Wow, that’s really insightful. I hadn’t thought of it in those terms, but avoiding algorithmic feeds is exactly what I’ve been doing for the last few years. I mostly use RSS to read news, and I avoid browsing Reddit as much as I can, other than reading posts on specific things that I find through a search engine.
For a time last year I kind of fell off the wagon, and found myself wanting to browse Reddit constantly, even though I know it’s mostly repetitive junk, rage bait, and memes. It took me a concerted effort over a couple of weeks to break free again.
My spider sense goes off in the same way when I find myself looking at Apple News, TikTok, Youtube, etc.
I think you’re absolutely right that the common thread there is the algorithmic curation.
What compelled you to buy something through an ad? Does it often work? My operating assumption is that every click-through internet ad other than major brands (Apple, car makers, etc) is basically a scam.
I've bought shirts I've seen through Facebook ads before. Ads can work, but Facebook is propped up with so many scams these days you have to wonder at what point do they get investigated over it? Amazon has had a similar problem, I've seen loads of threads here over it. I have been fortunate enough that most things I've bought off amazon have been legit.
I've gotten to the point where I consider anything advertised to me to be at least somewhere on the "scam spectrum". With the actual value/scamminess being indicated by a number of factors:
1. Frequency: The more I see ads for something, the more of a scam / less value I believe it to be.
2. Channel: Anything on YouTube or social media is 100% unequivocally a huge scam. To the point where if I think a product is legit or worthwhile, and I happen to see it on YouTube, I will change my mind and not even consider purchasing it.
3. Algorithmic vs. word of mouth: Anything I see that is obviously algorithmically fed to me (like recommendations, "you might like" and "featured" products) increases the scamminess / decreases the value.
It's too bad that legit small businesses trying to crack into a market are collateral damage, and I feel for them, but the ad pond is full of scum and if you're legit and you dive into it, you're going to get scum all over you.
I agree and I would similarly reconsider any purchase if I saw an ad for the product or company online. At this stage it's almost like if you have to advertise then you're not worth it.
How do we find what's worth buying then? Word of mouth, trying things in stores, reviews where they buy the products and are not given them.
I've blocked ads from my online experience for 20 years now, and I don't watch broadcast TV or radio, I live in a small town so I don't see much visual advertising. I feel like I'm at close to ad free as you can be in our ad saturated world. I don't feel that much is different between myself and our neighbours except that their house is full of shite they buy and throw out. None of it qol improving things. And we still have lots of material things, it's not like I spend no money. I guess my point is: what is the actual point of all this advertising anyway if you could remove it and not much changes. Make the world better, give us back our attention by default, we'll still buy stuff!
This has the same answer as when people ask "How do we find dating prospects without the internet?". Same way we did before the internet was a thing ;)
While I suppose I haven't technically seen a recent scam ad pretending to be a major brand, I have seen use of copyrighted art (Disney or anime characters), and Elon Musk's face, to imply they represented a major brand.
I completely agree. I did this many years ago. The only thing that annoys me is that for many local things it’s the only option. I’m actually significantly less informed and involved in the local community because things are so heavily reliant on Facebook, and I refuse to sign back up.
I left Facebook over a decade ago, and it was painful to realize how many people simply forgot that I exist, and how many events I missed because many people exclusively use it to invite people.
Similar experience where I met someone in 2017 and was enraptured with them, and we eventually drifted apart because they only communicated through Snapchat and Instagram.
I often wonder if abstaining from the platforms that I dislike was worth the increase in loneliness and detachment from society, but I don't have access to the alternative universe where I decided to grit my teeth and accept the data hoarding companies and dark patterns as a tradeoff for being able to interact with people who couldn't care less about the technicalities.
I think, if someone refuses to interact with you unless it's over their preferred corporate advertising-delivery platform, then they really aren't your friend. Real friends are willing to put in effort and at least agree on a least common denominator communication channel!
My friends know I am not on Facebook. If they really want me to invite me to an event, they know how to reach me, and they do. Anything being communicated out only on Facebook, I just don't go to, and I probably wouldn't want to go to it anyway.
I've been off of Facebook for so long, I don't even remember when I quit. At least 10 years ago, probably 15. And I never joined Instagram, TikTok, or any of these other ad-delivery platforms. I don't feel that I am any more lonely or more detached from society because of it.
it is how it is, but nothing's stopping any of us from reaching out or calling a friend or sending a calendar invite. I used Facebook for a local animal shelter I was volunteering at, but from the infinite scroll filled with infinite ads, very little local things in the middle using "FB Purity" firefox addon to hide all the garbage you see how much garbage is actually there. it feels like I pulled away from a dark matrix of things designed to keep us hooked, then I look around and see everybody else hooked, commenting with bots, sharing facebook encouraging memes/new age spirituality posts and fb doing all it could to hook everybody's attention, getting riled up against political opinions, bots.
is the loneliness worth it? probably not. is the freedom? yes.
> where I decided to grit my teeth and accept the data hoarding companies and dark patterns as a tradeoff for being able to interact with people who couldn't care less about the technicalities.
I know, right? that infinite scroll/showing all the good things on the timelines isn't their real life, they're filling a void within themselves surfing short videos and voicing opinions on nearly everything.
even Zuckerberg said Facebook isn't for making/interacting with friends anymore, it's other things, and not good things.
you're not alone, and you're not detached from society, you're just unplugged from the matrix. of course I say this while browsing subreddits and hn, but hobbies and activities where we meet people, these are always going to be the best thing available to us. in the digital world there's plenty of people who'd be down for a LAN, a hangout, an event like going hiking, and I've met some cool people outside of social media but there's many days where it was me, 4 walls, a book/finding things to occupy my time.
They globally reset the privacy settings for pretty entertaining reasons. Every few years a post goes around saying crazy privacy things that gives you instructions to change your privacy settings to only “share with yourself”. If you’re dumb enough to do it, you basically shadow-ban yourself. If enough people do it, they have to change the settings back because also those same people will complain about their aunt/neighbor/dad/sister whatever not being able to see their posts and have no idea why.
Because every unit of electricity causes climate change and burns resources (even renewable sources of electricity - they just burn them slower). From a societal point of view we are dumping huge amounts of electricity and resources into a hole to accomplish nothing that couldn’t be accomplished with a database and a trusted third party at a billionth of the cost (or less).
The vast majority of transactions are speculation on what other people might pay for a bitcoin (i.e., a line on a spreadsheet). And even then, that speculation and trading often occurs on secondary markets which rely on trusted third parties - thus rendering the entire ordeal even more pointless.
That dreams is dead. Bitcoin is never going to be a universal digital currency. No-one (*) uses it for that purpose now, because they discovered it was rubbish as a cash system
I agree except as to smart light switches, locks, and blinds. For me those have been set-it-and-forget-it devices that are really handy. I have various lights that come on from dusk until bedtime, doors that lock at night, lights that go off after 5 minutes (closets) or a couple of hours (kitchen). The blinds are blackout shades that go down at the kids’ nap times during the weekend. I also have a task light over a work bench that is controlled via my phone, since there is no wired switch there.
I set all this up over the course of several years, as needed, and haven’t thought much about it since. It’s nice.
I use Apple Watch Ultra constantly, it’s extremely worth it to me. The charging is annoying, but otherwise, the watch is amazing.
It keeps me on track every day. I have recurring alarms for my daily and weekly meetings/calls, and for life things like when it is time to pack up and get the kids out time to close things down and go to bed. Each morning I also set alarms for critical events that day. Basically I outsource the “scheduling” part of my brain to the watch and just focus on whatever I’m doing.
I also use it for a stop watch, cooking times, etc. I use it for GPS while hiking and biking. My phone running AllTrails can’t track a 25-mile bike ride through the mountains without dying, but the watch doesn’t even break a sweat.
Beyond that, it’s a great backup phone for when I leave my phone on the table or in the other room, etc. I also bind the button on the side to the flashlight feature, which I use almost every day. It’s not as strong as a phone flashlight but it’s instantly available and more hands-free. It’s so helpful for dealing with crying kids in the middle of the night. It’s nice when I don’t have a hand to hold a phone flashlight, like when I take the trash cans to the curb at night, etc.
Overall I get tons of use out of my Apple Watch every day.
I’m not a big fan of the name Toad, but the Textual framework is fantastic. I’ve been using it for years in a small project and it’s just a wonderful tool - it makes it really easy to get a super fast little UI for scripts.
5 miles is a long walk. That’s at least 1 hour and 15 minutes for a very fast walker, and probably around 2 hours for a more typical walker.
Plus you have to walk back, with groceries. Assuming you are feeding a family and not doing this 2-4 hour round trip every day, that means you’ll need a cart to push or pull.
Good luck pushing that loaded cart on a road with any amount of traffic. Most places in the U.S. where the grocery store is 5 miles away will involve either zero sidewalks and dangerous roads (more rural/suburban areas), or many many road crossings with lights that slow you down (denser areas).
I’m a big fan of walking. But 5 miles to a grocery store and then back is going to be way too much and too dangerous for most people.
It's still not practical. Humans just walk too slowly.
Let's be realistic here and accept the fact that anything that involves more than 1km of walking one way won't happen for 99% of people.
That's why we have bikes, for distances from 1km to 10-12km (one way).
And only after that should we have cars. Cars should also be reserved for very heavy loads (more than 50kg), groups of people (not single drivers, 2+ people in the car), and various other niche uses.
> And only after that should we have cars. Cars should also be reserved for very heavy loads (more than 50kg), groups of people (not single drivers, 2+ people in the car), and various other niche uses.
There is a (slightly) tongue in cheek video you should watch.
> Cars should also be reserved for [...] and various other niche uses.
to which you replied:
> I don't want to spend 6 hours commuting a daily in the UK. I've done this btw in the UK a decade ago. It was miserable.
6 hours per day commuting is 3 hours one way, which in almost every country in the world is called "super commuting" and it affects a very small minority of people:
-> the average commute is under 30 minutes each way.
-> commutes longer than 2 hours affect only 2% of workers.
So yeah, that's what "niche" means.
Besides that, I literally listed some recommended distances (up to 1km for walking, up to 10-12k for cycling), don't tell me your commute was 3h one way for a distance under 12km? You can walk 12km in less than 3h one way :-)
If you watched the video. The point is that it was something like a 2 and a half hour commute via public transport, it was much shorter while driving. It isn't a "super commute" if you are travelling less than an hour.
A commute in a car that less than an hour isn't niche.
The public transport commute was definitely a super commute, so that's the starting point.
And yeah, that's one of the things to take into account when choosing both a residence and a job.
If you don't have a direct connection (ideally) or very good transfers, yeah, it's going to get ugly quick.
I found a comment on Youtube particularly poignant for this type of problem:
> I worked 7 miles away in Redditch for 18 years, for my sins. The 16 minute journey by car took 45 minutes at rush hour, so I experimented with buses which took an hour and a half, needed two separate tickets from different bus companies, and didn't allow me to do any overtime. I took up cycling and once fit the journey only took 24 minutes.
* * *
Which leads back to my original point: let's all campaign for better public transportion infrastructure, for more dedicated bus lanes, for more bike lanes, for more walkable neighbourhoods, for less car-only infrastructure. Let's give people more options.
Because while there are tons of anecdotes against public transportation, for example, the numbers reveal that it's badly needed and used by millions and millions of people wherever it's available and the coverage and frequency aren't completely unusable. So demand for public transportation is there.
Cars should be there to "plug" the gaps where public transportation, cycling, walking are not valid options. Not be the default as they are in many places.
Let's optimize for 80% of the population first.
Oh, nice side effect: once all those sardines are neatly packed in buses, trams and trains (or on top of bikes) they're no longer on roads so people who do have to use cars have much faster and relaxed commutes.
Right. So you didn't watch it and instead cherry picked the comments. You missed a key thing in the video. It isn't really any cheaper using public transport. BTW my experience was roughly the same as in the video but replace buses with trains.
One of the key reasons I learned to drive was because trains, buses and taxis are expensive and mile per mile more expensive than using the car. Even flying in some circumstances is more expensive and longer than driving (short domestic UK flights).
The issue with public transport is that it doesn't go quite go where, when you want and nothing is going to fix that.
No amount of campaigning is going to change anything. Near where I live there is two roads closed. It been this way for almost three years now. If the council can't fix one road in three years, how are they ever going to sort out more complex issues.
So you have something that isn't cheaper, doesn't quite do what you want and generally is less pleasant than using a car, you aren't going to want to use it.
You are deflecting from the original point, while saying nothing.
It simply doesn't work for a lot of people and never will and you were trying to pretend these are niche things when they are not.
People generally don't like public transport. You have to be in a confined space with strangers, that in any other circumstance you would probably never see.
I ended up cycling through wet, snow, extreme cold because I got fed up of dealing with buses and trains after a week. When I had to travel by train it was because cycling wasn't feasible and I had no other choice. It was miserable. Everyday there seemed to be delays and that is 2 hours a day for a year I will never get back.
Saying use what you think is best basically equates to "I am going to drive" for the vast majority.
> Stop creating sock puppet accounts to push your agenda, please.
I don't keep logins for this site. I don't really care about have a consistent presence here. I don't have any sock puppet accounts.
If I was pushing an agenda would that be then? That I don't agree with you?
I am a long time cyclist that doesn't like transport activists because I've had to personally deal with them and I don't trust them. In many cases their livelihood is tied to their activism and I've heard your statements 100 times before. You are just parroting stuff that I've heard before.
I am trying to talk to you as someone that realised that most of it is crap.
I recently visited my parents. They live in a "Large Conurbation", which means (for all intents and purposes) it isn't official a city but is large enough to be one. Over the last year I've seen new bike lanes installed at what would be significant cost.
All they've done is made driving more difficult, the number of cyclists hasn't increased. I didn't see a single cyclist on these new lanes. I visit my parents once every 2 months and the winters are quite mild by UK standards. So it isn't a seasonal thing where people aren't using the lanes because it is cold. They just aren't using them.
So I've seen first hand that what you are suggesting doesn't actually work. This is in possibly one of the best areas to do this in the UK outside of Major cities and it doesn't work.
But it's only a good judgment call if you have the available transit + shopping time, able body, suitable climate, and a single store that has everything you need.
If any of those conditions are not satisfied then it's better economic utility to outsource that entire task and get your exercise and socialization by going to the gym. You can even walk to the gym too. You can outsource almost anything except exercise.
It’s funny how personal it is. I really hate the taste of alcohol and don’t even tend to like food cooked with alcohol (even if it has “cooked off” it clearly leaves a taste behind).
I tried drinking for a short while but I had to almost hold my nose and swallow it as if it were medicine.
I agree their name scheme sucks. But the way to buy a new CPU is to check with the motherboard vendor about what CPUs the motherboard supports. You can't expect it to work (although it may) if the motherboard maker doesn't list it as supported.
Having some portion of the socket name stay the same can still be helpful to show that the same heatsinks are supported. I agree there are many far better ways Intel could handle this.
For a time last year I kind of fell off the wagon, and found myself wanting to browse Reddit constantly, even though I know it’s mostly repetitive junk, rage bait, and memes. It took me a concerted effort over a couple of weeks to break free again.
My spider sense goes off in the same way when I find myself looking at Apple News, TikTok, Youtube, etc.
I think you’re absolutely right that the common thread there is the algorithmic curation.
reply