DreamerofDays

They also say to do what you love, and you’ll never work a day in your life. They say lots of things, many of them contradictory.

I think your advice of intentionally setting aside time is wise, though. I believe that too often we take for granted that things will just happen, and also overestimate the chilling effect of “not being spontaneous”.

Another way of thinking about it:

Numbers offer a sense of scale. As numbers go further left from the decimal, they get bigger and bigger. Likewise, as they go right from the decimal, they get smaller and smaller.

If I’m looking with just my eyes, I can see big things without issue, but as things get smaller and smaller, it becomes more and more difficult. Eventually, I can’t see the next smallest thing at all.

But we know that smaller thing is there— I can use a magnifying glass and see things slightly smaller than I can unaided. With a microscope, I can see smaller still.

So I can see the entirety of a leaf, know where it begins and ends, even though I can’t, unaided, see the details of all its cells. Likewise, you can see the entirety of the line you drew, it’s just that you lack precise enough tools to measure it with perfect accuracy.

I don’t have their numbers, but this isn’t the first place I’ve seen similar quoted. First one I found through some friends’ discussion was this, which puts us, at a quick glance, at around a third of last year’s total(still plenty bad).

so I just feel like I should be able to live my life and not have to worry about all this. Why can’t I?

Are you seeking permission or explanation?

If the model realized at scale repeatedly results in the same or similar effects, maybe there is something wrong with the model.

(Be those inherent mechanical flaws, flaws of ignoring parts of human nature, flaws of a model designed to work in a vacuum, or flaws of intricate and fragile necessary rules)

I think this is ignoring the seas of dross that have fallen away in the past. There have always been bad movies, and unoriginal movies, some of them doing quite well at the box office(used as a metric to show that people were showing up to see them). We don’t hold a lot of them in popular memory because we don’t watch them anymore, and what’s left from those eras are the movies of sufficient quality or resonance that we continue to watch them.

The system has a number of issues that are well trod, and certain pitfalls which are inherent, but hanging a lack of quality or unoriginality entirely on capitalism is overselling it.

I would posit that a lack of moderation, or a form of monomania is a bigger culprit here. Too much focus on the business side can stifle creativity, but too much focus on the creative side can result in sprawling, unfinished messes. With too much focus on safety we can be stigmatised from action, but with too much focus on action we can lose our humanity in favor of feeding the gears of progress.

This accounts for the bean counters, but doesn’t grant them the power of being the one true reason for everything being bad.

A lot of the internet survives by pattern and habit. Pattern, habit, and the hope, founded or not, that things might get better with a site you’ve been using for years.

Random thought this inspired: does this mean the old Twitter copyrights and trademarks are going unused and unprotected?

Just lie then

Not an ideal in forming relationships. Honestly, as much of a train wreck as his response was, at least it gave some useful information to the person he would potentially be dating.

I am not a bit, but I might be a cat

Always have been

It’s not like C-level folks aren’t cashing in well before their companies are profitable. They put on executive clothes and live executive lifestyles, either because it’s what they want or because it’s part of the theatre put on for investors.

I feel confident in the assumption that most users wouldn’t begrudge a company a modest profit off of the content they produce uncompensated on their sites. But it’s an unwritten social contract, and therefore ripe for abuse.

Some of it is born of users not realizing the value of what they give to the corporations— their data for mining, their engagement for attracting and maintaining even more users to the site. Some of it is born of the explicit contracts being written solely by one side(the execs).

Dropout (via Sam) also explicitly stated around the time Netflix was rumbling about cracking down on account sharing that they’re cool with it. So if you can afford to pay for the subscription, that’s great – it helps support some fantastic content and the people who make it. If you can’t afford to pay, but have a friend or family member who has it and is willing to share(or are the person in the position to share), that’s also good.

Maybe it’s more than a lot of noise

He realized he needed to make a push in the press, so he resorted to the only way he apparently knows how to communicate: lying.

I already had it mulling in my head privately, but this shit conches it for me: spez has to go. He broke community trust, and continues to more and more as this thing drags out.

It sounds like he wants to replace that “landed gentry” with a landed gentry loyal to him.

Very good and very Democratic. Stable genius level.

Most, I would wager, weren’t motivated to do it for Reddit. They were motivated to do it for their communities that happened to be on the site.

Moderation— particularly volunteer based moderation— tends to be about the bonds moderators have and develop with the users they interact with every day. Admins are a mixed bag: some of them may have sympathy towards the mods, but ultimately their livelihood is tied to the company line.

A lot of the internet is built on free labor. A lot of that we have been willing to let slide. That willingness ends when the quantum of respect doesn’t get paid for that labor. I don’t know how someone continues moderating on Reddit at this point; barring a big turnaround(and possibly the ouster of current management), it feels like the move should be to migrate their communities elsewhere.