Democracy and the open internet die in daylight

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Adtech, journalism, and funding

  • Several comments argue journalism’s crisis stems from adtech-driven business models and lack of sustainable revenue.
  • Examples like NYT games are cited as cross-subsidies that keep news afloat, but seen as fundamentally limited and non-scalable.
  • There’s disagreement over how dire things are: some say “news cannot survive” under current economics; others point to still‑large subscriber bases at major papers.

P2P, crypto-like ideas, and independent media

  • One vision: P2P social networks where identity is pseudonymous, reputation accrues in the graph, and attention is priced (e.g., burning funds or donating to charity to send messages).
  • Skeptics say P2P plus “I write for a living” has never worked at scale; the real blockers are funding and discovery, not protocols.
  • Independent media is seen as hostage to centralized platforms (YouTube, Substack, Patreon, payment processors) that can “buy and squash” or de‑rank dissent.
  • Self‑hosting is acknowledged as technically possible, but discovery is centralized and users rarely seek out alternatives.

Perplexity, browsers, and bundling with news

  • Heavy promotion of Perplexity’s browser and similar products is viewed as enshittifying, manipulative, and reminiscent of old Chrome bundling tricks.
  • Some see AI/browser tie‑ins and news bundles (like the article’s case) as a cash grab to prop up AI valuations, not genuine product value.
  • Debate over what a “pro‑consumer” browser could be highlights that all current models (ads, data harvesting, search deals, crypto) are compromised; one suggestion is a billionaire‑subsidized, intentionally unprofitable browser.

Legacy media, Washington Post, and billionaire ownership

  • The article’s framing of WaPo as democracy’s proxy is challenged; many reject equating any single paper with “democracy.”
  • WaPo’s slogan is discussed mainly as branding; some read it as melodramatic or even threatening.
  • There’s sharp criticism of WaPo for perceived activism, editorial interference by ownership, and subscriber loss; others counter with data that it still has over a million paying readers.
  • Comparisons to other billionaire‑owned outlets show ownership isn’t inherently fatal; execution and editorial autonomy matter.

Transparency, trust, and democracy

  • One line of discussion uses philosophical work on “the transparency society” to argue that transparency and trust can be in tension.
  • A long rebuttal insists transparency generally builds trust long‑term, while the deeper problems are incentives, corruption, and institutional failure.
  • A strong minority position advocates near‑total transparency as the only antidote to democratic decay; others say that without some baseline trust and shared values, democracy becomes unworkable.

Local vs national democracy

  • A substantial comment argues national democracy rests on healthy local self‑rule, which is eroding:
    • Local papers have died, so local officials act with little scrutiny.
    • Civic engagement and attendance at town meetings have collapsed.
    • Modern mobility reduces long‑term attachment to any one place.
  • Proposed (controversial) fixes include more appointment from higher levels, bigger municipalities, or tying voting/office to demonstrated civic participation.
  • The thread emphasizes that democracy is “who shows up”; widespread apathy effectively self‑disenfranchises many.

Platform lock‑in, proprietary access, and enclosure

  • The article’s complaint about content gated behind a proprietary browser is connected to broader patterns:
    • Discord as a “walled” social space that protects communities but silos knowledge.
    • Debate over whether web Discord is just an app vs a proprietary browser in its own right.
  • Commenters note the irony of the article’s site blocking access by geography, while lamenting closed access.

Everyday “enshittification” examples

  • McDonald’s Monopoly game requiring an app instead of simple in‑store redemption is used as a vivid example of shifting burdens onto users for data and engagement metrics.
  • Gas pumps blaring unmutable ads, loyalty apps, and mandatory app discounts are framed as symptoms of “multiple revenue stream” culture and late‑stage capitalism.
  • Some argue this is less about literal shareholder demands and more about C‑suite fashion and competitive paranoia.
  • Suggestions include boycotting such experiences and even creating an “Anti‑Enshitified Compliant” consumer label.

AI hype and financial exposure

  • A few see AI/browser/news bundles as part of a broader AI “pyramid scheme” to keep valuations high.
  • Others point out that most people are already exposed via index funds and private equity, and that macro policy now tends to inflate away bubbles rather than let markets correct.
  • One commenter responds by opting out of retirement investing entirely, living on social security as a form of quiet resistance.

Meta: frustration and irony

  • Several users note the paywall and regional blocking on the article itself as emblematic of the open internet’s decline.
  • There is pervasive fatigue with being forced into apps, closed platforms, and opaque bundles while rhetoric invokes openness, democracy, and user benefit.