The internet is dying

There is no stopping it, You can't fix a social problem with tech solutions. Pretty soon no one will even know how to use a computer anymore, everyone will be using phones for everything, if you think zoomers are tech illiterate retards just wait until gen alpha comes of age. i'm talking complete lobotomization of the population. all that will remain will be discord where everyones words are heavily policed and every conversation is about gender identity. this is it. this is how the internet dies, not with a bang but a whimper.

>>1
Generation X already ruined the internet in 1993.
I don't get what the fuss is all about.

>>2

The question is if WWW killed the Internet. The Internet consisted of Newsgroups, FTP, Gopher, Telnet BBS back then. Of all ancient high level protocols, only email survived due to the need to identify users on WWW, but it's monopolized by big tech e.g. Gmail.

I've heard that said before, that usenet was the peak of the internet. i can see that being true to some extent. i'm sure there was a wealth of information there unlike anywhere else because it was centralized. when everyone is just connecting to one place you will have most of the knowledge in one place and thus easy access to it VS having to scour the net reading hundreds of forums. centralization can be a good thing but it usually just degrades into echo chambers which is what's happening now.

so while the centralized model has its benefits they are negated by mankinds need for hierarchal control which inevitably leads to dictatorships.

imho the early 2000s internet was peak internet. it was decentralized enough so not one company or person held all the power but centralized enough that it was relatively easy to find stuff.

>>4

>imho the early 2000s internet was peak internet

>so while the centralized model has its benefits they are negated by mankinds need for hierarchal control which inevitably leads to dictatorships.

i never used usenet either. that was early to mid 90s internet. i didn't get online until 98. by then AOL had already taken over. People like to really bash AOL but it was a golden age, there was stuff going on 24/7, chats forums you name it. everytime you logged in your inbox was full from people you had met online wanting to talk about stuff or share files. chat rooms were packed day and night, you could join a chat room about literally any topic and there would be people in there talking about it. it was unlike anything that has ever existed or will ever exist again.

by the early 2000s aol was dying off and myspace had replaced it. there were lots of cool sites around but myspace started the decline, the internet started becoming a social status contest instead of an anonymous fun place. when FB came on the scene in the late 00s it only deteriorated further, now everyone is using their real identity on the internet which was always considered the biggest no no when online. that of course led to the self policing nature of ones words because now your online under your real name and your words have real world consequences so naturally you don't say as much.

>>6 I used to believe that web in the 1990's was a deserted space, but then I stumbled upon StumbleUpon! this website randomcrapmuseum.neocities.org/exhibits/ayashii/fansite/history and realized it was maybe even more active than we have it today. I mean numerous websites popped up every year, instead of just "content" on social media.

>that of course led to the self policing nature of ones words because now your online under your real name and your words have real world consequences so naturally you don't say as much

Make sure the power is up
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35506401
Haha

It’s already dead.

>>9 You mean "dead internet theory"? or something else?

People "in the know" were referring to it as the dead internet "theory" a few years ago. But now i think it's safe to say that it's no longer a theory, it's a fact. and the evidence is conclusive.

All i can tell is you are now living in the detritus of a once great civilization.

go look on internet archive (before the glowers kill that too) and look for archives of:
tribe.com (2011)
digg.com (2014)
myspace.com
aol.com (2003 -- 2005)
youtube.com (2011 -- 2014)
answers.yahoo.com (2003 -- 2014)

you will actually see the collapse unfold as you go through the years.

Listen to this...
Moyun says I got the right one
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5O7iG-yQpAQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPxeV0gks9Y

we still have each other and we are smart and strong i will stay with you fren, i wont let them hurt us

>>10
I doubt >>9 means "dead internet theory".
From my understanding, it's a conspiracy theory that nothing on the internet is real/it's all AI or some sort of machine.
By the internet is dead, he may mean that the internet lost its original soul, and is now a soulless husk of centralized websites controlled by tech giants.

>>15

>By the internet is dead, he may mean that the internet lost its original soul, and is now a soulless husk of centralized websites controlled by tech giants.

We are definitely nearing the end of the internet, what will replace it i don't know. the crypto people hoped web 3 would save the web by taking control away from the centralized infrastructure but that remains to be seen i guess. the problem with crypto is the banking system still controls all the fiat on-ramps and without those there is no way to get money in or out of crypto. and since no one in real life accepts it, it's utility is relegated to the internet only. and a majority of its "use cases" are actually just P&D scams.

As for AR/VR. i think they already tried that and it didn't work. google glass, facebook VR. the metaverse so on and so forth. i'm not sure if the tech just wasn't quite there yet or if user interest just wasn't there. or maybe both. either way it didn't seem to gain much traction.

Ok. so to tie all this blog post of mine up into a conclusion:

So by now i am probably starting to sound like a broken record, but everytime i see things in decline i can always trace the reason why back to this one speech given by this one man who not many have heard about: https://youtu.be/5WPB2u8EzL8

Everyone is looking at decline of civilization and looking at all the technical aspects that could be causing it. But in reality it's more base than that. everything around you from the internet to the economy to the environment is subject to the adaptive cycle. So it's very possible that what we are seeing in regards to social decline and technological decline is in fact due to our current position in the adaptive cycle. which unfortunately for us is the rigidity trap.

This system having reached maximum complexity will die and another system will arise in it's place. but it will be a much smaller system with far less energy inputs available. I hope as sid smith stated in his video, that we will learn from the past system and not try to mirror it in the new system.

>>17

> https://youtu.be/5WPB2u8EzL8

>>17

>one speech given by this one man who not many have heard about: https://youtu.be/5WPB2u8EzL8

Am I retarded for not caring? If underage memefags stay isolated to platforms like Twitter and Discord, then I won't have to worry about them shitting up the places I like, right?

>>20
Maybe a little bit, as the large platforms have already done a lot of damage to the web (ex. creation of echochambers, high quantities of misinformation, promotes a cycle of dependence on the platform).
The worst is the creation of a whole fucking retarded social media addicted generation.
I should use the internet less, but I keep all of my usage on my immobile desktop.
I don't bring my Apple iStimtron-9001™ with me everywhere and load StimulTokgram ver. 7.4 at a moment's notice of boredom.

>>21
That's what I'm getting at though. The MGS2 dystopia applies more to humanity than the internet, so how come the internet itself is in danger? It sucks that random people are becoming braindead and/or extremists because of the shitty algorithms that most social media platforms have, but that doesn't degrade the internet as a whole, just social media. Social media has practically quarantined those people from visiting my circles of the internet, so I don't entirely mind it in that case.

>>22
One danger of internet centralization is that it kills off competing sites.
For example, it's very hard to start a competing search engine to Google without forcing it upon users, such as what Microsoft is doing with Bing for windows users.
Another thing is that communities often make subreddits or discord servers, rather than create a dedicated website for their topic. No doubt that this is easier and cheaper, but it takes control away from them and they are the victims to the will of the website's admins.
Most ziggers are tech illiterate due to the web's ease of use. Nobody needs to learn to use a computer, they just boot Windows, load Chrome, and it just werks.

>>16
Playing Roblox and then getting sucked into Discord is a common pattern. It has a critical mass so expect it to grow until it's the Facebook (in scale) of genZ and genA if it isn't already.
Best I can tell Roblox will move to avoid codependency with Discord, but it's tricky business.

The different aspects of people being raised on/by the internet are sure to have some interesting effects. Looking at this only from the internet is mistaken; you have to consider fluxes like parenting styles, schools, and culture, childhood experiences and etc.

People raised within accepting communities might have fewer problems with hiding themselves.
A person experiencing general social rejection growing in a toxic community might grow to be scornful of humanity.

There is no telling for sure because of how intricate it all is, you can only guess at others.
Try to at least understand how it has affected you.

>>20

You are fine. The only problem you will face in some time is that your beloved platforms will die out without fresh blood.

I wonder how much different niche boards like this really are from the old web, and that maybe we just thought the old web was a brighter more exciting place merely because it was so fresh and new at the time.

Scratch that though, I miss how active message boards used to be.

Some people argue the old web was as quality as it was because. There were technical barriers to access, so it gatekept for smarter users.

The interesting thing about textboards like this to me is they create a barrier of boredom that high stimulus craving users can't stand, leaving users who are interested in engaging content.

>>26

>the old web was a brighter more exciting place merely because it was so fresh and new at the time