Skip Navigation

The internet is worse than it used to be. How did we get here, and can we go back?

190 comments
  • Libraries should evolve to play a larger role in the internet, theyve been trying to reinvent themselves and i think this best aligns with their spiritual purpose. Some ideas:

    Caretakers of digital archives.

    Caretakers of relevant open source projects.

    Could I get a free domain with my library card?

    Could I get free api access to mapping or other localized data?

    Should libraries host local fediverse instances for civic users? (think police, firefighter alert, other community related feeds)

    • It's fascinating how the absolute majority of people is trying to solve both social and technical problems at the same time via only social or only technical means. Again and again.

      You need both.

      Fediverse works right for moderation, but technically communities and users are part of an instance, and an instance is a physical thing that may go down. Just like most of our Web has vanished. And also, of course, it uses Web technologies.

      Further my idea as to what should be done about this (one approach is Nostr, unloved here because of people who use it ; I also think it's too primitive):

      The storage must be full p2p. Like Freenet, but probably optimized so that people would only store what they themselves need, and give some space to others in the communities they participate in. Not to all the network, like Freenet, but only to whom they want.

      The identities should be "federated", as in communities allowing moderation. Moderation should be done via signed "delete" records, and users would then not replicate "deleted" information.

      This way even when "an instance goes down" (say, instance admin has lost their private key or something like that), its stuff will still be replicated.

      One can even make "an instance" inherit another instance (again, instance admin has lost their private key or, say, someone has stolen it), so that its users would replicate that.

      One can imagine many mechanisms on top of that. But what's described would allow libraries and allows a thing similar to DNS (again, like a community, to which you subscribe for naming service that associates names with entities) and a thing similar to a static website, and something like Usenet with user identities, moderation and communities.

      Dynamic websites are possible too - but I'm not really knowledgeable about smart contracts and such required for it.

      I'm actually describing something in the middle of a few things far smarter people are already doing.

      This would allow agility between social and technical solutions.

    • I'm very much onboard with this. Idk if I'd say it's the libraries job though, I think it should be at the city level for community instances.

  • This. Lemmy is the way to go. Decentralized Communities connected via API.

    I don't see many other possibilities. The system needs a "free for ever" mechanic or big money shits into everything.

    • Lemmy is the way to go. Decentralized Communities connected via API.

      This only works to a degree. Eventually, the communities that allow people to register most easily and see the most active content become the overwhelming majority of the content on the system. And if these communities don't do a good job of self-policing, they just become mini-2008-style Reddits, filling up with the same bot accounts and serial assholes and sex pests that degraded the original.

      Bigger sites start swamping smaller sites with traffic and overwhelming the capacity of smaller communities, so you get waves of defederation and new Walled Gardens of content.

      The issue isn't the technology, its the participants in that technology. Too many malicious actors piling onto a platform and either corrupting the administration or degrading the quality of content will inevitably lead to enshitification.

      Federation only mitigates this by allowing smaller instances to break away and abandon larger ones. It does nothing to screen the sincere and human actors from the malicious and automatic accounts.

      • the communities that allow people to register most easily and see the most active content become the overwhelming majority of the content on the system.

        hasnt this already happened with lemmy.world being the Big One?

  • Since when internet usage became wide spread enough that it could be used to make billions and/or promote political propaganda (which really ties back to again making money in most cases).

    Anything that becomes used by a reasonable fraction of the whole world will be in the target of governments, venture capitalists (i.e individuals seeking for en masse manipulation). There is no way to prevent this as long as both exist.

    Creating a lot of small communities rather than one large community is a good incentive but I think it fails to completely address this issue as long as they are interconnected in some way.

  • Quality through obfuscation... make it harder to use. If the dimwits can't figure out how to use it...

  • Saying the internet was better is a haze of nostalgia, a gross underappreciation of new technologies, and a smattering of truth.

    Over 38% of the stuff I flush down the toilet is gone forever, too, and that's ok.

    The early Internet was interesting only because it was new and different. Most of the stuff out there was low-quality stuff just for funsies projects. The barrier to entry is still very low. Anyone who wants to put up a website with whatever they're interested in requires no technical expertise and isn't even expensive. But you don't see a lot of that because it's not new or exciting and few people are going to waste their time on it. On the upside, you can now throw up your own federated content system with relatively little work and have a huge community for very very little. Things are gone chiefly because they weren't worth saving. Sure, there are exceptions like DPReview, but they even got a reprieve because they were worth keeping.

    Before the advent of filter bubbles, the internet was a creative playground where people explored different ideas, discussed varying perspectives, and collaborated with individuals from “outgroups” – those outside their social circles who may hold opposing views.

    And how did anyone find those varying perspectives? Everything was unindexed, even search engines were crap. Fark, Digg and Slashdot, link aggregators and forums are the same as they've always been. Are the majority of those conversations gone? Sure, but you can find another 25,000 of them on Reddit, x, Instagram, and Lemmy, and when those are gone, some other service will replace them.

    If people are moving to algo-driven social media, it's because they perceive it as advantageous to them. I found the algo ate too much of my time and moved back to diverse and static youtube clients.

190 comments