No.111831
Web 3.0 is even less convenient and user friendly so I don't see why people would want to stick with them forever.
No.111833
>>111831I'm not even mentioning web3.0 here, if what you meant by that is about decentralization, right, it will never become mainstream.
What I meant is that these web2.0 site are moving away from the concept of "web" altogether. Mobile apps are user friendly enough to convince the mainstream audiences to use them and they are prime examples of post-web platforms.
No.111836
>>111835Nyaa has disabled new accounts for a few years now, and I think AB doesn't have open registration events anymore.
yande.re has recently disabled new accounts.
Not a web2.0 site but cock.li switched to invite only a few years ago.
No.111837
>>111836>>111835Oh, and almost forgot the pirate bay.
No.111838
>>111836Oh. I forgot about nyaa. I've never had a desire to make an account there. I think I made one on sukebei or whatever that was called but never used it. It seems like these sites are all centered around sharing pirated content, though. Yeah, it seems a lot of older communities are locking down. I don't think it's because they would despise new users, but because they feel vulnerable to the tightening grip of the corporate internet.
I think a lot of sites would be willing to deal with annoying teenaged memers for the 1% of them (like any group) that become contributors, but they have a target on their backs.
The 'refuge in obscurity' thing might not work as well for anime and doujin stuff today the way it used to, but then again I don't feel any sort of worry over going VPN-less on nyaa...
No.111839
>>111838People are also probably scared of a madokami situation where some retard e-celeb goes on video and blabs about everything to a huge audience and exposes the site to a fuckton more publicity than before.
No.111842
i thought what happened to madokami was that bato.to went down
bato.to used to be the go-to site for reading manga just like mangadex today
No.111846
has everyone else really gone private what about forums
No.111847
>>111846Feels like most forums have been replaced by discord rooms
No.111848
>>111846Most might as well be private because they feel like friend cliques
Or are a victim of political polarization
No.111972
Forums are quite depressing. I stumbled upon an old DS-focused one when looking up some information:
https://www.ds-scene.net/?s=forum It makes sense that a forum centered on the DS piracy scene would be dead, but it doesn't make it any less sad. It's such a good-looking site, too, from the bygone era of attractive websites.
I kind of wonder what keeps those sites around. I guess they don't use a lot of bandwidth, but someone is still paying to keep it around, right? I'm glad they do
No.111973
do newgrounds and battleon count as forums?
No.111974
omg battleon
No.112011
>>111973Their forums do.
In my experience, most of the actually good forums from back in the day were attached to something else; Something Awful and the Penny Arcade forums come to mind.
No.112149
>>112011Yeah, I'd count them as forums. I think it's like how there's multiple ways to see an imageboard, as boorus are technically imageboards. YTMND was basically a forum, too, since comment threads were attached to each submission and people had account names.
No.112150
>>112149Booru comments are ERP
No.112151
>>112150That's like saying imageboards are only for politics. There's all sorts of booru types out there, and even the pornographic ones still have regular comment chains
No.112152
>>112151Just a joke. I dont even know if Gelbooru still has comments enabled
No.112153
>>112151Ironically I see more political fighting on rule34.xxx than imageboards nowadays but I dont use 4chan or lainchan
No.112154
Gelbooru is pretty erpy unless someone baits about tagging characters as traps
No.112169
>>111830My take is that spam (both automated and not) has become so tenacious and destructive that open platforms can't survive like they could in the 00s. You can pay an indian 5 cents per captcha, while mods have to be paid significantly more due to the extra work involved. We need beter anti-spam systems,
especially on imageboards where reputation can't combat shilling. 4chanpass-style costs to spammers are a step in the right direction, but must be enforced rather than optional.
No.112171
>>112169Mandatory pass enforcement only puts the fate of the sites into the hands of payment processors, which nowadays are known for pulling plugs on anything not accepted by the establishment.
I think a better approach would be that all comments by new users must be manually approved by mods, and only after a certain amount of posts being approved the user can post directly.
No.112172
>>112171Thats hell for users using dynamic IPs. I think it can work with Monero
No.112173
>>112172For imageboards, it can be simply solved by requiring a token for posting which can be generated on the website anonymously and can be used by multiple IPs.
And for crypto payment you will need to setup the payment infrastructure on your server if you want them to be processed automatically and not depending on a third party crypto payment processor.
No.112174
>>112173The infrastructure to do this isn't too demanding, but for a small IB of tens of users maybe it's overwhelming.
>>112171That's why we have crypto, and why 4cp is only purchasable with crypto.
>>112172I'm working on something to make it not a payment but a deposit that can be refunded. We really need innovation in the IB space though, anonymous communities are super valuable.
No.112175
Exchanging crypto into real money is stupid expensive for the amounts any normal imageboard will receive.
No.112179
>>112169Failure to attract enough users is the problem most small imageboards suffer from. Commercial advertising isn't as big an issue, and is adequately dealt with by existing tools such as word filters, perceptual hashing, and recruiting more human moderators. Neither is flooding, assuming the board is designed sanely. In my experience, most flooders get bored after a few hours. If a board allows somebody to delete all the threads simply by flooding the board, that is a design issue with the board.
No.112180
>>112169Ultimately what you're saying is there are basically no imageboard devs left and benefit ting from the work is so unprofitable(monetaril
y, for a portfolio, for the benefit of society) that they're going to make them closed source platforms or be some sort of easily impressionable kid in bad straights
No.112181
>>112179We saw with 8chan that you just have to have a stable platform with features that solve a problem in other communities and wait. Gamergate happened and 8ch was flush with users due to the user-created boards (and thus moderators) feature.
>>112180Josh/null was working on a next-gen IB but abandoned it because dedicated CP spammers became too much for him to deal with, mentally and time-wise.
>>112175Yes, it's definitely a speed bump but the sooner anons get used to this sort of "hard living" the better, it's only going to get worse and worse as they try to get rid of us.
No.112182
>>112181I don't think that's the main reason he abandoned it, but it probably is a small part of it.
No.112183
Could Google's web drm be the nail in the coffin to web 2.0?
No.112184
>>112183How? As long as we have places like this it doesn't matter what youtube and twitter do.
No.112185
>>112181We saw with 8chan and s
*.****y that it's easy to attract terrible users by waiting for some other site to ban them. What's needed is a way to attract good or even average users by imageboard standards. Josh's problem on 9chan was a terrible userbase plus having made lots of enemies with his Kiwi Farms site. Other imageboards don't get nearly that much CP.
No.112186
I respect his tenacity/stubbornness in keeping his forum on the clearnet. Also fuck fred lolololol
Thats all I really know
No.112188
>>112184Well, youtube does host a lot of videos and twitter has a lot of artist, but we could soldier on without them, yeah.
>>112185I don't think attracting terrible users is successful on its own, it does still need a hook. And, well, they also need time to congregate somewhere before being expelled. They really do have a massive advantage in not caring about quality, though, as it's far easier to grow those. Might not be sustainable in the very long run, though.
No.112190
>>112188Youtube is going to kill itself and something like Odyssee will replace it with the way things are going. Probably Twitter too, but that seems less likely tbh with how much of a failure Threads is.
No.112192
We need to go back to basics. Peace.Love. Kissu. guerilla marketing campaign in Saskatoon
No.112195
>>112190I don't really see how youtube kills itself.
No.112196
>>112171>all comments by new users must be manually approved by mods, and only after a certain amount of posts being approved the user can post directly.This is the exact mechanism I came across when trying to buy stuff on Facebook's marketplace. There were multiple groups I managed to get into, and only one of them didn't have this barrier. The issue is that, even though that one had plenty of spam, it at least allowed me to interact with legit publications, while the barred ones didn't let me respond in time and the stuff would get sold without me having the chance to reply, because days would pass without mods bothering to approve my vanilla comments. I managed to find a seller in the unmoderated one, and ended up ditching the rest.
It shows that the mechanism does work, and it would certainly play out differently here where mods are far more attentive and interaction not being as time-sensitive, but it's also possible that it'll turn people off due to 1) the user not wanting to sit around and wait, and 2) associating the mechanism with power-hungry mods or circlejerks. I mean, if captcha is enough to turn some people off, then this will make them hightail outta there.
No.112197
>>112195Because of how desperate big creators seem to be to leave, thats more important than google being hostile to invidious and blocking adblockers etc
No.112198
>>112196>if captcha is enough to turn some people offOnly because its google, I have never seen complaints about it otherwise except from 1 website
No.112199
>>112198It's just an extreme and secondary example.
No.112200
>>112196That's a pretty far fetched example. Small imageboards aren't remotely that time sensitive, and powertripping happens on all sites with mods. But it won't be as bad as it seems if a post only needs a single mod's approval.
No.112201
>>112171It's been tried, but it's irrelevant if hardly anyone visits the board:
https://web.archive.org/web/20210411085735/https://ichan.net/b/Failure to attract users is the biggest issue with the vast majority of imageboards.
No.112202
>>112201That's a completely separate issue from spamming.
No.112203
>>112202It's not completely separate if your ideas to solve spamming (more or less an already solved problem) are counterproductive to solving the actual problems imageboards face.
No.112204
>>112203Spamming isn't an issue to be solved if the no one uses the board. Whatever you said is irrelevant and pointless.
No.112216
I think the invite-only thing is not out of elitism with the exception of AB, it may be that there are long swaths of time where moderators are not available and its just easier this way.
Web 2.0 MAY be entering the stage like (non-Taiwanese) dial-in BBSes, where it is moslty people acquainted with each-other of a certain age, but the young have anemoia for the old internet, so that might help the userbase rot. World2ch's "revival" has western 12 year-olds posting on it for some reason.
No.112217
When the third world came online in the late 2000s due to the accessibility of cheap smartphones, it became necessary to start gating communities to keep the riffraff out.
No.112218
indonesian phone users are not the ones bringing up politics at every chance...
No.112219
>>112217Uhhhh, smartphones weren't present in the third world during the 2000s. I don't even remember my 2012 phone having a browser, everyone used their computers.
No.112221
>>112217>>112217Third worlders are generally good users if they can speak english reasonably, except some flavors of indonesian and the occasional numbawans.
No.112241
>>111836>cock.liNon-professionally hosted email services pretty much have to be invite only because of the way people use them if you do not have to pay for them (which is a good sign, actually), trust me I know, I made a bunch of throwaway cockmails in the past I wish I could remember now. I think disroot and that one german guy are the only ones who don't do this who aren't also activist exclusive.
No.112246
>>112197I feel like YouTube is simply too content diverse and with more tools to succeed than any possible competitor could be at the moment. Although I guess we'll see in time if anyone is able to really make a threat, but the initial investment would have to be in the billions.
No.112247
>>112246Bilibili International maybe?
No.112248
>>112246>but the initial investment would have to be in the billions.This is what nobody ever thinks about when they're shilling open source alternatives to social media like the one they were trying to with Reddit is how expensive it is to actually host. And the reddit/twitter crowd is actually an easier sell because they're into talking to strangers online. Imagine trying to convince friends and family to switch to
https://friendi.ca/ or
https://pixelfed.org/ No.112249
Language and political gating is more a consequence than a decision. Advertisers don't want certain content so they get more aggressive with filters. People don't want to learn English so they go to domestic alternatives.
No.112251
Here's something strange...
Why does Twitch.tv and youtube streaming exist at the same time but there's no youtube alternative for entertainment
No.112252
>>112251discoverability and potential audience
No.112253
Kissu theatre will now be hosted on Kick
No.112254
i suppose youtube is the experiment in unprofitable centralization of video content, while others chose to profit by making things like Crunchyroll and whatnot
No.112256
>>112254Youtube does make a profit now, mainly because of Google's AdSense, which is why they're cracking down so hard against adblockers at the moment.
No.112257
>>112251Because YouTube had the resources to implement streaming, in order to compete with Twitch. The inverse is sadly not possible.
No.112258
>>112181I think for non-/pol/ imageboards, userbase rot is more of a threat than KF-style censorship
No.112275
>>112169Spam isn't really that hard to deal with; you just need to be vigilant. Kissu handles it fine, and unless something changed when I wasn't looking, it has a staff of less than ten people.
>>112197Big creators have been bitching about YouTube for over a decade now. That doesn't mean anything.
YouTube's big strength, from both a creator and a consumer standpoint, is its sheer scale. Creators stay on it because that's where the largest audience is, and the audience stays there because of the vast quantity of content on the site and the algorithm's effectiveness at recommending the subset that they like.
Attempting to beat an already successful product at its own game is stupid. Success comes when you fill a niche that isn't being satisfactorily filled. It's why TikTok is doing so well; it offers a different enough product that it can exist in the same space.
No.112277
>>112275Kissu has not dealt with dedicated spammers of CP. We're talking autistic NEETs that have nothing to do but spam CP all day, consuming moderator time and reducing morale. I've deal with some such people and it's dragged on into YEARS before I gave in and just closed the community. Targeted abuse is absolutely still a problem, anyone saying otherwise has never actually dealt with it before.
No.112278
>>112277It's actually not an insane task, but as I said
>>112180 there's just no incentive to do it.
The academic and financial value of me tackling the task just isn't there as yet.
But the solutions aren't exactly risk free either because you have to have your automated systems interact with CP.
I value the task at about 1000USD in development and I'd put open sourcing it at 2000USD. Would involve setting up an automatic and bot system to scan URLs and implementing various CNN for text reading over images. Along with some systems for adding a filtering mechanism on top of an imageboard engine which withholds certain posts for review if they have link shorteners in the text or image of posts. Effectively an addition on top of the previous features. Probably 500USD
No.112279
Kissu already has the above in a limited feature and it does have an effect because CP spammers across the imageboard sphere are reacting to the countermeassures I take.
No.112281
Yeah, but I'm not sure I could actually do it until next month because I'm both behind on the task I'm contracted on at the moment because of the employer and because I'm lazy when not at my appartment
No.112282
Also I might be kind of arrogant
No.112283
>>112280arabian princess kaguya
No.112285
>>112278This is the wrong direction to take. You will always be in an arms race with the spammers, and history has shown spammers will always win. The correct way to beat it is to increase the cost of spamming, not increase the efficiency of dealing with it. For example, users deposit $5 in crypto (or whatever) and if they get banned for CP the money is confiscated by the admin. This turns their weapon into an income stream.
No.112286
>>112285With that proposed system you'd need to consider user experience as well
There is a certain level of spam users are willing to tolerate and how much value do they place on that level? I'd doubt most users, even non 4chan users, would value spam protection so much that they'd be willing to deposit $5 in crypto to a site before posting. The monetary cost may be low but the cost of the other thing is probably high in the user's mind. Acquiring the right crypto or crypto at all if the user doesn't have any, processing the payment or more likely being comfortable with letting whatever payment processor the site chooses processes it and then of course having a paper trail to the site. There's also the validation of your purchase with the site, do i now have to make an account to verify payment? If it's a token system, do i lose my deposit and have to buy again if i lose the token? These are not negligible costs if the users we are talking about are imageboard users. This system would really only stifle future growth on an imageboard or may make it dead in the water. The only user group I can see this working with is those in the crypto space, which isn't small but it's also probably not a viable model for the general imageboard ecosystem.
None of this is to discredit your view that increasing costs to spammers is a better way to fight them but just to say that the given solution of crypto deposits probably won't work for the general imageboard.
No.112292
>>112285my pov is that we are in the stage of technology where, just as it is equally easy to break captchas through an AI bruteforce, it's equally possibly to create automated systems that make use of the same toolkits.
No.112293
>>112285>history has shown spammers will always winIkemen will always win
No.112295
>>112277Did you try chmod -r on all unreviewed images until they go away?
No.112300
>>112286When the spam is child porn, yes they want the spam to be at 0 because no one wants to unwittingly download and view CP (unless they are into that).
> do i now have to make an account to verify payment?You can do it with a smart contract where the account is just the Ethereum wallet. I have already created a PoC for this.
>This system would really only stifle future growth on an imageboard or may make it dead in the water.Yes, you're right here. People have become way to coddled with getting everything for free and now we are in captcha hell to pay for our sins. When things get so bad (AI is gonna make it WAY worse) that this becomes the only way, users will move.
Something Awful had a similar "pay to post" model way back when they started, and it turns out that was smart if for the wrong reasons. A deposit system would avoid the "payment" part, since you can get the deposit back when you don't want to use the site anymore.
No.112308
>>111830I think it will mostly die, but not entirely. If you've been around textboards and imageboards since their beginnings, you'd know just how much they've fallen off in recent years. The golden era for these communities was 2005 to 2010, after which they began to suffer from a lot of problems such as popularity, new traffic, a disruption of the established culture and then an entire transformation of the place.
But slowly, other platforms including social media (Facebook, Twitter) and discussion sites like Reddit became really big and the novelty of imageboards wore off for many of the people who flooded in after they became mainstream (think of the days when they'd mention 4chan on FOX or CNN...ugh) to the general public.
Then yeah the whole Web 2.0 as a sort of zeitgeist of internet usage and interaction made it so much easier and fluid feeling for people to scroll through a thing like Twitter. Design and accessibility of websites and services got real easy so imageboards began to also feel archaic to many.
It's why that although a place like 4chan, 7chan, 4-ch, SAoVQ and thousands of other obscure boards still exist out there, many more have sadly died off by now. Every so often I will go down rabbit holes and try to go to old boards I remember from way back, just to see that they've died. Because even the dedicated users like I assume we could be considered, begin to drift away.
They'll still exist but I imagine they'll go more unknown and only used by certain groups. Also I don't think Web 2.0 has died at all. It's just that so much of the internet and the way we use it have become SO CORPORATIZED! It sucks. So sure a site like Twitter and Facebook may seem like they're dying but it's because they keep ruining their own products, but I don't think there is a Web 3.0 yet to take its place. It's just going to all feel same-y for many more years to come, with only a tiny few places like this standing out amongst the majority of content out there.
No.112310
I think the idea of a paywalled community is very interesting and definitely worth pursuing; I personally have considered making my own small-scale social media platform funded that way so I can keep the lights on without relying on advertisements.
But putting up a paywall fundamentally changes the way your community functions, and doing it because you want to prevent spam feels like cutting off your nose to spite your face.
>>112285The obvious counterargument is that plenty of communities exist that handle spam perfectly fine. I'm not saying that it's
easy to deal with per-say (and it's gotten harder over the years), but it's not as impossible to deal with as you seem to think it is.
>>112300You're coddled.
>>112308I don't think you got what OP was saying. Web 2.0 means websites that let users post their own content, which includes imageboards and forums, as well as the big social media platforms. OP's talking about the transition from websites to apps.
No.112311
>>112310Only if government regulations came down so hard that anyone other then the diehards could make an imageboard.
No.112312
>>112310>The obvious counterargument is that plenty of communities exist that handle spam perfectly fineYou are unaware then that spam is weaponized to destroy communities by people who would like to see them gone. No one is talking about boner pills, this is weaponized CP that people use to get webhosts to pull sites that people don't like, like kiwifarms or 4chan. It's typically used when all other forms of deplatforming are exhausted.
Just because "some" communities don't have a spam problem now doesn't mean it can't be used in the future to destroy them whenever some sperg feels they have wronged him. We need to build resilience, not just deal with the problems of today.
No.112317
The cp spam is because they make money off of it.
No.112318
>>112317the threat they're talking about is not those random shotgun blasts, it's about a dude with a minigun shooting at you for twenty hours straight
No.112319
unless you're talking about people who spam a site with CP in a similar way as wojacks... in which case we resolved that issue probably a year or two ywo ago
No.112320
yeah we have systems in place to deal with that.
No.112321
i know, just wanted to avoid a misunderstanding
No.112326
>>112312>You are unaware...I'm not, I just didn't entirely get that that's what you were referring to. It's my bad for reading thru this thread on the phone (I'm on desktop now btw).
This sort of thing is worth considering, but not to the point where you shape your whole community around it. The vast majority of small-scale web communities aren't going to be targeted by this sort of thing. Most of the sites these sorts of spammers go for are places like KF: communities that are big enough that the actions of their users extend past the site itself.
Also, it's worth noting that, despite everyone's best efforts, KF is still around, and it (not entirely unreasonably, considering what they do) has a giant target painted on its back.
No.112328
>>112326>what they doThey do nothing themselves. Its just gossip and archiving, actually interacting is heavily discouraged and shamed
No.112329
>>112328That's what they all say.
No.112331
>>112330>ossipopen source gossip
No.112332
osseous gossipping
No.112333
'ossip and 'archiving
No.112334
Surely there is something more interesting to talk about than illegal content and gossipers.
>>112308Sometimes I wonder if it's the software holding imageboards back. The way stuff works now is aimed at preventing people from searching or thinking about things actively. Instead, the content is brought to them. A text/imageboard equivalent would be something like a random/related thread opening in your browser after you scroll to the bottom of a thread. You don't
think of entering it, it's automatically displayed on your screen or at best there's a button in the middle that says "LOOK AT THIS". A system designed to keep you engaged for as long as possible.
It sounds really terrible, but that's what you have to compete against.
No.112335
>>112328That's one way to put it...
No.112336
>>112334Randomly selected infinite scroll?
No.112338
>>112334most content is objectively bad though.