Slashdot Mirror


The Web We Have To Save

An anonymous reader writes: Hossein Derakhshan endured a six-year prison term in Iran for doing something most of us would take for granted: running a blog. He has a unique perspective — he was heavily involved in internet culture, becoming known as Iran's "blogfather," before suddenly being completely shut off from the online world in 2008. Seven months ago, he was released. When he got settled, he took up his old work of blogging, but was surprised by how much the web has changed in just a few years. Now he decries our reliance on monolithic social streams that prioritize image and meme sharing over the thing that makes the web the web: links.

"The hyperlink represented the open, interconnected spirit of the world wide web—a vision that started with its inventor, Tim Berners-Lee. The hyperlink was a way to abandon centralization—all the links, lines and hierarchies—and replace them with something more distributed, a system of nodes and networks. Blogs gave form to that spirit of decentralization: They were windows into lives you'd rarely know much about; bridges that connected different lives to each other and thereby changed them. ... Since I got out of jail, though, I've realized how much the hyperlink has been devalued, almost made obsolete."

114 comments

  1. Barking at the wrong tree by ArcadeMan · · Score: 4, Informative

    You won't get many counter-arguments on Slashdot. Most people here also think the same way, we hate Twitter and Facebook.

    1. Re:Barking at the wrong tree by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      You won't get many counter-arguments on Slashdot. Most people here also think the same way, we hate Twitter and Facebook.

      For me it's gone way, way beyond simple hate...I'm deep into "utter loathing" territory when it comes to twitter, facebook, linkedin, pinterest, etc etc etc.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    2. Re:Barking at the wrong tree by King_TJ · · Score: 2

      Well, yes and no. Frankly, although I don't use Twitter much -- I don't have a problem with the core concept. There's something interesting about a form of social media that places such strict requirements on the length of what you can send out in a single broadcast. At first, I thought it was pointless - but I've grown to rather like it when it's used thoughtfully. There's an art to realizing when you have something unique, thoughtful or funny to share and distilling it down to 140 characters. And there are "niche cases" where people came up with good uses for Twitter that its own developers probably didn't even imagine. (EG. The realtors that let you follow them so you get regular updates about new home listings, or the laundromats that use it to let you know when certain washers or dryers are finished.)

      Facebook is "all over the place" with what you can do with your account on the site. Personally, I like Facebook, but my friends and I tend to share hyperlinks (with comments about what we're sharing and why), and then enjoy the discussions that come about it in comment replies beneath it. Seems to me, that's almost exactly what Hossein is lamenting the death of on the net in this article!

    3. Re:Barking at the wrong tree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I don't get it. I'm not about to RTFA, but how has the hyperlink been devalued? Isn't most of the stuff posted on social networks still hyperlinks?

    4. Re:Barking at the wrong tree by buchner.johannes · · Score: 2

      People share links on Facebook, and re-tweeting is one of the core features of Twitter (culture), which always lets you retrace the original poster.

      I think this is more about meme-sites, where pictures (and cartoons, infographics, etc.) are *copied* rather than linked to the original website, often stripping away the original author. Therefore you have websites that do not produce their own content, but bundles (and earns money with advertisement). When the original authors claim their copyright, the site complies, but the stream (and people's attention) has moved on, so it does not matter and they get away with it.

      --
      NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
    5. Re:Barking at the wrong tree by ciaran2014 · · Score: 1

      For me it's gone into my /etc/hosts

      0.0.0.0 1-edge-chat.facebook.com
      0.0.0.0 2-edge-chat.facebook.com
      0.0.0.0 3-edge-chat.facebook.com
      0.0.0.0 4-edge-chat.facebook.com
      0.0.0.0 5-edge-chat.facebook.com
      0.0.0.0 6-edge-chat.facebook.com
      0.0.0.0 7-edge-chat.facebook.com
      0.0.0.0 8-edge-chat.facebook.com
      0.0.0.0 9-edge-chat.facebook.com
      0.0.0.0 apps.facebook.com
      0.0.0.0 connect.facebook.net
      0.0.0.0 de-de.facebook.com
      0.0.0.0 developers.facebook.com
      0.0.0.0 error.facebook.com
      0.0.0.0 es-es.facebook.com
      0.0.0.0 facebook.com
      0.0.0.0 facebook.net
      0.0.0.0 fbcdn.com
      0.0.0.0 fbcdn-creative-a.akamaihd.net
      0.0.0.0 fbcdn.net
      0.0.0.0 fbcdn-profile-a.akamaihd.net
      0.0.0.0 fb.com
      0.0.0.0 fbexternal-a.akamaihd.net
      0.0.0.0 fbm.mysocialpixel.com
      0.0.0.0 fbstatic-a.akamaihd.net
      0.0.0.0 fr-fr.facebook.com
      0.0.0.0 internet.org
      0.0.0.0 l.facebook.com
      0.0.0.0 login.facebook.com
      0.0.0.0 newsroom.fb.com
      0.0.0.0 nl-nl.facebook.com
      0.0.0.0 pixel.facebook.com
      0.0.0.0 scontent-ams.xx.fbcdn.net
      0.0.0.0 s-static.ak.facebook.com
      0.0.0.0 static.ak.connect.facebook.com
      0.0.0.0 static.ak.facebook.com
      0.0.0.0 static.ak.fbcdn.net
      0.0.0.0 static.api.ak.facebook.com
      0.0.0.0 threatexchange.fb.com
      0.0.0.0 upload.facebook.com
      0.0.0.0 www.connect.facebook.net
      0.0.0.0 www.facebook.com
      0.0.0.0 www.facebook.net
      0.0.0.0 www.fbcdn.com
      0.0.0.0 www.fbcdn.net
      0.0.0.0 www.fb.com
      0.0.0.0 www.login.facebook.com
      0.0.0.0 www.static.ak.connect.facebook.com
      0.0.0.0 www.static.ak.facebook.com
      0.0.0.0 www.static.ak.fbcdn.net

      --
      Help build the anti-software-patent wiki
    6. Re: Barking at the wrong tree by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 5, Informative

      Much of it has degenerated into inline JavaScript.

    7. Re:Barking at the wrong tree by justthinkit · · Score: 4, Insightful

      the laundromats that use it to let you know when certain washers or dryers are finished.

      I particularly like those tweets when I'm not even doing laundry that day!

      The realtors that let you follow them so you get regular updates about new home listings

      Real estate is a fantastically particular business. I would like to meet the person that wants to drown in every tweet from just one realtor or one agency.

      When I've looked for a home, the realtor and I were busy defining exactly what we were looking for. In short order we had a short list. We checked out that list. If that didn't work out, we re-defined and repeated.

      The process had absolutely nothing to do with breathlessly tweeting out every gasp in the real estate market and everything to do with being specific.

      FWIW, this sounds like it might be a job for RSS or email...but the notion of having to sort through tweets is ridiculous. Another problem with tweets is you would have to follow the link to learn anything at all -- there would be no room to describe the listing (unlike in RSS or email).

      --
      I come here for the love
    8. Re:Barking at the wrong tree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You won't get many counter-arguments on Slashdot. Most people here also think the same way, we hate Twitter and Facebook.

      Indeed. I'm going to show my age here by saying this, but it reminds me of the early days when AOL first brought the unwashed dialup masses onto the bulletin board system and IRC channels. It definitely had a distinct and deleterious effect on the culture that had prevailed up until that point. It was as if Joe Sixpack and the Slurpee crowd had been set loose in the quadrangle of the university and allowed to run amok. In many ways, the classic Internet culture never really recovered from that early shock. Now again we're seeing a further mass migration to dumbed-down social "experience" sites where people communicate in gibberish and talk about nonsense 24 hours a day. Sometimes I think that nothing short of WWIII will knock these do-nothing idiots out of their self imposed stupors or then again maybe we just can't fix stupid.

    9. Re:Barking at the wrong tree by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 0

      And there in lies the problem: RTFA!

    10. Re: Barking at the wrong tree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Nice try, random slash dot user, but I only trust APKs HOSTS file generator!

      Who knows _WHAT_ this is going to do in _MY_ HOSTS file...

    11. Re:Barking at the wrong tree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Publish and subscribe connections are for narcissistic idiots, intelligent developers only use direct connections preferably over a crossover cable.

    12. Re:Barking at the wrong tree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why not run your own DNS and do
      *.facebook.[com|net]
      *.fb.com

      etc ? While you're at it you can do *.cn and *.ru too.

    13. Re:Barking at the wrong tree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Eventually, the amoeba divides. Until then, it stretches itself thin.

      There once was a single internet culture. Then it began to stretch away from what it was, while still containing what it was. It continues to stretch. Eventually, a break will form and there will be two internet cultures. One for the "joe sixpack and slurpee crowd", as you put it, and one for the Eternal August (pre-Eternal September) crowd.

      Both will be fully functional and isolated from the other. They won't touch each other, because, cooties. Nerds don't want "dumb-jock" cooties, and non-nerds (jock or not) don't want nerd cooties. There's a reason people laugh at The Big Bang Theory, and this is it.

      And the world will be poorer for it. Only in the crucible, where heat and proximity force things to form unlikely bonds, can you make stronger alloys. Perhaps the "stupid" you should "fix" is your own.

    14. Re:Barking at the wrong tree by arekusu · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Corporate content aggregation, and new flocks of sheep to drink from those content streams are one phenomenon.

      "Entrepreneurs" re-inventing IRC every two weeks with more emoticons is another. Can we simplify every "internet innovation" into three bullets?
      1) threaded forums -> TCP -> Usenet -> every news service ever (time-buffered data delivery)
      2) "get hails" -> UDP -> IRC -> every chat service ever (real-time data delivery)
      3) hypertext -> HyperCard -> WWW -> links (glue that connects everything)

      And I'll argue "content aggregation" is just a fancy .* glob, so pre-net.

    15. Re:Barking at the wrong tree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      dumbed-down is key here. It permeates everything. Idiocracy and Brave New World are more prophetic than people realize.

    16. Re:Barking at the wrong tree by s.petry · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Ironically, the problem the author is attempting to address is not about the Hyperlink but the failure of people to process anything beyond a meme.

      You refuse to read, then make up your own summary. Proving once again that the mentally handicapped can use a computer and write sentences.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    17. Re:Barking at the wrong tree by gweihir · · Score: 1

      I think this is less of a problem. The 90% of people that do not use hyperlinked content were not using the web at all not so long ago. The hyperlinked web is not going away.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    18. Re:Barking at the wrong tree by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      You forgot one:

      0.0.0.0 player.ooyala.com

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    19. Re:Barking at the wrong tree by WOOFYGOOFY · · Score: 1

      Mod parent up. This is "innovation" in a nutshell

    20. Re:Barking at the wrong tree by ciaran2014 · · Score: 1

      Why not run your own DNS and do
      *.facebook.[com|net]
      *.fb.com

      etc ? While you're at it you can do *.cn and *.ru too.

      Just never got around to it.

      --
      Help build the anti-software-patent wiki
    21. Re:Barking at the wrong tree by kernel_user · · Score: 0

      Interesting threads are on reddit these days, not Slashdot. I like Slashdot, but it's kinda stucked in the noughties, don't you think ?

    22. Re:Barking at the wrong tree by King_TJ · · Score: 1

      Well, it's not like your complaints are technically insurmountable challenges.

      A realtor who was smart could manage multiple Twitter accounts and have interested people subscribe to only the appropriate one(s). EG. Offer one list for only commercial properties, one for only foreclosures, and several for regular residential listings, broken out by price ranges.

      As for the laundromat idea? It's just an example of something creative I saw done with the technology. If you find it unbearable, fine ... don't use it! I doubt most laundromats offer the feature anyway. But I've also seen a similar thing done inside area hospitals, where if you subscribe, you get tweets with immediate updates on little things like specials their cafeteria or gift shop has running that day. You'd probably subscribe to it only for as long as you were staying in the hospital, and remove it again when you leave -- so not a big deal.

      I mean, ultimately, you can do ALL of this social media stuff with only the older technologies out there. Email and Usenet newsgroups, plus RSS feeds and links to downloads via FTP cover a lot of ground. Throw in some IRC servers to handle chat, and you're "golden".

      The thing is though, people decided there were fancier ways to get some of these things done. It's a lot easier to toss an app on a smartphone and let someone create a user login/password for the service than figuring out how to configure everything necessary to pull down a Usenet feed, subscribe to the right groups, decode binary attachments, etc.

    23. Re:Barking at the wrong tree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Twitter is useful when a normal website I visit is down for maintenance or under a DDoS attack. It at least allows me to know what's happening.

    24. Re:Barking at the wrong tree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      A realtor who was smart could....

      But they don't. Nobody does. Nobody uses Twitter like this. It's a god damn firehose that people, for some unfathomable reason, want to shove up their arse until it shoots out their nose, at which point they put Twitter hoses in their nostrils and the process repeats itself.

    25. Re:Barking at the wrong tree by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      The process had absolutely nothing to do with breathlessly tweeting out every gasp in the real estate market and everything to do with being specific.

      You were buying a home. Many people don't. Many people buy investment properties and will absorb those tweets like the weekly junk mail advertising the latest low price gadgets at the local electronics store.

    26. Re:Barking at the wrong tree by thegarbz · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The point of much of social media is not to share links but to replicate content and isolate it from it's original context. You're sharing content not necessarily hyperlinks.

      Just look at Facebook this week. Yesterday a video was released by DC Shoes about a daredevil who rode a wave on his motorbike. and hyperlink

      You won't get that link anywhere else. I had to google it. That's the original content. Yet my local news had a link to the video on youtube, naturally embedded in the news page. Facebook today has the video itself shared multiple times on their platform without any link to the outside world what so ever each share also removing context of the previous share. The video on my friend's page has 3 comments on it, the video on Motorcross Australia's page has 400 comments on it. Each of these are now detached despite being the same content from a single originator who is never linked to.

    27. Re:Barking at the wrong tree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Corporate content aggregation, and new flocks of sheep to drink from those content streams are one phenomenon.

      "Entrepreneurs" re-inventing IRC every two weeks with more emoticons is another. Can we simplify every "internet innovation" into three bullets?
      1) threaded forums -> TCP -> Usenet -> every news service ever (time-buffered data delivery)
      2) "get hails" -> UDP -> IRC -> every chat service ever (real-time data delivery)
      3) hypertext -> HyperCard -> WWW -> links (glue that connects everything)

      And I'll argue "content aggregation" is just a fancy .* glob, so pre-net.

      Why not just have 1 2 and 3 all together and call it MonolithicInternetLLC.gov ? "One company/government in charge?" (the Microsoft dream)

      Why have multiple pants pockets?

      Why doesn't everybody live in one home?

      Why don't we just make ONE BIG 500 square mile desalinization plant in Antarctica and run pipes to our ONE BIG HOUSE for our drinking water?

      While it might be wisest to have 1 car sometimes, it might be wisest to have more than 1 wheel on your car. And the traction system (wheels) don't need to be connected directly to the air conditioning system nor are rear window defroster systems directly pertinent to brake line routing. Modular.

      Fuck Windows btw. (While we are on the subject of what is simplicity.) Monolith vs modular.

      http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/server-storage/virtualbox/downloads/index.html
      distrowatch.com

      Free as in have a nice day.

    28. Re:Barking at the wrong tree by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      When I've looked for a home, the realtor and I were busy defining exactly what we were looking for. In short order we had a short list. We checked out that list. If that didn't work out, we re-defined and repeated.

      I never understood this approach. With information, the two basic methods are browse and search. If your data set is small, you don't need to search, since you can browse a dozen items quicker than any search, with a zero error rate which is the biggest flaw with search. I've been in the Real Estate market a few times, and in a city of 5 million I know which suburbs are of interest, and out of those there is only a dozen or so new listings every week. So each time I'm in the market I can simply browse all listings and sort them within a minute. The agent really serve no purpose other than to get in the way and take a fee.

    29. Re:Barking at the wrong tree by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      The point of much of social media is not to share links but to replicate content and isolate it from it's original context.

      One reason for this is that the original host is useless at hosting data. eg my local news site publishes video in low res that always freezes and buffers, and you can't pause or fast forward and they're loaded with ads. Whenever I see an interesting story, I Google the same thing and find a source elsewhere (usually youtube) which I can actually watch without all the problems.

    30. Re: Barking at the wrong tree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Love it

    31. Re:Barking at the wrong tree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't need to add DNS to do it by using hosts (DNS eats more resources too)

    32. Re:Barking at the wrong tree by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      No offense to DC shoes (they may be great guys, I wouldn't know), but I have a lot more confidence that their content will exist on Youtube in 10 years than it would on dcshoes.com.

    33. Re:Barking at the wrong tree by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      The survival of the content is irrelevant to a discussion about taking that content away from it's context.

      While you're certain that content will exist longer on youtube than DC's website, I'm certain that content can be discussed in a coherent place as everyone is making copies and working with copies.

      It's a classic data management problem. With 2 copies of the data which is the master? In the old web where everything was hyperlinked to a source the source could be modified, updated, discussions could be had on it. Nowadays the all that is lost.

    34. Re:Barking at the wrong tree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" vs. a fair challenge http://news.slashdot.org/comme...

      * Gweihir, you're a bullshitting blowhard politician 'talker', nothing more, & a shithead troll...

      APK

      P.S.=> Keep on shooting your blowhard done nothing in computing mouth off gweihir - I'll be RIGHT THERE AGAIN to expose your crap yet again (have fun with the shame you'll have to publicly endure here & YOU STARTED IT WITH ME YOU USELESS TROLLING LOSER WITH NO SKILLS BUT LOTS OF MERE "TALK", lmao)... apk

  2. copy and paste by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can copy and paste. Slap a attention grabbing headline. Suddenly you rolling in the dollars.

    It is kind of funny to watch things start on some random website. Then spread to reddit. Then within a week on all of the 'meme' boards. Each step of the way making it look like 'they came up with it'.

  3. Links? by houghi · · Score: 1
    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    1. Re:Links? by basscomm · · Score: 1
      --
      http://crummysocks.com
  4. I agree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I've been using DARPANET/Internet/WWW in one way or another since the mid-80s. The signal to noise ratio is, indeed, appalling. I miss the WWW when it was far and away less commercial, when everything didn't need to be "monetized'. I miss reading Websites with links to other Websites with content that all one page. These days, a simple article is broken down to be spread across multiple pages, and for why? Ads. So people see more ads. Knowing this, and seeing this occur before it became the norm, I started blocking ads in the late 90s using a hosts file. Now, it's simpler with browser-based tools.

    The WWW is not what it was. It's been hijacked by the corporatists.

    1. Re:I agree by JackieBrown · · Score: 1

      I guess if we get your internet back, we won't need to argue anymore about what download/upload speed is fast enough anymore

    2. Re: I agree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope you get a virus and it bricks all your computers. You do not need to be on the web. You on the web makes it a worst place.

    3. Re:I agree by Smauler · · Score: 1

      There's far more on Wikipedia alone now than there was on the the web in totality in the early days. If you don't like adverts, and just like information, you can just use wikipedia now.

      Yes, I'm saying that Wikipedia (one site) now is better (much better) than the entire web used to be.

      If you don't like the sites that you're seeing, close the window (or tab). No one is forcing you to go to sites that you do not like.

    4. Re:I agree by KGIII · · Score: 1

      You take that back! A foreign agent is holding a gun to my head, right this minute, and making me look at porn.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    5. Re:I agree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wikipedia?! Not sure if serious. o_O

    6. Re:I agree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That depends heavily on the subject matter, Wikipedia is very variable, both in wideness of scope and in quality. And then there are its editorial policies, some good, some bad. So for some people Wikipedia will be a bad fit. And that's a problem: the existence of Wikipedia discourages independent websites on topics. More and more, it's the Wikipedia way or no way. I think that's bad.

    7. Re:I agree by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This can be fixed. Create content without ads that only links to other content without ads. There's no reason why "www2" can't be just like 1990's www.
      All you need is a simple spec for hosting that anyone can follow, ie no ads, content on one page where possible, no multimedia unless absolutely necessary, and start the revolution.

    8. Re:I agree by kilgoreTrout1968 · · Score: 1

      Wikipedia has degenerated over the past several years. This is partially due to many of the references to dead links (many at news sites that have ported everything to a CMS that purposely killed old links), many not even in archive.org (because of financial interests in harvesting dollars for gated news sites). At any rate, this is such a shortsighted observation. If you read the blogger's article, you will understand that what is at stake is a larger social dynamic, and not the availability of static information.

    9. Re: I agree by Rakarra · · Score: 2

      The only thing that is "faster" is video.

      For pretty much everything else, web pages are slower to load, pictures wait while advertising websites choke, and javascript-heavy pages make your browser grind as easily now as it did 20 years ago.

  5. god i hate kids. by nimbius · · Score: 5, Funny

    Anything to get your 'hypertext protocol' off the ground eh? Well it wont work. You can piss n moan about your hyperlinks all you want but im perfectly happy downloading the memes over Gopher. now if youll excuse me the CSO query for another rib-tickler just came in and judging by the name, lemon party, its bound to be a real gasser.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:god i hate kids. by hackwrench · · Score: 1

      Gopher? Pfft. I get my primordial memes from BBS's using a 28.8k modem... And loving it.

  6. I've got a link for ya! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's to a meme!

  7. An Inkblot story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Open mike for ranting about whatever "trend" y'all don't like.

  8. What's wrong with social networks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Links take you to learn more info about something.

    Social networks already have you so profiled that they know where you want to go and take you there.

    1. Re:What's wrong with social networks? by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      Links take you to learn more info about something.

      Except that SN's are trying to host that data within themselves, and FB is using it's monopoly power and it's algorithims to prioritize stuff in the newsfeed hosted on FB.

      Social networks already have you so profiled that they know where you want to go and take you there.

      They know the intersection of where you will spend time and where they will serve ads. This is not the same.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
  9. Uh-huh. Good luck with that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Go read the places that millenials post about tech at, and you'll quickly see that they're all to the last a bunch of authoritarian fascists who regard privacy as an outdated concept ("if ur on the internet, ur not private neways xd xd xd").

    They have no concept of the value of the web as an interconnected and open platform where they share with people of different viewpoints, as long as they can get their Happy Merchant apps they'll be happy to accept a new and closed platform.

    In other words, good luck on getting them to make the right choice.

  10. Priceless by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "The web was not envisioned as a form of television when it was invented. But, like it or not, it is rapidly resembling TV: linear, passive, programmed and inward-looking." https://medium.com/matter/the-...

    Sad but true.

    1. Re:Priceless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Problem is the masses enabled this, aka the tech illiterate. Nowhere do we see this enabling more strongly then videogameland, the likes of Steam, MMO's and always online DRM.

    2. Re: Priceless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ^ this. And the ones that build their own machines Are the worst. Give a man a little knowledge and they swear they know it all and have seen it all.

    3. Re:Priceless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's not all bad though. The purchasing power of tech illiterates gave us cheap supercomputers and wonderful displays (in admittedly crappy form factors).

    4. Re:Priceless by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 1

      No it isn't.

      The web has video that works these days, yes. This is progress. It also has platforms like Twitter and Facebook that encourage ordinary people to publish and hyperlink to things, even if those people are not wordsmiths and would never have had a regular blog.

      Despite all these wonderful new things, I have not noticed people suddenly ceasing to write long form articles. It's been purely additive.

  11. Perhaps it just more people... by captnjohnny1618 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I completely agree with the author's point. MOST people rely on a few social media sites for almost all of their internet surfing, and as others have pointed out, Slashdotters are almost unanimously going to agree that social media sites are not how we prefer to use the internet.

    Perhaps though the underlying internet hasn't changed or disappeared, it's just that social sites are so much "friendlier" to use that folks that didn't use the internet a long time ago are now using the "internet" and the increase in their traffic has dwarfed the less "friendly" (although I disagree that it's less friendly), link-ier part of the internet the author references.

    I have no numbers or citations, just wanted to throw that thought out there. I know people who consider themselves very computer savvy, but couldn't do much beyond set up a facebook profile or a shitty wordpress blog, but that doesn't mean that they've taken our "home" away.

    1. Re:Perhaps it just more people... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The internet has become all of the things that the old AOL represented.

    2. Re:Perhaps it just more people... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'm a slashdotter, and I get 90% of my news from Slashdot, you insensitive clod!

    3. Re:Perhaps it just more people... by captnjohnny1618 · · Score: 1

      I so desperately wish I could mod this up!

    4. Re:Perhaps it just more people... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slashdotters are almost unanimously going to agree that social media sites are not how we prefer to use the internet

      Screw social media, but we love coming here to talk about the news... for nerds

    5. Re:Perhaps it just more people... by xanthos · · Score: 1

      Ditto.

      BTW, does anybody know what the opposite of TL;DR is?

      --
      Average Intelligence is a Scary Thing
    6. Re:Perhaps it just more people... by ArcadeMan · · Score: 2

      RS:AR?

    7. Re:Perhaps it just more people... by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      What's wrong with a wordpress blog?

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    8. Re:Perhaps it just more people... by captnjohnny1618 · · Score: 2

      Nothing. I meant "shitty" as a modifier to individual instances, not Wordpress as a whole. I was merely illustrating that the internet today is largely people who are not "computer people" and the bar for "tech savvy" is shifting for many.

      The author is worried about the centralization of the internet, but much of the internet usage is concentrated on "platforms" (e.g. wordpress, facebook, squarespace, twitter, etc.) and "tech savviness" concentrated on a platform is not going to help decentralize things again.

  12. Irony by mrchaotica · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Immediately following the end of the article, I found this:

    Log in to Medium and "recommend" this story.

    [infinite facepalm]

    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  13. my favorite stream... by pyrrhos · · Score: 1

    ... is slashdot!

  14. 28.8K??? Well LA-te-DA, Mr. Moneybags! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "Ooo, look at me, I'm made of money, I've got a 28.8K modem! The sun must rise and set in my buttonhole!"

    300 baud should be fast enough for anyone...

    1. Re:28.8K??? Well LA-te-DA, Mr. Moneybags! by rstanley · · Score: 1

      And:

      â€oe640K ought to be enough for anyone†â€" Bill Gates

  15. He became obsolete by jmyers · · Score: 5, Insightful

    He is bitching because the medium he used to become popular is now obsolete for the masses. It is no different than newspapers complaining about the internet or "journalists" complaining about bloggers. Now its bloggers complaining about average Joe's. Unfortunately as the ability to publish moved down the food chain anyone with a computer is "publishing". Now we get a huge volume of useless content drowning out anything of value.

    The fact is the same people publishing cat pictures and dumbed down quotes would never read a meaningful article anyway. They have just joined the internet and now outnumber the people who actually want to generate and consume meaningful content. Welcome to real life.

    1. Re:He became obsolete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The progression is almost obvious. In my AC opinion it started with shortened urls. Pure evil. Hey trust this link, just go ahead and click on it. Anyways he can still blog. People might read it, but he may need to get some twitter followers to re-treat about some stupid article he wrote for the typical net user these days to know about it and then perhaps read it. In some ways this is better for him, he just has to stop complaining and move on. And probably provide his blog links w/ a shortened url. *ducks*

    2. Re:He became obsolete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, when do we start building that B Ark?

    3. Re:He became obsolete by quax · · Score: 0

      Yes it is different, because going from newspapers to blogs was enhancing our freedom, no barriers to become a citizen journalist. Something that is especially important when leaving under a tyrannical regime like Iran.

      Now everything is migrating to the walled garden of social nets, where your true identity is enforced, and all your activity can be centrally monitored.

    4. Re:He became obsolete by quax · · Score: 1

      ... was meant to write "... living under a tyrannical regime". Hossein Derakhshan would probably gladly leave Iran if he could.

    5. Re:He became obsolete by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      It's already here but I don't think that's what you meant.

    6. Re:He became obsolete by nickweller · · Score: 1

      That the future of the Internet is seemingly becoming like old television is no accident as it's the only way the old media can claw back influence over the msg. That the so-called social media are turning into a freak show is merely a side effect.

    7. Re:He became obsolete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The main reason why Glastonbury started was so people could freely enjoy the music, to meet and have fun and to feel free
      Today is a corporative event where money is the main event TV channels and all
      And the kid are none the wiser.
      the same thing is happening to the internet and the kids may never know/care that it could be done different

  16. Sites which do not want to be linked to. by grahamm · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Added to that there are sites which do not like you linking to their pages, some even going as far as to claim that linking to them is violating their copyright.

  17. 300 baud should be fast enough for anyone. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You joke, but 99% of relevant content for news and discussion can be done at 300baud. FWIW, that's about my typing speed on /. after my browser has been open for a while on a moderately new computer.

    1. Re:300 baud should be fast enough for anyone. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Scrolling if VERY slow at 300baud. 1200 or 2400 is much more comfortable.

  18. Block IP address ranges too by knorthern+knight · · Score: 2

    Here are their IP address ranges that I block

    31.13.24.0/21
    31.13.64.0/18
    66.220.144.0/20
    69.63.176.0/20
    69.171.224.0/19
    74.119.76.0/22
    103.4.96.0/22
    173.252.64.0/18
    204.15.20.0/22

    --

    I'm not repeating myself
    I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
  19. Blame the ISPs by fustakrakich · · Score: 4, Interesting

    They prefer a one way connection, so they restrict services and uploading. They are working hard to turn the internet into TV, with little to no resistance from their customers.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    1. Re:Blame the ISPs by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 1

      Publishing meaningful written content doesn't use any meaningful upstream bandwidth. Try again!

    2. Re:Blame the ISPs by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Yes, we can all write 'letters to the editor', can't we?

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  20. tl;dr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    tl;dr

  21. Me and some political prisoner in Iran by WOOFYGOOFY · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Wow we're the two guys in the world who feel this way,. I knew there was someone else out there somewhere.

    Most of javascript and the massive javascript libraries out there are trash which have the net effect of\ making the ability to write and maintain web pages less democratic. The whole idea that the web has to be some form of advanced TV, with infotainment graphics and video in little squares all over your page is completley mistaken.

    You acquire knowledge through reading; through either written words or equations on the page. Knowledge acquistion for humans is inherently and forever a process of abstract symbol processing- we process speech and scratches on a page and transform it into understanding. That's as natural as breathing. Plain text is the once and a future king of the internet.

    Sure, interactive infographics is a real step forward in faciliating the comprehension of complex data sets and interrelationships but those are few and far inbetween and most of the web is a designed for something else.

    Suer somethings are better demonstrated than explained verbally. No one is arguing with that.

    But the vision of the web as a general purpose computing platform hosted in the cloud which distributes it's "resuts" to limited capacity machines (that would be yours) which more or less passively consume the output is the TVization of the web.

    It's what the media companies crave because it puts them back into the seat of power they've always held- power to decide what you see, what you're told, what you know; the power to turn you on and and turn you off using draconic and insane theories of "intellectual property" like software patents and copyright-forever and take-down notices - the whole SOPA and PIPA machinery of innovation control and democracy annihilation which is being about to be passed into law through the TPP passage.

    Pages like Huffpo and Facebook it's ilk are unendurable, with video splattered everywhere, their incessant loading , reloading, sputtering and changing. But worse, on a deeper level, they're deliberately designed not to inform readers but to *develop detailed profiles of reader's specific interests which are then sold to marketers and employers*.

    They do this by making the headline, the actual content and the link-paths to their stories micro-interest sieves. With each follow-me link, with each carefully worded headline, every news story is broken out along predefined personality/interest micro topics. By the time you've clicked down to the actual story you wanted to read, you've told huffpo and their "partners" an enormous amount yourself personally, your personal circumstances, your private interests, private concerns and life circumstances.

    When read Huffpo you repeatedly engage in the above cycle and they in turn tweak and retweak their sieves to be finer and finer over time - this is an iterative game for them- so it reads you back, like a book.

    It knows you're a 23 y/o white woman living in THAT house with 3 roomates who's had an abortion, makes 23k a year working as a temp and is currently looking for a partner with which she can surprise one day by intimating she's willing to explore 50 Shades of Gray type S&M and that you have 34k in student loan debt you worry a lot about.

    It knows that and it shares that information to "its partners" which is to say anyone with enough money who wants it, who in turn sell that to your potential employers, that grant issuing institution you applied to, that political organization you're thining about joining, perhaps to see how far you can go.

    It sells it to the gatekeepers of your life so that when you show up in your new business causual outift to interview, you might as well be butt fucking naked with what you thought was your most private and personal information neatly typed out in Courier 12 on bond paper instead of you education and qualifications.

    And that's if your just Joesephine Average. If you're Josephine Someone, then you've effectively given your

    1. Re:Me and some political prisoner in Iran by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe you can find this book in English: Giovanni Sartori - Homo Videns.

    2. Re:Me and some political prisoner in Iran by Smauler · · Score: 1

      You acquire knowledge through reading; through either written words or equations on the page. Knowledge acquistion for humans is inherently and forever a process of abstract symbol processing- we process speech and scratches on a page and transform it into understanding. That's as natural as breathing. Plain text is the once and a future king of the internet.

      Suer[sic] somethings are better demonstrated than explained verbally. No one is arguing with that.

      It seems like you are.

      Writing is a new invention in terms of the history of humanity. A hundred thousand year old caveman could (in theory) understand a youtube video in a language they knew, but they could not read anything. They could also get something from a youtube video even if they did not understand the language. You can't get anything from text if you don't understand it.

    3. Re:Me and some political prisoner in Iran by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uhh... isn't language also new in terms of the history of humanity? ;)

  22. Maybe it takes somebody from Iran ... by quax · · Score: 2

    ... somebody who really is sensitized to what freedom means, to remind us that on the social nets we are just playing at the pleasure of our corporate overlords.

  23. The hyperlink WAS the message by RandCraw · · Score: 1

    The OP is channeling McLuhan. He's resurrected cool vs hot media all over again -- the cool aging hyperlink vs the hot social site or app or vendor supplied smartphone service. Inevitably media evolves.

    In architectural terms, hyperlinks were akin to craftsman-style houses and mission-style furniture: the building's infrastructure was left exposed so the mechanisms of its construction were part of the art. But of course that lovely transparency limited the architect's range of artistic expression possible in that medium. When skyscrapers arrived on the scene, it was no longer feasible to expose the inner workings of such a behemoth in an aestheticly pleasing and accessible way. The internet is no different.

    With the rise of audio and video and ephemeral mesaging content, the web's infrastructure had to grow up or stultify. None of us wants to dwell online by having to dig our way through the now nearly infinite morass of net content: new, aging, old, long dead, and better-it-had-never-lived. Organization of relevant from irrelevant is now essential.

    But who's going to do this? A curated web made of hypertext is not gonna happen. Too expensive and too slow. So we get the next best thing -- a hosted web, where the hypertext disapears into the architecture. Corporations invest in building virtual communities to attract content providers and consumers. Like it or not, the web's architecture grows up, sheds its skin, and moves on.

    1. Re:The hyperlink WAS the message by WOOFYGOOFY · · Score: 1

      Your points are orthogonal to each other. The exposure of hypertext links has nothing to do with curation or no-curation. The rise of web pages as apps and opaque services which present ephemral content instead of durable content has nothing to do HTML and links to durable URLs.

      What we want is durable findable content . Google actually did a good job at rating that content for the average surfer. Pages linking to pages takes care of the case where specialized cmmunities judgement is superior to Google's.

      What does this have to do with Twitter and Facebook type apporaches? Nothing. The analogy of web 1.0 to the craftsman movement is interesting but ultimately non-informative. It's just an analogy and the consequences of their respective specific internal details for the two subject areas do not somehow parallel each other.

      This is really a discussion about the difference between

        findable, referenceable, durable, cohesive and relevant [text + image + graphics + video}

      vs

        ephemeral [advertising copy + vacant images + video junk +infotainment]

    2. Re:The hyperlink WAS the message by RandCraw · · Score: 1

      Apparently we agree that the increased need for web content findability was ill served by hypertext links alone.

      My grander point was that the visibility and ubiquity of links served the wild wild west mentality of Web 1.0 and its aesthetic of maximum content visibility and its sense of freedom and "infinite content". That's not unlike the advent of Arts and Crafts as society's attempt to beautify the rise (and counter the dehumanization) of industrialization. Both movements sought to celebrate the winsomeness of tech, but couldn't survive the growth of tech for long.

      And yes I used an analogy (a metaphor, actually). But EVERYTHING shared is analogy. Says Plato anyway, and who am I to gainsay an icon like Plato?

  24. The point to point hyperlink is still missing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    On the subject of “the hyperlink”
      Th point to point hyperlink is still missing from the HTML standard.
      There is still no “CitationLink”, back to the original.
      There is still no good way to build knowledge by pointing to a phrase on a page.
      I have attempted to remedy this lack here: http://algorithmicartisan.com/showquote
      Now you can point to an additional billion things on the web.
      I’ll be happy when this functionality is part of the next W3C HTML standard.
      This CitationLink has obvious applications in journalism, science, human and machine learning. We have fingers to point to something with, it is about time the web did also.

  25. All is lost anyway... by Jawnn · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The local TV stations have taken to broadcasting a selection of Tweets about the events they cover, as if what Joe Sixpack has to say is somehow "news". Derakhshan is right, of course, but I don't see the Joe Sixpack's of the world giving a rat's ass about something takes more than five seconds to consume.

  26. BEHOLD THE NEW HYPERLINK by argormar · · Score: 0

    It looks like this:

    morphis://3syweaeb7xwm4q3hxfp9w4nynhcnuob6

    See:

    http://morph.is/description.ht...

    http://morph.is/v0.1

    http://reddit.com/r/morphis

    Sorry, I'm a little late releasing, but you can find the git clone link in the latest announcement on /r/morphis.

    1. Re:BEHOLD THE NEW HYPERLINK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      P2P stuff has been stagnant for 10 years, just some shiny website isn't going to change that.

  27. Probably why Iran let him go by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The authorities managed to figure out his thesis before he did.

  28. Nike Air Max TN 2015 Requin Hommes Chaussures by zhenkanhan · · Score: 1

    your Charlotte now Bobcats huge overseer nike free run pas cher , nike air jordans footwear appears to be lovely sad, due to its situation that Bobcats this period of year, scoring 10 is the winner and in addition Twenty deficiency, 30 four already have saved of which then the dismissal among Harry Dark, The air jordan and therefore dynamically attempting to . find to assist you to exchange the newest getting as well as forex currency trading Bobcats using pitfall. Never the less, all these really fail to effects Nike air jordan keeps flawed to require have fun with existence, "Charlotte Observer" noted down all of the genuine same time, placed into funds Three or more,One,000 jordans treated small throughout Charlotte now,Jordan You Wonderfiul Top ( Design # 332550-005 ) the exact good bring about turned into:Nike air jordan Footwear the exact will destination tops! founded upon neighborhood reputable land package office, the fresh "Qiao room Courtyard" is found in Charlotte, most of the high-class home region, any kind of place involved with Six hundred and fifty rectangular yards, about the dwelling on the Bobcats lone a http://www.frunike.fr/ life span of your respective next year, in addition to may likely even better tend the software day-to-day inhabits on for the build up. Most recently,

  29. Geocities by CanEHdian · · Score: 1

    I remember when "everyone" that got online, wanted to start their own website on e.g. Geocities. Easy to set up, pictures (animated 'E-mail' icon) happily copied from wherever you found it, etc. Now the Dark Side (copyright mafiaa) is taking over and soon it will be illegal to link to "unlicensed" content, and soon thereafter it will be illegal to link to links to "unlicensed" content.

    --
    When the copyright term is "forever minus a day", live every day like it's the last.
    1. Re:Geocities by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      I remember when "everyone" that got online, wanted to start their own website on e.g. Geocities. Easy to set up, pictures (animated 'E-mail' icon) happily copied from wherever you found it, etc. Now the Dark Side (copyright mafiaa) is taking over and soon it will be illegal to link to "unlicensed" content, and soon thereafter it will be illegal to link to links to "unlicensed" content.

      To be fair, those Geocities sites were crap and of little value to anyone. And if the content owners won't let you use their content, make your own, unlicensed. It's pretty hard to cry foul when you have the best tool in the universe for sharing original content and your biggest complaint is that you want to be able to copy someone else's.

  30. hyperlink was NOT invented by Berners-Lee by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    It was developed some 20 years earlier in the 60s.
    Hell, the concept of linking documents together was done up before Berner-Lee.
    What Tim did, was create an open language based on SGML's standard.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  31. medium.com == SHIT by Mats+Svensson · · Score: 0

    Im not reading shit on that useless POS site. medium.com represents everything that's wrong with todays kiddie-design. Fuck that site, and everyone who post there.

  32. There's a reason for this by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

    "Since I got out of jail, though, I've realized how much the hyperlink has been devalued, almost made obsolete."

    We've learned that linking is bad, because the link might be dead tomorrow.

    --
    I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
  33. It'll do what it says here... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You'll go faster, safer, & more reliably connected online http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    * :)

    (You're modded as "funny" - what's funnier? The fact that none of you can prove what's enumerated in that link wrong on a valid technical level...)

    APK

    P.S.=> Now THAT in parenthesis above, is funny... apk