501 karma · joined April 21, 2017
Set this up, allow no-auth sending from any address on your LAN, and then spinning up new local services that need outgoing mail is easy, because you can just give them the IP of the relay and omit credentials.
- It removes ads for my kids, which are going to watch YouTube no matter what I do
- It includes YouTube Music, so I don't need a separate Spotify subscription
- It sends money to creators based on what I proportionally spend time watching, rather than based on how valuable of an audience I'm deemed to be when an ad slot is auctioned
- It is a signal that I'm willing to pay for content, and I want platforms and creators to continue offering that option
In other words, make all the money you want, get as rich as you want, but it goes back to the commons when you die and can't use it any more.
https://youtu.be/y_ywOVQyafE?si=IvKjy7QUYgxGPNgD
PS (I have not bought the guy's course and have no idea whether it's any good)
It's taken a while, but the longer we go down this path, the more clear it seems that it is impossible to design a content algorithm that does not have significant negative cultural side effects. This is not to say that content algorithms don't have benefits; they do. It's just that they can't be useful (i.e., designed to optimize for some profitable metric) without causing harm.
I think something like asbestos is a good metaphor: Extremely useful, but the long-term risks outweigh any possible gains.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/19zt9067x8j230810bjcp/Screens...
But as a comment in a different thread suggested, I do think that we'd want something like this to be accompanied by a shift in how we think about copyright.
Right now, copyright is used for two broad reasons: 1) preventing unauthorized "commercial" use, and 2) preventing piracy.
Use 1 is broadly good but flawed in the current system. But use 2 is culture-killing and creativity-surpressing with current copyright lengths, a good example of which being the loss of what.cd.
The more I think about it, the more I think we need to separate the two uses, so that creative works are in the public domain by default after a short time for the purposes of private use and archival projects, but corporations are prohibited from using creative works they haven't paid for for commercial purposes on a much longer timescale.
On balance, copyright seems to restrict the public and benefit corporations, and ideally that would be inverted.
See https://www.theverge.com/24255887/social-ai-bots-social-netw...