Won’t get fooled again?
Welcome to the Post-Naive Internet Era
Submitted 1 month ago by chobeat@lemmy.ml to technology@lemmy.world
https://www.mozillafoundation.org/en/nothing-personal/the-post-naive-internet-era/
Comments
Kowowow@lemmy.ca 1 month ago
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Internet in 2005: “Don’t trust anything you read in the newspaper, watch on TV, or hear on the radio. The real truth is here.”
Internet in 2015: “You can now read the newspaper, watch TV, and listen to the radio on the Internet! The real truth is here.”
Internet in 2025: “AI gibberish”
ruuster13@lemmy.zip 1 month ago
The subset of human behavior includes predation. It’s in our DNA, whether it is in you or not. It’s this fact we can’t forget or become naive about.
Kowowow@lemmy.ca 1 month ago
This was mostly a reference to a song by the who
shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip 1 month ago
If it’s not decentralized, it can be taken over. Don’t use anything that isn’t decentralized.
vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org 1 month ago
Criminal culture is decentralized, neo-Nazis are decentralized, power is decentralized.
Decentralized doesn’t equal good. I mean, I agree, but also one should use things with the smallest possible effective difference between suggested main quality and “what if not”.
That’s also why I’ve become skeptical of encryption lately. If one of your group members is compromised, it’s all compromised, doesn’t matter with how many member keys you encrypt each message, one is enough. In Signal they do that to conceal who’s a member of which group, and that is, of course, a noble endeavor. But see the previous paragraph. Either you expect one thing or the other. Either you are in a public group and have to watch your opsec and words, or you are in some cryptic conclave among trusted brethren. Except the latter is never true. Fringe of psychology and tech, as all security.
It’s similar with decentralization. It’s just a trait. Whether you need it is defined by your goal.
In my opinion it’s good when it’s real. Say, for the goal of countering bad market-driven phenomena in the Internet, - yes, it’s a real solution and it’s good when it works. For the goal of countering authoritarianism and surveillance it’s not, because it doesn’t solve the problem, in such a situation they can block and prosecute whoever they want and they will, and decentralization won’t work by itself.
So, when it works. It works when it allows people making stuff to make money, and when that includes stuff making the whole system work. If such a decentralized set of tools had been already made, it would have already won by market means. Despite all the advertising bullshit, oligopoly and vendor locks.
PerogiBoi@lemmy.ca 1 month ago
Bolo bolo but it’s the internet.
etherphon@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Sounds great in theory, but I feel like the minute one of those places becomes a viable alternative it will be sold for a pile of cash.
chobeat@lemmy.ml 1 month ago
A lot of these spaces are reading, writing and designing around so-called “anti-capture” protocols exactly to avoid that.
jjlinux@lemmy.zip 1 month ago
My thoughts exactly.
Auth@lemmy.world 1 month ago
I do not get what they trying to say here
cabbage@piefed.social 1 month ago
“Please accept our cookies bro!”
“And please follow us on Bluesky, Instagram, Linkedin, Spotify, and Tiktok! Together we’re building a better internet!! wooo!!”
Fucking hell Mozilla. What became of you.
GEEXiES@lemmy.world 1 month ago
And of course it loads content from Google! :( Well, it tried, because I block all that stuff, but how sad anyway. There are very few “independent” sites out there these days, all of them depend on third-parties, sometimes for a valid reason, but many others not.