The Biggest Challenges Create The Biggest Opportunities
from the an-equal-and-opposite-reaction dept
As is the tradition on Techdirt, my final post of the year is about optimism and how I continue to be optimistic about innovation and online community, even in the midst of whatever other nonsense may be happening around the globe. This is now my 16th such post. The trend kicked off in 2008 when I had multiple conversations noting that I seemed weirdly optimistic about innovation, even as I was constantly writing angry screeds about stupid stuff that was going on.
As I told Ed Zitron during a podcast earlier this year, I’ve always been a fundamental believer in innovation making the world a better place for all, and whatever anger you see from me comes out of a frustration against those who seek to delay or limit the benefits of such useful innovation. However, as last year’s final message pointed out, this is not the same thing as saying “acceleration at all costs,” because if you build without taking into account the potential harms, your advancements will be short-lived, and the backlash will be even worse.
I believe in supporting innovation, but with an eye towards building it thoughtfully, such that the gains can be sustainable.
If you want to look at the past posts, here’s a list:
- 2008: On Staying Happy
- 2009: Creativity, Innovation And Happiness
- 2010: From Pessimism To Optimism… And The Power Of Innovation
- 2011: From Optimism And Innovation… To The Power To Make A Difference
- 2012: Innovation, Optimism And Opportunity: All Coming Together To Make Real Change
- 2013: Optimism On The Cusp Of Big Changes
- 2014: Change, Innovation And Optimism, Despite Challenges
- 2015: Keep Moving Forward
- 2016: No One Said It Would Be Easy…
- 2017: Keep On Believing
- 2018: Do Something Different
- 2019: Opportunities Come From Unexpected Places
- 2020: Make The World A Better Place
- 2021: The Arc Of The Moral Universe Is A Twisty Path
- 2022: The Opportunity To Build A Better Internet Is Here. Right Now.
- 2023: Moving Fast And Breaking Things Is The Opposite Of Tech Optimism
For this year, I’ve heard a few people suggesting that they were curious how I’d pull off an optimistic post given all the nonsense the larger world is facing, and the US (in particular) appears to be treading down a stupidly dangerous path. I have seen some suggest that the capture of the White House by at least some Silicon Valley interests could be good for innovation, but I think that’s only true at the margins.
The success of American dynamism comes from a variety of sources, but our basic institutions are a key part of them. And the MAGA/Trump world is threatening to rip apart some of those institutions while destroying other important norms that lead to innovative societies. The attacks on free speech, the gleeful vindictiveness against a list of perceived enemies, and the general openness to corruption certainly don’t bode well for building sustainable, useful innovations.
On top of that, the rush of big tech and media companies to fawn over and fund Donald Trump in his return to the White House similarly suggests that they’re not looking to push innovation forward, but rather to become toadies hoping for handouts.
So why am I still optimistic? Because this actually offers an important alternative (and potentially better) path towards innovation. This is not denying all of the terrible shit that is going to happen over the next few years, nor the harm that many will have to deal with, especially the most vulnerable among us.
But it can also kickstart alternatives. Rather than relying on the slow and messy process of antitrust or questionable regulations, the mess that the government is can open up opportunities to build better systems from the ground up. Obviously, I am very biased, but I think the rapid adoption and growth of Bluesky gives you just a tiny glance into the kinds of things that may be coming. And Bluesky is just one example – there are many areas ripe for building user-empowering protocols and systems.
When other stuff goes bad, it opens up an opportunity to build something fundamentally better, something that starts from a different conception, not just on creating “the next [fill in the blank enshittified service]” but a technology that is much more resistant to enshittification in the first place.
As we’re seeing with Bluesky, some of that change is difficult. Part of the important nature of Bluesky is that it’s built to give more power to the users, and yet we often see users demanding that the company reject that principle in favor of a preferred outcome, even as users have the ability to build that outcome for themselves.
We’ve spent much of the past two decades fighting over who was going to better protect people online: the big evil companies or the big evil government. And hopefully what we’re learning is that neither is the best solution. Providing users the tools (whether on their own or via third parties) is going to lead to better (and more competitive) long-term outcomes.
There will be growing pains because we’re all learning (or relearning) much of this on the fly. But the opportunity is now. People are reasonably upset with both the way the government handles things and the way the biggest companies handle things. Rooting for one or the other to get better seems futile. Let’s focus on making sure that neither matters as much.
We’re already seeing it happen in certain corners of the internet, and there’s plenty more opportunity where that comes from. Just today, I was having a conversation (on Bluesky) about possibilities for a more “protocol” approach to e-commerce, not just social media. There are all sorts of creative ways in which we can rethink the internet and bring it back to its original fundamental promise.
I don’t like the fact that we are in a position where the biggest companies and our elected officials are equally untrustworthy, but if that’s where we are, we might as well use it as an opportunity to route around both and build better systems that aren’t focused on extraction from the public, but empowering the public.
The concerning actions of both government and big tech companies, rather than being cause for despair, can actually spur people to build better, more decentralized systems that empower users rather than institutions.
Yes, many things are terrible, but history has shown us that the greatest innovations often seem to take hold at these kinds of moments. The need is there, as is the public’s distrust in the way things were done before. That has led some to embrace the wrecking ball approach to government, which seems quite likely to fail in disastrous ways.
A more positive approach is to build the systems that route around all of that, at a moment when many people are tired of the old systems and are much more open to adopting something that is both new and empowering. If we have to be dealing with lots of terrible things, I’m going to dedicate my efforts towards getting better systems online that help empower individuals, and I hope that others will join in the process.
As always, my final thoughts on these posts are thanking all of you, the community around Techdirt, for making all of this worthwhile. The community remains an amazing thing to me. I’ve said in the past that I write as if I’m going to share my thoughts into an empty void, not expecting anyone to ever pay attention, and I’m always amazed when anyone does, whether it’s to disagree with me, add some additional insights, challenge my thinking, or even reach out to talk about how to actually move some ideas forward.
I know this community is full of creators, thinkers and advocates who care deeply about using technology to make the world better. Let’s use this opportunity to prove that innovation, thoughtfully applied, can route around institutional failure and corruption. Once again, thank you to those who are reading this for making Techdirt such a wonderful and special place, and let’s focus on being truly optimistic about the opportunities in front of us.
Filed Under: decentralization, empowering users, new year's message, optimism


Comments on “The Biggest Challenges Create The Biggest Opportunities”
The future is scary, and I worry about the open internet becoming closed and fractured forever.
But, the point regarding Bluesky gives me hope. Maybe I won’t lose contact with my online friends, maybe the freedom to express yourself online won’t get crushed, only moved elsewhere.
Maybe the internet as it is now won’t be destroyed at all. But either way, a much more user-controlled, decentralized internet would be a great gift to the world as a whole.
Re:
You worry too damn much.
If you want to stop the bad outcome you worry about from happening, find a way to help stop it from happening. If you can’t stop it from happening, you can stop worrying—because there’s no point in being afraid of the inevitable—and start making plans to work around that bad outcome. Whining and droning on about how you’re scared and worried won’t change shit.
Yes, plenty of people worry about what you’re worried about; I’m not exactly thrilled about the prospect of a one-way Internet, either. But worrying yourself into an anxiety spiral and asking everyone else to soothe your fears while you do nothing isn’t going to stop the bad outcome from happening. Either fight it or plan to work around it, but for the sake of all things divine, stop whining about it so damn much. Throwing a pity party and expecting others to show up won’t ever do you any good.
Re: Re:
It’s not an “anxiety spiral” for me. I just assess what’s possible, what’s likely, and move forward from there. I grew up queer in a time and place where that was, let’s say, frowned upon. Acknowledging the ugliest realities around me was key to being able to respond appropriately, and in fact, survive at all.
“Don’t think about that.” “Don’t talk about that.” These things are not constructive whatsoever when the “that” in question is reality and the status of civil society. Nobody owes you cope and hope.
Re: Re: Re:
Does talking about how worried you are about those things actually do anything to help you with that, though? Again, I’m not exactly keen on the idea of a non-open Internet, but whining about how worried I am about that outcome won’t actually change that outcome.
I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but I’ve never said either of those things. Talking about the possibility of a non-open Internet is fine. It’s worth talking about. But tossing in a bunch of bullshit about how you’re soooooooo worried or distressed or anxious about it happening, and doing it on as many articles as possible, is an invitation for a pity party. I refuse to give you the RSVP you want for that.
Feel free to worry. A non-open Internet is something worth worrying about. Alls I’m asking is that you please stop trying to drag everyone else into an anxiety spiral so you can either make yourself feel better or make everyone else feel worse.
Re: Re: Re:2
I’m not actually the original commenter you responded to. I’m just passing by and getting the impression that you’re shouting it down because it upsets you, and wrapping your feelings in a combination of projection and pseudo-logic to lend them factual validity.
Re: Re: Re:3
You’re missing the context that the doom poster has been dumping the same useless doom and gloom comments on articles here for a while.
Re: Re: Re:4
..For once I’m trying to be more positive on an optimistic article and this is the response I get.
Not positive enough I suppose. Maybe the problem was that I mentioned how I felt about things at all.
Re: Re: Re:5
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It%27s_a_Good_Life_(The_Twilight_Zone)
Re: Re: Re:5
Look, dude, I’m actually sorry that I might come off as trying to shout you down and tell you to be super-optimistic and all that. I’m not, I assure you. The world is a shitshow right now and saying as much isn’t “doomposting”. That isn’t the issue here.
The issue is that, for weeks on end, you (and maybe others like you) have been doing this “oh this is so bad, this is so distressing, I’m so worried” schtick on a hell of a lot of articles. Seeing that kind of defeatism and such all the time, even in the smallest of doses, gets tiring to people who are also worried but are trying to do something other than worry themselves into an early grave.
My rants—and yes, I’m willing to call them that—aren’t about trying to shove a ray of sunshine up your ass and force you to smile and all that “put on a happy face” bullshit. They’re about trying to get you (and others like you) to see that whining about your worries in public on a regular basis is effectively asking for pity and expecting to be validated in return. I’ve been where you are in that regard; trust me when I say that it isn’t going to work forever, if it even works at all.
Yes, you can worry about the state of our fucked up world. I’ve never said, and will never say, “you can’t do that”. Alls I’m really saying is that if you’re worried about a given subject and “I’m worried” is the only remark you have to contribute to a conversation, maybe consider how that won’t actually contribute to the conversation. And if you’re so worried that you can’t help but express that worry all of the time to anyone who will listen (or host your speech), you may want to consider finding and talking to a licensed therapist instead of coming to this site and low-key acting like its regular commenters should do that job.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:4
I’m not missing any such context. I’m aware some of the resident posters here start screeching if anyone’s not smiling enough for their taste.
Re: Re: Re:5
Ignoring said context is worse.
This has nothing to do with “not smiling enough”. OP has consistently and repeatedly posted doom comments on articles for weeks. As Stone points out, that kind of pity party is useful for nobody.
Re: Re: Re:6
I’ve got more “context” than you do.
Re: Re: Re:5
Clearly you’re missing a lot of context if that’s the takeaway you’ve opted to go with.
Re: Re:
That’s such a weirdly aggressive comment with huge amounts of projection.
“Whining and droning on about how you’re scared and worried..” It was one sentence.
“worrying yourself into an anxiety spiral…” When did they say that?
“asking everyone else to soothe your fears while you do nothing …” When did they ask that?
“stop whining about it so damn much…” Again, it was one sentence.
“Throwing a pity party and expecting others to show up…” They never said they were doing that.
Are you ok?
Re: Re: Re:
He’s been posting similar comments on other articles for weeks.
Again, he’s been doing this for weeks.
He’s justifiably tired of seeing the same person whining about the same things over and over and over again.
Re:
Can I point out that the doom posting and the doom post shaming are equally stupid and annoying. Knock it off.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re:
You write an article criticizing Elon Musk for asking people to post productively on 𝕏, then you ask people to post productively? What a hypocrite.
Re: Re: Re:
Actually a better description of the article Mike wrote is: article calling Elon a hypocrite for being an asshole ,and then demanding others be nice.
And in this context: Mike wrote an article about being… optimistic… and then asked people to stop doom posting… that’s not quite the hypocrisy the oversimplification provided would have us believe.
Re: Re: Re:2
Mike asked people to stop doom posting in response to a comment that wasn’t a doom post unless you squint really hard. Just an FYI.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:3
Will you shut up? I don’t want people piggybacking off of my anxieties to prop up their “Mike evil” parroting.
Re: Re: Re:4
It’s unkind to willingly be such a burden to your family.
Re: Re: Re:2
Mike asked people to stop doom posting in response to a comment that wasn’t a doom post unless you squint really hard. Just an FYI.
Re: Re: Re:
“You write an article criticizing Elon Musk for asking people to post productively on 𝕏”
… after having told others to go fuck themselves in the face.
“then you ask people to post productively? What a hypocrite.”
… when did Mike tell others here to go fuck themselves in the face?
Re: Re: Re:
Only when you connect two unrelated things and try to conflate them.
Re: Re:
Am I the only one seeing this thread group as a flat list instead of nested (even though the other threads… mostly just the doom thread) are correctly nested? Or is this a site bug?
Re: Re: Re:
You aren’t the only one, I was confused when I saw replies and then the replies looked like ordinary new comments… Methinks a bug has been found.
Re: internet?
Easy solution..
As the corps have DONE nothing to update and make the net better. Take it back, le the gov. Deal with it, as they USED to do with the utilities(before handing them to the corps, for profit).
For Some odd reasoning the gov. has forgotten its power and How it watched over things. Insted of letting Corps designate how to do things, and Profit from Inches insted of feet.
Long ago, far away the Telephone system was Built FOR A REAL REASON. Speed of information, and it Started as a distributed system, Which kinda sucked. Then the Corps Started buying all the small companies out, BUT kept the Charges and relay system to Charge Everyone with.
The Original idea was WWI and WWII, and getting info around the nation, and WE PAID for it, as well as the Rural parts. The Corps paid for Little and charge the gov. much.
Would LOVE to see the Gov. Become the corp Boss. As it should be, as it was. NOT BOUGHT OUT, as it has become.
The future is always scary but rarely as horrible as we imagine. Having a consummate conman and convicted felon as president certainly increases the odds of horrible.
Re:
I’m already positioned for stagflation.
API Time?
Good post, thanks. I think we can all use a little more optimism.
On the point of protocols I fully agree and have been thinking recently that AI agents might be a similar situation as you’ve described for the incoming political dumpster fire in the US. There are now systems were you can tell an AI what to do and it will go and browse the web for you.
Think about that: A computer pretending to be a human using a browser to interact with a server. It’s nuts. What we need is for the internet to be more API-ified so systems can interoperate in an efficient way that makes sense – including AI agents. That transition could be an opportunity to realize a more decentralized and protocol-driven internet.
Hopefully you’re right that the stupid things happening today can lead to a better tomorrow.
Re:
What? That is literally exactly what web crawlers have been doing for the last 25+ years.
Re: Re:
Crawlers interact with servers too, yes, but not to make use of the service the site offers. I’m talking about someone wanting to interact with a service to actually use that service for its intended purpose and instead of making an API request to the service they use an AI to operate a browser which in turn uses the API.
TBF often a proper API is not available so simulating the requests a browser would make is the closest you can get, but that’s still less crazy than an AI feeding clicks and keystrokes into a browser.
The point is hopefully more sites will focus on interoperability so hacks like this aren’t necessary and AI can focus on language and user intent rather than simulating human behaviour.
Techdirt had help me gain a greater understanding of not only technology itself, but how other people could use it. And for that, I am quite grateful for it.
what would be interesting?
If fixing a few things that Corps Changed.
Like the stock market.
There is no ownership while owning stocks, anymore. They can Add to the original Value at anytime, and NOT affect the stock value.
Then lets Fix Copyrights and that Whole system.
If you AINT using it, it is not considered as a Product to be Protected. Books and Motors, engines, All of it. If Not used or has become Old tech, its an OPEN USE product. And adding Parts to a single product does NOT make it a NEW/Same Product. As in a new Medicine because they added another ingredient.
Dont know if its been changed, but if you didnt know, that you can Build your OWN, Anything, from scratch, and its not regulated, but has to pass certain Fed regulations, like building your own car. And it would be interesting to Take This part and that part and make your own. But I dont think the corps would like that.
Then would love the Old School Tech to come back abit to compete with NEW, Anti Computer tech.
Re:
If you AINT using it, it is not considered a product to be protected.
But how long should they get to have their products be considered still in use? I’d say give them twenty years protected and then twelve months to come up with something that proves they care by commercially releasing something or it belongs to the people
Re: Re:
I feel like I’m piling on a bit here, but I’d like to add something: this kind of doomerism/”I’m worried” posts just makes everyone else depressed. Or it can. After a while of constantly seeing it, it causes everyone else to get depressed or outright annoyed/angry because they have to constantly put up with trying to be your therapist instead of constructively discussing the shitty world we live in and ways of solving those problemEh, 20 years is too long for me. I say renew it annually and prove that you actually need it. If you can’t prove that (1) your commercially using it and (2) competition will harm you in some way that can’t be cured in some other manner, you lose it. Copyright is something I strongly disagree with, hence why I think it should be strictly controlled. It is, after all, a bypass to the anti-monopoly laws that we normally would throw at people, and things like that are prime candidates for the “prove that you genuinely, actually need this or fuck off” protections.
Re: Re: Re:
Uh, oops… Apparently the site merges comments when you hit reply on one comment, and then hit reply on another (since there isn’t a cancel button)… My bad. The copyright stuff was meant for one of the comments below, should’ve deleted the original text… 🙁
Re: Re: Re:2
There is a “cancel reply” link, but the thing is that if you have a reply typed in already and you click that link, the text you’ve typed will still be in the Comment box unless you refresh the page. I don’t know if that’s what happened to you specifically, but I know that it’s possible.
Also, in re: the bug about comments not showing up in a thread, that’s a known “bug” of the new comment system. When a comment is deleted, any replies become unthreaded, so any replies to the unthreaded replies are similarly unthreaded. Dunno why it works that way.
Re: Re: Re:
So basically, you advocate a return to the publisher monopolies that existed prior to copyright laws.
What Is Their Problem?
What is the problem with those users?
What do they want? Another 𝕏? If that is what they want then they can go back to 𝕏, or at least to Mastodon. Or, maybe, they do not really know what they want, in which case they should not complain.
Re: problem with freedom of speech?
HOW free do you want?
Between the BS, and racism, and Just those trying to point fingers..
Over 50% is an absence of knowledge and whats happening, and those Pushing to make Sure you DONT understand.
A good slave does not need to be smart.
Innovation is bandied about as the latest proxy for progress, just like patents used to be but I’m seeing a lot of innovation in the wrong direction.
KOSA will likely be back this year (2025), but so will the organizations opposing it. And it sounds like they plan on doing what they can to expand that opposition.
I don’t know how the KOSA situation, nor any other censorship or mass surveillance regime, is gonna pan out, but one can hope for the best, at least.
Out of curiousity, how would something like bluesky and other decentralized platforms handle something like a negative outcome of the Texas SCOTUS case regarding age verification?
From how I understand it, if SCOTUS doesn’t strike the law down, it’s gonna be impossible to shoot down similair bills in any other state, or federal level.