves in getting some great sources. Just in the last couple of weeks admissions by John Kelley and Gen Milley have proven stories The Atlantic broke 2 years ago with anonymous sources were accurate and credible.

          • @Copernican@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            2
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            The Atlantic is a pretty reputable source. And I think there’s a difference between subscribing to news for news reporting like the New York Times, The Guardian, etc, vs subscribing to magazine like the Atlantic, New Yorker, or New Republic that will give you more political commentary and analysis. Both have a role to play and both need subscribers. I subscribe to the Atlantic on and off (I’ve kind of rotated between the atlantic, new republic, and the nation over time). Primary subscriptions for my household are the New York Times and New Yorker. Then I have my annual membership/donations for NPR and PBS. Gotta support the news and good political commentary. It’s holiday season soon. Subscriptions make good holiday gifts.

        • Maeve
          link
          fedilink
          -11 year ago

          Yt is complaining about adblocker not being allowed. Waiting for disable unless you whitelist

  • @Krauerking@lemy.lol
    link
    fedilink
    English
    361 year ago

    Simple, capitalism found a new promised land. The next space to fill up. And manifest destiny within.

    Unfortunately but fortunately as well, it’s an infinite space. Early money has built large infrastructure within it. It’s been built over time and now is so massive it’s hard to comprehend in the real world. It’s nearly impossible to compete with them other than them tearing themselves down, but the space is still nearly infinitely large and competitors can still rise in the fringe and who knows after decades maybe rise to the same kinda massive company

    So now we must limit the infinite. Cull all of it to the finite they can control. The virtual world is real, the metaverse is already upon us, and unfortunately it’s already starting to look like the late capitalism asphalt shopping plazas.

    So it’s worse cause it’s built for the investors and being limited for them too. It’s why people beg for the next BIG thing, so that they can find new land or new ways to control this 4th space.

    • SnausagesinaBlanket
      link
      fedilink
      English
      201 year ago

      so that they can find new land or new ways to control this 4th space. Pretty sure that Meta was meant to be the next big market space.

      I think Zuckerberg was expecting all of us to sit in a chair with VR headsets on all day and buy buy buy.

      I personally feel like it’s a total invasion of my privacy because it learns “me” and then tries to influence my every move a lot more intimately than cookies in a browser does.

      • @Krauerking@lemy.lol
        link
        fedilink
        English
        121 year ago

        100% absolute control over your life to sell you as much as possible… And people consider that a utopia and not a problem

      • TheSaneWriter
        link
        fedilink
        English
        61 year ago

        It also shows how detached some of these billionaires really are. A VR system is not yet affordable for the majority of Americans, and the technology has much more development to do before it’s as widespread as video game consoles, never mind PCs.

    • @Auli@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      101 year ago

      Yah don’t see a small player coming around anytime soon. People don’t realise how uterlu massive these tech companies are.

      • @Krauerking@lemy.lol
        link
        fedilink
        English
        71 year ago

        Yeah no. Not a chance we see valid competitors until cracks really start forming in the services these monopolies can offer. It’s gotta get worse before there can be competition and so they can t just buy them and aquire it to break immediately. I mean we can see some monopolies having their fun ruined look at Twitter; but Facebook, Amazon and Google have money in reserve and an ad system (or AWS) that pays all the bills still.

        But yeah people don’t comprehend that these massive online companies are all the Nestle of their space and people can’t even comprehend what being the Nestle of Nestle is, and the power they wield.

    • @MataVatnik@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      31 year ago

      The virtual world is real, the metaverse is already upon us, and unfortunately it’s already starting to look like the late capitalism asphalt shopping plazas.

      Poetry

  • @the_q@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    321 year ago

    Take me back to the days of FFVII’s Aerith Theme midi playing in the background of someone’s Geocities site dedicated to Chrono Trigger. The non-consumer driven Web…

    • @Thrashy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      61 year ago

      Or give me the joy of discovering a webforum dedicated to some niche community you were interested in, and making actual, real-life friends with the people you met there. Can’t say that I’ve made a connection like that since, oh, Burning Crusade-era WoW at the latest.

        • @Thrashy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          4
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          From Vanilla through Wrath I played with a core group of college buddies and we collected more friends as we moved between guilds on our server. Out of that extended group resulted two marriages and a half-dozen or so real-life friendships with people from all over the country and from all walks of life. I struggle to imagine anything like that happening on the Internet as we know it now. Social media seems engineered to promote only passing and often hostile interaction with people outside of your core group, and games have engineered away all of forced social interaction of community servers, clan/party/guild formation in favor of fast and frictionless matchmaking that pairs you up with randoms that you may never see again after one game. The early Internet promised to connect you with people from all over the world, but we’ve collectively decided instead that we just want easy, tokenized interactions with people who we never have to get to know.

  • @mushrooms_smell_bad
    link
    English
    271 year ago

    Tell me no one actually needed to be told that. Please. For my sanity.

    • @Misconduct@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      41 year ago

      Hold on let me Google it…

      Sorry, just seven pages of ads about vacuums because I bought one six months ago and links that all go to the same regurgitated article that only vaguely mentions it 🙃

    • @douglasg14b@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Please tell me no one thinks that evidence < anecdotes? Please, for my sanity…


      The sad state of knowledge & logic aside:

      There is SIGNIFICANT value to proving something we all think is true. This means action can be taken, it can be cited in argument, and is actually credible as opposed to a “feeling” that’s it’s worse.

      Sure, we “know” it’s worse. I’ve experienced search results getting worse and worse for what seems like nearly 10 years now. But I have no proof of this, as such it’s an anecdote.

  • @_Lost_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    251 year ago

    Funny, but this isn’t the best example. The Atlantic has been a subscription magazine for coming on 200 years now. It’s also one of the few places you can get non click bait articles without ads.

    • /home/pineapplelover
      link
      fedilink
      English
      81 year ago

      Or disabling js. Most of you use ublock origin. Ublock has a setting to disable JavaScript and you can whitelist sites you want js

    • z3rOR0ne
      link
      fedilink
      English
      4
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      True, but that’s yet another step every time I want to read an article. Personally i just use ublock origin and add this custom filter list.

      And yeah, you can also turn off JS to accomplish a lot while browsing the internet.

    • 👁️👄👁️
      link
      fedilink
      English
      31 year ago

      They’re not asking to get around it, they’re pointing out shitty practices that are common now.

      • @dan@upvote.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11 year ago

        People don’t want to pay, but they also don’t want to see ads. How does everyone think these companies are going to afford to operate?

    • z3rOR0ne
      link
      fedilink
      English
      10
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I strangely feel very conflicted over Google. I have a Pixel phone which supports the security hardened GrapheneOS.

      Were it not for Google allowing their phones to be so easily rooted, I’d probably be with Apple, who have their own egregious privacy invading practices.

      Google also left rss feeds available on Youtube, which essentially allowed me to easily move my subscriptions to my rss feeder instead of outright subscribing. Then, thanks to Invidious, I just use an extension to reroute any time I visit that channel/video.

      Grant you, Google could easily remove these features that strangely enough allow for easy migration away from their platform, and I can definitely see a future where they do just that.

      It just is such a strange thing for a company to have these built in aspects to their products that literally allow you to migrate away from their platform.

      To be clear, I’m not suggesting that this gives Google some sort of pass to do as they please. I haven’t used Google search regularly in a very long time. I still use their email and calendar solely because my current job team uses it as one of their main scheduling tools, but would prefer if we used something like a NextCloud instance.

      In short, I have done some things to get away from Google’s suite of software and will continue to do so, but these strange loopholes, especially the interesting relationship Pixel/GrapheneOS has, make me wonder about how Google could still make certain products and remain a smaller, much more regulated, part of the Internet as a whole…

      • @Potatisen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        41 year ago

        The amount of people who would do that, like you, me and possibly most of the Lemmy users, are so small that the good PR is worth it. Guaranteed, if there’s a mass exodus those options will disappear.