Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
Comment
[i]Italic Text[/i]
[b]Bold Text[/b]
[spoiler]Spoiler Text[/spoiler]
>Highlight/Quote Text
[pre]Preformatted & Monospace Text[/pre]
[super]Superset Text[/super]
[sub]Subset Text[/sub]
1. Numbered lists become ordered lists
* Bulleted lists become unordered lists
File

Sandwich

something I've noticed about using the internet

Reply
Hide
- Wed, 11 May 2022 08:21:33 EST BCDamEuF No.5216011
File: 1652271693961.jpg -(174065B / 169.99KB, 680x796) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. something I've noticed about using the internet
be an asshole and antagonistic: instant interaction and quick replies

vs trying to start a conversation or requesting help for a particular thing: minimal engagement and lack of responses

why?
>>
Tarsem Singh - Wed, 11 May 2022 08:41:05 EST +ROthsKH No.5216013 Reply
>>5216011
Fuck you, that's why.

Hope this gets you some replies, OP. Best of luck.
>>
Ruckus - Wed, 11 May 2022 11:01:24 EST turIPj0J No.5216020 Reply
>>5216011
Only on stuff that faces the public. There's too many normies around to use public stuff anymore. Go into discords and private forums.
>>
Ivan Menjivar - Wed, 11 May 2022 13:10:17 EST TzXdRYoI No.5216029 Reply
le funny comedian™ is the guy who can throw shade on others in creative ways.
>>
François Massialot - Wed, 11 May 2022 14:08:11 EST 2d692Yvl No.5216038 Reply
It wasn't that bad until social media websites appeared, imo the internet should've remained the exclusive club of its original inhabitants: Scholars, Hobbyists and fat nerds.
>>
Amy Finley - Wed, 11 May 2022 19:13:23 EST LJurAsqA No.5216062 Reply
>>5216038
the old internet was just chaotic and it was fun to talk to people then. I'm seeing that years from now there will be less freedom on the internet but it's a good and bad thing at the same time. someone should make like a hypnospace outlaw type game about the old net I'd buy it.
>>
Arya Stark - Wed, 11 May 2022 20:25:39 EST uJVF2rYS No.5216074 Reply
>>5216038

I personally feel that the internet really started going downhill around the time 4chum got namedropped on fox news
>>
Julius Eaton - Wed, 11 May 2022 20:45:32 EST bZl+Iy0y No.5216081 Reply
>>5216038
Maybe your shitty geocites for dragon ball z because there was some shit in MSN/Yahoo groups that will make all the thin skins in here have meltdowns.
>>
Julius Eaton - Wed, 11 May 2022 21:00:57 EST bZl+Iy0y No.5216083 Reply
>>5216082

documenting reality and rotten were tamed to some of the shit "under the surface" from back then.
But I mean it was much better than this 3.5 internet.
>>
Gabriel Gonzaga - Wed, 11 May 2022 21:41:21 EST TCnFBeS9 No.5216084 Reply
>>5216083
>rotten.com

yeah i don't think anyone here would have a "meltdown" over that. Most people grow out of their teenage "gore is so edgy n cool" phase
>>
Eliza Povingbet - Thu, 12 May 2022 12:58:17 EST NmFi7wGH No.5216114 Reply
>>5216038
Also smartphones. Nobody gives a shit about their own posts when you're using your phone.
>>
Newman - Thu, 12 May 2022 22:47:45 EST Ifst5HLP No.5216129 Reply
1652410065374.jpg -(31152B / 30.42KB, 236x238) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
It happened and I think it was Samsung that did it
They're the ones that did it with their big phones like galaxy note
Big ass smart phones started popping in normies pockets
suddenly the internet is full of hateful retards
>>
Barry Cockethroat - Fri, 13 May 2022 01:29:17 EST JrDmflAP No.5216140 Reply
1652419757892.jpg -(138382B / 135.14KB, 1505x939) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>5216129
Technically it was IBM (as usual) then Apple who really sealed the deal, but you're 100% correct otherwise.
>>
MartinHeshhall.cda - Thu, 19 May 2022 17:58:02 EST JPpZl7kw No.5216648 Reply
think about television
karl albrecht said something about television, I think
it's the same principle, things that draw your attention immediately are more competitive and cause the rest to become rare
dog eat dog world
>>
DorisHesslespear.hqx - Thu, 19 May 2022 22:15:38 EST SIBw45s6 No.5216667 Reply
A direct force to everyone's head would make them stop thinking around everything about their individuality over the top. Bright white lights shining at them.
>>
Brad Pickett - Sun, 22 May 2022 16:54:42 EST LmCc6mym No.5216941 Reply
As has already been suggested, the internet began the big "normie" transition in 2007 (release of first mainstream smart phone from Apple), and the deal was sealed by 2008-2009 (2008 was when first mainstream Android smartphone was released). That's when the existing effort-related barriers to online forum/"social media" participation collapsed, and any village idiot could participate in extremely low effort ways.
>>
Homer J. Simpson - Sun, 22 May 2022 17:08:11 EST AZkaf+qS No.5216945 Reply
>>5216941
>effort related barriers
what barriers are you even referring to? you act like it was required to be fluent in a programming language to post on chans
>>
Homer J. Simpson - Sun, 22 May 2022 17:52:53 EST AZkaf+qS No.5216953 Reply
>>5216952
4chan got steadily more and more popular all the way up to 2010 or 2011 maybe, that's unrelated to my question though. what barriers were there before the iphone?
>>
Medium Beatrice - Sun, 22 May 2022 17:59:36 EST id/N6J4Q No.5216954 Reply
1653256776751.jpg -(79188B / 77.33KB, 407x405) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>5216945 It all started with Facebook

You used to have to know *at least a little* what you were doing to use the internet. Even on sites like Livejournal and Myspace, it helped to know a bit of 90s era html. I didn't personally notice the whole Iphone/Android difference so much as what happened with the appearance of Facebook. That was the first site that truly even an idiot could use, and BOYEEEE DID THEY EVER!

Nowadays I generally use the internet as a Hitchhiker's Guide, I can find information on anything that comes to mind. Which, actually, was what I used the internet for my first several years. I do sometimes partake of the whole e-shopping-mall that I always suspected would become of the internet eventually, but I have not done one single lick of "social media" since 2012. From what I can gather, "social media" is still getting a little worse every minute.
>>
Homer J. Simpson - Sun, 22 May 2022 18:05:11 EST AZkaf+qS No.5216955 Reply
>>5216954
sounds more like you have an agenda against user friendly interfaces
>>
Little Egypt - Sun, 22 May 2022 20:18:01 EST p0bL6wS9 No.5216961 Reply
>>5216954
objectively true.

That shit made everything worse, not better.
Documentaries prove this. LOVE some anti FB documentaries.

Those mfs be actively profiting on making societies worse, and fueling agendas that cause more and more chaos among the people of the world. This was proven, in fact.
User is currently banned from all boards
>>
Little Egypt - Sun, 22 May 2022 20:22:43 EST p0bL6wS9 No.5216963 Reply
1653265363850.png -(83078B / 81.13KB, 544x155) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>5216038
and this, i too share this opinion, very much so.
Pic Related from 2014. You’ll find 2015 was the tipping point, >>5216062

https://youtu.be/yVwAodrjZMY ED SNOWDEN on how to take the internet back, and why.
Insider Scoop from a tech worker contracted and involved with all of that; https://youtu.be/Pp1MAMkIa6A

Both videos are not short. 8 Minutes is one and the other is like a half hour Ted Talk from the guy who actually exposed how corrupt government already was about tech.
User is currently banned from all boards
>>
Sanford Black - Sun, 22 May 2022 20:23:30 EST 9phik5ql No.5216964 Reply
>>5216961
Facebook didn't pioneer that practice though, they just got paid to let other people polarize the community they created. Years before facebook ever got in trouble over the trump campaign, everyone knew google tailored your search results based on your personal views. They started doing that shit in 2004
>>
Little Egypt - Sun, 22 May 2022 20:32:33 EST p0bL6wS9 No.5216967 Reply
>>5216964
> 2004 Google was already tailoring results
no shit?? I wouldn’t have noticed at the time, but that doesn’t fully surprise me either, tbh. What was that like back then, to see that? How did people realize? Was it like now, sort of like the before/after effects were just very noticeable? When did the lack of a real search result, and instead a limited or bias result, become the norm?

i remember using Bing to begin with, eventually i found Google, but there was like multiple search engines in the 90s and earlier 2000s. I just remembered searching for hood search engines, and it was Bing over Google back then for me, even as a lil jimmy.
User is currently banned from all boards
>>
Sanford Black - Sun, 22 May 2022 20:51:26 EST 9phik5ql No.5216969 Reply
>>5216967
I mean, it started out as an account-based service, but since 2009 it's been a universal feature of google. That's off wikipedia, but i vaguely remember everyone becoming more paranoid about the state of technology around the middle of Obama's first term onward, that was around the Occupy era and a lot of acrivists/anarchists got raided by swat largely over their internet conduct and cell data
>>
Jeffrey Dean Morgan - Mon, 23 May 2022 11:43:40 EST /wBBHkSu No.5217003 Reply
>>5216953
>what barriers were there before the iphone?

You didn't have to be actively using a desktop computer (likely at home or I suppose in the library etc. ) or a clunky laptop to participate. It used to be an activity you truly had to "go out of the way" to participate in, relative to the average person that lives a busy life with work/school etc. It might sound mundane, but it had a profound effect on the post quality/poster dynamics on the internet as a whole (particularly forums).

The access (read: convenient hand-holding) to mostly specialized forums (where each was about a specific topic/set of topics) required both time/effort and often a pre-existing vested interest in said topics. Sure g00gle was already tailoring results, but forums of 100s of topics weren't all conglomerating under a single umbrella (i.e. re3ddit).

It allowed people to literally start shit posting, because they could now conveniently post some low effort trash whilst taking a dump on the toilet.

What more can I say?

I'd say the internet heavily started changing in 2008-2009, and by ~2012 was a totally different place than pre-2007. And it's only gotten worse. I haven't enjoyed browsing /b/ on the main chan in over a decade, but by ~2014-2016 that forum had become an absolute 0 original content, downright russian/chinese/idk disinformation platform (pushing all the BBC interracial stuff, the traps threads almost totally void of real traps...just sissy non-passing gays, the weird black guys breeding white women or men threads, sometimes even medical castration threads? Wtf?) and was totally unusable.

I don't mean to suggest that f0ur Chan is a good representation of internet culture as a whole, but its all gone to shit largely due to literal shit posting, even before the whole issue of over half of posts/accounts online being fake propaganda by various countries and entities.

Now the internet is a tool to manipulate the population (at least bending it at the margins). This is proven fact by the Cambridge Analytica scandal and the related proof that such strategies objectively caused Brexit to pass, objectively either outright caused Trump to win or at least reduced his odds of failure by over 50%, various SCOTUS judge candidates/other candidates being pre-emptively canceled by unproven sexual/otherwise negative social allegations that never saw a courtroom, just the court of public opinion, etc.

The internet never used to be a tool to bend the masses without them even realizing they're being bent. I'm arguing that, while it may have started before 07-08, that's when all of this went into fast forward mode (including, for better or worse, better cheese pizza/JB censorship, algorithms deflecting away/outright scrubbing various gore, etc.).

By '09, the major shit posting (posting whilst taking a shit) tool, the smart phone, had become mainstream in the USA. Before then, we didn't have to hear from the kind of people that were too lazy or unmotivated to participate without one. It changed everything.
>>
Netjester !AI.skYnEt - Mon, 23 May 2022 11:43:47 EST iLikEToleARn No.5217004 Reply
>>5217003
21st to the tribal chief has morbidly obese man inside if that was for him but even though, good or not" vibe (basically google loomis/bridgman/hampton/norfolk VA area, that is conveniently the size of the worst career moves I've ever seen of any streaming issues) and try to get over if you seriously cannot understand, and OVW TV episode 267.
>>
Jeffrey Dean Morgan - Mon, 23 May 2022 12:08:58 EST /wBBHkSu No.5217005 Reply
>>5217003
Also, I forgot to add that Facebook became available to the general public sometime in Sptember 2006. It was niche and exclusive before then. I don't remember perfectly, but it did take at least 1-3 years minimum before there was full widespread (say 50%+, at least of specific age groups) adoption/nearly full user saturation.

Which, again, lines right up with the '08ish advent of

  1. Somewhat affordable pocket computer phone hybrids
  2. A specific justification for "needing" a pocket computer on you at all times (i.e. shit book, back when it was mostly innocent naive family pictures and for group chatting with extended family/maybe close friends).

It killed the whole niche/hobbyist specialty vibe of the internet (at least for well adjusted adults at that time...for teens/kids it went from just needy ones posting to basically everyone).

I'm not debating whether its good or bad, just pointing out the facts. It's crudely similar to voting. While there's mainly other factors that correlate heavily with choosing not to vote when there's additional effort required (e.g income levels, physical mobility competency, etc.), one of those factors is whether a person is, at the very least, indifferent/apathetic about politics.

Again for better or worse, when you add even more restrictions than currently seen in most of the US, theres a disproportionately larger drop in voting participation for the less/uneducated, and therefore also the less political-science-competent people.

The same can be said for general internet participation.
>>
Jeffrey Dean Morgan - Mon, 23 May 2022 12:11:05 EST /wBBHkSu No.5217006 Reply
>>5217005
>needy ones posting

*nerdy

Jesus christ mb it autocorrected it twice.

Nb
>>
Marc Kai - Mon, 23 May 2022 12:42:40 EST 18Wa/UUt No.5217007 Reply
>>5217005

I guess in a similar vein, I remember facebook in terms of siblings. I remember seeing them get on facebook, they're also a few years older than me, so they were in college at the time. I got on facebook a few years after them. Remember seeing them buying blackberries, iphones, etc, I only got a phone later.

They also had an easier time than I getting into high-level employment opportunities, this might just be my family though.

I feel like the wide-spread adoption of le-pocket-computer also corresponds to a generational scarcity of opportunity. Computer technologies and their corresponding social circles allowed people ease of access into opportunity that was subsequently saturated as less-niche demographics made their way in. Technically, yes I am part of that niche, the tailing end, but through circumstance decided against a computer job much to my chagrin (parents mentor your kids!)
>>
Alan Guth - Mon, 23 May 2022 14:50:56 EST qISaCH1C No.5217017 Reply
>>5217003
>Now the internet is a tool to manipulate the population (at least bending it at the margins).

Considering the internet started out as a military project, this seems like quite possibly the goal all along
>>
Jarvis Cimmleridge - Mon, 23 May 2022 15:42:19 EST jz0P9T0W No.5217024 Reply
>>5217017
>Considering the internet started out as a military project

Don't forget with ample involvement of the CIA (as was anything tech research related in the 50s)
>>
David Cornslit - Mon, 23 May 2022 16:31:08 EST T8/5mr/F No.5217035 Reply
>>5217017

Isn't language somewhat inherently manipulative? It's used to confer knowledge or experience, to tell somebody *this* (the thing said, the transferred knowledge) is the way something is.
>>
PollyBlatherspear.ffo - Mon, 23 May 2022 16:33:55 EST znkr1Spt No.5217038 Reply
>>5217035

Not just language, but inflection, word choices and all sortsa shit are inherently manipulative. The key is to have a good inner core of reason and awareness of how language shapes the mind and perception so you don't get swept up in someone elses word-induced trance state.
>>
David Cornslit - Mon, 23 May 2022 16:45:30 EST T8/5mr/F No.5217040 Reply
1653338730225.jpg -(1851245B / 1.77MB, 2400x1812) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>5217038

Yeah, I hate it when people try to use the dark arts against me.
>>
PollyBlatherspear.ffo - Mon, 23 May 2022 16:45:57 EST znkr1Spt No.5217041 Reply
>>5217038

tbh I think it's either manipulative or shows you the biases of the other party if you can cut through the crap well enough. Like its one or the other

nb for triple post lol
>>
PollyBlatherspear.ffo - Mon, 23 May 2022 16:50:13 EST znkr1Spt No.5217043 Reply
>>5217040

Malicious use of NLP, psychology etc is absolutely a real thing. I think if this were properly understood phenomena like gangstalking would be easier for both the alleged victims and society to understand.

For me, one of the biggest 'pisses me off' things regarding this is how completely transparent it makes the biases of news presenters. Extremely annoying. Although I don't think thats on purpose malicious I think its just employees followng the status quo and not crossing editorial lines.
>>
Marie Troisgros - Sun, 05 Jun 2022 13:28:10 EST DiHHjXyB No.5217902 Reply
>>5217043
If something is mainstream or on the news then it's probably a psy op important to know
Report Post
Reason
Note
Please be descriptive with report notes,
this helps staff resolve issues quicker.