I feel like I saw people saying this back in 2007 (with different terminology, ofc). Kids just like in-jokes and being ironic. It’s not ruining the Internet, big business is what’s ruining the Internet.
Back in 2007 Jagex ruined the Internet by adding the EOC update to Runescape
EoC came later, 2007 was the summoning update. EoC was 2012.
Lol, yikes, that guy was all “sarcasm liked the Internet” like it was his religion and he was 💯% wrong. It’s like, check out my next Ted talk on how onomatopeia killed the telegram. Lol, can you imagine? 💀💀💀 (/s, obvi 🙄)
Right. When we were all laughing at the people who would have genuine reactions to things people would say to them on the internet because “the internet is serious business lmao,” that was totally fine and a different thing. It’s those damn zoomers that fucked it all up. Right.
The internet is suffering from commodification not irony. on top of all the ads people are happy to commodify themselves as if they don’t put in enough time doing that at work already
I say a lot of people get posters madness.
They get so addicted to the dopamine feedback of upvotes and follower counts and occasionally actual money that they abandon themselves in hopes of becoming exactly the person that will get them the most dopamine feedback.
Everyone that participates in social media suffers from it to a small degree but there is a threshold upon which it can turn you into a p-noid zombie, which is typically right around the fame threshold.
The only way back is for your entire profile and sometimes career to come crashing down around you.
Yep, not a single post of irony on the Internet before zoomers.
Absolutely true. Usenet was completely devoid of irony, outside of alt.science.metallurgy, of course.
I agree with this post with 4 layers of ironic sarcasm.
Since there’s an even number of sarcasm layers I appreciate your sincerity.
i am cringe but i am free
This reminds me of what David Foster Wallace wrote: “The next real literary “rebels” in this country might well emerge as some weird bunch of anti-rebels, born oglers who dare somehow to back away from ironic watching, who have the childish gall actually to endorse and instantiate single-entendre principles. Who treat of plain old untrendy human troubles and emotions in U.S. life with reverence and conviction. Who eschew self-consciousness and hip fatigue. These anti-rebels would be outdated, of course, before they even started. Dead on the page. Too sincere. Clearly repressed. Backward, quaint, naive, anachronistic. Maybe that’ll be the point. Maybe that’s why they’ll be the next real rebels. Real rebels, as far as I can see, risk disapproval. The old postmodern insurgents risked the gasp and squeal: shock, disgust, outrage, censorship, accusations of socialism, anarchism, nihilism. Today’s risks are different. The new rebels might be artists willing to risk the yawn, the rolled eyes, the cool smile, the nudged ribs, the parody of gifted ironists, the “Oh how banal”. To risk accusations of sentimentality, melodrama. Of overcredulity. Of softness. Of willingness to be suckered by a world of lurkers and starers who fear gaze and ridicule above imprisonment without law. Who knows.”
Is David Foster Wallace a word-smith? Maybe. Critics and reviewers certainly seem to think so.
Personally, he writes far too densely for my tastes. His points get lost in an avalanche of flowery, intellectual language that, even with context clues, I’m never quite sure I’m interpreting right. In the above quote, for example, just what the hell does “endorse and instantiate single-entendre principles” actually mean?
The man also seems to detest paragraphs. That, or he loves them far too much; and ensures they are as long and intimidating as possible. Reading Infinite Jest, you’ll often come across blocks of text that are multiple pages long with no breaks.
It’s not like he isn’t insightful though, it’s just that uncovering what he’s trying to say is a chore.
If I remember correctly, and I don’t have the quote for this, but I think he once said that he was aware that Infinite Jest takes effort to read. It wasn’t a deliberate choice to make it difficult for the sake of being difficult, but that it was difficult because we’re no longer used to putting in the effort into reading. The deal must be that if you do the work, the story will reward you for it. Any book can be made difficult to read, but if they do it for the sake of being difficult, you will not want to read more from that author I guess.
Cringe is life.
Oof that’s ironic
I mean that concept is a thing that does exist, but the internet is doing fine. Its inevitably gonna get better again at some point, both technology wise and socially.
Federated, decentralized and open source platforms are saving the internet. Everything else is pretty trash.
Peoples creativity online is still VERY alive. Like omg some people on TikTok are doing some very interesting stuff out there.
Greed is the issue, not normal people (though they till suck sometimes)
This is not a generational shift. The iron dome of irony is a tried and true coping technique for the brutality of teenage culture where the rule of cool rules with an iron fist and being uncool means social death. And what is cool shifts at a moment’s notice, yet uncool is forever. So normies learn to armour themselves by treating everything ironically to pre-empt any whiff of uncool. Because at the very least, it’s never uncool to make fun of something. This carries forward into one’s 20s when some begin to rediscover the coolness of being authentic, sincere, and genuine regardless of what others think. So then you have the reaction of radical acceptance, not yucking others’ yum, respect for others’ interests, etc. GenX had their equivalent, even Boomers. It’s part of growing up. And of course not everyone gets there.
A lot of people confuse my arrogance for irony.
what killed the internet is information overload. in many way no one can have a private or closed space. twitter for example you are bombarded with everyone’s thought on everything and before long you have a lot of information about things you dont care about, and no way to engage properly with just one of those things. you can be vulnerable on the internet, but in a mostly public and algorithmic internet, its gonna be exposed to so many people who will hate that.
The trick to this is to accept that some will be that way, but you don’t have to. It’s a choice for which we must all take personal responsibility.
