On 20/05/2021 09:03, Bernard Rosset via Dng wrote:
> I do hope that change does not hurt IRC use more than it was already,
> albeit I somehom know it does/will.
> IRC is not popular amongst the masses anymore, as the general
> population get more and more individualistic, and does not think nor
> care about principles behind the products they seek using, usually
> proprietary, free of charge or not.

I don't think it will harm IRC: The people who use IRC will know and
carry on and the people who don't use IRC won't know and won't care.

It seems to me that IRC is dying out (at least in terms of proportion of
Internet users who use it) because there are so many alternatives. It is
being out-competed, not because the alternatives are 'better' but simply
because it has no single back to make it interesting and exciting. The
network effect is at work: The people and content that people want are
more and more often on different, newer IM/social environments.

Also I don't think that the general population is become more
individualistic. It's just that the Internet is a mass market today and
so it reflects people in general. The Internet is no longer a minority
interest, as it was back when IRC was in its heyday. And people in
general are not very interested in principles (certainly not if it takes
effort!); they are just consumers. They consume what is most interesting
and/or easiest for them.

We know that social media of all sorts is massively popular and so
clearly people in general can't be all that individualistic: People love
to share stuff and socialise on the Internet. But it's not about about
principle to most of them; it's just about consumption, entertainment
and fun. People even forget principles such as privacy and common sense
when consuming social media.

Complex principles (such as software freedom, privacy, and so on) will
always be of conscious interest only to a minority of the people in
general. Regrettably so.


--
Mark Rousell