SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
We recently discussed reddit's woes and the hiring of a new CEO. However, we have seen communities come and go for many years.
Clay Shirky wrote about his experience in 1978: "Communitree was founded on the principles of open access and free dialogue... And then, as time sets in, difficulties emerge. In this case, one of the difficulties was occasioned by the fact that one of the institutions that got hold of some modems was a high school. ... the boys weren't terribly interested in sophisticated adult conversation. They were interested in fart jokes. They were interested in salacious talk. ... the adults who had set up Communitree were horrified, and overrun by these students. The place that was founded on open access had too much open access, too much openness. They couldn't defend themselves against their own users. The place that was founded on free speech had too much freedom."
There are two clear trends. One is that less input and customization tends to grow bigger. Note how Geocities was replaced with Myspace which was then replaced with Facebook and Twitter. These newer systems take away personal freedom of expression and makes people follow a 'prescribed' system, albeit an easier one to use. The other trend is that communities that try to be truly free and open end up either stifled by that openness or give up. The only obvious exception is a platform that allows us to simply filter out everything we don't want to see, which becomes a series of the feared echo chamber. With the excessive amount of data and the build up of complex rules on how information is shared, where does this leave us? It seems that like the famous iron triangle allowing free (and legal) speech with the possibility of diverse opinions, a cohesive group, and growth only allows you to pick two.
It seems to me this is a wicked problem, perhaps unsolvable. But I wonder if the community thinks there are other design options? Is this even possible with human nature as it is?
Original Submission
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 19 2015, @02:37PM
many have tried to create anonymous message boards using Tor, but from what I've seen, they only last around a month, maybe 1/2 a year, before they are compromised and/or something strange happens with the database and/or admin accounts. In an age where anything can be compromised, I don't see how a long lasting free speech system can exist for the long term.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by maxwell demon on Sunday July 19 2015, @03:51PM
Well, if they have a central database, then that's the first error. If there's no central database, nothing can happen to it. The same is about admin accounts: If there's a small list of dedicated admin for the complete system, that is a vulnerability.
Usenet already did both better. And it still exists; it has just fallen out of fashion.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 19 2015, @05:25PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitmessage [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 2) by urza9814 on Tuesday July 21 2015, @03:41PM
All that shows is that the people doing it on Tor have no idea what they're doing. Freenet has had anonymous message boards for at least a decade, and last time I checked they still seemed to be working just fine. Of course, they don't have a database, and they don't have admins. If you have either of those, it can't really be anonymous anymore. Sounds like the guys doing it on Tor were trying to bolt anonymity onto software specifically designed to NOT be anonymous -- it should be pretty obvious why that would fail...