Because big media got hooked on advertising revenue and news became subsidised and we got news/information cheaply, we'd been collectively taught that fact generation and dispersion costs were neglible (although they're not, work and energy is required and this was offset by the ad. revenue).
Move this to the digital space where information flows at close to light speed and you can accurately measure all sorts of marketing stuff - it just goes faster to the point of absurdity. Whatever value we can create via connectivity gets trashed by being subverted or obverted by corporate interests.
I'm now pissed off because I pay youtube $x per month not to be interrupted by ads, and now the content creators have their own ads in their content.
When you scale out, it becomes a sad picture of humanity that is excitedly self-reinforcing monetisation of things via interruption of engagement/continuity.
Actual value is evapourating.
No wonder we're all getting ADHD.
The spaces that are mostly simple and left alone are where interesting things can still continually occur. That's precisely why HN is actually still going strong.
When a tribe gets to large, because of Metcalfe's law the tribe loses the ability to discuss things to a level of nuance that is required, and that causes fractures that lead to a tribal split.
Because all of the internet communities have no natural way to split, the only thing left is for them to become toxic and eventually die.
Systems attempt to keep the tribe going longer by attempting to keep track of metrics, and this works for a while because the tribe had built up trust, but the bigger the tribe gets(with new members never trusting, forming Eternal September), the more the metrics reign, Goodhart's law states the more inevitable it is that it collapses.
> ... there seems to be only one cause behind all forms of social misery: bigness. Oversimplified as this may seem, we shall find the idea more easily acceptable if we consider that bigness, or oversize, is really much more than just a social problem. It appears to be the one and only problem permeating all creation. Whenever something is wrong, something is too big. ... And if the body of a people becomes diseased with the fever of aggression, brutality, collectivism, or massive idiocy, it is not because it has fallen victim to bad leadership or mental derangement. It is because human beings, so charming as individuals or in small aggregations, have been welded into overconcentrated social units. - Leopold Kohr, 1957
For the longest time I paid for MeWe, hoping they'd introduce pseudonyms and become a non Google Google+.
I would actually have paid for Google+ too if they had kept it around.
I only paid to support a good cause and in the hope that it would become a replacement for Google+.
After a year or two where they never responded to feedback I just gave up.
I don't need another place to worry about leaking my identity connected to deeply personal issues.
I'd like to discuss mental health issues as well but personally I don't feel like posting to ADHD or anything when my family or my boss or my future boss can trivially easy (two clicks, no mental gymnastics) go from my post there to my professional profile.
Besides, the term "far-right" is so utterly abused now that it doesn't mean anything except "people I don't like".
And, hey, would you have been happier if I'd called them Nazis?
This is the opposite of what I learned in Econ 101. People voluntarily transact because both parties stand to benefit - otherwise one party would choose to sit out.
Money is meant to represent equivalence of value but it doesn't do this very precisely or well - which is why using it to 'measure' things causes so many problems.
I get where you're coming from, but that's Econ 101 idealism where you assume both parties are fully knowledgable about everything regarding the transaction - the real world is not like this. People also naively transact simply because they've been taught to do so.
Cafés and restaurants handle this well. I think it is because they “commoditize their complement”[1], i.e. you’re allowed to talk while you consume. (Not too loud, though.)
A café, in most places, is a place for hanging out that makes money on the assumption that people will like refreshments, snacks or even small meals while doing so. They're typically not going to ask you to leave just because you haven't gotten anything in an hour or two (unless they're full). The exception appears to be some places where coffeehouses think they're a theme park ride.