A New Direction..

[VinceBordenIII]

Usenet is dead. AOL, MySpace, Google+, all dead or dying.
Twitter, Instagram, messages, these are the technologies of today.
I believe persistence is important: a set of users that persists enough so you feel like you belong to a community. eFriendships.
So how will people form eCommunities and communicate in groups in 5 years?
Simply a new wrapper on an old technology? Usenet with a facelift?

[Blast]

I'm thinking forums where people insult or ignore each other. This is the dawn of the anti social network.

[Animal]

Usenet is dead. AOL, MySpace, Google+, all dead or dying.
Twitter, Instagram, messages, these are the technologies of today.
I believe persistence is important: a set of users that persists enough so you feel like you belong to a community. eFriendships.
So how will people form eCommunities and communicate in groups in 5 years?
Simply a new wrapper on an old technology? Usenet with a facelift?

it seems like i heard on a news report the other day that some guy (maybe zukerberg sp?) came out and said that he thinks the next move is going to be into a more private messaging format. where stuff isn't visible to everyone, only the person being communicated with.

it seems like he said the focus would be on privacy more than anything.

[Stapes]

Virtual reality.

[VinceBordenIII]

I'm thinking forums where people insult or ignore each other. This is the dawn of the anti social network.

This could be a thing. Write an app - call it "SLAM" - for mobile devices. People find other registered users in the vicinity and berate them. Sometimes they actually meet and fight. You could make a mint!

Apple won't carry it

[VinceBordenIII]

it seems like i heard on a news report the other day that some guy (maybe zukerberg sp?) came out and said that he thinks the next move is going to be into a more private messaging format. where stuff isn't visible to everyone, only the person being communicated with.

it seems like he said the focus would be on privacy more than anything.

Irony is lost on the Zuck.

[Animal]

it seems like i heard on a news report the other day that some guy (maybe zukerberg sp?) came out and said that he thinks the next move is going to be into a more private messaging format. where stuff isn't visible to everyone, only the person being communicated with.

it seems like he said the focus would be on privacy more than anything.

Irony is lost of the Zuck.

yeah, i thought it was a very odd comment from him considering all the issues he has had. which might have been his reasoning.

i remember when i was hearing it thinking, "that's like if the CEO of Ford came out and said that he thought the future of automobiles would be not to have automobiles"

[VinceBordenIII]

The future of automobiles is self-driving cars. A ways off, yet. You won't even be able to drive on the freeway. Eventually, not at all. You won't own a car. The reliability of the tech will be too essential for your average rube to be trusted with one.
Lift, Uber, Amazon, Ford... they will own fleets of millions. You will order up a car, or get a deal for a regular car. It may be out all night and show up in your driveway at 3 AM. Some will look beat, but they'll be mechanically sound. Also graffiti. Most of you will not live to see this.

[Animal]

The future of automobiles is self-driving cars. A ways off, yet. You won't even be able to drive on the freeway. Eventually, not at all. You won't own a car. The reliability of the tech will be too essential for your average rube to be trusted with one.
Lift, Uber, Amazon, Ford... they will own fleets of millions. You will order up a car, or get a deal for a regular car. It may be out all night and show up in your driveway at 3 AM. Some will look beat, but they'll be mechanically sound. Also graffiti. Most of you will not live to see this.

if there is a wreck on the other side of the freeway, will self driving cars slow down so you can look at it?

[WestTexasCrude]

I know one thing that will go the way of the dinosaurs soon. Comment sections on news websites. Devolved into back and forth name calling. I understand it was intended to be the equivalent of the "Letter to the Editor" in traditional newspapers. But, they forgot about one very important thing.

[Degas]

Usenet is dead. AOL, MySpace, Google+, all dead or dying.
Twitter, Instagram, messages, these are the technologies of today.
I believe persistence is important: a set of users that persists enough so you feel like you belong to a community. eFriendships.
So how will people form eCommunities and communicate in groups in 5 years?
Simply a new wrapper on an old technology? Usenet with a facelift?

it seems like i heard on a news report the other day that some guy (maybe zukerberg sp?) came out and said that he thinks the next move is going to be into a more private messaging format. where stuff isn't visible to everyone, only the person being communicated with.

it seems like he said the focus would be on privacy more than anything.

Boy that sounds suspiciously like a fucking phone call to me, the last thing people use their smart phones for.

[VinceBordenIII]

I know one thing that will go the way of the dinosaurs soon. Comment sections on news websites. Devolved into back and forth name calling. I understand it was intended to be the equivalent of the "Letter to the Editor" in traditional newspapers. But, they forgot about one very important thing.

They don't like it when people smarter than them tear up their articles.

[WestTexasCrude]

I know one thing that will go the way of the dinosaurs soon. Comment sections on news websites. Devolved into back and forth name calling. I understand it was intended to be the equivalent of the "Letter to the Editor" in traditional newspapers. But, they forgot about one very important thing.

They don't like it when people smarter than them tear up their articles.

No, the problem is that in using the "Letter to the Editor" format in traditional newspapers that date way back to it's earliest history, anyone desiring to post a "letter" was required to give their name/ address (verified by the editor). You were more than welcome to submit even controversial ideas/ subjects, but your true name and identity were attached to it for all readers to see (and subject to public censure according to local norms). Now it's just anonymous trolls with made up names going at each other for years on end with "Libtards", "Trump Dotards", etc, etc.

[Animal]

I know one thing that will go the way of the dinosaurs soon. Comment sections on news websites. Devolved into back and forth name calling. I understand it was intended to be the equivalent of the "Letter to the Editor" in traditional newspapers. But, they forgot about one very important thing.

They don't like it when people smarter than them tear up their articles.

No, the problem is that in using the "Letter to the Editor" format in traditional newspapers that date way back to it's earliest history, anyone desiring to post a "letter" was required to give their name/ address (verified by the editor). You were more than welcome to submit even controversial ideas/ subjects, but your true name and identity were attached to it for all readers to see (and subject to public censure according to local norms). Now it's just anonymous trolls with made up names going at each other for years on end with "Libtards", "Trump Dotards", etc, etc.

ya think?

[WestTexasCrude]

I know one thing that will go the way of the dinosaurs soon. Comment sections on news websites. Devolved into back and forth name calling. I understand it was intended to be the equivalent of the "Letter to the Editor" in traditional newspapers. But, they forgot about one very important thing.

They don't like it when people smarter than them tear up their articles.

No, the problem is that in using the "Letter to the Editor" format in traditional newspapers that date way back to it's earliest history, anyone desiring to post a "letter" was required to give their name/ address (verified by the editor). You were more than welcome to submit even controversial ideas/ subjects, but your true name and identity were attached to it for all readers to see (and subject to public censure according to local norms). Now it's just anonymous trolls with made up names going at each other for years on end with "Libtards", "Trump Dotards", etc, etc.

ya think?

There are still a few news sites that have someone "oversee" the comment section and delete objectionable comments. But then you have 2 problems. Will this overseer be accused of biased against liberal or conservative comments. And then the main problem is it has to be a 24 hour job. 100% of news websites will just drop it as not worth it.

[Geist]

What major news sites still use comments? I remember when CNN and a few other news sites ditched Disqus. It was a dumb idea. Was it toxic on all sides, sure. But that's like Facebook taking out its interests section. Comments are useful marketing tools.

[WestTexasCrude]

What major news sites still use comments? I remember when CNN and a few other make sites ditched Disqus. It was a dumb idea. Was it toxic on all sides, sure. But that's like Facebook taking out its interests section. Comments are useful marketing tools.

Yeah, agreed. Actually many, if not most (say 70%) still have them. I visit maybe a dozen a day- many here in Texas. On the national level- comment sections are still at LA Times. NY Times, Washington Post, USA Today. All the State news sites here still have them. I've noticed CNN, BBC, WSJ, others have dropped them. Actually when seeing an article in an obvious biased site, I usually click the article and don't even read one word and go straight to the comment section. The Master of manipulation of the comment section is Yahoo News. Take Trump articles (Duh) for example. Almost always negative (of course), but when you go to 2 different comment sections on different articles, every (almost) comment (and there are thousands each) are deliberately stacked one way and then the other. That is not how a free flow of opinions is expressed.

[VinceBordenIII]

What major news sites still use comments? I remember when CNN and a few other make sites ditched Disqus. It was a dumb idea. Was it toxic on all sides, sure. But that's like Facebook taking out its interests section. Comments are useful marketing tools.

Yeah, agreed. Actually many, if not most (say 70%) still have them. I visit maybe a dozen a day- many here in Texas. On the national level- comment sections are still at LA Times. NY Times, Washington Post, USA Today. All the State news sites here still have them. I've noticed CNN, BBC, WSJ, others have dropped them. Actually when seeing an article in an obvious biased site, I usually click the article and don't even read one word and go straight to the comment section. The Master of manipulation of the comment section is Yahoo News. Take Trump articles (Duh) for example. Almost always negative (of course), but when you go to 2 different comment sections on different articles, every (almost) comment (and there are thousands each) are deliberately stacked one way and then the other. That is not how a free flow of opinions is expressed.

If you’re going to huffpo you’re going to get a different readership than daily caller.

[HighNDry]

I'm thinking forums where people insult or ignore each other. This is the dawn of the anti social network.

Sounds like this forum.

[Blast]

I'm thinking forums where people insult or ignore each other. This is the dawn of the anti social network.

Sounds like this forum.

It does, doesn't it you fucking little bitch

[HighNDry]

I'm thinking forums where people insult or ignore each other. This is the dawn of the anti social network.

Sounds like this forum.

It does, doesn't it you fucking little bitch

Say what you want. I'm ignoring you.

[JackRabbit_Slim]

I'm thinking forums where people insult or ignore each other. This is the dawn of the anti social network.

Sounds like this forum.

It does, doesn't it you fucking little bitch

Say what you want. I'm ignoring you.

I think you missed the point

[HighNDry]

Wouldn’t be the first time.

[QillerDaemon]

I don't know about Usenet being truly dead. It's not the same social medium it used to be, but I still get on it to find answers to technical issues that are hard to get thru the Web. The problem with it always was the great mass of info that had to be passed along to other Usenet servers, and most ISP's got tired of hosting it. But there are private servers that still host at least a good chunk of the newsgroups. It's not dead, though.