Do you care about owning your space on the web?

[Brapuccino]

Publishing thoughts was however exactly what I quoted. So if the site itself is already part of some artsy fartsy expression then my arguments ofc don't apply. The original words were "getting your thoughts out into the world" however which is most commonly understood as thoughts translated into spoken or written words.
I just dislike the one dimensional perspective of "big social media sites always bad in every way" and in the context of this discussion personal websites just aren't a universal solution or an always better alternative.
If you want to reach many people for whatever reason (show them you art, propagate your politics, ask for help, seek like minded people in a large group and many more) a personal website can't beat the big sites and it's not even a matter of convenience since it isn't a matter of effort to reach that many people online with your own site. Can't just amass the same amount of regular visitors as rëddit with just diligence.

I agree with the sentiment here ^, @Collision . I often think about this type of thing, hanging around "creative" types. The idea of someone arguing in favor of doing things for the sake of it without wanting an audience often feels like cope to me. Why would you need anyone to agree with your view, if you just like doing a thing and don't care to show anyone then why even bring it up. You could ignore those goofy people wracking their heads about how they're going to have their voices heard and do your thing. But you speak up instead, because you also want your voice to be heard. And you also want the approval of a like-minded individual.
Thinking also about all forms of "self expression" throughout history, whether it be literature, science, sculpture, music or the arts in general, every great piece or discovery is out there for us to appreciate and benefit from because it was shared. And you could try to argue that maybe there's something even greater that never was shared but then what is the point of that? It would be absolutely meaningless, because we don't know about it so it might as well not exist at all. Saying then, that audience is unimportant to "self expression" is a meaningless statement, I'd argue at that point "self expression" itself is a meaningless term.
Now I'm not saying at all that there's no people out there doing things for the hell of it that need no attention, or situations where it makes perfect sense. But wondering where the line dividing true passion/actions taken purely for the self and masturbation lies, I think it's right there where you feel the need to express to other people the idea that expressing yourself to other people is unimportant.
/rant

 

[stonehead]

In a broad sense, I agree that it is pragmatic for most people. That is, if your goal is exclusively to have your vapid thoughts, artwork, and music heard by as many people as possible (if the blessed algorithm deems you worthy).

Social networking websites, and the content on them, rely on recommendation algorithms to propagate. This isn't a problem necessarily, but it often results in content that is more shocking, aggravating, and absurd being served over content that the user actually joins the platform to see. It's the complete lack of control the users have in what they see, and the sheer slavery of being played for your attention that really bothers me.

The only "social media" site I really use is YouTube, and I have a browser extension that disables the homepage and the recommended videos sidebar. I have a similar setup on my phone. Again, not for everyone, but it's worth thinking about.

I don't think it's totally fair to equate wanting your art to be seen with your art being vapid. I get that it's hyperbole to make a point, but still. It's natural to want to share the things you make with people, especially if you put a lot of thought and effort into it. Maybe vapid, attention seeking content rises to the tops of the algorithms, but that's hardly the only type of thing that gets posted though.

Personally, I don't like the "feed" layout of social media websites. What I love about the internet is the ability to freely browse around, clicking whatever links interest you instead of reading a linear stream of posts laid out in front of you. I end up spending more time reading personal websites and wikis, than I do on social media. Still though, the audience of people like you and I is not very large. There's endless amounts of personal blogs on the internet, and I don't have that much free time. And I only spend a fraction of it browsing the internet. It's the method I prefer, but I can't deny that it's a terrible way to get eyes on your work.

---

On a completely separate note, I thing journaling is very relevant to the discussion of "purposeless" personal websites. I don't do it myself, but I've read that journaling is a good, healthy way to get ones thoughts in order. Plenty of psychiatrists recommend it, even to those who aren't struggling with any mental issue in particular. Writing your thoughts down forces you to actually think through them, and get them in order.

It isn't weird when someone spends money on a nice journal, or spends some of their free time formatting or decorating it. It shouldn't be weird then to put time and money into building and styling a personal website.

You just need to go in with the right expectations. If you want people to read your writings, write them somewhere that isn't a personal journal. Likewise, if you want people to see your art, post it somewhere besides (or in addition to) your personal blog.

 

[Collision]

Publishing thoughts was however exactly what I quoted.

Sure, I still don't see why the only thing that matters about publishing your thoughts is how many people actively engage with them in a short time period. Lots of expression, written or otherwise, has gone totally unappreciated within the lifetime of the author. I don't see why anyone should choose to post their thoughts on >reddit just because it might get a wider audience in the immediate future. You're trading almost all control over presentation just for the wider audience.

So if the site itself is already part of some artsy fartsy expression then my arguments ofc don't apply.

A use case for the web doesn't have to be something artsy. When I wrote my post, the example I had in mind was file sharing.

I just dislike the one dimensional perspective of "big social media sites always bad in every way" and in the context of this discussion personal websites just aren't a universal solution or an always better alternative.

Personally, I don't think social media is bad in every way. I don't think it's bad that information, generally, is much more discoverable on the web now then it was 20 years ago. I just think that these services tend to be massively over-wrought and extremely capricious in their policies. For many use cases, not exclusively artistic ones, it's simple to do it yourself.

I agree with the sentiment here ^, @Collision . I often think about this type of thing, hanging around "creative" types. The idea of someone arguing in favor of doing things for the sake of it without wanting an audience often feels like cope to me. Why would you need anyone to agree with your view, if you just like doing a thing and don't care to show anyone then why even bring it up. You could ignore those goofy people wracking their heads about how they're going to have their voices heard and do your thing. But you speak up instead, because you also want your voice to be heard. And you also want the approval of a like-minded individual.
Thinking also about all forms of "self expression" throughout history, whether it be literature, science, sculpture, music or the arts in general, every great piece or discovery is out there for us to appreciate and benefit from because it was shared. And you could try to argue that maybe there's something even greater that never was shared but then what is the point of that? It would be absolutely meaningless, because we don't know about it so it might as well not exist at all. Saying then, that audience is unimportant to "self expression" is a meaningless statement, I'd argue at that point "self expression" itself is a meaningless term.
Now I'm not saying at all that there's no people out there doing things for the hell of it that need no attention, or situations where it makes perfect sense. But wondering where the line dividing true passion/actions taken purely for the self and masturbation lies, I think it's right there where you feel the need to express to other people the idea that expressing yourself to other people is unimportant.

Just to respond briefly, this isn't what I said. I didn't say that, "expressing yourself to other people is unimportant." I said that the amount of positive feedback that one's expression receives might not be the most important measure of how worthwhile it is. Publishing work on your own server instead of to a major service doesn't mean no one will ever see it.

 

[Voicedrew]

I don't think it's totally fair to equate wanting your art to be seen with your art being vapid. I get that it's hyperbole to make a point, but still. It's natural to want to share the things you make with people, especially if you put a lot of thought and effort into it. Maybe vapid, attention seeking content rises to the tops of the algorithms, but that's hardly the only type of thing that gets posted though.

Personally, I don't like the "feed" layout of social media websites. What I love about the internet is the ability to freely browse around, clicking whatever links interest you instead of reading a linear stream of posts laid out in front of you. I end up spending more time reading personal websites and wikis, than I do on social media. Still though, the audience of people like you and I is not very large. There's endless amounts of personal blogs on the internet, and I don't have that much free time. And I only spend a fraction of it browsing the internet. It's the method I prefer, but I can't deny that it's a terrible way to get eyes on your work.

---

On a completely separate note, I thing journaling is very relevant to the discussion of "purposeless" personal websites. I don't do it myself, but I've read that journaling is a good, healthy way to get ones thoughts in order. Plenty of psychiatrists recommend it, even to those who aren't struggling with any mental issue in particular. Writing your thoughts down forces you to actually think through them, and get them in order.

It isn't weird when someone spends money on a nice journal, or spends some of their free time formatting or decorating it. It shouldn't be weird then to put time and money into building and styling a personal website.

You just need to go in with the right expectations. If you want people to read your writings, write them somewhere that isn't a personal journal. Likewise, if you want people to see your art, post it somewhere besides (or in addition to) your personal blog.

Do understand, it was never my intention for my statement to be interpreted that way. Obviously, people make things with the hope that they are seen, and there is nothing wrong with that.

I wanted my statement to be read as (vapid thoughts), (artwork), and (music).
Whereas you read it as (vapid) thoughts, artwork, and music.

Obviously, I know you meant no ill will by this.

 

[Andy Kaufman]

I agree with the sentiment here ^, @Collision . I often think about this type of thing, hanging around "creative" types. The idea of someone arguing in favor of doing things for the sake of it without wanting an audience often feels like cope to me. Why would you need anyone to agree with your view, if you just like doing a thing and don't care to show anyone then why even bring it up. You could ignore those goofy people wracking their heads about how they're going to have their voices heard and do your thing. But you speak up instead, because you also want your voice to be heard. And you also want the approval of a like-minded individual.
Thinking also about all forms of "self expression" throughout history, whether it be literature, science, sculpture, music or the arts in general, every great piece or discovery is out there for us to appreciate and benefit from because it was shared. And you could try to argue that maybe there's something even greater that never was shared but then what is the point of that? It would be absolutely meaningless, because we don't know about it so it might as well not exist at all. Saying then, that audience is unimportant to "self expression" is a meaningless statement, I'd argue at that point "self expression" itself is a meaningless term.
Now I'm not saying at all that there's no people out there doing things for the hell of it that need no attention, or situations where it makes perfect sense. But wondering where the line dividing true passion/actions taken purely for the self and masturbation lies, I think it's right there where you feel the need to express to other people the idea that expressing yourself to other people is unimportant.
/rant

Maybe there's artists that are happy creating work that never see the light of day but so far everyone I met, be it a musician or someone who draws, would upload their work for the world to see. Tumblr(back then)/deviant art for drawings and my best friend has like a 12 sub YouTube channel where he uploads piano covers and self composed songs. I think expression necessarily requires someone who percieves it. Maybe not almost but what's the point in uttering words if no one reads them at the end of the day. Not saying gettinf the highest social media numbers on your art of course isn't the main goal but choosing a big site for a chance that your art gets seen by potentially many people is totally reasonable and the better option rhan a website for many reason.

Sure, I still don't see why the only thing that matters about publishing your thoughts is how many people actively engage with them in a short time period. Lots of expression, written or otherwise, has gone totally unappreciated within the lifetime of the author. I don't see why anyone should choose to post their thoughts on >reddit just because it might get a wider audience in the immediate future. You're trading almost all control over presentation just for the wider audience.

A use case for the web doesn't have to be something artsy. When I wrote my post, the example I had in mind was file sharing.

Personally, I don't think social media is bad in every way. I don't think it's bad that information, generally, is much more discoverable on the web now then it was 20 years ago. I just think that these services tend to be massively over-wrought and extremely capricious in their policies. For many use cases, not exclusively artistic ones, it's simple to do it yourself.


Just to respond briefly, this isn't what I said. I didn't say that, "expressing yourself to other people is unimportant." I said that the amount of positive feedback that one's expression receives might not be the most important measure of how worthwhile it is. Publishing work on your own server instead of to a major service doesn't mean no one will ever see it.

The positive feedback wasn't part of my argument. You can make weird, niche art or have fringe political takes but going on a big site means that you get a huge pool of potential interaction to build an audience to begin with. Even if just 1 out of 1000 stays that's better chances than what you'd get by self hosting.
And while censorship is bad on those sites, it's usually guns/violence, porn and certain politics that are banned. If that's the focal point of your online expression self hosting is mandatory of course but I think there's still plenty of room for other topics.

Oh and filesharing wasn't really in my mind when talking about "expression". That's more of a utility thing for me.

 

[Andy Kaufman]

The quality of those views would be 100 fold better than random internet addicts on reddit.

People that actually make stuff or make actual meaningful contributions would much prefer to go to an actual webspace than to go on socialslop.

How would you even gauge the quality of a view? Someone who silently views something is usually only expressed by an integer increasing. If that's on >reddit or on your website. Sounds like you want just a circle jerk of hipsters that huff their own farts for fun.
That's good because Agora Road is exactly that.

 

[Eden]

A facet of this discussion I consider interesting is the amount of hostility self-promotion can garner in some spaces. I think nowadays, with the fight against advertising more prominent than ever, a little nuance is lost. I believe the masses are a little too quick to equate the sharing of an individual's work with something like a corporate Pepsi commercial. This is why the advertising industry can get away with so much, in my opinion, because they possess that kernel of truth: you should share your work; but, naturally ofc, it's taken too far. And what do we wind up with? Individuals with guilt, reinforced by their peers. Meanwhile, the mega-corporations satanic-ritually removed shame from their consciousness eons ago. (Not defending blatant, out-of-context shilling here, btw. Just how quick we perhaps are to generalize.)

I think there's a similar phenomenon with Indie culture as a whole, no? That there is value in something being different, in NOT being mainstream or traditionally popular. And I think there's only a problem with that when it's the singular facet for which one cares about something. After all, aren't you still being pushed around by the greater forces that be in this scenario, just in a contrarian direction?

Besides being "hipster": Why explore personal websites?

Well, *I* do it because they tend to feel a little more authentic to me than traditional social media. Not that you can't find authenticity ON social media, but that there's something to be said for taking away A LOT of the external factors: advertising, engagement, profit, likes / upvoots / retweets / reactions, walking on eggshells' cause of moderation, "monkey-branching"; just, the politics of it all. Like visiting someone, just to see them, and nothing else, because that in-itself, is enough. It's not easy, it's a bit of work- but yeah, man, so is visiting someone. It is deliberateness rather than passivity.

A similar thing can be said for making a site, that the fact that it is a lot of work, that it keeps you out of that unconscious state, is potentially, perhaps a good thing.

 

[stonehead]

Do understand, it was never my intention for my statement to be interpreted that way. Obviously, people make things with the hope that they are seen, and there is nothing wrong with that.

I wanted my statement to be read as (vapid thoughts), (artwork), and (music).
Whereas you read it as (vapid) thoughts, artwork, and music.

Obviously, I know you meant no ill will by this.

Whoops, can you tell what my worst subject was in school? Thanks for the clarification.

A facet of this discussion I consider interesting is the amount of hostility self-promotion can garner in some spaces. I think nowadays, with the fight against advertising more prominent than ever, a little nuance is lost. I believe the masses are a little too quick to equate the sharing of an individual's work with something like a corporate Pepsi commercial. This is why the advertising industry can get away with so much, in my opinion, because they possess that kernel of truth: you should share your work; but, naturally ofc, it's taken too far. And what do we wind up with? Individuals with guilt, reinforced by their peers. Meanwhile, the mega-corporations satanic-ritually removed shame from their consciousness eons ago. (Not defending blatant, out-of-context shilling here, btw. Just how quick we perhaps are to generalize.)

Yeah, the hate for shilling seems like it bleeds into hate for original content itself some times. I get the desire to not want your discussion spaces to turn into a marketing venue, but it goes overboard for sure. "This is a website where we talk about music. What's that, you make music? Ew, get out. All we do is talk about making music."

What I find especially strange is how different the reception is to someone promoting their friends work from someone promoting their own work. "Hey, look at this painting I made" gets, at best mostly ignored, and at worst active scorn. "Hey, look at this painting my brother/friend/husband made" however, gets tons of love. The inevitable result of this is that when someone wants to shill, they just make a second account and pretend to be their own brother/friend/wife.

 

[Collision]

Here are some activities that I think are much easier to do if you self-host:

1. Distribute a recipe with photos placed inline with the text
2. Create an adventure game
3. Distribute a comic or other graphic art with simple interactive elements
4. Distribute a hypertext walkthrough for Baldur's Gate with an interactive map
5. Provide access to a software-defined radio
6. Distribute interactive examples of simple electrical circuits
7. Create a viewer to display a hypercube
8. Document the history of Kai Krause
9. Provide access to a true random number generator
10. Distribute plugin modules for a Sony Playstation emulator and document the development of your plugins

It's true that you probably won't build a following by doing any of these things.

 

[Boxerdog]

How would you even gauge the quality of a view? Someone who silently views something is usually only expressed by an integer increasing. If that's on >reddit or on your website.

Assuming that you have something that you are putting out, like a webcomic or music etc.

You would gauge the quality of a view by those who interact with it, of course you cannot 100% mind read through the screen but usually someone who would seek content outside the main plataforms will usually either make their own things and or/ have an appreciation for your own unique content. If some random person comments on your music on the internet, even assuming its anonymous you are more likely to assume that that person is not into inflation porn for example, of course you cannot 100% mind read through the screen, but those people tend to congregate into places with similar people, the internet while not real life its populated with real life people, and just like with real life people tend to form their own groups and corners.
You would also share your web space with your already acquired friends. Contrary to popular beliefs most websites are spread through word of mouth(or writing on the net), Of course you would need some sort of good content to go with to keep viewership but those who organically searched for it or were recommended by your tree of influence(Which starts with your own IRL group of friends) are more likely to be aligned with the values of your content.
If for whatever reason your thing becomes really popular hopefully you would already have an established a audience behind with with their own distinct culture surrounding it instead of having your product being absorbed by whatever group it became popular into.

If you want to make a undertale website most definitely post on >reddit, because that is where your audience congregates.

The quality of the views its a personal thing that aligns with your content, You post something on >reddit, you have a >reddit audience, you post something on -chan you have a -chan audience, you post something on pornhub you have a pornhub audience, and most importantly the people and culture that come with it.

Sounds like you want just a circle jerk of hipsters that huff their own farts for fun.

Its not about being hipsters, it about cultivating your own audience, Sounds like you want to make a website to be an e-celeb not to share whatever you do, which is fine but that has never ended well.
I assume you wouldn't want your thing being for example your thing being on: Big bang theory as a recurring joke and then becoming a part of the zeitgeist for people that are on that audience.
If you think its better to have 1M people that think your thing its cool because its the cool thing to be rather than 1k that think its cool because they actually enjoy it the end product and identify it as a part of their personal zeitgeist, There are plenty of websites like that already, you are better off doing a Youtube channel or having a instagram meme account.

 

[bnuungus]

that huff their own farts for fun.
That's good because Agora Road is exactly that

actually we're all huffing cognac's farts, no one else's

 

[Andy Kaufman]

Assuming that you have something that you are putting out, like a webcomic or music etc.

You would gauge the quality of a view by those who interact with it, of course you cannot 100% mind read through the screen but usually someone who would seek content outside the main plataforms will usually either make their own things and or/ have an appreciation for your own unique content. If some random person comments on your music on the internet, even assuming its anonymous you are more likely to assume that that person is not into inflation porn for example, of course you cannot 100% mind read through the screen, but those people tend to congregate into places with similar people, the internet while not real life its populated with real life people, and just like with real life people tend to form their own groups and corners.
You would also share your web space with your already acquired friends. Contrary to popular beliefs most websites are spread through word of mouth(or writing on the net), Of course you would need some sort of good content to go with to keep viewership but those who organically searched for it or were recommended by your tree of influence(Which starts with your own IRL group of friends) are more likely to be aligned with the values of your content.
If for whatever reason your thing becomes really popular hopefully you would already have an established a audience behind with with their own distinct culture surrounding it instead of having your product being absorbed by whatever group it became popular into.

If you want to make a undertale website most definitely post on >reddit, because that is where your audience congregates.

The quality of the views its a personal thing that aligns with your content, You post something on >reddit, you have a >reddit audience, you post something on -chan you have a -chan audience, you post something on pornhub you have a pornhub audience, and most importantly the people and culture that come with it.


Its not about being hipsters, it about cultivating your own audience, Sounds like you want to make a website to be an e-celeb not to share whatever you do, which is fine but that has never ended well.
I assume you wouldn't want your thing being for example your thing being on: Big bang theory as a recurring joke and then becoming a part of the zeitgeist for people that are on that audience.
If you think its better to have 1M people that think your thing its cool because its the cool thing to be rather than 1k that think its cool because they actually enjoy it the end product and identify it as a part of their personal zeitgeist, There are plenty of websites like that already, you are better off doing a Youtube channel or having a instagram meme account.

Sorry this just comes off as elitism to me. I browse all kinds of places, including rëddit sometimes. Social media too but so comfy underground message boards with maybe 5 posts a week. Limiting your audience to "people who found my website through organic means" sounds like you're way more caught up in wanting to be special and popular with the right people than just wanting to create something and share it with everyone.

I post here because people will see it and WoTs barely have a place anymore. Imagine everyone here was sitting on their little isolated island hoping someone else reads their drivel and then feel good about it because another hipster found your page. Idk you do you man but I think your view of humans is way too simplistic and you don't seem to notice that people like you and me are everywhere and what websites they browse isn't a core part of their identity like you seem to think.

 

[Boxerdog]

Sorry this just comes off as elitism to me

The internet was built on elitism. Every single septembering is a form of elitism.
1988? 1993? 2000? 2007? Every single one of these changed the demographic of the internet by allowing more and more people that would have not organically reached it before. Is it good or bad? Depends on the perspective, but you cannot complain about the current state of the internet as it its without recognizing that when people got easy(smarthphone) access to it its when things became as they are right now.

Limiting your audience to "people who found my website through organic means" sounds like you're way more caught up in wanting to be special and popular with the right people than just wanting to create something and share it with everyone.

Define right people.

You mean your friend group? Your scene? Or people that would organically look for something they appreciate? If that's so then yes.

I could post content on pornhub and have all kinds of weirdos be part of my thing and have the thing be linked with coomer culture, I am sure there is an overlap from people that would organically enjoy the content that also would use pornhub, but that means nothing compared to the larger audience. Thats how every single thing of notice works, something like dungeons and dragons might be popular now, but nobody was going to a college party in the trying to get people to become part of the playerbase, people that wanted to organically found it, Maybe that really cute girl is actually really interested in role playing and she is everywhere from a sports team to the anime club , but the college party its not the place to put your d&d table out there, those people are simply not the audience you would want at your games.

I saw this exact same discussion happen with a usenet boomer and a zoom zoom a while ago, yes I am shamelessly stealing the boomer college party scenario.

Imagine everyone here was sitting on their little isolated island hoping someone else reads their drivel and then feel good about it because another hipster found your page.

This is literally what the internet was from 1982 to the iphone release.

humans is way too simplistic and you don't seem to notice that people like you and me are everywhere

People are everywhere, yes, people that browse music scene forum #5000 also likely have a instagram account, but those things are not related , their scene its not part of the broader instagram culture, if their music scene #5000 was based solely on instagram, the demographics, style and culture of the music scene #5000 would look pretty different that it is now.

and what websites they browse isn't a core part of their identity like you seem to think.

You don't think that a majority of people have their social media being a core part of their lifestyle?
How many people work 9-5 go home and just watch youtube as their daily activity then repeat?
If you repeatedly spend any amount of meagniful time in an activity that is part of your identity wheather you like it or not.

It just happens that most traffic its between few places, therefore it seems normal to be into instagram or youtube, because they are part of the normal fabric of society post 2010s that you don't even think about it.

You don't need to justify why you post where you post.

 

[Andy Kaufman]

Define right people.

You first. You said you think some viewers are inherently more valuable than others.

This is literally what the internet was from 1982 to the iphone releas

No. Forums, MySpace and Imageboards existed before that.
Also Even if that was the case: How would that even be an argument for this being good or bad for expressing yourself to people?

People are everywhere, yes, people that browse music scene forum #5000 also likely have a instagram account, but those things are not related , their scene its not part of the broader instagram culture, if their music scene #5000 was based solely on instagram, the demographics, style and culture of the music scene #5000 would look pretty different that it is now

But that's where you're wrong. Subcultures form on bigger sites all the time. There's bubbles of interest groups all over YouTube, Facebook, twitter and yes, even Instagram. The medium they use is largely irrelevant for tons of niche hobbies. Just perma online nerds like the average user here think platforms have some inherent spiritual power over the content that's posted there and the users when most don't really give a fuck and just enjoy finding like minded people easily.

You don't think that a majority of people have their social media being a core part of their lifestyle

No. Especially not people that aren't teenagers anymore.

How many people work 9-5 go home and just watch youtube as their daily activity then repeat?
If you repeatedly spend any amount of meagniful time in an activity that is part of your identity wheather you like it or not.

Idk, you got any numbers on that?
Your main character syndrome paired with your misanthropy or wherever your disdain for random starngers comes from needs some reflection imo. People aren't ad shallow as you want them to be. Many people congregating on big sites isn't what you think it means. Many people are passionate about many different things and you might be some pleb/NPC/sheep in their eyes for not being as knowledgeable/involved in their spheres as they are. Web/tech stuff is just one avenue and whatever medium people use to talk/enjoy/express about their niche isn't as relevant as you want it to be.
If some boomers want to talk about model trains in their Facebook group then that's completely valid and they don't need to host their own site to satisfy your elitist ass. If some fashion chicks use Instagram to post/browse about a certain fashion style or subculture then that's also ok and they wouldn't benefit at all from self hosting.

Just because many people consume trash content on big sites a lot, doesn't mean that most people are shallow. I just know too many people to know for certain that the NPC meme is just that. a meme.

 

[sizeofcat]

You first. You said you think some viewers are inherently more valuable than others.

No. Forums, MySpace and Imageboards existed before that.
Also Even if that was the case: How would that even be an argument for this being good or bad for expressing yourself to people?

But that's where you're wrong. Subcultures form on bigger sites all the time. There's bubbles of interest groups all over YouTube, Facebook, twitter and yes, even Instagram. The medium they use is largely irrelevant for tons of niche hobbies. Just perma online nerds like the average user here think platforms have some inherent spiritual power over the content that's posted there and the users when most don't really give a fuck and just enjoy finding like minded people easily.

No. Especially not people that aren't teenagers anymore.

Idk, you got any numbers on that?
Your main character syndrome paired with your misanthropy or wherever your disdain for random starngers comes from needs some reflection imo. People aren't ad shallow as you want them to be. Many people congregating on big sites isn't what you think it means. Many people are passionate about many different things and you might be some pleb/NPC/sheep in their eyes for not being as knowledgeable/involved in their spheres as they are. Web/tech stuff is just one avenue and whatever medium people use to talk/enjoy/express about their niche isn't as relevant as you want it to be.
If some boomers want to talk about model trains in their Facebook group then that's completely valid and they don't need to host their own site to satisfy your elitist ass. If some fashion chicks use Instagram to post/browse about a certain fashion style or subculture then that's also ok and they wouldn't benefit at all from self hosting.

Just because many people consume trash content on big sites a lot, doesn't mean that most people are shallow. I just know too many people to know for certain that the NPC meme is just that. a meme.

In light of all the current stuff happening, Imgur removing stuff, Youtube removing stuff, you keep saying that a comment on some shitty social media site has a better reach than a well thought post on a website you own? My friend, you can go yell in a zoo if that's what you want. If you're after the "allmighty reach" then what's stopping you from making an Instagram account and do some roastie shots?
I might be new here but I can already notice you're the site contrarian. Which is a pitty, tbh, "my Youtube comment has better reach than gwern.net" is such a shitty take that it's just not worth the time to write this reply. Honestly, wtf.

Just because many people consume trash content on big sites a lot, doesn't mean that most people are shallow.

I see. I'll just ignore your bait from now on.

 

[№56]

Not really, I think there is a semblance of "authority" if you write something on your website as opposed to a random forum or imageboard.

I have seen too many ideas and concepts blow up out of nowhere as a result of anonymous posts to believe this. The Dead Internet Theory is an obvious example. Whoever wrote that original post didn't have a website and didn't sign their name, but it keeps generating conversation several years later and has attracted more attention than any of the similar (and probably more in-depth) theories about the internet that I've seen self-published on personal websites. Traditional ideas about authorship and intellectual property just don't have the same weight on the internet as they did in the world of the printing press. I'm all for making personal websites and self-hosting, but at the end of the day they're just another way of getting images and text out onto the network. In that sense I think "owning digital real estate" is only useful to the extent that it gives you a place you can retreat to and regroup in case something happens to one of the bigger network nodes.

 

[Andy Kaufman]

you're the site contrarian.

From one conversation where I rationally argue that self hosting is overkill for many, many reasons when you're online? You know nothing. People argue here all the time and aside from a few trolls also in good faith. Maybe you're just not used to this kind of stuff.

you keep saying that a comment on some shitty social media site has a better reach than a well thought post on a website you own?

It does, though. It's objectively true, more people are gonna see it that way.

If you're after the "allmighty reach" then what's stopping you from making an Instagram account and do some roastie shots?

Where did I say I was after anything? Where did I say that "reach" is the goal in itself? I said multiple times, that depending on what your goals are, having the big meeting spots online is simply the most pragmatic and efficient way and I'm arguing against some elitists conception that big sites are incapable of horboring valuable niche interest groups that use the site's reach and ease of access to their advantage and only their advantage. I'm tired of listing all the examples over and over but self hosting just is not the optimal way to do things for many applications. It is for others but not for all.
If nuance = bait then you won't have a good time here.

I see. I'll just ignore your bait from now on.

Wow. Fuck off then.

 

[Andy Kaufman]

 

[Jackal]

Fuck lobsters​

Lot of lobster sympathizers around here feeling sorry for the lobster. Lobsters are the bane of my existence. Every ounce of my being has been dedicated since the age of 13 to wipe every lobster off the face of the earth. Lobsters are Satan-worshiping beasts that live off of the misery and suffering of all other people. I was there when the lobsters raped my mother, I was there when the lobster hordes killed my entire family, and I was there when the lobster took all of our women for themselves. The lobster have spent a millennia killing the human species and hiding in plain sight underneath the ground and in the oceans plotting their attack and they are close to succeeding and taking over the world with their vile devil-worshiping and relentless slaughter of all humans no matter the age. The only good lobster is a dead lobster, and to all the lobster sympathizers I pity you for your end will come at the very lobster claws you claim to love and sympathize with. You blind fools!

YIKES YOU THOUGHT LMAOOOO
I FUCKING LOVE LOBSTERS

Okay, I pull up, hop out at the after party
You and all your friends, yeah, they love to get naughty
Sippin' on that Henn', I know you love that Bacardi (Sonny Digital)
1942, I take you back in that 'Rari

 

[myrriad]

why would you care about reach, why would ever turn your art (or even worse, yourself) into a product?

how i pity those so shallow they need the views and approval of others to feel good about themselves and what they do