What is Wrong With The Internet ?

Yes, I know we could write a book, but essentially what is wrong with the Internet is the way we use it.

The public changed has the way it uses the Internet to the benefit of a few monopoly tech companies and those that want to spread disinformation because laziness has caused them to succumb to the cult of convenience.

We will skip the very early days before the World Wide Web and corporations being allowed on to the Internet and jump to the Internet/Web being broadly adopted by the public and accessed via computers.

In those days websites operated by organizations, institutions, media, businesses and even individuals were how we accessed the web. Phone apps did not exist.

We used search engines (Alta Vista was my preference) to find websites that we trusted to proved us with information. And we judged that information by how much we trusted the sources, seeking medical information from places like Health Canada or the Mayo Clinic and our news from reputable news media that we trusted offline.

We also used the World Wide Web for creating communities via online forums for specific subject interests like photography or mountain biking. All without being beholden to one predatory corporation for everything we did online.

We did not simply type a question into Google and believe the first response it provided without even paying attention to the source as many do today, and was the start of the decline of the reliability of the Internet (due to our choices). And this was before Google started selling search rankings and site operators started using Search Engine Optimization (SEO) techniques to artificially raise their rankings.

Perhaps the biggest thing wrong with the Internet is users not paying attention to the actual source of the information they find there.

The next thing that went wrong was users abandoning the Open Internet for the convenience of one proprietary source designed to sell advertising and drive traffic to that advertising. That, of course, was/is Facebook and it only became worse when it became a phone app and now a huge percentage of users never use the Open Internet at all and just use Facebook because it is so easy and all that they need and it is so easy and they do not care about all the well documented problems with and evils of Facebook because it is so easy. The cult of convenience trumps everything. And of course people believe Facebook is free.

This is not to say there are not a lot of good things like community resources and voluntary organizations available through Facebook. The thing is before Facebook all these resources were available on the Open Web. Unfortunately those of us who will not engage with the evil that is Facebook no longer have access to many of these resources that are now only available on Facebook because so many have decided that Facebook is absolutely necessary and irreplaceable. For many Facebook and other related phone “apps” have replaced the Open Internet.

I was going to link to articles on the evils of Facebook and how it is not free but that information is readily available and being added to regularly so we will let people use the Open Internet to do their own research, preferably not via Google. We suggest DuckDuckGo.

If only Facebook was the greatest evil online.

I once had the naive view that the Internet would be an effective tool against the promotion of hate and bigotry. In the “old days” the racists and bigots used to recruit directly from disaffected groups, youths with no hope for the future, recently laid off workers, etc., by befriending them and providing them a community where they would teach them their hate and bigotry. These were closed communities that sheltered members from other points of view.

When recruiting moved online I thought that the easy access to the truth would be an effective counterbalance.

Unfortunately they have created their own closed communities online in dark places like Eight Chan and Q’Anon fuelled by disinformation sites like InfoWars and Rebel News and now BrandX, formerly Twitter, along with certain places on YouTube.

Their followers shy away from the mainstream media, they shy away from science, they shy away from any authoritative information sources. These are people who believe stories like PizzaGate.

I just wrote “perhaps the biggest thing wrong with the Internet is users not paying attention to the actual source of the information they find there”. But that may not be true. Perhaps the biggest thing wrong with the Internet is users limiting their use of the Internet, with its broad access to knowledge, to just sources that reflect back to them their own world view, a world view often based on wilful ignorance and disinformation and actual real fake news.

I have not yet touched on what the cult of convenience has done to online shopping. My first experience with online shopping was using the Internet to check product features and specifications on manufacturer’s websites while purchasing locally. I moved on to the convenience of purchasing online with free shipping, but for the most part sticking to stores with local retail outlets.

However, for many, the inconvenience of shopping around has become too much work and they have decided buying everything from one predatory monopolistic outlet is best for them. The cult of convenience wins again.

However I find Amazon’s business model to be as abhorrent as Facebook’s and I will never buy anything from them unless I absolutely need it and I absolutely cannot get it anyplace else.

There are wonderful information sources on the Open Internet and every day I learn of something new that I don’t always have enough time to check out. It is sad so many people want to hide away in dark places avoiding the light the Internet can bring to them.

The stages of corporate social media

Corporate social media essentially goes through three stages.

The first is new, free and wonderful, lots of functionality, user friendly and free, or at least pretending to be free. It’s purpose is to build a customer/product base (as the customer is the product).

The second stage is monetization. The purpose is to make money so once the free loss leader period is over measures to create revenue are introduced. These are usually things the users can live with and are introduced along with measures to make the customer dependent on the product.

Once that is achieved we move into stage three, equivalent to the final stage of capitalism. We move from earning a fair profit to profit maximization with no regard for the user, the assumption being that by this time the user is convinced their very existence is dependent on the product, also known as the Facebook effect.

With the introduction of Brand X, EvilElon is clearly telling us he is moving Twitter into Stage Three as capitalism moves into it’s final stage.

Why Mastodon

So why did I open a Mastodon account and why do I think Mastodon can replace Twitter.

I started looking for alternatives to Twitter soon after Elon Musk purchased it and sent it to hell in a hand basket.

Of course, Twitter’s problems started much earlier than that. As soon as Twitter realized that as a business it had to monetize it’s product an emphasis on profitability took over and it ceased to be a primarily community space. At that point many of us wished there was some sort of co-operative community based alternative. Many of us did not realize that one did exist, in the form of Mastodon, until we started looking harder after Elon Musk purchased Twitter as his personal vanity project.

Of course the purchase of Twitter by the world’s richest person could have been a positive thing, The new owner could afford to subsidize it as a project for the common good. But instead he decided to use if for self promotion and to pursue his own perverted concept of free speech, turning it into a haven for disinformation, conspiracy theories, the spewing of hatred and a platform for right wing extremists and white supremacists.

This has forced many from minority and vulnerable communities to leave the hatred for their own self-preservation. Those of us more privileged were able to use our ability to filter what we see to protect ourselves. The reason we remain is that so far no alternative has the audience reach that Twitter does. But many of us are looking at Mastodon as that potential alternative and replacement for Twitter.

Can Twitter be saved. Perhaps, but it’s business model means profit will always be put before community. Could an angel investor with deep pockets subsidize it for the common good. Perhaps, but there are very few people in that position and that would leave the Twitter community beholden to that person.

Can Mastodon realistically replace Twitter. The beauty of Mastodon is in it’s co-operative federated structure and volunteer moderation teams. What Mastodon would need to replace Twitter is a huge increase in server and bandwidth capacity. But it does not need a single angel investor. It could do that with thousands of individuals, organizations, and even corporations willing to provide for the cost of the server and bandwidth capacity necessary, in exchange for the goodwill that would create. As to the increase in moderation capacity needed, the strength of Mastodon is that it is scale-able, as it’s user base increases so does its potential volunteer base. So, yes, I do believe Mastodon can eventually replace Twitter.

The other benefit of Mastodon is that it will not attract the hateful elements that Twitter does. For example, these are the rules for the server I am on.

Some ground rules. These are set and enforced by the mstdn.ca moderators.

1.  No toxic and hateful speech.
2.  No incitement of violence and no promotion of misleading or violent ideologies.
3.  No harassment, dogpiling, or unwanted advances.
4.  No doxxing of other users.
5.  No content illegal in Canada or copyrighted content that you don't own rights to.
6.  Sexually explicit or violent media must be marked appropriately.
7.  No spamming. Excessive posting, boosting, advertising or mass-marketing posts will be   actioned accordingly and based on intent.
8. Be yourself. Accounts intended to impersonate or parody are not permitted, and those found to be directly misrepresenting themselves as another person or entity will be actioned accordingly.
9. Agree to the Terms of Service and Code of Conduct.

Put more briefly, this simply requires that users not be assholes and that they act like decent human beings while using Mastodon. However, this will keep the “anti-woke/anti-PC” crowd away as they see human decency as an affront to their right to free speech and would not want to be associated with such a “woke” service and will likely prefer “TruthSocial” anyway.

For now I will remain on Twitter, taking advantage of the greater reach it currently provides. As for Mastodon, I will likely be easing myself into participation there as I figure things out.

My Mastodon user name is @the5thColumnist@mstdn.ca and my Mastodon main page is located at https://mstdn.ca/@the5thColumnist

You can learn more about Mastodon here https://joinmastodon.org/

To join mstdn.ca go here Sign up - Mastodon Canada (mstdn.ca)

The Benefits of Being a Nobody on Twitter (& free speech)

Following 193 accounts and with 329 followers I am a relative nobody on Twitter. By controlling who I follow and who I block I can protect myself from the worst of Twitter. By choosing to follow legitimate news sources and people with similar interests, like cycling, my Twitter feed is interesting and mostly enjoyable. I even have a few significant followers who I occasionally engage with and who may extend my reach with retweets. I hope my tweets, usually about politics and social issues along with cycling and the outdoors, are interesting and useful to people.

Since I am a relative nobody I do not have to worry about being trolled and if I am “attacked” on Twitter it is for what I have said and not who I am. That cannot be said about what a lot of people on Twitter are facing, particularly in light of the new “freedom of speech” Twitter which has increased trolling and attacks on vulnerable and disadvantaged minorities forcing many to leave Twitter.

Free speech should belong to everyone. If Twitter becomes a haven for privileged white men to spew hatred that will not be a victory for free speech, but a failure of it.

A Tale of Two Twitters

It is the best of the Internet, it is the worst of the Internet, it is the purveyor of wisdom, it is the purveyor of disinformation, it is the home of knowledge, it is the home of wilful ignorance.

Beyond the literary allusion (words inspired by Charles Dickens) there do indeed seem to be two Twitters. 

One can be a place of enlightenment where people share information, opinions and even wisdom and rationally debate the issues of the day.

The other can be a place where people spout conspiracy theories, lies, hate, and even threats, without any personal accountability under the cloak of anonymity.

What is the solution. Some would have us eliminate the second Twitter in the name of civility. Others would argue that Twitter should be a place of absolute free speech without any required personal responsibility.

I would suggest a solution that allows the users to choose which Twitter they want to be part of with a few simple changes that otherwise allows Twitter to continue as it is.

The first thing is to open up Verified Accounts to anyone who wishes to be verified rather than allowing verification only for VIPs and so-called influencers. The second would be to then allow Verified Users, if they wish, to restrict who can see their Tweets and whose Tweets they can see to Verified Users only.

Let people choose the Twitter they want to be part of.

Mayor Jimmy Really Doesn’t Get It

The following twitter exchange exemplifies Mayor Jimmy's petty reaction to criticism.

I suppose I should be thankful I have not been blocked yet, like so many of the mayor's critics.

Jim Watson ‏@JimWatsonOttawa
Pleased to join @Eli_Ward5 and @AllanHubley_23 and Cyril Leeder at Tanger Outlet ground breaking in Kanata
pic.twitter.com/RXzKKT46gZ

Richard W. Woodley ‏@the5thColumnist
@JimWatsonOttawa @AllanHubley_23 @Eli_Ward5
paving farmland and clearcutting forests sure makes our mayor happy and proud #developersrule

Jim Watson ‏@JimWatsonOttawa
@the5thColumnist and where do you live? Oh yes, a former farmers field.

What can I take from this but the suggestion that somehow anyone who lives on what used to be farmland or wilderness has no right to oppose the inappropriate development of farmland or environmentally sensitive lands. That is a pretty neat trick to basically take away the rights of anyone who lives in a city, in this case the city of Ottawa, to oppose the development of farmland or environmental lands. After all, most cities, including Ottawa, started as rural agricultural areas and before that was wilderness.

But no, because we might live on what was once farmland or wilderness does not take away our rights to be concerned about and oppose inappropriate development.

Mayor Jimmy may want to label us as crazy environmentalists who should all live in cabins in the bush but we are not against cities and development but rather understand that boundaries need to be set, and rules need to be followed, to allow for appropriate development, and appropriate development is not defined as whatever developers want.

Does Mayor Jimmy really expect home buyers to determine what lands are developed by their purchasing choices made after the fact. Does he really think that would work. That people will not buy houses that are already built because they think they should not have been built there, knowing their decisions will not bring the farmland or wilderness back. Does he really think he can transfer the responsibility for proper decision making by the authorities who actually have power to the virtually powerless consumers of these mega corporations' housing developments.

It is the responsibility of the political authorities at the federal, provincial and municipal levels to set limits and establish priorities to protect agricultural land environmental lands. And as more land becomes developed and agricultural and environmental lands become scarcer it becomes more important to protect them. We need to strengthen, not weaken these protections. We need to be more vigilant, not less vigilant, in enforcing the rules.

Politicians, like Mayor Jimmy, need to take these responsibilities seriously and not dismiss criticism in a petty way simply because it is expressed by people who actually live in the City of Ottawa, the people they are supposed to represent.

Rogers and Me Part 2: When You Have A Monopoly I Guess You Don't Have to Tell Your Customers What They Are Paying For

After my original attempts to get Rogers to answer my questions via e-mail failed I posted my questions to Google Drive (originally Google Docs) and tweeted the location to them and finally got answers via Twitter, 140 characters at a time.

That brought me to the next stage of the decision making process, which was deciding between the Digital Plus and VIP packages. So that should be easy - go to the Rogers website and see just what the differences between the two packages are. Not so easy I discovered. I expected to find a listing and description of the Basic package, and then what Digital Plus adds, and then what VIP adds. But it does not work that way. They only list the full complement of channels for each package and you have to go through them yourself to determine just what additional channels you get with the each package and then you only have a list of names. So then I went looking on the Rogers web site to find descriptions of the channels they wanted me to pay to subscribe to, without success so, I tweeted @RogersHelps again, resulting in this exchange.

Richard W. Woodley ‏@the5thColumnist @RogersHelps is there a place on your website where I can find a DESCRIPTION of all the channels in the VIP package, not just list of names

Nicolas @ Rogers ‏@RogersNicolas @the5thColumnist Hi Richard, I'm afraid we don't have a description of each channel individually.

Richard W. Woodley ‏@the5thColumnist @RogersNicolas rather astounding that you can't provide customers with a description of what you're trying to sell to them @RogersHelps

So I did my own research and made my own list which I posted to Google Drive here and I am still considering my options. But it is rather astounding that they expect people to buy a package without knowing it's contents, and more so that they can get away with it. The power of a monopoly.

Rogers and Me: Father Corporation Knows Best in Mister Rogers Neighbourhood

I prefer to deal with companies using email because it allows me to carefully ask questions and carefully consider the answers before asking follow-up question, as well as providing a written record of the information received.

I was quite surprised to find that Rogers Communications, which considers itself to be the best Internet service in the country, does not provide a means for customers to communicate with them via e-mail.

I searched Rogers website looking for an e-mail address for customers to ask questions about upgrading our analog cable TV service to digital and could not find any. The only place that had any sort of form for submitting questions to get an email response was here - https://www.rogers.com/web/content/contactus - and the closest form was for for Cable Media Relations, hardly the place for customer information requests.

I then queried the @RogersHelps Twitter account and was told first that Rogers didn't answer customer questions by email and then a further response referred me back to the same place on the website so I submitted the questions with no answer after a week, and none expected.

I am aware that Rogers has telephone and live chat help available and I know some customers prefer that. However, as stated above, I prefer to use e-mail to deal with companies I do business with.

Perhaps I am being stubborn and should just trust that the big corporation knows best how I should communicate with them but I believe that companies should let their customers choose which way to communicate with them, as long as it is reasonable and normal, which of course email is, in fact being the norm with most companies. Twitter on the other hand may be trendy and an effective way for customers to get a corporations attention but it is not an effective medium for seriously asking and answering complex questions.

These are the questions we are trying to get an answer to from Rogers.

The first question is about the PVR purchase and rental options. We noticed a rent to own option of $15 a month for 36 months which was appealing because by renting we do not have to buy a PVR outright that only works with Rogers if we want to change TV providers but yet if we are happy with the service after 36 months we own the PVR and have no more rental payments. However we also noticed a $25 rental option without purchase after 36 months. Why would anyone opt to pay more to get less. My best guess is that the $15 rent to own option is really not a rent to own option but simply a financing option and we are committed to keep paying for 36 months no matter what. Can you tell us what the differences between the $25 rental forever option and the $15 rent to own after 36 months option are.

Oh, and does the $500 PVR come with the recommended HDMI cable, or is that extra.

We understand there is a $50 installation charge. Is it possible to do the install ourselves by picking up the necessary outlet signal splitter and digital boxes at one of your stores, or having them delivered to us.

Also is it possible to connect TVs to the additional outlets without a digital box and get the basic analog channels on it.

Also if it is possible can I indicate all this during the online ordering process.

So we are left considering our options as to whether to just do as we are told by Rogers, who obviously believes they, not their customers, knows best, or simply seek out a different Television Service Provider who has more respect for their customers.

Reflections

This has probably been the longest I have gone between blog posts, despite my best intentions, but as I said I have not abandoned you. I have simply been busy with other things mostly related to mapping and biking and the South Match Highlands struggle.

But I have also been using Twitter a lot to express my political and social opinions so if you see nothing new in this space look to the right for my Twitter Feed or go directly to it here.

Facebook is NOT The Internet - The Internet IS The (Social) Network

In the beginning there were BBSs (Bulletin Board Systems). In a foreshadowing of things to come, almost immediately following the invention of the Personal Computer (PC) they became communications devices as BBS systems were set up for hobbyists to use to share information and home-written programs. At this time PC users were primarily computer hobbyists and the BBSs were mainly confined to dealing with techie things, although in another foreshadowing you could soon download Sunshine Girl like pin-up photos.

As personal computers became more prevalent and the Internet was established in academia more broadly based online service providers such as CompuServe, Prodigy and America Online (AOL) were established to allow people to access and share information on various interests and hobbies. These services while proprietary and limited to their own online resources also provided an interface to Internet email so people could communicate between service providers using email.

The first access the public had to the Internet was via Freenets, such as the Cleveland Freenet and National Capital Freenet (Ottawa). These used a text interface to allow people to access documents stored online, which were mainly of serious academic interest at that time. These documents were accessible via something called Gopher using search engineswith names like Archie and Veronica. This was before the invention of Hyper Text Markup Language (HTML) and the World Wide Web (WWW). The Freenets also provided members with access to the Internet email network.

The Freenets allowed community organizations to communicate with members and the public by becoming Information Providers. Freenet Information providers included hobbyists in many different fields as well as community activists. This quickly became a way for the Internet to become a community organizing tool and extended it's usefulness beyond academia to the general public.

You could also connect into other Freenets from your local Freenet.

With the creation of the World Wide Web the Freenets established interfaces to access the content on the web as well as allowing information providers to provide information in HTML format.

All of these early online information providers were accessed via dial-up telephone at slow modem speeds but were soon to be followed by full fledged Internet Service Providers (ISPs) that provided the public with full access to the Internet and the emerging World Wide Web.

Although today most users access the Internet via the web, discussion forums, known as Usenet newsgroups can still be accessed via dedicated software and messaging and live chat can be accessed via Internet Relay Chat software, and many people still use dedicated email software. So the Internet is not just the World Wide Web.

But things were changing, high speed Internet via Digital Subscriber Lines (DSL) and cable was becoming available and the controversial idea of allowing commercial and business use of the net was being proposed, again foreshadowing the current controversy over net neutrality and what is becoming commercial dominance of the Internet. While we cannot go back, and I would not want to give up access to Internet commerce and banking and the ability to research products online, we must maintain and protect the most important role of the Internet as a public utility and public information and communications network.

Which brings us to the seemingly most popular Internet phenomenon, Facebook. It seems that for many people the Internet, and they themselves, could not exist without this commercial proprietary site that makes millions be leveraging not only people's personal and private information but that of their friends, in what can best be described as a social marketing business plan.

Perhaps I have no right to criticize Facebook as I do not use it. But I do not use it because of what I have learned about it and my intuitive sense, as an early personal computer and Internet user, that Facebook is evil. While I may also have some concerns about the empire Google is building, and avoid Google Plus because of that, my intuition is that Google is still managing to remain true to it's "don't be evil" principles.

What surprises and concerns me most about Facebook is that it has been able to extend that same sense of necessity, that "we have to be on Facebook to reach the public", to progressive community organizations, that I believe should know better. Everyone that is on Facebook, the so-called social network, is on the Internet. The Internet is The Network and there are many organizing tools on the network for progressive organizations to use.

So what tools do progressive community organizations have available on the Internet.

The main tool for providing an online presence has always been a website. Although it does not have the sexy new cachet of a blog or Twitter, or even Facebook, a website provides the basis for connecting all of an organizations online tools. That is why the web was designed the way it was, why HTML was written the way it was, and why Uniform Resource Locators (URLs) allow all online tools to connect to each other.

A website allows an organization to provide basic and comprehensive information to it's members and the public as well as links to documents stored online using resources such as Google Docs. Organization websites can also to link to other resources such as blogs or Twitter accounts. The first website I was responsible for is now archived here.

Web forums connected to websites, which have replaced Usenet newsgroups, provide an excellent means for organizations to communicate with and hold discussions amongst their members and the general public. Forums can be organized by subjects with separate threads for each discussion and can be open to the public or private, in terms of ability to read them or post to them. They can allow interested persons to choose what to read and respond to and avoid receiving massive amounts of email, that can be restricted to more important urgent messages. An example of an effective web forum can be seen here.

Blogs are also very useful for organizations and their members to provide information and express opinions and can be linked from the organizations website, allowing individuals to use whichever blogging platform they choose. Two of the most popular platforms are Blogger and WordPress. This blog is written on Blogger and an example of a WordPress blog is here.

Blogging aggregators, such as Progressive Bloggers are great resources too. They allow you to reach like-minded people with your blogs as well as read blogs of interest. Aggregators are available according to political philosophy, region and subject interest

Another very interesting and little known, little used, Internet resources is Internet Relay Chat (IRC) which provides for real time group discussions, as well as one on one one chats and document transfers. It can be used to hold online meetings. All you have to do is log onto an IRC server using appropriate software and create a room, which can be public or invite only.

Twitter is one Internet resource in particular that I want to talk about. Twitter is the newest Internet tool and one of the most interesting - sort of like a mass e-mailer with a character limit, but not exactly. And of course like most Internet tools Twitter can be abused.

Twitter can be used to tell everyone you know what you had for breakfast or what you're wearing to the prom, but, please don't. I find one of its best uses is by journalists to tweet out breaking news before they have written their complete stories and to live tweet public events, sort of a current affairs play-by-play service. It can also be used effectively by organizations to send out news or event information to their followers.

I follow a few key guidelines in using Twitter. I only try to send out a few tweets a day, either links to my latest blog posts or blog or news entries I think are important and sometimes insightful or witty thoughts. My Twitter feed can be found here.

I limit myself to following people that post interesting and useful information and limit their amount of posting, I do not have all day to read tweets. I recently added, and then quickly deleted, WikiLeaks from my followers due to their over-tweeting. Tweeting a countdown from 10 to 1 in separate tweets before tweeting an announcement is not clever. It is just annoying. But not quite as annoying as random messages inviting people to porn sites.

I also do not understand people who collect followers by following random people hoping they will follow them. Do people who follow thousands of people actually read their tweets. If they have that little of a real life they are probably not worth following.

As the Internet evolves there will, of course, be various other new online resources organizations can use, all of which can be connected together via the main website.

It is very important that we, the public, do not let the telecommunications industry, or other commercial or proprietary interests take control of the Internet and progressive community organizations should avoid being co-opted by such attempts. The Internet IS The Network.

the5thColumnist Is a Twit

Yes, I've decided to become a twit, or a twitterer or whatever you call one who tweets. I've been watching Twitter for awhile and decided to try it. Like most forms of Internet technology I think it is misused more than it is well used, particularly as another way for celebrities to say "I'm more popular than everyone else - I have more friends without lives of their own following me than you do."

One of the things I think Twitter is really useful for for is live blogging - allowing 'citizen journalists to cover events live just like the mainstream media as well as for disseminating in formation on political/social/environmental campaigns and events.

I will probably be using it primarily to let followers know when I have updated either of my blogs - The Fifth Column or Richard' GPS Trail Maps and occasionally to draw followers attention to other blog posts that I am really impressed with.

So why now. Well I just broke my arm a week ago in a mountain biking accident and will be unable to bike for 6 to 8 weeks and somewhat limited in what I can do with just one useful arm and hand so I'm probably going to be spending more time at the computer for awhile.

You can find me on Twitter at Richard W. Woodley (the5thColumnist) on Twitter. You do not have to have a Twitter account to access this page and read my twits.