• cAUzapNEAGLb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    18 days ago

    Fuck the commodification of culture.

    Fuck full time content creators.

    I don’t want people working full time on social networks. I don’t want to read your ad, your secret knowledge, your product placement, or sponsorship, or your oh so subtle pitch for VC funding. I’m certainly not going to give money.

    I want people who do their own thing in the real world, and as a hobby and show-and-tell, submit their work freely to the Internet to hone and expand their craft and field, and gain organic enrichment altruisticly.

    If you want to sell stuff and make money, make your own website and store. Not on our forum.

    Don’t pollute our forum. I want to be inspired, be in awe, be entertained, be informed, and to give back in my own way that continues this cycle and fuels the forum.

    We’ve fled so many greedy sites - fleeing this capitalistic parasite in hopes of finding honest discussion untainted by greed. I’m tired of fleeing.

    • octoturt@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 days ago

      creating things costs money. crowdfunding platforms like patreon have already proven an incredibly powerful avenue to enable independent creators who are passionate about things to share that with an audience. entertainment is, in fact, a job, which requires resources and time, and i loathe the implication that it isn’t.

      • symthetics@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        17 days ago

        100% agree. This attitude actually ends up devaluing art and entertainment because it basically boils down the to the idea that “it’s not a real job.”

        • cAUzapNEAGLb@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          17 days ago

          That’s not what I am saying.

          In my opinion the forum is a altruistic area. Is the value I provide tailoring the posts by up voting and down voting not valuable? Is the value I provide by summarizing and or giving interpretations of the articles posted here not valuable? Or engaging in thoughtful honest discussion not valuable?

          I believe they are.

          Do I feel entitled to some profit because of my input on this forum? No I do not.

          I give this work because I provide my value to this site voluntarily, honestly, many hours of my day, altruisticly, to build a better community and discussion. I don’t demand money because I receive a community in return.

          What I am saying is that this kind of stuff will segment our community, by creating a profitable segment of the community and an unprofitable segment of community, implicitly creating a “correct” and “incorrect” way. Beyond that it will introduce people to our community who care less about furthering this forum, and more about making profit.

          Remember YouTube before the partner program and video responses and how much more engaged and equal that community was? And what it is now with most every prominent channel being sponsored on top of ad breaks and product placement?

          Obviously, if a person wants to dedicate their full time to some art and wants money for it, they should, and I’m excited for what they produce, but this is not where to do it.

          But you don’t have vibrant thoughtful debates about world events in target, you don’t purchase microwaves at the library. You go to stores to buy stuff, you go to forums to discuss stuff.

          Content creators can create their own site, their own patreon, or whatever - they can freely submit their work to our forum for feedback and an audience, and they can even link someone the link to their store if they ask - but introducing the profit angle directly to our forum and integrating it in will be the beginning of the end for this community as it is. The first crack of enshitification.

    • demesisx@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      17 days ago

      I just wish your perspective was the norm. As these platforms catch on, that toxicity you mention becomes inevitable. Also tired of fleeing. I sincerely hope we don’t have to find a way to tie financial incentive into this relatively untainted community.

      As far as I’m concerned, whatever they’re selling here in OP’s article ain’t it. And perhaps my ideas (above) of a future decentralized fediverse are misguided too.

      I will say this: I don’t WANT to find a way to monetize this stuff. People are just increasingly more desperate for money. As the world gets worse, people are going to get increasingly more desperate to find a unique niche to fill to make a living.

    • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      18 days ago

      I think having a way for something like liberapay to be more closely coupled with your fediverse account so people can easily see one can accept donations would be good, but adding sub-only posts is a step too far I think.

  • demesisx@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 days ago

    Are we so hive-minded here on Lemmy that we have been brainwashed into hating crypto so much that we, a DECENTRALIZED community, have decided to start a centralized service to pay posters rather than use the trustless, decentralized systems literally DESIGNED for that purpose that already exist?

    All crypto isn’t a scam, people. Stop scoring own-goals against the big banksters and do your part against crypto scams by thoroughly vetting crypto projects before you put your trust in them rather than blindly believing that they’re ALL out to scam you.

    This idea should obviously be implemented with cryptocurrency but of course it isn’t because of our unfounded vilification of an entire industry that is clearly more philosophically aligned with the principles of the fediverse than centralized, legacy systems that we’ve been duped into continuing to support.

    🤦

    • symthetics@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 days ago

      I disagree. The fediverse just proves you can have successful decentralisation without any whiff of blockchain. You call them legacy systems, but they are in fact still current systems aren’t they… we’re still using them.

      • demesisx@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        16 days ago

        You don’t want decentralization? Your argument against crypto is that we still use centralized systems? We will do that until we don’t. That’s like way back before cars were ubiquitous, seeing a car and saying, “we use the horse and buggy.” Yes we do. The car replaces the horse and buggy in many important ways. It takes a while to catch on, though. In the same way, IMO technology should always be guided toward further decentralization unless we WANT the powers that be to be the gatekeepers of information.

        Honestly, even without crypto attached to it, I’d say the next version of the internet WILL be more servers running by independent operators and less centralization in data centers. It is inevitable regardless of anything I wrote here. Centralization is bad for so many reasons…the most damning of which is censorship.

        • symthetics@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          16 days ago

          There are lots of arguments against crypto, but the main one is that it is inferior to the current system in every conceivable way.

          -It’s slower -It’s harder to use -It’s full of scams -It’s backed by nothing -There is no consumer protection -It amplifies the existing problems of the financial system instead of solving them (money laundering/scams/financial inequality) -It’s dominated by the same rich cunts you’re trying to escape, but they’re even worse in crypto -All networks generally need L2s because they’re so shit and slow

          Those are just some off the top of my head.

          Additionally, it’s been around for a long time now. Everyone in crypto is so involved in solving the problems that are unique to crypto and Blockchain that they’ve missed the fact that no one gives a shit because it literally offers nothing we don’t already have that works better.

          The only reason anyone has ever cared about crypto is because it potentially offered a way to get rich quickly and ‘easily’ and get out of the grind.

          It’s a casino. That’s fine, you might make money. But that’s all it is.

          I’m not saying the current system is ideal, or even good, but crypto is nothing like a viable alternative.

          I’m all for decentralisation, but you do realise that all systems end up centralising to some extent over time because it’s just more efficient, right? Maybe we can find a good balance and make sure accountability actually means something in our systems, whatever industry they’re in, but the answer isn’t crypto from what I’ve seen.

          Interesting you talk about gatekeeping information when you’re literally parroting crypto echo chamber rhetoric because if you dare suggest anything other than crypto is the future you will instantly get shut down. It’s a cult, basically.

          • demesisx@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            16 days ago

            Interesting you talk about gatekeeping information when you’re literally parroting crypto echo chamber rhetoric because if you dare suggest anything other than crypto is the future you will instantly get shut down. It’s a cult, basically.

            Interesting that you don’t even have enough self-awareness or knowledge of the problem domains you claim to understand to see that you’re doing the EXACT same thing.

            You parroted partially true (cherry picked) all the way down to completely untrue things about the properties of this technology. If you understood the technology in the first place, you’d recognize that. There are so many different permutations of it and you paint it with the broadest brush possible.

            Tell me, do you know about proof of stake? Do you know what proof of work is? Do you understand the concept of an oracle?

            Of course it doesn’t solve every problem (it won’t ever be used to stream video…of course…did anyone ever say it would?)…but the ones it DOES solve (that you pretend it hasn’t) are not achievable with any as of yet known technology.

            Here’s just one that I’d love to see you pretend could exist on any other technology: Digital Identity and Land Deeds in war-torn (or even no longer existing) countries. Let’s say bombs destroy any paper deeds or even deeds on the servers all around a country. A person fleeing the country might return to the country and be homeless because they couldn’t prove that they owned that land. On a decentralized public blockchain, those deeds can be minted and henceforth can never be erased. Even if the official body that authorized them to be minted goes under or out of power, they are, in fact, IMPOSSIBLE TO ERASE SINCE THEY ARE ON A DECENTRALIZED BLOCKCHAIN and would be very hard if not impossible to discredit. The person would be legally able to get their house back.

            Another one is voting. Electronic voting on a PUBLIC DECENTRALIZED blockchain would be literally the ONLY way to achieve a fully-open, auditable election. Furthermore, if you’re proposing that a similar centralized government solution (equal in all other ways other than one being truly decentralized and the other not) is even remotely similar in its robustness and trustworthiness, you’re SURELY being disingenuous.

            There are TONS more but I don’t feel like wasting my time writing a term paper for someone that is clearly being disingenuous, parroting some world bank wage-slave neoliberal nonsense in the first place.

            • symthetics@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              15 days ago

              Thanks for proving my point by responding with the classic go to ‘rebuttal’ when anyone challenges crypto: “you don’t understand the tech!”

              Cool. Let’s save both of our time then. All the best.

              • demesisx@infosec.pub
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                15 days ago

                No problem.

                Thanks for proving mine as well.

                I even ended up writing you a stupid term paper but you just couldn’t hang I guess.

          • demesisx@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            16 days ago

            It’s slower

            and virtually impossible to hack

            It’s harder to use

            and virtually impossible to hack

            It’s full of scams

            people are idiots. I have literally never been scammed. If it’s not open source and a small group of insiders have massive bags of it, don’t invest, dumbass. Invest in cryptocurrencies that are TRULY decentralized by actually using your brain and reading.

            It’s backed by nothing

            It has intrinsic value. Gold is only worth something because someone says it has value.

            There is no consumer protection

            It easily could if regulators weren’t intentionally wishy washy about whether it is legal or not. Regulation will come. Sounds like you’re REALLY chomping at the bit to have the inevitable alternative: revocable central bank digital currencies.

            It amplifies the existing problems of the financial system instead of solving them (money laundering/scams/financial inequality)

            Not really. It is FAR more auditable than legacy systems. People are dumb. AI magnified how dumb companies are and so did crypto. People that understand it and AI will use it well. Those that villainize it (just like AI) do so because they are brainwashed by polarized viewpoints (just like AI). The truth is probably somewhere in the middle.

            It’s dominated by the same rich cunts you’re trying to escape, but they’re even worse in crypto

            That’s not true. Look at the financial holdings of billionaires in fiat vs. crypto. It’s FAR more egalitarian than fiat. You have to be talking about some fairly shitty cryptocurrencies for that to be true. Ethereum and Bitcoin have massive institutional investment. Their money is as green as anyone else’s.

            All networks generally need L2s because they’re so shit and slow

            It’s called architecture. Do you also not see the need for GPU’s and dedicated modules on a motherboard? Should the CPU do everything. Multithreading is bad I guess? Are you aware of what decentralization and parallelism can accomplish in technological spaces? Do you actually know what an L2 is? Seems like you don’t understand it.

    • comfy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 days ago

      I’m not complaining about it being crypto - I prefer crypto over credit card payments for online stuff. On the other hand, any monetisation of online communities leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I came to Lemmy years ago to get a step further away from for-profit internet treating me like a customer. Root of all evil, and all that.

      • demesisx@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        16 days ago

        I couldn’t agree more. When I was proposing crypto tie-in for votes, someone mentioned the Cobra Effect and I honestly had no answer to prevent it. I think it is wise to proceed under the assumption that it is somewhat inevitable that we see some sort of monetization as the user base grows and it becomes prohibitively expensive to run an instance. Personally, I think it is important that we really get deep into these discussion now so we can find a good consensus (with the least tradeoffs) before it’s too late and people just start forcfeeding users the classic “enshittification” modus operandi. I think the method detailed in this article is straight up enshitification incarnate; Patreon with more steps.

        https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/mind-brain-and-value/202402/what-the-cobra-effect-teaches-us-about-reward-psychology?amp