this post was submitted on 17 Apr 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

87147 readers
3725 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 5 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] jqubed@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

It’s interesting to see the author mention BlueSky, I think as a potential positive, alongside Mastodon and other federated protocols. Here in the Fediverse I only ever see negative views of it, largely because it doesn’t use Activity Pub but also because it’s coming from a private company. But it sounds like the author thinks we need that diversity?

[–] classic@fedia.io 1 points 2 years ago

It's an interesting, useful analogy. My concern is that, like with nature, many fear the wild. The moment a rewilding of the internet might lead to a negative event, people would run and beg for the reinstament of walled gardens

[–] schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The Internet has never been as large and diverse as it is now. In the 2000s Wikipedia was often the only place where you could find generally useful information about the world on the Internet, now everything in it plus many other things can be found on many other websites competing for algorithmic attention.

The real thing about today's Internet is that on it, censorship happens not by having too little information, but too much, much of which will never be shown to very many people because of the algorithms of search engines or social media recommendation systems. I don't do a lot of "social media" and always find it weird to hear about personalities there who apparently have thousands or millions of followers but whom I have never heard of before.

[–] nix@midwest.social 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I don't agree that Wikipedia used to be the only place. There were plenty of competing encyclopedias, it was simply the best long-term.

[–] FunnyUsername@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

britannica has entered the chat