| > I'm not a bit worried we'd go without capable search engines, without ads. Very likely there'd be donation-supported ones that are at least as good, and maybe better for some purposes (IMO Google's utility peaked around '08). This isn't necessarily wrong. I personally use Gigablast, which is excellent and entirely independent (unlike many 'alternative' search engines it isn't backed by Google or, more often, Bing). However, pace the problem of other minds, I am not the only person in the world, and many people enjoy and rely on Google. I think this conversation is continually falling into the trap of muddling up what you personally prefer vs what would most satisfy the majority of people, and thus achieve adoption. It's not a good solution if most people consider it worse for their needs, irrespective of your own personal preferences, or your feelings about what other people should like. > The free side of Youtube is a UX problem to be solved by something like torrent clients (maybe plus some RSS). Come on. This is as near as possible to an objectively worse solution. Again, I think you're struggling to see beyond your own preferences and abilities, to how most people in the world interact with technology. > It's plain that a huge percentage of online content could be replaced with Snake Game on an old Nokia with ~0 loss of enjoyment for the consumer. I refer back to my previous sentence. [Also, both Snake and old Nokias are exactly as available today as they ever were, and I see no sign whatsoever of this happening, despite the clear advantages in price, battery, uptime, etc.] > People look at the stuff but the value is extremely close to zero, in that nearly any other time-wasting activity is just as good. I refer back to my penultimate sentence. > Why should that be privileged over what I'd prefer? I refer back to my antepenultimate sentence. The answer is: because you are one person in a world of seven billion, and your solution is not going to go anywhere if the mass of people don't like it. --- Look, in summary, this is not a useful conversation if all you have to contribute is moralising about the worth of other people's preferences. I don't care if you think most people should spend their time knitting or listening to Brahms. I'm trying to come up with a solution that satisfies people, and, therefore, can actually compete. |
[EDIT]
> if all you have to contribute is moralising about the worth of other people's preferences
Definitely a complete characterization of my views on this, and of these posts. You've looked carefully, considered thoughtfully, and discovered the entire thing. Very good.