Onderhond on Dec 11 2017, 07:10:37 PM wrote:Definitely not, but the difference is that they don't reflect back on IMDb directly.
True, good point.
I don't mean to hate on Facebook too much, everything you said is true, and there are many benefits to it, sure. You get a personalised feed which (mostly) consists of pages and groups of your choice (broadening your interests, information, or entertainment (memetic content)), you can choose to attach other profiles as friends (or not), you can keep connections with those you wouldn't expect to (because of geographic divide), it tracks events for you, allows extremely fast communication, etc. But most of it is just daft, the streams of collected data floating through it are dumb and worthless, generated by people naively uploading their crass pitiful narcissistic 'identities'. But this is obviously always going to be the case. And facebook has conquered the world, sucking everyone in. And you do have to adapt, lest you perish.
If you make a screenshot of a snapchat from someone it informs that other person, right?
Your distinction between in-depth ("encyclopaedic") vs. broad ("Google") knowledge I find a bit simplistic at the moment, but you are onto something. Certainly academia and how it has changed and will change under the influence of the Internet is worth looking into. The Internet, with its vast informational resources, is a little paradoxical in this respect, because you can delve into almost any topic and thus disproving ("fact-checking") some form of real-life proposition suggested by someone else, but on the other hand, it's a place where deep schisms and divides will occur, and where you can find "evidence" for and against the exact same proposition, thus increasing illusions, uncertainty, entropy, and a 'lack' of knowledge. The creation of new, isolated "bubbles". "The net is vast and infinite."
Well, you certainly need a substantial group of people (or philanthropic intents, as you said) to create an alternative; I'm not going to create my own zetaboards site by myself and hope people will come in. But for example letterboxd, a competitor to IMDb, reacts to IMDb's changes (e.g. after the message boards shut-down, it allowed everyone to upload their ratings for free, hoping to attract "refugees"). It's just the same old market demand-supply structure, where we, consumers, are free to choose between alternatives and set-up our own companies if we like. Obviously our icmforum.com doesn't generate any monetary revenue, but in a sense all our traffic, communication, lists, and so on - they're all capital and information too, created, transferred, energised. When a new user joins the forum, he invests part of his (energetic, informational, cognitive) 'wealth' to "our products", and contributes to those "products" that "sell" this forum to the outside world.
Honey PuPu - Thanks, that makes me more eager to see it; I've already got the file.