• 3 Posts
  • 84 Comments
Joined 4 months ago
cake
Cake day: August 23rd, 2025

help-circle


  • you run an overpriced web hosting company and run conferences for race scientists. my bayesian intuition tells me humanity will probably be fine, or perhaps better off.

    Someone in the comments calls them out: ā€œif owning a $16 million conference centre is critical for the Movement, why did you tell us that you were not responsible for all the racist speakers at Manifest or Sam ā€˜AI-go-vroom’ Altman at another event because its just a space you rent out?ā€

    OMG the enemies list has Sam Altman under ā€œthe people who I think have most actively tried to destroy it (LessWrong/the Rationalist movement)ā€


  • I agree that a big part of the problem is financialized capitalism (whether VC money or Reddit’s stock market speculation or the Putin regime realizing that they could just buy LiveJournal). We also have the right to take generous paychecks from Substack, or host all our video on Youtube for free. But we can’t expect that Substack will be as generous forever or YouTube could offer exactly what it offers today minus the ads and tracking and pay for itself. There are lots of Internet communities which are decentralized or nonprofit or democratically governed but they don’t have the budgets of giant corporate services.

    Online communities can also fade for mundane reasons like ā€œfailure to recruit new members as fast as old members leaveā€ or ā€œfounders have a tiff and the community breaks up into warring factionsā€ or ā€œold site was designed for laptops and dialup, now we have smartphones and broadband, but our user base does not want to change.ā€ Financial speculation make this worse but community management is hard.


  • Not at all. I am saying that we cannot all have our own digital Versailles and servants forever after. We can have our own digital living room and kitchen and take turns hosting friends there, but we have to do the work, and it will never be big or glamorous. Valente could have said ā€œbig social media sucks but small open web things are greatā€ but instead she wants the benefits of big corporate services without the drawbacks.

    I have been an open web person for decades. There is lots of space there to explore. But I do not believe that we will ever find a giant corporation which borrows money from LutherCorp and Bank of Mordor, builds a giant ā€˜free’ service with a slick design, and never runs out of money or starts stuffing itself with ads.


  • A point that Maciej Ceglowski among others have made is that the VC model traps services into ā€œspend bigā€ until they run out of money or enshitiffy, and that services like Dreamwidth, Ghost, and Signal offer ā€˜social-media-like’ experiences on a much smaller budget while earning modest profits or paying for themselves. But Dreamwidth, Ghost, and Signal are never going to have the marketing budget of services funded by someone else’s money, or be able to provide so many professional services gratis. So you have to chose: threadbare security on the open web, or jumping from corporate social media to corporate social media amidst bright lights and loudspeakers telling you what site is the NEW THING.



  • Its not nihilism to observe that Reddit is bigger and fancier than this Lemmy server because Reddit is a giant business that hopes to make money from users. Online we have a choice between relatively small, janky services on the Internet (where we often have to pay money or help with systems administration and moderation) or big flashy services on corporate social media where the corporation handles all the details for us but spies on us and propagandizes us. We can chose (remember the existentialists?) but each comes with its own hassles and responsibilities.

    And nobody, whether a giant corporation or a celebrity, is morally obliged to keep providing tech support and moderation and funding for a community just because it formed on its site. I have been involved in groups or companies which said ā€œwe can’t keep running this online community, we will scale it back / pass it to some of our users and let them move it to their own domain and have a go at running itā€ and they were right to make that choice. Before Musk Twitter spent around $5 billion/year and I don’t think donations or subscriptions were ever going to pay for that (the Wikimedia Foundation raises hundreds of millions a year, and many more people used Wikipedia than used Twitter).


  • I think I read that post and thought it was incredibly naive, on the level of ā€œwhy does the barkeep ask if I want a drink?ā€ or ā€œwhy does the pretty woman with a nice smile want me to pay for the VIP lounge?ā€ Cheap clanky services like forums and mailing lists and Wordpress blogs can be maintained by one person or a small club but if you want something big, smooth, and high-bandwidth someone is paying real money and wants something back. Examples in the original post included geocities, collegeclub.com, MySpace, Friendster, Livejournal, Tumblr, Twitter and those were all big business which made big investments and hoped to make a profit.

    Anyone who has helped run a medium-sized club or a Fedi server has faced an agenda item like "we are growing. Input of resources from new members is not matching the growth in costs and hassle. How do we explain to the new members what we need to keep going and get them to follow up? "

    There is a whole argument that VC-backed for-profit corporations are a bad model for hosting online communities but even nonproffits or Internet celebrities with active comments face the issue ā€œthis is growing, it requires real server expenses and professional IT support and serious moderation. Where are those coming from? Our user base is used to someone else invisibly providing that.ā€



  • I wonder what would have happened if Ceglowski had kept focused on talks and on working with the few Bay Area tech workers who were serious about unionizing, regulation, and anti-capitalism. It seemed like after the response to his union drive was smaller and less enthusiastic than he had hoped, he pivoted to cybersecurity education and campaign fundraising.

    One of his warnings was that the megacorps are building systems so a few opinionated tech workers can’t block things. Assuming that a few big names will always be able to hold back a multibilliondollar company through individual action so they don’t need all that frustrating organizing seems unwise (as we are seeing in the state of the market for computer touchers in the USA).