this post was submitted on 12 Jan 2026
61 points (100.0% liked)

Ask Lemmy

36629 readers
924 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

In elaborate terms: you have the ability to change any one of the protocols, specifications, designs or standards of the above at their proposal stage or before their mass adoption. You may choose to modify or reject an existing one or create one by yourself.

Some users and I would have common ideas in mind, however I would love to see some esoteric ideas as well.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old

Gopher.

Or Gemini (protocol, not AI). No fancy rendering, you get plain text.

[–] ICastFist@programming.dev 1 points 13 hours ago

Hmmm, I got a few ideas, not necessarily to make a "better now".

One is for Unix's initial development to only begin in the mid 1980s, instead of the 1970s, which would hopefully result in some of its more obnoxious "features" not existing. rm -rf / - No asking for confirmation, because that will certainly not have any undesired consequences! The main downside is that we wouldn't have the Unix-Haters Handbook

Another is making RISC style CPUs the default for desktop computers, whether the originals by Acorn or even with Intel deciding to make their own ARM x86 series all the way back in the 80s. I'd pick this one.

[–] Earthman_Jim@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

The internet would be free, operated and maintained by the postal service.

Forums and YouTube remain the main forms of social media. No Facebook or anything of the like.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Here's an esoteric one: Kill the internet (as we know it) before it begins.

Okay, hear me out. Internetworking existed before HTTP and websites, and once the system of routing was there it was inevitable it would be used for all the things it is today. Email came first, and what is the Fediverse but an automated, abstracted-from-the-user email system?

With no HTTP, somebody comes up with the idea of an application that formats your mailing lists into one navigable page, and then somebody else starts caching mailing list emails at the server until requested by a user (like an instance). SMTP directly transitions into ActivityPub, and there's no need to build platforms overtop which can be monopolised. We might get to skip the Zuckerbergs and surveillance capitalism entirely.

[–] Sunsofold@lemmings.world 22 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Regulatory: Ban advertising.

All of the worst elements of the internet are ad supported. There would be no downside.

[–] oopsgodisdeadmybad@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I've said this for years, but not about technology. Just a complete worldwide ban.

Provide yellow pages type of thing you can look up businesses in, companies can "advertise" on their entry, with a separate resource to look up information and data about them.

Throw in word of mouth, and that's it. Free market determines everything else. Also, no logos on any product. The products can't become the advertisement either.

But if take this rule back to like the (19)00s, so we just head off radio and TV commercials before the get go.

Maybe this prevents capitalism from becoming what it is in the first place. The main thing is presenting objective facts alongside the ads, so people don't just buy something because "it said it was the best". (Maybe that could extend to preventing people from believing something because "it said it was true" as well >_>)

[–] Sunsofold@lemmings.world 1 points 1 day ago
[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

You'd need to still have a whitelist, so putting the name of your store on the front of the store or telling a friend about a cool new thing you bought is allowed. But yes.

In a similar vein, letting websites render whatever they can imagine has proven ripe for abuse. Basic HTML is a kind of whitelist of it's own.

[–] Sunsofold@lemmings.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The best definition I have come up with so far is to ban 'Party A compensating party B via money, goods, or services for displaying and/or broadcasting media to party C, in particular and/or in general, without party C's specific consent and request.' The only exception might be to allow it for companies that both A. have an annualized revenue less than 10x the median wage, and B. are not making a profit. That would be just to allow small businesses to get the word out at the start but would cut off anything getting to the point where it should be self-sustaining.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

So you could advertise on via own platform as much as you want? Billboards, sign spinners, flyers, door-to-door sales.

It would kill surveillance capitalism as we know it, I guess, but it seems like if you're killing advertising you might as well go all the way.

The small business carveout is nice, though.

[–] Sunsofold@lemmings.world 1 points 5 hours ago

Sort of.

Billboards are not owned by stores. They are owned by marketers and rented to advertisers. An additional element may be needed to require 'own space' advertising to only advertise products and/or services available at that location. (i.e. within ~100meters)

Sign spinners are being paid to display their sign. They're gone.

Flyers are not delivered with explicit consent and request. They're gone.

Door-to-door is tougher to classify because it has variance in form, but probably would be allowed on the condition that the first thing the potential customer sees is a person requesting consent and not some piece of media.

Also, I think I'd have to simplify the start to 'issuing or accepting payment' rather than targeting a single party. Advertisers and marketers should both face punishment.

[–] Brkdncr@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

Prevent MS from forcing their docs xml standard on us all.

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

I'm not really that smart when it comes to protocols but I would go to Stanford University and guard the IT cabinet and tell Aaron Schwarz to stay the fuck out and go do something else.

[–] j4k3@piefed.world 41 points 2 days ago

Full documentation and second sourcing of all hardware.

This restores the right of ownership and destroys the current dystopian nightmare world of lost citizenship and democracy. It is closely tied to google winning the right to digital slavery and the buying and selling of your digital person to exploit and manipulate you.

[–] Snapz@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago

Hard to say, but we needed to leave a minimum level of a learning curve to using any computer, not a PHD required, but enough to bore the red hats. As soon as Apple's toddlerfication of smashing BIG, bright, colorful, soft shapes made it so everyone in the world could gold the history of humanity's knowledge in their pocket... They started confusing their pocket with their brains. Holding knowledge doesn't mean HAVING knowledge.

The instant and infinite false confidence that magic slab gives hateful idiots was our downfall as a species.

[–] JakoJakoJako13@piefed.social 13 points 2 days ago

Erase Facebook/most social media from the collective consciousness and go back to forums.

[–] Xylight@feddit.online 7 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Ban UDP. Illegalize the formation of UDP. I hate UDP. TCP is God's transport layer protocol. Everything successful uses TCP. Minecraft, best selling game in the world? Guess what, TCP. UDP fans will really send their packet into the void praying for a response that will never arrive, for their packet was completely ignored by the receiver and will never see the light of day again until a stupid 60 second timeout. I Refuse to use udp. DNS? tcp only. HTTP/3 is disabled everywhere, as QUIC is an unholy bastard born from the wrath of UDP and the comparably great TCP. Even my VPN over wire guard (mullvad) uses the UDP over TCP bridge so that I am not required to come into physical contact with the hell that is UDP. I hate the stupid uncancellable timeouts that every software waits a full minute for, even though I know the request has failed. Everything that has failed uses UDP.

[–] ieGod@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

UDP has uses beyond internet and PCs. The embedded world makes extensive use of it.

[–] Xylight@feddit.online 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

God it's all hopeless. It's hopeless. I thought the "Reddit/Lemmy users can't detect satire" was mostly a joke but it's all too real

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 1 day ago

/s was invented for a reason.

We're not dumb, it's just that the internet is so full of incredibly crazy takes nobody can tell.

load more comments (2 replies)

This one will be super controversial, but I'd say get rid of mobile internet. I think it was a huge turning point for society, and not in a good way.

It's tough because it actually does a lot of really good, useful things. But it also has a ton of negative effects. We seemed to do ok before it, and cell phones would still function as phones for calls and texting.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 16 points 2 days ago (11 children)

Stop IPv6 from existing.

Make IPv5, add a fifth number to the address, and improve NAT.

Not every particle in the universe needs a publicly routable address.

[–] prex@aussie.zone 4 points 1 day ago

Upvoting, not because I necessarily agree but because its a good discussion.

[–] ambitiousslab@feddit.uk 10 points 2 days ago (2 children)

That's interesting - I hadn't heard too much dissatisfaction with IPv6 before, except for the slow adoption, and the not-as-nice looking addresses. Is it an aesthetic preference or just that IPv6 is overkill? Or any other advantages to doing it the "IPv5" way?

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] kbal@fedia.io 16 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I'd like to know how things would've turned out if they hadn't made the decision to start allowing commercial traffic on the Internet.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] wesker@lemmy.sdf.org 12 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I'd stop development of JavaScript.

[–] chunes@lemmy.world 13 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Now VBScript would have likely become the default for Internet Explorer and would have likely won out.

[–] qaz@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

And Microsoft would be in control of the web

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I wonder if Gates would still go along the personality trajectory he's had if he was even more powerful.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] FreshParsnip@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'd make the internet automatically fact check everything

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

How?

Like, it's hard enough for a group of humans to credibly do, because of the whole "who minds the minders" issue. The internet infrastructure itself couldn't even tell the town of Scunthorp from profanity very well, until recently with the advent of LLMs.

[–] FreshParsnip@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I haven't really thought through how

[–] CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de 11 points 2 days ago

One? Tie between redoing CFAA, DMCA, and privacy regulations before they became problems.

[–] scytale@piefed.zip 9 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Make it so that security is a priority when developing a standard, protocol, or specification. Even at present, new stuff is developed for functionality first, with security coming in later. IMO they should be developed in tandem, secure by design.

[–] Quetzalcutlass@lemmy.world 1 points 23 hours ago

Definitely. Insecure protocols linger on for ages even after we have better options. The internet used to run on unsecured HTTP, FTP, and Telnet, and it took decades for their encrypted successors to make headway and become the default.

I think email is the last major old protocol that's still blatantly terrible, but it's too deeply entrenched/too decentralized to do anything about.

load more comments
view more: next ›