Open internet is dead only to those that don't take the effort to discover. Otherwise it's still as open as it always was.
Since there was an internet to speak of, there always were and still are vast amounts of people unaware of stuff that exists, limited by no "platforms" but only by their own lack of desire.
That is true to some extent. However, let me ask you one simple question: how would you try to search for something if you are not aware of it's existence? In other words, how people that are not aware of existence of open-source projects (such as OpenTTD) are supposed to discover them if they're not searching for them on purpose (which is impossible given that they have no clue about their existence)?
Of course there will be some ways like social media or something else. But that question is what seems to worry many people in our case, in my humble opinion. Remember that most of the planet's population is not even aware of existence of open-source projects and open-source concept itself. So how are they supposed to discover it if they don't know about it? When it's present on platforms like Steam and GOG, it helps to spread the word, but when it's not... Well, I guess that seems to be a problem for some people.
> how would you try to search for something if you are not aware of it's existence?
You're asking a leading question. The verb you're using here is one specifically indicating interaction with a "platform" (a digital aggregation of information). The answer is you don't search anything, you completely change your epistemic and interaction model. Instead you build a social web of people who have their own social webs, and you share things you've made and things that have been shared with you. This is your "platform".
> how would you try to search for something if you are not aware of it's existence?
How are most games on steam found? I kinda doubt all people find them through steam own mechanisms. I even doubt the majority find them this way. Gaming has multiple sources of information, be it news, social media, influencers or cooperations. Video-content is probably the biggest source of being discovered for most games these days.
there are more platforms for searching for games: youtube, google, chatgpt... it's not so dire that if steam bans you then there is no way to find a game
> In other words, how people that are not aware of existence of open-source projects (such as OpenTTD) are supposed to discover them if they're not searching for them on purpose (which is impossible given that they have no clue about their existence)?
This question tickles me. In the before time, something would be so good you were compelled to tell someone about it.
Sriracha, Costco are brands you likely know that dont advertise, and somehow got popular. In the 90's there were bands that were massively popular with little to no air play, and less promotion (Fugazi is a great example).
My introduction to their Sriracha was in 1994, when the Puerto Rican cook at the Italian restaurant I worked at sent me to Stop and Shop for the "rooster".
Till hosing their relationship with Underwood Ranch (their sole provider of chili's) this was the only product in the marketplace (much like ketchup was always Heinz for a time). Absolute market dominance wrecked over not honoring your handshake deal with your ONLY supplier.
The latest batches by them are green, and no one wants them. The underwood version of the product is taking over --- it has a giant dragon on the bottle now, and what I look for now rather than the rooster.
Right. This is a chicken-egg problem. We also need a replacement for google search; Google ruined it, on purpose. We are being made blind (not totally blind, but dumber, and then blind).
By googling "best open source games" and finding blogs and forums that talk about them. In fact googling that exact phrase returns as its first search result a Reddit thread in which OpenTTD is one of the first games listed.
It's not like you can discover it on Steam any easier.
Of course, searching for information itself is also a skill, but it is a truly essential one for the modern world.
Although I agree on the general point, it's technically not true that the internet is "still at open as it always was". Nation states are increasingly putting up barriers and filters, and (pushed by commercial interests) forcing people to identify themselves.
Technology Connections referred to this as “algorithmic complacency”, young people don’t like Bluesky because they have to decide for themselves what content to follow instead of a default algorithm feed
I use a similar argument to those who say that gaming is dead. Sure, if you're waiting for $AAA_DEVELOPER to change, it's probably dead, but you don't even have to look that far to find amazing games everywhere in indie and AA.
Sadly indie developers are only just starting get into my preferred genre. I am excited to see how a number of upcoming titles turn out, but for the time I’m stuck waiting for $AAA_DEVELOPER to change.
I’ve had half the mind to just try my own hand at game dev again.
Short of developing psychic abilities, how would you then address the discoverability problem without relying on a third party?
Forums, search engines, social media, and link aggregators are all third parties with their own ranking. Nobody outside of a handful of small-web hobbyists have put a "cool links" section into a website since 1997.
This is classic engineering missing the forest for the trees.
The answer to your question is: same as we always did before! Do you talk to friends? Colleagues? Family? You definitely chat with us here on HN. All of these people share things with you constantly.
There's a funny obsession in tech circles to gather all the information they can as quick as possible. I much prefer to optimize for the quality of information I'm ingesting.
> The answer to your question is: same as we always did before! Do you talk to friends? Colleagues? Family? You definitely chat with us here on HN. All of these people share things with you constantly.
So, in your opinion, we can cut out the reliance on third parties by relying on third parties?
There’s always a relationship aspect in discoverability. Unless the set is small, there will always be intermediary nodes in that graph that will connect consumers and producers. But there’s no need for it to be a mega tech company. Radio DJs help with discovering musics. Books club can help with recommending books.
Doesn't need to be, but most traffic is driven by search. I reckon 2nd most common is influencers, and I don't know if that's an upgrade (even easier to buy out).
This is as good an argument as saying that Americans with unhealthy diets bear sole responsibility, ignoring the massive corporate efforts to convince them of the healthfulness of highly processed foods. While, obviously, individuals have ultimate responsibility for their actions, ignoring the concerted efforts to influence those actions through psychology, marketing/ads, paid “experts”, paid influencers and celebrities, lobbies, blah blah et cetera.
When I started using the internet, if I asked someone what the internet was I was unlikely to get any answer at all. It was new. I had to define it for myself. Ask a 6 year old what the internet is. It’s YouTube. TikTok. Roblox. Experiences that are designed to keep them there. It is obviously more difficult for an individual to engage with the open web than it ever has been (for those with access at all).
>ignoring the concerted efforts to influence those actions
Ignorance isn't the point. The issue is that it's your responsibility to stop them. the buck always stops at "I". Are they just going to stop themselves? Is your neighbor going to stop them for you? If so, why should she if you don't?
As Kant said, enlightenment is getting out of your self inflicted tutelage. When is it self inflicted? When you have the reason but lack the courage to act without direction from someone else.
Yes, there's influencers and lobbies but the solutions are still one search away. Even Google doesn't hide the alternatives from you. And sure we can force feed every American veggies and force install linux on their computers but that'd defeat the point.
People who are not aware of a topic are not lacking courage for not engaging in it. Being damned without awareness of salvation is more of a St. Augustine thing. And Kant said my ancestors were less than human, so fuck him.
who isn't aware? If we were in the 80s and you lived in a village without an internet connection, sure but today everyone is aware of the means to liberate their computing environment or whatever else is bugging them. That's not an excuse any more for virtually anyone. The average American spends, not metaphorically 'literally', actually literally five hours per day on their smartphone. If you can doom scroll for five hours you can learn how to use linux, or get on a treadmill to lose some pounds.
the reality is people have the option to choose between comfort and autonomy and they voluntarily choose the former and call people annoying who preach about internet freedom and privacy. Which they might very well be but it also makes it clear they know and don't care.
Wait if it is your responsibility to stop corporations from doing bad things, why are they still doing them?
I didn’t realize there was an individual to talk to about this but, while I’ve got your attention, frankly for the sake of mankind you need to do better at this. They are running wild out here
> It is obviously more difficult for an individual to engage with the open web than it ever has been (for those with access at all).
It’s very easy. If you’re a producer, you maintain a separate presence outside the walled platforms. If you’re a consumer, you look outside the walled platform for content.
>It’s very easy. If you’re a producer, you maintain a separate presence outside the walled platforms.
I want to try one day. Steam's pricing parity adds friction to that, though. I can't reward people for venturing to a place where they own their software, and that seems to be the only real way to move many.
You don't need 4gbps pf queues or even fiber on every single machine in a datacenter. So be surprised, it is used widely for its simplicity and reliability not to mention security compared to those proprietary implementations you speak of, may they rot in hell.
At least accepting that one lacks virtue is intellectually honest and saves resources otherwise wasted on deceitful proclamations of nonexistent and imaginary virtues. It's not like anything was meant to be done either way.
Pretending to be good at least may influence/shame other people in to actually being good. When everyone is just rolling around in the muck there is no incentive to be better.
> When everyone is just rolling around in the muck there is no incentive to be better.
There have been many celebrated and uncelebrated people throughout history, known for their tremendous insight and wisdom, who all say the same thing about virtue: It's better, by far, to be a good person with fuck-all than a pos with billions.
* "For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?" - JC
* "The one who lives a hundred years immoral and uncontrolled is not worth as much as one who lives a single day virtuous and meditative." - Buddha
* "It is not the man who has too little, but the man who craves more, that is poor" - Seneca
* "Very little is needed to make a happy life; it is all within yourself." - Marcus Aurelius
Etc. And that timeless fact doesn't change no matter where or when or who you are; or how many people are "rolling around in the muck".
It's not even an especially hidden fact. It's awful sad that grown-ass adults can look at people like Musk or Gates or Trump or the Manosphere shitlings and think, wow, those look like happy content people.
I'm still on a contract from 2016 or so with my mobile (cell) operator. 10 years of inflation, I pay basically nothing for some occassional data use and more voice than I could ever use.
Of course it irks them much to not be able to sell me less for more. But they can't do anything short of disconnecting me and that is unspeakable for a mobile operator.
I used to have a good deal for years at Orange. They tried to get me on a new contract (slightly expensive) for a while, but at some point they just decommissioned the old program, basically they cancelled the old contracts and migrated everyone to the new plan. It was a minor change to me so went with it, then later they started to hike prices on the new plan, eventually I cancelled and left them after about 20 years.
reply