|
|
|
|
|
|
by autoexec
1585 days ago
|
|
|
> Most people I know care much less than the Hacker News community about privacy, bloated web sites, web advertisements, etc. and would gladly trade these for free software such as Facebook, Gmail. I'm not saying I agree with them, but I recognize that reality. "Gladly" here seems like a stretch. No one is happy about slow ad filled webpages that make it hard to read the content they want, they aren't clamoring for pervasive tracking, or unnecessary restrictions. Most people hate those things, but they aren't aware of a reasonable alternative offering what they actually do want and are glad for (reliable email service, pictures of their grand kids, etc) so they tolerate the horrible abuses forced onto them and are grateful for what they can get. The main difference I see is that most people online don't know that things could be any different. Many don't even realize how much more enjoyable their online experience would be if they simply installed an ad blocker (and used a browser that allowed them). To this day I run into people who honestly think that without pervasive advertising and surveillance capitalism the internet couldn't exist and no one would ever bother to create content for it. Folks who saw the internet in its early days know better, and can see what things have improved and what's gotten worse and how much potential hasn't been realized. A dog raised eating nothing but table scraps is never going to care as much as someone who is forced to eat them after once having a seat at the dinner table. |
|
|
Obviously people would prefer, for example, a YouTube that is free, without advertisements, private, etc. But, my point is that developers tend to have different preferences than the general population and, thus, we shouldn't be surprised that the Internet has evolved in a way that reflects those differences.