• Splitting The Web

    From Ben Collver@21:1/5 to All on Fri Dec 22 17:47:18 2023
    # Splitting the Web by Ploum on 2023-08-01

    There's an increasing chasm dividing the modern web. On one side, the commercial, monopolies-riddled, media-adored web. A web which has
    only one objective: making us click. It measures clicks, optimises
    clicks, generates clicks. It gathers as much information as it could
    about us and spams every second of our life with ads, beep,
    notifications, vibrations, blinking LEDs, background music and
    fluorescent titles.

    A web which boils down to Idiocracy in a Blade Runner landscape, a
    complete cyberpunk dystopia.

    Then there's the tech-savvy web. People who install adblockers or
    alternative browsers. People who try alternative networks such as
    Mastodon or, God forbid, Gemini. People who poke fun at the modern
    web by building true HTML and JavaScript-less pages.

    Between those two extremes, the gap is widening. You have to choose
    your camp. When browsing on the "normal web", it is increasingly
    required to disable at least part of your antifeatures-blockers to
    access content.

    Most of the time, I don't bother anymore. The link I clicked doesn't
    open or is wrangled? Yep, I'm probably blocking some important
    third-party JavaScript. No, I don't care. I've too much to read on a
    day anyway. More time for something else. I'm currently using
    kagi.com as my main search engine on the web. And kagi.com comes with
    a nice feature, a "non-commercial lens" (which is somewhat ironic
    given the fact that Kagi is, itself, a commercial search engine). It
    means it will try to deprioritize highly commercial contents. I can
    also deprioritize manually some domains. Like facebook.com or
    linkedin.com. If you post there, I'm less likely to read you. I've
    not even talked about the few times I use marginalia.nu.

    Something strange is happening: it's not only a part of the web which
    is disappearing for me. As I'm blocking completely google analytics,
    every Facebook domain and any analytics I can, I'm also disappearing
    for them. I don't see them and they don't see me!

    Think about it! That whole "MBA, designers and marketers web" is now
    optimised thanks to analytics describing people who don't block
    analytics (and bots pretending to be those people). Each day, I feel
    more disconnected from that part of the web.

    When really needed, dealing with those websites is so nerve breaking
    that I often resort to... a phone call or a simple email. I signed my
    mobile phone contract by exchanging emails with a real person because
    the signup was not working. I phone to book hotels when it is not straightforward to do it in the web interface or if creating an
    account is required. I hate talking on the phone but it saves me a
    lot of time and stress. I also walk or cycle to stores instead of
    ordering online. Which allows me to get advice and to exchange
    defective items without dealing with the post office.

    Despite breaking up with what seems to be "The Web", I've never
    received so many emails commenting my blog posts. I rarely had as
    many interesting online conversations as I have on Mastodon. I've
    tens of really insightful contents to read every day in my RSS feeds,
    on Gemini, on Hacker News, on Mastodon. And, incredibly, a lot of
    them are on very minimalists and usable blogs. The funny thing is
    that when non-tech users see my blog or those I'm reading, they
    spontaneously tell me how beautiful and usable they are. It's a bit
    like all those layers of JavaScript and flashy css have been used
    against usability, against them. Against us. It's a bit like real
    users never cared about "cool designs" and only wanted something
    simple.

    It feels like everyone is now choosing its side. You can't stay in
    the middle anymore. You are either dedicating all your CPU cycles to
    run JavaScript tracking you or walking away from the big monopolies.
    You are either being paid to build huge advertising billboards on top
    of yet another framework or you are handcrafting HTML.

    Maybe the web is not dying. Maybe the web is only splitting itself in
    two.

    You know that famous "dark web" that journalists crave to write
    about? (at my request, one journalist once told me what "dark web"
    meant to him and it was "websites not easily accessible through a
    Google search".) Well, sometimes I feel like I'm part of that "dark
    web". Not to buy drugs or hire hitmen. No! It's only to have a place
    where I can have discussions without being spied and interrupted by
    ads.

    But, increasingly, I feel less and less like an outsider.

    It's not me. It's people living for and by advertising who are the
    outsiders. They are the one destroying everything they touch,
    including the planet. They are the sick psychos and I don't want them
    in my life anymore. Are we splitting from those click-conversion-funnel-obsessed weirdos? Good riddance! Have fun
    with them.

    But if you want to jump ship, now is the time to get back to the
    simple web. Welcome back aboard!

    From: <https://ploum.net/2023-08-01-splitting-the-web.html>

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marco Cawthorne@21:1/5 to All on Fri Dec 22 15:07:40 2023
    When really needed, dealing with those websites is so nerve breaking
    that I often resort to... a phone call or a simple email.

    Yeah, a lot of the web is so unusable I try to have the web browser
    open as little as possible.

    Good relatable article overall

    -- Marco

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From yeti@21:1/5 to Ben Collver on Sat Dec 23 01:48:25 2023
    Ben Collver <bencollver@tilde.pink> writes:

    You know that famous "dark web" that journalists crave to write
    about?

    No. I do not know what journalists are talking about. I know Tor and
    similar things.

    (at my request, one journalist once told me what "dark web" meant to
    him and it was "websites not easily accessible through a Google
    search".)

    Sounds like a real expert! /s

    --
    I do not bite, I just want to play.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From yeti@21:1/5 to Ben Collver on Sat Dec 23 01:47:49 2023
    Ben Collver <bencollver@tilde.pink> writes:

    You know that famous "dark web" that journalists crave to write
    about?

    No. I do not know what journalists talking about. I know Tor and
    similar things.

    (at my request, one journalist once told me what "dark web" meant to
    him and it was "websites not easily accessible through a Google
    search".)

    Sounds like a real expert! /s

    --
    I do not bite, I just want to play.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From candycanearter07@21:1/5 to yeti on Fri Dec 22 23:43:30 2023
    On 12/22/23 19:48, yeti wrote:
    Ben Collver <bencollver@tilde.pink> writes:

    You know that famous "dark web" that journalists crave to write
    about?

    No. I do not know what journalists are talking about. I know Tor and similar things.

    (at my request, one journalist once told me what "dark web" meant to
    him and it was "websites not easily accessible through a Google
    search".)

    Sounds like a real expert! /s

    Not even "inaccessible". Just "hard to access". geez..
    --
    user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From immibis@21:1/5 to All on Sat Dec 23 11:39:10 2023
    On 12/23/23 06:43, candycanearter07 wrote:
    On 12/22/23 19:48, yeti wrote:
    Ben Collver <bencollver@tilde.pink> writes:

    You know that famous "dark web" that journalists crave to write
    about?

    No.  I do not know what journalists are talking about.  I know Tor and
    similar things.

    (at my request, one journalist once told me what "dark web" meant to
    him and it was "websites not easily accessible through a Google
    search".)

    Sounds like a real expert!  /s

    Not even "inaccessible". Just "hard to access". geez..

    They are, in a sense, dark, and part of the web. I don't think it's a
    bad name for such sites, just an ambiguous one. I wouldn't limit this to
    Google though, not to binary values. The content of public Discord
    groups is dark*er* than the content of a website you can find with
    Google, and a public IRC channel is presently darker than a public
    Discord group because fewer people can see it, but both are lighter than
    an invite-only Discord or IRC channel.

    Silk Road, or whatever they're using now, is lighter than an invite-only channel, because anyone can install Tor and go to visit it.

    I think limiting the term "dark web" to hidden sites is unnecessarily restrictive and pedantic.

    The original meaning of "darknet", before Tor co-opted it, was a network
    whose very existence was outside of your immediate neighbours was
    invisible. Usenet is almost a darknet, but the Path header provides
    visibility of network interconnections. Retroshare is a modern darknet,
    or so I heard - I've never tried it - because you only peer with people
    you trust, and distant people only send messages to each other through a
    trust chain, without a direct connection, just like NNTP. I2P isn't a
    darknet, because you can see all the network nodes - I2P's anonymity is
    that you can't tell which node is hosting an address.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From immibis@21:1/5 to Spiros Bousbouras on Sat Dec 23 20:38:36 2023
    On 12/23/23 15:44, Spiros Bousbouras wrote:

    The other issue is that if one is not familiar with what's on topic on some of the crossposted groups , it creates a dilemma whether they should simply remove the crossposting or spend time to visit the groups to become familiar and see if their response would be on topic.


    Considering that Usenet is not moderated, is filled with extremely
    off-topic spam, and there is absolutely no penalty for a post that is
    related to what the group is about but still different from the usual discussion, I don't think that's anything to worry about.

    People who use "old web" technologies like Gopher and Gemini are sure to
    find it interesting.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Computer Nerd Kev@21:1/5 to immibis on Sun Dec 24 07:52:11 2023
    immibis <news@immibis.com> wrote:
    Considering that Usenet is not moderated, is filled with extremely
    off-topic spam, and there is absolutely no penalty for a post that is
    related to what the group is about but still different from the usual discussion, I don't think that's anything to worry about.

    People who use "old web" technologies like Gopher and Gemini are sure to
    find it interesting.

    I see all the fuel for Usenet's first Web/Gopher/Gemini flame
    war. Except for participants, that is.

    Still, I'll keep the popcorn on standby...

    --
    __ __
    #_ < |\| |< _# | Note: I won't see posts made from Google Groups |

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From D@21:1/5 to All on Fri Jan 5 12:55:52 2024
    XPost: comp.infosystems.gemini, comp.infosystems.gopher, comp.infosystems.www.misc

    There's a recent thread titled "Which groups are active?" over on alt.usenet.newbies that might have some good leads.

    Hopefully one upside of Google leaving Usenet will be that there'll be
    less spam, and the number of messages in a group will become a better reflection of how active the group really is.

    Great suggestion, thank you very much Rayner!

    Best regards,
    Daniel

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mike Spencer@21:1/5 to nospam@example.net on Sat Jan 6 03:53:38 2024
    [ groups snipped to comp.misc ]

    D <nospam@example.net> writes:

    I always wondered if there was room for starting a business that
    would aggregate all programs on behalf of other people and thus
    "garble" the information. Think of it as an e-commerce proxy where
    people pay you cash or through bank transfer and you (and your
    staff) buy things online on their behalf. The profile then built up
    is based on 10, 20...x persons so won't really be useful. I assume
    that it is illegal but would be a nice privacy preserving
    service. =)

    If there were a local person to whom I could hand cash in person, who
    would do that on demand for a small percentage fee, I'd do that.

    I have had a friend -- an on-line friend I've never met in person --
    get some things for me on-line. Haven't heard if he's been inundated
    with ads for raw carnauba wax, electric blankets or Ford fuel gauge
    senders or not. :-) But I don't want to burden him with trivial
    purchases (as opposed to things I need for some urgent purpose and
    can't find locally.)

    I don't see anything illegal about it. Some vendors might make an
    issue of the mailing address to which an item is drop-shipped when (as
    it would be) it's different from that of the on-line person doing the
    ordering. That potential flaw hasn't turned up as a problem in the
    few times we've done it.

    And what nasty a word choice! Loyalty is unselfish
    faithfulness and commitment at the sacrifice of one's own
    interests and well-being. Getting a discount is the
    opposite.

    Yeah. We just treat the whole loyalty card things a an unavoidable
    bother like parking meters.


    --
    Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From D@21:1/5 to Mike Spencer on Sun Jan 7 01:08:22 2024
    On Sat, 6 Jan 2024, Mike Spencer wrote:

    I always wondered if there was room for starting a business that
    would aggregate all programs on behalf of other people and thus
    "garble" the information. Think of it as an e-commerce proxy where
    people pay you cash or through bank transfer and you (and your
    staff) buy things online on their behalf. The profile then built up
    is based on 10, 20...x persons so won't really be useful. I assume
    that it is illegal but would be a nice privacy preserving
    service. =)

    If there were a local person to whom I could hand cash in person, who
    would do that on demand for a small percentage fee, I'd do that.

    Hello Mike,

    It does sound like a nice idea, doesn't it! =) The problem is to scale
    up and...

    I don't see anything illegal about it. Some vendors might make an

    once you scale up the credit card companies will probably stop you or
    money laundering rules or know your customers rules etc.

    But perhaps at some time in the future, I might try just to see how far
    it would scale before hitting the credit cards companies or the
    government regulations.

    Best regards,
    Daniel

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From immibis@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 7 02:28:49 2024
    On 1/7/24 01:08, D wrote:


    On Sat, 6 Jan 2024, Mike Spencer wrote:

    I always wondered if there was room for starting a business that
    would aggregate all programs on behalf of other people and thus
    "garble" the information. Think of it as an e-commerce proxy where
    people pay you cash or through bank transfer and you (and your
    staff) buy things online on their behalf. The profile then built up
    is based on 10, 20...x persons so won't really be useful. I assume
    that it is illegal but would be a nice privacy preserving
    service. =)

    If there were a local person to whom I could hand cash in person, who
    would do that on demand for a small percentage fee, I'd do that.

    Hello Mike,

    It does sound like a nice idea, doesn't it! =) The problem is to scale
    up and...

    I don't see anything illegal about it.  Some vendors might make an

    once you scale up the credit card companies will probably stop you or
    money laundering rules or know your customers rules etc.

    But perhaps at some time in the future, I might try just to see how far
    it would scale before hitting the credit cards companies or the
    government regulations.

    Best regards, Daniel


    You make a good point - this is precisely what happens. Someone uses
    your service to buy drugs, and the government comes down like a stack of bricks, and gives you 3 life sentences for illegal operation of a money transmitting service.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From immibis@21:1/5 to immibis on Sun Jan 7 02:29:15 2024
    On 1/7/24 02:28, immibis wrote:
    On 1/7/24 01:08, D wrote:


    On Sat, 6 Jan 2024, Mike Spencer wrote:

    I always wondered if there was room for starting a business that
    would aggregate all programs on behalf of other people and thus
    "garble" the information. Think of it as an e-commerce proxy where
    people pay you cash or through bank transfer and you (and your
    staff) buy things online on their behalf. The profile then built up
    is based on 10, 20...x persons so won't really be useful. I assume
    that it is illegal but would be a nice privacy preserving
    service. =)

    If there were a local person to whom I could hand cash in person, who
    would do that on demand for a small percentage fee, I'd do that.

    Hello Mike,

    It does sound like a nice idea, doesn't it! =) The problem is to scale
    up and...

    I don't see anything illegal about it.  Some vendors might make an

    once you scale up the credit card companies will probably stop you or
    money laundering rules or know your customers rules etc.

    But perhaps at some time in the future, I might try just to see how far
    it would scale before hitting the credit cards companies or the
    government regulations.

    Best regards, Daniel


    You make a good point - this is precisely what happens. Someone uses
    your service to buy drugs, and the government comes down like a stack of bricks, and gives you 3 life sentences for illegal operation of a money transmitting service.

    Addendum: services like this do exist in places with less insane
    governments.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From D@21:1/5 to immibis on Mon Jan 8 11:12:23 2024
    On Sun, 7 Jan 2024, immibis wrote:

    You make a good point - this is precisely what happens. Someone uses your
    service to buy drugs, and the government comes down like a stack of bricks, >> and gives you 3 life sentences for illegal operation of a money
    transmitting service.

    Addendum: services like this do exist in places with less insane governments.


    Really?! Please give me a pointer in the right direction, because I'd
    like to become a customer! =)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From D@21:1/5 to immibis on Mon Jan 8 11:11:44 2024
    On Sun, 7 Jan 2024, immibis wrote:

    once you scale up the credit card companies will probably stop you or
    money laundering rules or know your customers rules etc.

    But perhaps at some time in the future, I might try just to see how far
    it would scale before hitting the credit cards companies or the
    government regulations.

    Best regards, Daniel


    You make a good point - this is precisely what happens. Someone uses your service to buy drugs, and the government comes down like a stack of bricks, and gives you 3 life sentences for illegal operation of a money transmitting service.

    Well, buying drugs is easy to protect against in the way I imagine such
    a service, but even buying regular things could still trigger ALM/KYC
    laws.

    I'm running my own business and I know first hand how revolting it is to
    have anything at all to do with banks and the government.

    I think, for this service to be even remotely feasible, it would have to
    hide in plain sight. You would have to have x "purchasers" with personal
    credit cards, and spread the customers out among them to ensure that
    neither purchasers consumes too much in any given month.

    Best regards,
    Daniel

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From immibis@21:1/5 to All on Mon Jan 8 20:10:10 2024
    On 1/8/24 11:11, D wrote:
    I'm running my own business and I know first hand how revolting it is to
    have anything at all to do with banks and the government.

    I think, for this service to be even remotely feasible, it would have to
    hide in plain sight. You would have to have x "purchasers" with personal credit cards, and spread the customers out among them to ensure that
    neither purchasers consumes too much in any given month.

    You would then go to prison for money laundering.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From immibis@21:1/5 to All on Mon Jan 8 20:12:28 2024
    On 1/8/24 11:12, D wrote:


    On Sun, 7 Jan 2024, immibis wrote:

    You make a good point - this is precisely what happens. Someone uses
    your service to buy drugs, and the government comes down like a stack
    of bricks, and gives you 3 life sentences for illegal operation of a
    money transmitting service.

    Addendum: services like this do exist in places with less insane
    governments.


    Really?! Please give me a pointer in the right direction, because I'd
    like to become a customer! =)

    ISTR in some African villages, there would be one person who held the
    money for the whole village and kept track of each person's individual
    account.

    Somewhat related: Hawala

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From D@21:1/5 to immibis on Tue Jan 9 12:23:17 2024
    On Mon, 8 Jan 2024, immibis wrote:

    Really?! Please give me a pointer in the right direction, because I'd
    like to become a customer! =)

    ISTR in some African villages, there would be one person who held the money for the whole village and kept track of each person's individual account.

    Somewhat related: Hawala


    Good point about Hawala. But sadly where I am from, the hawalaboys are
    now being forced to submit to the finance authority so I think that way
    is slowly being closed.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From D@21:1/5 to immibis on Tue Jan 9 12:22:11 2024
    On Mon, 8 Jan 2024, immibis wrote:

    On 1/8/24 11:11, D wrote:
    I'm running my own business and I know first hand how revolting it is to
    have anything at all to do with banks and the government.

    I think, for this service to be even remotely feasible, it would have to
    hide in plain sight. You would have to have x "purchasers" with personal
    credit cards, and spread the customers out among them to ensure that
    neither purchasers consumes too much in any given month.

    You would then go to prison for money laundering.



    Incorrect. It would depend on the countries involved and the mount of
    money involved all of which is under my control.

    But, you do have one point which I concede and that is that we, as
    citizens, daily are committing crimes due to the extremely convoluted and numerous laws in existence.

    So yes, just by living in todays society you are very likely to have
    committed some kind of crime somewhere at some time.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From immibis@21:1/5 to All on Wed Jan 10 09:48:40 2024
    On 1/9/24 12:22, D wrote:


    On Mon, 8 Jan 2024, immibis wrote:

    On 1/8/24 11:11, D wrote:
    I'm running my own business and I know first hand how revolting it is to >>> have anything at all to do with banks and the government.

    I think, for this service to be even remotely feasible, it would have to >>> hide in plain sight. You would have to have x "purchasers" with personal >>> credit cards, and spread the customers out among them to ensure that
    neither purchasers consumes too much in any given month.

    You would then go to prison for money laundering.



    Incorrect. It would depend on the countries involved and the mount of
    money involved all of which is under my control.

    But, you do have one point which I concede and that is that we, as
    citizens, daily are committing crimes due to the extremely convoluted
    and numerous laws in existence.

    So yes, just by living in todays society you are very likely to have committed some kind of crime somewhere at some time.

    The point is not that you can accidentally commit crimes. The point is
    that all things which fall outside of government control are crimes.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jim Jackson@21:1/5 to immibis on Wed Jan 10 12:29:17 2024
    On 2024-01-10, immibis <news@immibis.com> wrote:
    On 1/9/24 12:22, D wrote:


    On Mon, 8 Jan 2024, immibis wrote:

    On 1/8/24 11:11, D wrote:
    I'm running my own business and I know first hand how revolting it is to >>>> have anything at all to do with banks and the government.

    I think, for this service to be even remotely feasible, it would have to >>>> hide in plain sight. You would have to have x "purchasers" with personal >>>> credit cards, and spread the customers out among them to ensure that
    neither purchasers consumes too much in any given month.

    You would then go to prison for money laundering.



    Incorrect. It would depend on the countries involved and the mount of
    money involved all of which is under my control.

    But, you do have one point which I concede and that is that we, as
    citizens, daily are committing crimes due to the extremely convoluted
    and numerous laws in existence.

    So yes, just by living in todays society you are very likely to have
    committed some kind of crime somewhere at some time.

    The point is not that you can accidentally commit crimes. The point is
    that all things which fall outside of government control are crimes.

    That is blatantly not true.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)