Infrastructures are poor substitutes for intelligent people interactions

For all the proverbial bells and whistles augmenting what once was so simple a web, I can't say any garden – walled or otherwise – therein has ever provided a space exceeding the joy I experienced in the likes of USENET, IRC, and even late 1980s local BBSes (I can still see the lights of my 1200 Baud modem, still hear its sonic handshake orgasms: oh... Oh... OHHH.... OHHHHHHHHH.. I'M... I'M... I'M CONN...NEHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH...CTINNNNNNNNNNNG!!!!!!).

And not because those technologies were particularly fun. No! In fact, I perfected the pronunciation of many a curse word fighting with the protocols, utilities, and applications defining the surface of such environments.

Turns out that struggle also guaranteed a high(er) intelligence entry fee to such spaces – and, thus, the likelihood of finding an interactive paradise on the other side.

That's why I read articles about how “we” just need this kind of infrastructure and/or that kind of post-melding whatever, and the ensuing eye-rolling quickly becomes world class.

But I can understand why developer types get hard over such never-quite-satisfying toy-age.

I've seen the promised land, and it was attainable on a regular basis in unadulterated 7-bit ASCII – and, furthermore, was so good it was worth waiting for, e.g. waiting one's turn to be the next to sign into a BBS, waiting for USENET server propagations...

... as starkly opposed, say, to instantaneous YiB of, well, what you get when you lower the bar of access/participation such that any idiot mingle.