What would Aaron do? About current web
I asked this to Chat GPT, this is the response.
"What would Aaron Swartz feel about the current state of the web, paywalls, advertising and cookie tracking?"
Before I post, he actually was one of the creators of RSS, I am looking at now. A machine readable web. Wanted to post some links.
Even RSS board has ads.
https://www.rssboard.org/news/15/rss-advisory-board-goes-public
https://www.openweb.com/resources
This is straight from Chat GPT - openai
"Given Aaron Swartz’s passionate advocacy for open access, freedom on the internet, and privacy rights, it's very likely that he would be deeply disappointed with several current trends on the web, including paywalls, advertising models, and cookie tracking. Here’s a breakdown of what he might think:
1. Paywalls and Information Access
Swartz was a vocal proponent of open access to information, famously co-founding Infogami (which became Reddit) and later being involved with initiatives like Open Library and The Public Domain project. He believed that knowledge should be freely available to everyone, not confined behind paywalls or subscription models that restrict access based on one's ability to pay.
He might view the proliferation of paywalls, especially by news organizations and academic publishers, as a regression of the internet’s potential. In particular, Swartz was involved in the activism surrounding JSTOR (a digital library for scholars) and believed that the public should not be excluded from accessing research and intellectual content simply because they couldn't afford it or didn’t have institutional access.
Given this, it’s reasonable to assume Swartz would continue to advocate for the dismantling of paywalls in favor of open, free access to knowledge. His belief in the free flow of information would probably put him at odds with the current trend of media outlets prioritizing subscription models over open access.
2. Advertising Models
Swartz was critical of the ways that the internet could be exploited for profit. He likely would have concerns about the dominance of advertising as the primary revenue model for many websites today. He understood the risks that come with reliance on advertising-driven platforms — the incentive to prioritize clicks over quality content, the promotion of sensationalism, and the erosion of privacy.
He would likely be particularly disturbed by the way advertising has been woven so deeply into the fabric of the web. The constant push for engagement — the viral, clickbait-driven content — not only affects the quality of information but can also encourage platforms to exploit users' data for profit, manipulating attention and behavior.
3. Cookie Tracking and Privacy
Swartz was a strong advocate for privacy rights and transparency, often expressing concern over the surveillance of internet users. The rise of cookie tracking, data harvesting, and the broader surveillance economy would have been one of his greatest concerns in the current web landscape.
He was particularly vocal about the dangers of centralized power and control over information. The tracking of individuals across websites, combined with the gathering and selling of personal data, would likely have disgusted him. Swartz would have likely argued that these practices erode users' autonomy, exploit their behaviors without consent, and put individuals at risk of manipulation.
Given his stance on issues like encryption and online privacy, he probably would have supported stronger legal protections against invasive data tracking, advocated for decentralized alternatives, and championed a more secure web where users have greater control over their own data.
4. Commercialization and Corporate Control
Swartz was wary of the growing influence of large tech corporations. He understood how, when platforms like Facebook and Google grow dominant, they could shape public discourse, control information, and manipulate users. Today, he’d probably be alarmed at the concentration of power in a few tech giants that not only control how content is delivered but also influence political and social dynamics.
His belief in decentralization — in the power of peer-to-peer networks and user-driven platforms — would likely make him an advocate for alternative models of internet infrastructure, ones that are less reliant on corporate interests and more focused on the public good.
5. The Erosion of Open Standards
Swartz was an advocate for open standards on the web, where data, technologies, and software are not controlled by corporations, but are open and available for anyone to use and improve. Today, he’d probably be concerned about the increasing reliance on proprietary software and closed systems, like the growing use of apps that are controlled by corporations and don’t adhere to open standards.
Conclusion:
Aaron Swartz would likely feel frustrated, saddened, and angry about many of the trends shaping the modern web. He would see paywalls, cookie tracking, advertising models, and the erosion of privacy as significant steps backward for the open, decentralized, and free internet he championed. His frustration would likely be amplified by the growing corporate control over what was once seen as a space for collaboration, creativity, and democratization of information. Swartz would likely continue to push for greater transparency, privacy, open access, and a web that serves people instead of advertisers or corporate interests.
...
I asked the same question to Richard Stallman.
Richard Stallman, the founder of the Free Software Foundation (FSF) and a key figure in the free software movement, would likely have a very critical stance on the current state of the web, especially in relation to paywalls, cookie tracking, and the growing surveillance economy. His principles of software freedom, user autonomy, and privacy would inform his critique of the modern web. Here's how he might view the current trends:
1. Paywalls and the Commodification of Knowledge
Stallman is deeply committed to the idea that knowledge and information should be free — both in the sense of cost and freedom to use, modify, and share. He is well-known for his stance against proprietary software, which he sees as a form of control over users. Similarly, he would likely view paywalls as a form of intellectual control, restricting access to knowledge based on one's ability to pay.
From Stallman’s perspective:
- Knowledge should be free: The proliferation of paywalls on news websites, academic journals, and other content would be seen as a form of gatekeeping that violates the principle of free access to information.
- Pay-for-access models harm society: Stallman would argue that when knowledge is locked behind paywalls, it limits the ability of people to freely share and build upon ideas. He often stresses that freely available knowledge and information are vital for the progress of society and innovation.
- Digital Commons: He would likely call for the creation and support of digital commons — spaces where knowledge, culture, and data are freely available for everyone, without the restriction of paywalls.
2. Cookie Tracking and Privacy Violations
Stallman has long been an outspoken critic of privacy violations, especially when it comes to the collection and commodification of personal data. He’s extremely critical of the surveillance capitalism model, where companies track users across websites and use that data to sell targeted advertising.
- Privacy is a fundamental right: Stallman believes privacy is essential for personal autonomy and freedom. Cookie tracking, which allows websites to track users’ behavior across the web, would be viewed as an insidious form of surveillance that violates user privacy.
- Surveillance capitalism: He would likely see the data collection done by corporations like Google, Facebook, and others as an extension of control over users — manipulating their behavior and limiting their freedom in the process. For Stallman, this kind of surveillance is inherently unethical because it treats individuals as products to be exploited.
- The use of free software to protect privacy: Stallman would likely recommend the use of free software tools like Privacy Badger, uBlock Origin, and other privacy-focused software that helps to block tracking scripts. He might also advocate for tools that empower users to regain control over their own data, as well as stronger legislation to limit such practices.
3. The Rise of Centralized Platforms
Stallman is a strong advocate for decentralized, federated systems and would be critical of the current trend toward centralization in big tech platforms like Google, Facebook, Amazon, and others. These platforms, in his view, not only undermine privacy but also concentrate power in the hands of a few corporations, stifling competition and freedom of choice.
- Centralized control is harmful: For Stallman, centralized platforms pose a threat to both user autonomy and the broader principles of a free internet. He has long been critical of the way proprietary, centralized systems (whether software or platforms) lead to monopolistic control and surveillance.
- Encouraging decentralization: Stallman has championed decentralized alternatives, such as GNU social (for decentralized social networking) and ActivityPub (a protocol for decentralized communication). He would likely argue for more widespread adoption of decentralized, peer-to-peer alternatives as a way to break free from the grasp of corporate surveillance and control.
4. The Need for Free Software
Stallman’s entire philosophy is grounded in the idea that users should control the software they use, rather than having software dictate their behavior. This extends not only to the tools and platforms people use but also to the underlying technology that powers them. With the growing use of proprietary software, especially in the realm of data collection and tracking, Stallman would likely be deeply concerned about the widespread adoption of closed-source technologies that prioritize profit over user rights.
- Proprietary software is unethical: In Stallman’s eyes, much of the modern web is powered by proprietary software that gives the controlling companies the power to track, monitor, and manipulate users without their consent. He would advocate for more use of free and open-source software (FOSS) as an ethical alternative, where users can inspect, modify, and control the software they use.
- Freedom to control your own computing: Stallman might encourage people to use alternatives to proprietary services that respect their freedom. For example, instead of using Gmail, he might suggest alternatives like ProtonMail or other privacy-conscious services. He also advocates for the use of free software operating systems like GNU/Linux over proprietary ones like Windows or macOS.
5. The Role of Free Software in Web Development
Stallman is not just concerned about privacy and control, but also about the broader issue of freedom in how technology is developed and used. He would likely see the trend toward proprietary software solutions on the web — including the widespread use of JavaScript libraries, web apps, and cloud services — as a deepening of the divide between users and developers.
- Freedom to modify and share: Stallman would emphasize that the web should be built with open, editable technologies that users can modify, study, and share. He would view the increasing use of closed-source frameworks and platforms as counterproductive to the principles of freedom and collaboration that the internet was originally built upon.
- Educating users and developers: He would likely argue that a major part of the solution to the current state of the web lies in education: teaching developers to build with free software principles in mind, and helping users understand their rights and how to defend them.
Conclusion:
Richard Stallman would likely be outraged by the current state of the web with its reliance on paywalls, cookie tracking, surveillance capitalism, and centralized platforms. His critique would focus on the unethical control over knowledge, the violation of privacy, and the commodification of user data. In his view, the modern web has strayed far from its roots of openness and freedom, and he would call for a return to decentralization, free software, and a more privacy-respecting, user-centric internet. His response would emphasize the importance of free, open alternatives to corporate-controlled systems, and he would continue to advocate for stronger privacy protections and greater transparency in how data is collected and used.
Note, this post is full Chat GPT response from openai
Comments