arisuchan    [ tech / cult / art ]   [ λ / Δ ]   [ psy ]   [ ru ]   [ random ]   [ meta ]   [ all ]    info / stickers     temporarily disabledtemporarily disabled

/r/ - miscellaneous

CONTENT NOT OTHERWISE SPECIFIED.
Name
Email
Subject
Comment

formatting options

File
Password (For file deletion.)

Help me fix this shit. https://archive.arisuchan.jp/q/res/2703.html#2703

Kalyx ######


File: 1494089964639.jpg (38.89 KB, 220x287, Σωκράτης,_Ακαδημία_Αθηνών_….jpg)

 No.102

please ignore economy and how it affects anything for the duration of this post.

do you guys ever feel like 'fun' has made the internet less fun? think of an internet like this:
- a library, lots of stuff to read, but you have no way to talk (discussion is separated at the least)
- academic, serious and on-topic - mailing lists or groups; well moderated
- group assignment or a school project; collaboration
- documented: every service provides good manuals of their use; they also document how they actually work, things come with source code attached; transparency, you may even look around on servers
- common sense and self-moderation; some purpose required: you can't just use the "school tools" for anything

things that are NOT present or allowed:
- for-profit activity, advertisement, buying-selling services or products.
maps, catalogs are okay thought (think of a commercial phone-book, but one where 'google headquarters' comes after 'goofy suits shop, town, country' and has the same font, etc)
- entertainment or humor
no youtube or any of its bullsoykaf (useful things hosted by sites locally); no vidya games (goodbye flash); no porn; no pointless fun-posting anywhere; no gifs; no parodies and ironies; no memes.
go out, make friends, have fun with them, joke about things with them.
- social stuff, politics
no public social media in any form. no facebook, no twitter, no such things as a public post. if you want everyone to hear you, message them one by one (and get derezzed for spam) or get on TV. if you want to be social, go out and find people, or a place where they assemble. if you want to talk politics, get out.
you can text-chat / voice call 1 on 1 or make groups chats/calls; something like e-mail for more professional/formal conversation.
- personal/identity stuff
no blogs, no neocities page, no awesome gif profile picture, no personal anime watch list signature. are you worthy of a wiki article? now you have one. are you not? fuck off, go do something with your life so you earn that wiki article, or be a cool kid in your hometown. if you have to look away from reality and customize your 'life' online, you see what actually needs fixing.
- bloatpetition
since there is time and organization, soykafty duct-taped-together solutions don't get to grow into status quo just because they were first.
there are a few alternatives for every task that are well-designed and maintained. overhauls happen every now and then to remove layers of glue from the evolution of the technology (your kids won't hear about X.org, you are not backwards-compatible with punch-card programs, choices made long ago get revisions with the present and predictable future in mind)

such an internet would be a serious community effort; all the bullsoykaf human needs, bored kids, petty social games, pettier political games and the forever hungry profit-monster would be excluded; forced to be and act in the real world where they belong to.
i know its not something that is ever going to happen, yet I can't help but feel that this is how it started and also how it would have been the greatest

 No.103

The removal of either dynamic content, or the <img> tag, or both from html would resolve nearly every issue I have with the internet. Then again, my issues with the current state of the net are remedied in a much easier fasion by just, not visiting the parts I don't like. What I can't see can only hurt me when it leaks into the dark corners I still see value in visiting.

 No.104

>>103
I'd say it has much more widespread effects. The evolution of technology supporting the infrastructure is heavily influenced by whatever is hip and popular. With the kind of internet described, perhaps entire types of devices would be missing or blooming - e.g. no smartphones but lots of terminal-like places in public/for free. Since sensitive corporate data and most publicly unacceptable nsfw content would simply not be online, crypto would be less advanced and privacy less of a concern. User data being collected or sold would be less of a concern.

There's also the effect it has on society by allowing people to keep in touch without keeping in touch. Kids can play together online, so there's no point in going over, or meeting somewhere. While it's nothing new (television), people now have all these ways of flashy, colorful, interactive and long-term distractions to waste their free time on; the rush of stimuli raises their tolerance to a point where plain social interaction and some regular hobbies that develop some marketable skills are too boring to pursue. Lots of kids become tech-illiterate professional consumers. This doesn't apply to everyone, but a significant enough portion of people to transform the landscape.

I would bet that the way people think is also somewhat affected, more apt at searching and indexing but worse at keeping concrete details. They are more resistant to certain kinds of scams, but also more gullible around novel methods. Post-irony and memes.

These, and similar large-scale effects are impossible to avoid, and simply not using certain software, hardware or entire platforms, and not using services and visiting places doesn't really change how the entire ecosystem has adapted to these conditions.

I really wonder what society would look like in an alternative scenario where the internet remained a library-academy-public forum kind of thing, while the market, social things and entertainment were kept outside, probably not wired into homes in any form.

 No.105

You make me envision an academic, professional, research-oriented internet that sprung up during the late 70s in an alternate timeline. Also the curse of Xanadu. I have this project website bookmarked where they're working on global page comments like helpful notes you could leave in the margins for others to see because there isn't a comment box. I could see something like that being a standard way back then in the future that never happened. I fear the internet going downhill is a backburner issue compared to the rise of the precariat.

 No.137

File: 1494797283859.jpg (828.04 KB, 1161x1780, anarchist_by_hielga.jpg)

howzabout we do exactly that, except that we don't cover the whole bloody web with it? How about we just make a self-contained, well-modded community? what harm is there it letting idiot kids and soyposters duke it out on the no-man's-land of the open webbernet?

sure, I'm disappointed in the state of things too. most of it is the fault of capitalism and the state though, not memes or flaming. I can easily avoid or partake in the latter two as I please, but the former two follow me around wherever I go and cause me grief and paranoia.

you want to fix the internet? take down the state and capitalism.

 No.138

>>137
>you want to fix the internet? take down the state and capitalism.
How so?

If it was not for the state we would not of had a national sans international network created for the military.

If it was not for the capitalists looking to make a buck we would of not had its rapid expansion.

What use would agrarians have for a world wide packet switching communication network?

Why would a communist society need to build such a thing?

 No.139

>>138
>if it was not for
I don't care about that part. The internet exists now.
>agrarians
lol no
>need to
we would want to.

 No.142

>>139
>I don't care about that part. The internet exists now.
And without reliable consistent maintenance its only for now, the effort and technology needed to keep it running is immense. Its not a thing that Just Works(TM) like an iPhone.

>lol no

When this Modem his 88 Potatoes Per Second you are going to see some serious soykaf. In Latvia.

>we would want to.

Why? What possible need would you have for a telecommunications network that needs massive upkeep? A anarchist society would have a damn hard time keeping it available after a collapse of the capitalist system, it would have to be rebuilt years after it fell apart. The skill set for this is pretty broad, its not like drawing a picture and uploading it to deviant art.

 No.143

>>102
Internet is what you make of it. You choose what content you want to interact with. If you can't help yourself, there are plenty of ways to prevent yourself from accessing sites that you don't like, or, at least, force you to put some time and conscious thought in to revert these measures.

I do agree with the puritan sentiment and the disdain for omnipresent vanity in the internet, to some extent. We are here, nonetheless, and we are a small part of a larger culture stemming from playfulness and social exchange, so there is something that we've gotten out of the society/meme ordeal.

So, I would like to see gone all the vain things that I do not personally like, like social networks, selfie-photo-image-tumblr-snapchat-instagram-lifestyle-blog-lifejournal-showoff stuff, pornography, bullsoykaf youtube, and merchants pushing their products whenever I don't want to buy them.
I have no power to do that, so I just don't use them, and the result is pretty much the same.
Yeah, I would like to be among people more interested in contemplation, not pleasure.
But I have no power over all the other people, and I would like to keep it that way.

>>105
>rise of the precariat
Why are you bringing up a completely unrelated, purely economic issue? Could you refrain from pushing your politics at least when it is specifically requested?

>>137
>howzabout we do exactly that, except that we don't cover the whole bloody web with it? How about we just make a self-contained, well-modded community?
I thought places like lainchan were supposed to be exactly that; maybe a bit more lax than in the OP.

>most of it is the fault of capitalism and the state though

>brings up economy and politics in a "imagine an internet society based on intellectual merit, not on politics and people pushing their stuff everywhere"
Your behavior is a part of the problem.

>you want to fix the internet? take down the state and capitalism.

Ugh. The same as above.
Honestly. Do you intend for the conversation to be derailed? Because that's how you get it derailed.
Or are you just trying to push a little of your bullsoykaf here and there, hoping that other people won't do it, thus showing us what tragedy of the commons is, and why your ideology is mistaken?
Big infrastructure usually requires some degree of centralization. If I understand correctly, anarchism is not too big on centralization.

>>142
>(TM)
>not ™
u+2122 - this one is very easy to remember.

 No.144

>>142
you make a fair point. maybe anarchy won't be able to uphold the internet as it exists rn, but I suspect it will have some form thereof. Maybe there could be a more decentralized way of accessing servers world wide based on node hopping and p2p, i don't know.

>>143
>brings up economy and politics in a "imagine an internet society based on intellectual merit, not on politics and people pushing their stuff everywhere"
uh
>pettier political games and the forever hungry profit-monster
uhh
I know, I get it, you're pissed off because whenever politics shows up on the internet it fucks soykaf up and spoils a whole thread. Don't you see that I agree? Don't you think that an internet without capitalism and the state would be an internet where politics and economics are less intrusive and disruptive aspects of internet discussion? I think that monied interests and state propaganda twist and polarize discourse on the internet, where there could have been simply intelligent discussion of political philosophy.
You proposed an internet without politics (such idealism!) and you expected to create a thread without any politics. I admire your hope but not your foresight.

 No.145

>>144
>maybe anarchy won't be able to uphold the internet as it exists rn, but I suspect it will have some form thereof. Maybe there could be a more decentralized way of accessing servers world wide based on node hopping and p2p, i don't know.
I think this is pretty much in line with the OP. You'd be able to make a decentralized network where each node is a library or university, and use it exclusively for sharing knowledge. It wouldn't need to be nearly as complex as the internet is now, you could have some basic IM to chat with someone in the other library (simpler and friendlier than a search engine + indexation system), a book transfer protocol (or, if the other end is not that far, you could use a book transfer device i.e. a bike and a backpack), and some sort of BBS-like to make, publish and join classes and study groups. Everything else would be done in person and the results of such meetings could be made into a book that could be shared with people from other places.
The actual technologies wouldn't even need to be standardized across the network, different nodes would be able to experiment with new ideas for the actual hardware and/or software, and if you're fresh off the ground you could just use a courier. It would naturally become more efficient over time.

 No.146

>>137
I don't remember wanting to fix it, wanting to change it, or cover anything in anything else. I'm a person interested in theory, what ifs and possibilities, not should and judgments of any kind.

>>143
>Internet is what you make of it. You choose what content you want to interact with.
No amount of avoiding or not looking at the fat on one's belly will make it go away. Every layer (users, programmers, network admins, designers, researchers, manufacturers, hardware supply chain, hardware, cables and wiring, protocols, standards, libraries, OSes, server-side software, web browsers and other clients, whatever else) is adapted to fit in with all other layers. Even if you ignore or try to rebuild from scratch one or several layers, you will have to twist and adapt them to other layers that have already adapted to the old ones you're trying to rebuild. Users will want smartphones with messenger and snapchat or Windows PCs with Office and games. Webdevs will want HTML5, CSS3 and JS. Annoying weebs will probably want torrents, Arch, emacs and vichan. Everyone will want what they already know and worked on, and so even if the whole things is built from scratch, you'll probably get the same thing.

>>144
>You proposed an internet without politics (such idealism!) and you expected to create a thread without any politics. I admire your hope but not your foresight.
I admire your eagerness to assume, but not your skill at making the right assumptions. Now that you know >>143 is not OP, let's get to

>I know, I get it, you're pissed off because whenever politics shows up on the internet it fucks soykaf up and spoils a whole thread. Don't you see that I agree?

First off, people with a knack for abstraction can easily make the statement "the current political system affects how the internet works". They don't need to talk about how this or that specific political system works to understand that they differ and they have different impacts on the internet. Consequently, they don't have to disagree and then go off into long off-topic discussions about irrelevant details of specific political systems.
I indeed find that when politics show up in a thread where it doesn't belong, discussion gets derailed. There probably are no two people who have the same political opinion on everything; or ascribe the same meaning/definition to words about which hundreds of books were written; or would propose the same solutions for any problem. This alone allows for endless amounts of off-topic bullsoykaf and meta-discussion. Anyone who is willing to skip self-moderation and insert their own political stance is likely too pragmatic and goal-oriented to seriously discuss theory.
Which is why the sort of internet outlined in the OP post would certainly not have posts like >>137 appear anywhere at all, regardless of who the poster agrees with for whatever wrong reasons.

 No.147

>>146
I respectfully concede. Sorry about that.

 No.219

>>102
>do you guys ever feel like 'fun' has made the internet less fun?
No, but I do think the attitude of "It's the Internet, I don't need to care about the purpose of this particular website is!" has. Or in general, the treatment of the Internet as a singular venue that curates content itself rather than a medium in which domains exists as venues, each with their own curation process. It's the presumption that any large-scale media is necessarily one defined by a monolithic culture and set of values, even when it's specifically not presented as such.

> entertainment or humor

Try getting speaking to a librarian about removing all entertainment and humor and see what they have to say about it. Humor exists even in the most academic of settings, and such aspects of human culture cannot and should be simply excluded from the technological advancement of computer networks. If anything, we ought to create better avenues for creative expression so artists can display their work with those instead of the hacked-together mess we have now.

As far as removing commercial interests goes, I do think that is partly a technical issue and part of solving it will involve a system like SAFE Network or IPFS to distribute the load of sharing content and thus reduce the need to commercialize websites by reducing the need for commercial hosting services.

Social media like Facebook and Twitter just exist because people don't know how to set up a public mailing list or IRC channel they can access from their phone. This would as well be better solved by giving people better tools that help them host things on their own instead of relying on central media distributors.

>>103
Sounds like you want to be using gopher. Go ahead and do it, it's a thing that exists and which lacks the things you don't want.

>>146
The layers you describe go deeper even than the computer hardware, to the very human culture in which computers were developed in the first place. To attempt keeping material deemed less serious offline is just another way of ignoring it. The only difference is that personal expression is simply made more difficult if doing so online is prohibited. Information technology should not be the sole domain of a particular culture or community, and to say that non-academic things should be done in person makes no more sense than saying all academic things should be kept off the internet, confining them to libraries and universities.

 No.224

A lot of the things you describe, OP, could be easily done by simply removing JS and CSS from the web. The web would become much more like a library.
I'd like to retain all the fun parts of the internet like IRC, MUCKs, and usenet though. But to have the web become what it is, a collection of hypertext documents, would be neat.
>well moderated
Who mods the moderators? Where do they get their authority from? Have they earnt their respect? Mods destroy more communities than not, online.
>go out
I live in a place where people are utterly different from me in ways that are unenjoyable.
>e-mail for more professional/formal conversation
Email isn't inherently formal. I use it even to talk with my friends.
>no blogs, no neocities page, no awesome gif profile picture, no personal anime watch list signature. are you worthy of a wiki article? now you have one. are you not? fuck off, go do something with your life so you earn that wiki article, or be a cool kid in your hometown. if you have to look away from reality and customize your 'life' online, you see what actually needs fixing.
Pretentious. Now you imply some people are worth more than others.

 No.261

>>138
anarchism =/= communism =/= stalinism

when the government outlives its purpose and begins to rot its time for people to take matters into their own hands.

Educate yourself on anarchism, the old people here in Spain who lived for a few years under it say it was the best time to be alive. I



[Return] [Go to top] [ Catalog ] [Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]