future of ~the internet~

i'm not getting the revelatory effect for some reason, maybe you have to buy the coffee table book and watch the videos to really understand

maybe this guy had never seen internet users before

"I don't know if I really understood the consequences of what I was saying, because of the unintended consequences of a network when it grows to a billion or 2 billion people and ... it literally changes your relationship with society, with each other ... It probably interferes with productivity in weird ways. God only knows what it's doing to our children's brains."

Sounds like the guy has done a bit of growing up?

Who will tame this monster, this manticore? You and I my friends, you and i!

anyway social media wasn't created it was discovered

P.S. Parker, on life science allowing us to "live much longer, more productive lives": "Because I'm a billionaire, I'm going to have access to better health care so ... I'm going to be like 160 and I'm going to be part of this, like, class of immortal overlords. [Laughter] Because, you know the [Warren Buffett] expression about compound interest. ... [G]ive us billionaires an extra hundred years and you'll know what ... wealth disparity looks like."

sean you're supposed to cherish those thoughts and keep them close, not speak them

"when im 160 and just a withered skeleton with skin stretched over it and a million hoses coming out plugged into external replacement organs and taking my food in through a straw ill be laughing at you poor losers"

"when i die of natural causes at 75..."

"When Facebook was getting going, I had these people who would come up to me and they would say, 'I'm not on social media.' And I would say, 'OK. You know, you will be.' And then they would say, 'No, no, no. I value my real-life interactions. I value the moment. I value presence. I value intimacy.' And I would say, ... 'We'll get you eventually.'"

woah with this kind of salesmanship talent no wonder he's a billionaire

real life interactions? ffs.

have you ever had someone LIKE a URL you have referenced? sheer bliss

"when im 160 and just a withered skeleton with skin stretched over it and a million hoses coming out plugged into external replacement organs and taking my food in through a straw ill be laughing at you poor losers"

https://www.geek.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/cassandra2-625x351.jpg

where was the brain in that being

There's a little tank at the bottom, just out of frame

one day you will be able to post to borads with your mind

...and the resulting paste will look just about the same as now

resultant paste

http://isp.netscape.com/

it's someone's job to "curate" that page

http://isp.netscape.com/men/bb/

check out my new bikini babes feature. it's on

Netscape Internet Service men's from AOL-HuffPost Lifestyle

this is from an industry blog that analyzes traffic on the reg so i tend to place a little more trust in it that in the typical broadsheet thinkpiece

"Who is still sharing fake news on social media?"
http://www.newswhip.com/2018/04/still-sharing-junk-fake-news/

key takeaway: fear is what drives these shares - the seeming confirmation of things people are already afraid of

"People are stupid; given proper motivation, almost anyone will believe almost anything. Because people are stupid, they will believe a lie because they want to believe it's true, or because they're afraid it might be true. Peoples' heads are full of knowledge, facts and beliefs, and most of it is false, yet they think it all true. People are stupid; they can only rarely tell the difference between a lie and the truth, and yet they are confident they can, and so are all the easier to fool."

Wizard's First Rule, page 560

Terry Goodkind is a pretty bad writer but that bit has always stuck with me.

His popularity as a writer is a demonstration of the truth of that quote.

Idk “people are stupid” always seems like a bad analysis to me.

a few idle thoughts i had while brushing my teeth this morning: is the ad-reliant experience of using the internet the same throughout the world? are there countries that use a different model? is the internet, on its current trajectory, inherently capitalistic and thus spreading/reinforcing capitalism across the world as it continues to be adopted and intertwined with daily life? here's what i mean, briefly:

the internet basically runs on advertising (though i realize that model is currently failing, in many ways), which seems natural in the united states. i can use a service for free because theoretically the website can make their money back by making we watch advertisements. but is that true elsewhere in the world? is there a heavily socialist country that somehow subsidizes certain internet properties, or in which they somehow get funding in another way, besides ads? are there places where the subscription/pay-wall model works better, perhaps because of cultural differences in how the website's visitors approach the idea of supporting businesses? (i'm talking out of my ass here; very ignorant obv, sorry, just asking the question).

or is the internet full of ads absolutely everywhere it reaches? and if that's the case, is the expansion of the internet basically spreading capitalism?

these ideas are founded in my own ignorance of what it's like to use the internet across the world (my only substantial international internet experience was behind the great paywall in china circa 2006). and they're also based on an assumption that an ad-reliant model of business is inherently capitalistic, and that there's another viable model that isn't. so...anyway. throwing all that out there

Idk “people are stupid” always seems like a bad analysis to me.

otm. I much prefer to think in terms of inherent design flaws in the systems which comprise our intelligence. We all have them and it takes experience to see them in ourselves and training to mitigate them.

Even though you could subsidize a useful replacement (imagine france's minitel but pulled forward 30 years) how do you outpace the shine of what the advertising-driven market can provide?

I don't think this can happen in the free-market parts of the world today. The advertising business model makes too much money and then those businesses can invest much that money they make back in the products.

And outside the free market, for example in China, the real business is helping keep the government in power.

And outside the free market, for example in China, the real business is helping keep the government in power.

Phrases like ‘outside the free market’ and ‘for example China’ should not exist in the same sentence. China hasn’t a hyper capitalist internet (and everything else) with a bread and circuses approach to keeping the government in power. The internet as commercial and capitalist entity funds, supports and provides the manpower for the apparatus that directs and channels freedom of expression. Whilst there is censorship, distraction with consumerism is a much more powerful tool.

But there's a deeper story to the Chinese market than that. The government does control who can participate in it.

good example from china is the baidu medical ads https://www.whatsonweibo.com/behind-baidu-scandal-baidu-putian-medical-group/ and this guide to baidu seo is interesting i think even if you're not trying to promote anything on baidu https://www.dragonmetrics.com/baidu-seo-guide/ the chinese internet for the most part, outside the dark corners, is a mirror of the english-language internet but just with tech companies you've never heard of running things.
i wish i could come up with a clear unified statement on how state ownership / investment in media platforms looks translated to internet platforms. recently (i think it's been three, four years since it launched?) you had thepaper 澎湃, basically same level of relevance and respect as huffpo, piggybacking off a larger state media company, has millions in state funds keeping it afloat (but it has also strayed enough from the party line to be subject to a recent crackdown) so it looks markedly different from similar sites operating off advertising, but there are other examples like older rival caixin's online media properties funded mostly from the private sector (backed by tencent first, who bought a stake from a provincial newspaper [citation needed]) look and feel like you're reading wapo or whatever (paywalls + ads). once outside of those big media platforms it does feel like the chinese internet is more choked with ads? and without adwords to hold a big enough share, so it's more scattershot, more corrupt anus and stomach hospitals / snake oil / online casinos.

hi can I get more details on corrupt anus and stomach hospitals

indeed

No results found for "corrupt anus and stomach hospitals".

In France most newspaper content is paywalled, sometimes with 3 or 4 free views per month. I guess the big national usa papers are like this now too?

french internet forums like jeuxvideo.com (kind of a french reddit I guess though obv there are french subreddits) are ad heavy so you have a point about this global infection.

trying to imagine what subgenre of metal would give rise to that as a track title xp

Colorectalchairmancore

i like little more than clicking 'reject' when a website tells me it's going to track my activity. some websites make it pretty simple, i can reject all, or sometimes i'm offered a choice - i can accept functionality cookies but not advertising cookies. works pretty well sometimes! but there are some sites, like tumblr, that just fuckin do not care. they hide the link to 'manage' cookies, and all that page does is link to amazon, google etc's privacy policy pages! it is a hiding to NOTHING attempting to opt out of cookies placed by those sites via tumblr. i literally think it can't be done. i don't see how that complies with GDPR frankly. i know i'm being ridiculous and pedantic but EU law around this is supposed to allow this to actually work, to say 'i don't want your goddamned tracking cookies' and if big sites like tumblr (hollow laugh) blatantly don't give a shit how is there even a pretence that any of this is effective?

yes i've been here - http://www.youronlinechoices.com/uk/your-ad-choices

the website barely loads

there's also this page? http://optout.networkadvertising.org

tried to read an article on Slate today and 'Agree' is literally the only option. all or nothing. i know i'm being crazy. it's making me crazy. maybe i was always crazy. i feel like richard stallman over here.

but maybe... maybe if i'm using Privacy Badger it doesn't matter? i could just say yes and my lil' blocker'll block 'em anyway? it's hard to tell from reading their FAQ - https://www.eff.org/privacybadger/faq#What-about-tracking-by-the-sites-I-actively-visit,-like-NYTimes.com-or-Facebook.com

I used to think the EU mandated cookie warning was almost enough reason to brexit, now i can't get enough of clicking 'reject all'. Gotta love the ones that only let you turn off the advertising cookies one by one, partner by partner, in a list of 50 or more. Nigh on impossible on a phone.

yeah exactly. or a computer tbf. and sometimes that list of advertiser cookies includes entries without a button to turn off the tracker, just a link to the advertiser's website. which turns out to be in dutch.

just cause i'm insane i sent a letter to Slate's privacy address asking them how I was supposed to opt out, and got an actually pretty detailed autoresponse back with various things to do. last graf reads:

"Finally, please also note that your deletion request would only affect data for vendors with data controlled by Slate. Some of the other vendors with which Slate works may have collected data, but they are independent controllers and thus request that users reach out to them directly. You may access a list of these vendors here."

of course that link goes to a webpage that first demands you accept cookies before reading it ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

patreon yesterday had a pop up ad for a web seminar which covered the whole page and wouldn't allow me to close it without clicking that I was interested in going (I'm not)

A private equity firm has bought the .org domain, which will likely drive up prices for nonprofits. https://t.co/IrPax3uqBK

— VICE (@VICE) November 19, 2019

"Ethos Capital," you can't make this stuff up

dangit, my personal website is a .org

fuck

serve up .ilx and we'll win the internet

minimum buy in to get a gTLD is…prohibitive for goofy hobbyists