Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

All true, but the Eternal September for me came when I lost control of my feed to arbitrary ML algorithms attempting to maximize shareholder value whilst alienating the fewest users.

I think someone could recreate early FB on the blockchain and take a huge chunk of interesting people off of the two current awful choices. Because I do remember the time when it was fun to reconnect with people and follow their lives there.



> I think someone could recreate early FB on the blockchain

wtf does this mean?

I'm asking only because this sounds exactly as loaded and buzzwordy as "I lost control of my feed to arbitrary ML algorithms attempting to maximize shareholder value whilst alienating the fewest users" you've just gone the opposite direction with the hyperbole.


It means I would like "liking" a post of grumpy cat to use as much energy as a Toyota Carola driving from Miami to Washington DC. Luckily, actually posting grumpy cat photos causes brownouts, so there are none to like.


Hyperbole. Modern blockchains do not use much energy. This is an obvious great idea waiting for implementation.


You got a source for that? Everything I've read says they do. And yeah, obviously hyperbole in service of a joke...

I also have no idea why this is such an obviously great idea. I don't see anything obviously great about it. Care to explain.


It means move the authorization and verification of identity outside of any corporation and make the feed 100% user-controlled. Corporations end up pursuing goals frequently unaligned with the goals of their users because the users have become the product.

And are you really saying in 2018 that ML is just a buzzword?

Because what I see is an algorithm (whatever it is, probably some secret sauce ML goulash of topic models or clustering) picking stuff I don't want to see and burying stuff I do. Just give me the pure feed and the ability to follow/unfollow. This is apparently now hard(tm).


But it doesn't call for a blockchain to address. It calls for a subscription based social network.

It wouldn't need to be expensive either to keep the servers running. There would be no flashy advertising displaying links that you would never click anyway and there be no sneaky algorithms trying to maximize your clicks or your attention since that would no longer contribute to the company results.

Everything would be far simpler. Getting there is less simple.


    on the blockchain
Why? Everything else you wrote makes sense to me except for this.


Because I doubt a corporation would stay aligned with the non-paying customer long-term. Witness GOOG.

Compare and contrast with AMZN where the customer is indeed the customer.


I think we can have decentralized technolgy without blockchains though.


> Why?

Shysters gotta shyst. After all, somebody has to buy those heavy bags...


Have a look at Patchwork, which runs over the decentralised Scuttlebot https://github.com/ssbc/patchwork


Urbit's ambition is to achieve something that fosters that ability.


There is already SSB / Patchwork that was recently feautred here in HackerNews.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16273096

https://www.scuttlebutt.nz/


and if I understand correctly, the 'log' of your activity is basically a blockchain!




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: