Isn’t that a normal feeling?
15 Likes
Is it? I have no idea…
9 Likes
Both of you are valued and appreciated!
14 Likes
12 Likes
Are you one of the thirteen Icelandic Yule Lads? And if so, which one? Giljagaur? Pottaskefill? Askasleikir? Skyrgámur?
7 Likes
Update to my earlier post…
I got the screen shown above on one of my Macbooks.
On the other much older Macbook, I can still read BB without that overlay appearing. As far as I know both browsers are configured in the same way, and I think the versions being run are the same. 
(And the shrug emoji here is not as expressive as the one over there was.)
2 Likes
Different blocklists on the ad blocker? That drifts for me on multiple machines.
3 Likes
Out of curiosity: I tried opening it on different browsers (not on my regular lists anymore):
- Firefox (w/ uBlock): overlay triggers
- Vivaldi (w/ UBlock, internal adblocker disabled): overlay NOT triggers
6 Likes
Well, it’s not an ad blocker as such - Brave Browser in default ‘shields up’ mode. There may be version/config differences but they are both pretty much ‘out of the box’ installations. Hey-ho.
1 Like
I started getting it the other day after I updated ublock on Chromium. I had to set up a custom filter to disable the popup and restore overscroll default behavior (they also hide the scrollbar when the popup is up). Then I had to turn off JS for BoingBoing because they use an event handler to force scroll to the top to account for people who restore the scrollbar.
It was.quite aggressive. The no JS will have some side-effects like no embeds, but it’s fine, I’m sure.
I have the SuS subscription but mostly I browse from my RSS reader, so usually I find myself reading articles at the old website.
For all BB’s failings as a media platform it does still have the occasional pointer to an interesting story. But the enshittification has definitely come.
14 Likes
I’ve basically resolved all this internally to the analogy of a failing pub rebranding itself as a disco.
I suspect The Other Place’s leaders felt it was time for a change, knew the old patrons would be unhappy, but made the call.
I don’t harbor any ill-will - you see this happen in many industries. The good news is that the Regulars have a new place to call home - HERE!
19 Likes
Eh, I don’t really want to harbor any ill will…but suddenly and without warning moving in with a Nazi bar feels like a slap in the face of people who gave time and energy as volunteers to maintain a safe, welcoming community. Like we have a strong LGBTQ contingent…can you really say that telling them “good news, we don’t care any more” wasn’t cruel?
25 Likes
It’s cruel. But it’s a business at the end of the day.
We are its customers - our traffic is how people get paid, and if they want to change the menu it is their call.
So people vote w their feet, or not.
6 Likes
People use “it’s just business” to cover way too many sins and the world is not a better place for it. Do you think the people who volunteered to be community moderators were told they were simply customers, to be disregarded the moment it’s convenient, or do at least they get to be upset at being used and discarded? People deserve to be treated with consideration, business or not.
23 Likes
7 Likes
AFAIK capitalism was invented for slave trading, Swedish mines and East India Company so it’s evil by it’s basic nature.
5 Likes
Gentle reminder that commerce, and business, existed for thousands of years before capitalism did, and certainly before capitalism became the driving paradigm for all business.
There’s still room for ethics and morality in business if we can get capitalism out of the way.
20 Likes
The ‘old’ IBM had five stakeholders. The informal view was that treating them equally was in the best long-term interests of the company. (I’ve no idea if they still use all five, but their behaviour over the years certainly suggests the balance has changed significantly.)
- Shareholders,
- Employees,
- Customers,
- Suppliers,
- The communities in which it operates
Too much late-stage capitalism exhibits the following attitudes:
- Shareholders are venerated above all else, especially in the short term even if prioritising others may be better for shareholders in the long term. Damage to others is perfectly acceptable if it improves EPS this quarter.
- Employees are an inconvenience to be dispensed with wherever possible and exploited as much as possible, otherwise
- Customers are respected (often it’s just lip service) but can be exploited to the extent that the corporation can get away with it (there’s always more customers, or enough who will tolerate the shit, and often they have no choice - monopolies are the ideal to be striven for).
- Suppliers are there to be screwed - they’ll take the shit, they need the business, very few are irreplaceable.
- The communities? Don’t make me laugh. To the extent that PR weaseliness can paper over cracks and maintain a plausible veneer of caring, that’s good enough.
There are some corporate exceptions, to some extent, but at root this is modern capitalism. Maybe it always was. But look at some of the great historic entrepreneurs and their ability to see how a wider appreciation of stakeholders was good for their business.
Lever Brothers and Port Sunlight or the (Quaker) Cadburys and Bourneville, for example. I know of one local business that guarantees a set price for what its suppliers can deliver, even if it is sometimes above market rates, because it wants to preserve that supply chain’s existence (it is a very fragmented one) and maintain its access to it. Your average capitalist today would scoff at such antics.
Personally, I blame the rise of the business schools and their MBAs, plus the toxic effects of the political philosophies of Reagan/Thatcher and their fellow travellers and antecedents.
(Not sure where I was going with this, but I was in need of a minor rant.)
16 Likes
Yeah I hear you.
Websites/bbs like BB don’t neatly fit into those models as the users aren’t ‘customers’ in the conventional sense of paying for goods or services.
In some ways the users are the goods/services here - affecting traffic but not getting compensated.
In both cases no real ‘contract’ exists- so there’s no real obligation by BB to keep them happy.
Life is strange
8 Likes
I tihnk there is “a capitalism” that can be ethical, at least for a while, but I’m not sure there’s such a capitalism that can exist without eventually ballooning into big-C Capitalism, which is where we see all the late-stage shareholder-value-cult stuff suffusing everything like so much toxic mycelia.
Whether the capitalism that our current Capitalism emerged from was ever ethical is left as an exercise to the reader.
16 Likes