[HN Gopher] The Cluetrain Manifesto (1999) ___________________________________________________________________ The Cluetrain Manifesto (1999) Author : KingOfCoders Score : 64 points Date : 2023-07-03 11:14 UTC (11 hours ago) (HTM) web link (www.cluetrain.com) (TXT) w3m dump (www.cluetrain.com) | ryandrake wrote: | The "power of conversations among people" espoused by the | Cluetrain Manifesto never really panned out, thanks to companies | poisoning the well by absolutely cramming it full with spam, SEO, | Social Media Marketing, astroturf, fake reviews, soon ChatGPT, | and by Social Media companies filling it with outrage and | battles. Genuine conversations now pretty much happen within | small filter bubbles. Most of what you see on the broad, open | Internet is either Marketing, "Influencing," or outrage. We've | left the Cluetrain and ended up in the Dark Forest Internet[1]. | | 1: https://onezero.medium.com/the-dark-forest-theory-of-the- | int... | tiffanyg wrote: | Very true. Sadly, while "companies" play a very large role, | ultimately, it's people. | | The dynamics are, I think, somewhat interesting. The essential | pattern appears like "theme and variations", woven endlessly | through human history that I'm familiar with. | | It has been possible, in brief periods, to imagine that perhaps | _we_ had moved past some of it ... grown a bit, on the whole. | But, it 's really difficult to imagine we might ever reach a | sort of "Star Trek: First Contact" ... "economic regime"*. | | Circumstances continually evolve and even relatively subtle | changes in policies and principles and such, at scale, can make | a big difference. One key problem is simply that the cohesion | and principled behavior and all of that, borne out of | challenging times** and the desire to make things better for | ones offspring, so easily leads to less purposeful more | entitled people who can even end up resentful at what previous | generations accomplished, the philosophies they espouse, the | plaudits that they have engendered... and purposefully wish to | go against that grain. | | But, to get a bit away from this unintentionally increasingly | high-falutin' "jibber jabber" - the phases of commercial | internet development adhere to fairly typical (modern) human | patterns. | | First: optimism and practically "free money" ... an initial | gold rush, real attempts at building real value ultimately | drowning out the charlatans and general gold rush "carnival". | Second: a sort of plateau, "professionalization", coalescence, | big companies consolidating and buying up (additional) | innovators, etc. Third: the land in terms of current resources | mostly staked out, various little (and mostly legitimate | "fish") utilizing the big products and services to provide | smaller products and services ... a sort of completion of an | "ecosystem". Fourth: increasing trouble making additional | money, creating real distinct new value, economic cycle getting | past peak, probably inflation issues, etc. ... plus, crime and | illegitimate activity more and more present ... tools and | opportunities for charlatans, more and more ... Even | established big companies having issues with their models, | etc... The "only real hope" is the next big innovation... | | This comment is overly long, and yet, hardly adequately covers | the shallowest surface of the topic. But, eh, best I can do | this moment. | | It's unfortunate to watch these kinds of cycles, and easy to | have hope that "this time it'll be (more) different". But, no | matter how quickly technology changes, humans seem more stuck | when it comes to "evolution" (even accounting for changes in | communications, education, etc.). And, really, ultimately, some | people realized even 1000s of years ago that almost all of this | is a kind of futile "chasing the dragon". | | * https://youtu.be/PV4Oze9JEU0?t=2m28s | | ** E.g.,https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8763215/ | BLKNSLVR wrote: | Is that just a factor of time plus the tendency for | gamification of <identified positive thing>? | | KPIs become meaningless over an amount of time depending on how | well thought out they are. | | All things need to evolve to outrun the corruption of what they | used to be. Feels like this is a universal truth. | Eddy_Viscosity2 wrote: | This is why we can't have nice things. | bilsbie wrote: | An elegant sentiment from a more civilized age. | bilsbie wrote: | This could be an amazing opportunity though. It's what everyone | wants. | mistermann wrote: | Totally agree (well, _most_ people), but as I recall there | was some language in the TikTok bill subjecting any | onlinecommunity over X people being subject to "monitoring" | by the government. | | This advice should maybe be heeded: | | https://youtu.be/WP-lrftLQaQ | onetokeoverthe wrote: | [dead] | api wrote: | "All open systems without a built in economic system are | destroyed by spam. No exceptions." | | This is a problem cryptocurrency could have tackled, but it | never really did because scamming and gambling are so much more | profitable than solving real problems. | YesThatTom2 wrote: | So.. by that logic we can conclude it didn't have a built-in | economic system? | | No, I think think the conclusion is that spam will destroy | all open systems. | larata_media wrote: | [flagged] | heisenbit wrote: | Corporation have capital and can shoulder risk. To the degree | that medium to long term insights have value their access to | capital ads value. | superq wrote: | "capital ads value" | shove wrote: | Oldie but goodie | santoshalper wrote: | Two things stand out: | | 1. I really miss the days when I was optimistic about the | internet. Though to be clear, 1999 was not peak internet optimism | and this was more of a reaction to us already seeing signs of | corporate takeover. | | 2. If we're being real, a lot of this is seriously pretentious | bullshit. | jrm4 wrote: | But you NEED the stuff we call "pretentious bullshit" to be a | useful "Overton Window" endpoint. This is precisely why I'm so | pro e.g. Richard Stallman/GPL et al. Not because I actually do | all that shit, but because I recognize how useful an absolute | weirdo at that endpoint is. | BLKNSLVR wrote: | Without those at each far end, the centre would be shifted | closer to the other. | | An incomplete theory of mine is around problems of using | behavioural patterns to identify potential criminals. Not all | deviant behaviour is criminal, but identifying deviance and | somehow cutting it off or minimising it, just means that the | next inner level of the bell curve of that deviancy becomes | the next target. | | Eg. Everyone who's killed an animal larger than a mouse put | on a watch list for sociopathy. Ok, so once that's done, we | need yet another level to score some cheap political points. | Ok, how about kids who have amputated their siblings dolls, | yeah, they're fucking nutters... | | It's an incomplete theory because it fails the slippery slope | logical fallacy, potentially fatally. | | But behaviour patterns are already used to predict where | crime will occur based on where it has previously occurred. | This feels like an ever tightening loop that acts to | increasingly justify itself whilst trapped in an echo chamber | of our very own unintentional design. | jrm4 wrote: | I have no idea what you are even trying to say here because | the underlying idea is so far from mine. Also -- uh, black | enslaver? hope I'm reading that wrong | BLKNSLVR wrote: | You're only the second person who's read it as that. | Black and Silver. | | I considered deleting the comment altogether as it did | ramble. | santoshalper wrote: | I'd need to think about that more, but I upvoted your idea | because it is interesting and potentially useful. | BLKNSLVR wrote: | I don't like the assumptions I'm making here, but I still think | it's worth saying to you and anyone who agrees with "the | internet isn't what it used to be": | | Don't let your idea of the internet be what your habits are | limiting you to experiencing. | | Create something that's your flavour of weird or interesting | and put it out there. Link to it when conversation strays | somewhere that it may be appropriate. Search for weirdness in | the flood of what has come be to normal. | | It's like music. I listen to a local, community, subscription | funded radio station because they don't play what most radio | stations are paid to play. They play what the weirdly artistic | hosts like, and they play predominantly local country | (Australia) and local state (South Australia) music. There's a | whole lotta bad music out there, and I've heard more than my | fair share, but my word, there are diamonds in the rough. You | just have to keep sifting. | | Most people don't have the motivation or energy. Most people | are ... "Happy", I guess... listening to the same old | manufactured bullshit on insanity inducing high rotation. Fuck | man, music is life and most people choose to be zombies. | | I don't browse the weird web, but I know it's there if I looked | hard enough. I seemingly am more "affected" by music than the | average person, and so I do have the motivation and will to | endure the sift. It's not for everyone. In fact, it seems to be | for quite the small percentage. | prepend wrote: | I feel like 1999 was peak internet optimism. The crash happened | in April 2000, so 99/ winter 2000 was the peak. | | After that everything was crashing and then consolidating into | Amazon, google, eBay, and then Apple. | jmacd wrote: | The Cluetrain Manifesto and Small Pieces Loosely Joined were | major influences on my young brain. I'm glad I, for some reason, | decided to read them. | | Over the years I had several chances to meet Doc Searls and David | Weinberger and it was a case of it being a good idea to meet your | heroes. They were just very nice to an eager young kid. | Mizza wrote: | Personally, I can't believe I ever fell for this bullshit, but | it is nice to remember the optimistic feelings I had during | that era. Now, I am a cynic, and that I ever thought "markets | are conversations" was a profound idea and not the Ritalin | ramblings of the most annoying guy in the world fills me with | self-cringe. | itomato wrote: | But now they seem to be. That's about all they are. It's so | transactional that the transaction mode has become the | relationship, platform and product all-in-one. | | Right down to Credit Cards and Car Insurance. | Mizza wrote: | I guess my objection - besides the tedious style - isn't | that it's incorrect, but that it's _bad_. | | I find it deeply unnerving when corporations act like | people. I don't want to have a "conversation" with a | company if it means they've used surveillance to stalk and | harass me across the internet so they can build a data | profile of me and my habits. I don't want my life | controlled by ruthless monopolies with happy human faces. | | The result is not corporations that are more human, it's | people that are less human. There is a straight line from | Cluetrain to OnlyFans fleshmarkets. It worked, and it | sucks. | prepend wrote: | > I don't want to have a "conversation" with a company if | it means they've used surveillance to stalk and harass me | across the internet so they can build a data profile of | me and my habits. | | I feel similarly. I don't want my grocery store or | restaurant to understand me. I just want to buy a gallon | of milk and don't want to discuss my day with them. And I | don't want my order called out to my name. Just give me a | number and I'll listen for it. | | I think the idea is that relationships make me spend more | money. But I don't want to spend more money on groceries. | I want to spend as little as possible. | | Also in this category is companies that want to wish me | happy birthday or happy pride month or anything else | related to what I want from them. I don't need my water | company to wish me happy new year, just provide water | efficiently. | dreamcompiler wrote: | A major credit card company (whose cards are usually | green) used to bug me with surveys asking what else they | could do to make me happier. My answer: Get more | merchants to accept your card. | | How about cash back? No, cash back means I paid too much | in the first place. | | How about free movie tickets once a year? Won't make me | use my card more. | | How about free access to airport lounges (as long as you | pay an extra $500 a year)? No. | | Then what can we do? | | Improve. | | Your card's. | | Acceptance. | | Hmmm. How about a free credit checkup? | | Aaaand this is why I no longer respond to surveys: | There's often one blindingly obvious thing a company can | do to improve customer satisfaction, and coincidentally | it's usually the thing the company least wants to do. So | survey responses that tell them "Do the obvious thing" | just get ignored. | parasubvert wrote: | So, don't give the corporations you don't like your data? | Many people DO want to have these conversations and are | okay with surveillance of a sort if they get something of | perceived value in return. OTOH, there are plenty of ways | to avoid surveillance via ad blocking and onion routers | (which is now shipping on all Apple devices). | | I'm also not sure why you think people are less human in | all of this is, or why OnlyFans is "bad". Commercial porn | has existed for 50 years, and like the music industry, | has had its economics upended because of Mindgeek (or | Reddit, or ...) giving most porn away in exchange for | surveillance rather than money. OnlyFans brings the 70's | NYC Times Square peepshow back to the mainstream. | | The cluetrain manifesto and that crowd all saw this | coming over a decade before the mobile smart phone put | this into hyperdrive; to me it's not "bad" it's just | "different from the 90s". | mpweiher wrote: | Related: The Gluetrain Manifesto: | | https://web.archive.org/web/20041022054701/http://gluetrain.... | nologic01 wrote: | What a complete fail... | | Subtitle: _The end of business as usual_. | | At least they got that right: Today Apple hit the 3 trillion | valuation mark. | | The very concept that the economy is a decentralized something is | up for discussion. | parasubvert wrote: | Not a fail - a raging success of a manifesto that was largely | ignored by the old guard and the results were, predictably, | winner take all for those that saw it coming. | | And by now the conversations have been corrupted because the | old guard did eventually catch on and flooded the channels with | shit. | | That said, what does the valuation of a company have to do with | its participation in an economy? The only implication to me is | that some corporations are so valuable that there's no way they | can be taken over by a hostile entity. Revenue is a more | important indicator. Apple is big at $400 billion, but there | are lots of other big companies. | paulorlando wrote: | Back in 2011 I looked at how many of the URLs in the book had | survived. For a Dotcom era book, I think they held up pretty | well. Anyone want to update the list? | https://startupsunplugged.com/startup-communities/random-fac... | | Cluetrain.com: y. Haveanotherbeer.com: n (fake). (bought by | Google) deja.com: n; liveperson.com: y. (with diff name) | chrisworth.com: y. Boy-are-we-clueless.com: n. Dunkindonuts.com: | y. Dunkindonutssucks.com: n. Ford.com: y. Wdc.com: y. | Whitehouse.com: n. Whitehouse.gov: y. Thesphere.net: n. | mancala.com: ?. panix.com: y. (not updated) rageboy.com: y. | cratermoon wrote: | https://zombo.com/ | parasubvert wrote: | I find it fascinating that some comments think this was wrong. | Yes it was pretentious and arrogant. But it wasn't wrong. | | It was right: too right, and was winner take all for those who | figured it out (Amazon, Meta, Apple, Microsoft, Google, many | others), before spam invaded and made the conversations much | harder. | | The web architecture , technology , and protocols are still the | decentralized underpinning of the internet, but people have | forgotten why they're there. It's almost an archeological dig for | the new generation. It's a foundation ready for decentralization | but tech folks were frustrated when people CHOOSE to live in | large cluster silos, socially (eg. meta, tiktok, Twitter etc) . | But in most other domains with network effects, this clustering | isn't entirely surprising. Network effects is often a euphemism | for "winner take all". Same confusion as to why AOL was so | popular for so long. But the web moves on. | | Ask yourself: how did TikTok take off? Or how do new sites come | about and grow (as is happening with Bluesky, Mastodon and | others? How many businesses do I transact eCommerce with | directly? If we truly had a big bad hierarchical dystopia , it | wouldn't happen. | | It requires _hard work_ to get noticed, but the hyperlink (and | HTTP /MIME/HTML/JS) is still the foundation of all of our | interop. which is why Elon shutting off Twitter unauthenticated | hyperlinking this weekend is the biggest signal he wants to tank | the site: no more network effects for you! | | What's interesting to me is that technical folks never quite | "got" the web, the way the mailing list archives from the 90s | understood the web. It was built, deliberately. People now assume | it's a utility that was always there. They've not experienced | true silos (CompuServe Vs AOL Vs GEnie, anyone?). But still, the | evolution stalled. RSS Feeds were the closest we got to an | evolution , though ActivityPub is finally showing promise 15 | years after AtomPub belly flopped. People have to build | compelling software to make users want a more decentralized | experience, and that's hard to fund when your investors usually | want winner take all network effects. | flyinghamster wrote: | You hit the nail on the head. For all of our Eternal September | jokes, before then it was a morass of networks that didn't talk | to one another at all. But now it's time to fix the damage of | centralization. We all got lazy, myself included, and today's | mess is the result. | | I still need to sit down and give one of the fediverse systems | a shot. I sat on the sidelines as RedFaceTwitTok ate the world | (and have never had an account on any of them). So, for me, the | loss of Twitter and nerfing of Reddit are not _quite_ as big a | deal as it is for someone who has invested years into a | presence there only to get banned or have the site go under. | | If I'm going to do $SOCIAL_MEDIA, you better bet I want to be | able to jump ship (or, if necessary, self-host). | walrus01 wrote: | > Yes it was pretentious and arrogant | | a lot of things in the VC bubble dotcom 1.0 boom were | pretentious and arrogant | | a lot of things today still are pretentious and arrogant | | nothing has changed | majormajor wrote: | If I'm understanding you correctly there seem to be two main | points in here: | | 1) "It worked much better at first but now spam has invaded and | it doesn't work as well" | | and also | | 2) "It's still working enough because new things like TikTok | are emerging from things other than some top-down mandate" | | My response to the first is pretty short, like: if it didn't | still work once big corporations and political actors, etc, | noticed it, then it wasn't actually significantly different, | just a new venue that was temporarily less crowded. And so the | "new guard" is just the innovators in the Clayton Christensen | sense who were able to win _new markets_ with _fairly | traditional methods_ but without some new profound | disintermediated relationship with their customers. | | But the second one... to me this is really where it's much more | "meet the new boss, same as the old boss" and actually | inherently a flawed, naive position. | | People were never entirely at either extreme of "sheeple | controlled by big corporations" or malcontent sarcastic "haha | brands are dum and embarrassing themselves." _New things | emerged in non-top-down ways pre-internet too_. But overall, | before-and-after, big corporations that "win" then still | usually get stuck in the same patterns that stuff like 66-95 | predicts will go away: they have to please their investors, | they have to please the media. The hold of the money people | hasn't been broken by the internet. | nologic01 wrote: | Well, if you narrow enough the scope of the analysis a lot of | things can be "right". | | My brilliant manifesto talks about cars, with round wheels, on | paved streets, taking people places - it will be a wonderful | democratization of travel. Come buy a car. | | I forgot to manifest that the road is severely inclined and the | cars lack breaks. | | > The web architecture , technology , and protocols are still | the decentralized underpinning of the internet | | The web is whatever Chrome and Safari say it is [1]. | | Its not winner-takes-all on some level playing field. Its a | winner-takes ALL, _including_ the playing field. | | [1] https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share | npsimons wrote: | > winner take all for those who figured it out (Amazon, Meta, | Apple, Microsoft, Google, many others) | | What's really funny to me is the following quote from | "Cluetrain Manifesto" that sticks out in stark opposition to | the above: | | > We are not seats or eyeballs or end users or consumers, we | are human beings. And our reach exceeds your grasp. deal with | it. | mojomark wrote: | [flagged] | api wrote: | (7) is completely wrong. Hyperlinks do not subvert hierarchy due | to network effects combined with the fact that the lookup system, | DNS, is hierarchical. | | Nobody uses hyperlinks anymore except to link into social media | silos or "up" to media sources. The web as an actual web died and | nobody noticed. | | It's pretty thoroughly dead now. Creating your own home page or | even a hosted blog is now a weird niche activity. | jrm4 wrote: | I'd hold the phone on that one, literally today? I think | there's not a bad chance _right now_ that social media somewhat | collapses and people significantly return to more things like | that; a possible happy medium with -- ideally federated | services, but if not, even just like 20 or so twitters and | reddits instead of two? | api wrote: | If the fediverse ever gets big enough to be a juicy marketing | target or able to sway elections then the same bad actors | that destroyed e-mail, Usenet, the open web, and social media | will come for it. | parasubvert wrote: | This is far too cynical. Firstly, DNS is mostly irrelevant to | hyperlinks, it's been a long time since everyone fought over | getting "the right .com name". With a proliferation of TLDs, is | this is really even a big deal? | | The web is still there as the foundation and glue. It's not | dead, it's used all the time for eCommerce, support, | documentation, research, forums, and most importantly for | universal interoperability across whatever "silos" are out | there. URI, HTTP, MIME, HTML, and JavaScript are literally the | glue that holds even the silos together, or allows our myriad | devices to interoperate with them. | | How else did TikTok take off? Hyperlinks! There's no central | hierarchy , the network effects of the web won out. | | I think the issue people have is they confuse network effects | with even distribution. But that's never been the case: think | of the countryside Vs cities. Network effects often lead to | huge clusters. Even peek web circa 2012 had Google Reader as | the ultimate blog aggregation experience. | | All the architecture and tech of the web is sitting there ready | to be used. It's up to software creators to make decentralized | software people actually want to use. | dredmorbius wrote: | I'd argue that creating your own homepage or a hosted blog were | _always_ a niche activity. | | Though at one time, so was posting any online content | whatsoever, and the first small niche was a much larger share | of the second small niche. | dredmorbius wrote: | Two significant past discussions: | | The Cluetrain Manifesto (2022)| 42 comments | <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32395587> | | The Cluetrain Manifesto (2016) | 31 comments | <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11220242> | [deleted] | wffurr wrote: | [flagged] | marcus0x62 wrote: | Dr Bronner's did it better. http://all-one- | typography.com/Dr_Bronners-label-Peppermint-3... | thom wrote: | A spiritual successor to the Cluetrain was Hugh McLeod's | Hughtrain: | | https://www.gapingvoid.com/blog/2010/10/16/the-hughtrain-mki... | | If you read it in the most cynical possible way, it actually came | to fruition in a way the Cluetrain didn't. | CommieBobDole wrote: | Why is thesis #83 a spam link for boner pills? | | It used to be "We want you to take 50 million of us as seriously | as you take one reporter from The Wall Street Journal.". Now it's | "Research in the field of medicine. Now it is easy to buy viagra | online for men." | netbioserror wrote: | There are some really good points here that are soured by an | almost high-school-socialist level of rhetoric. Probably would've | been better written as a continuous essay or treatise instead of | a list. I'm sure, 24 years later, the authors would acknowledge | that. But they can probably say the same in not so many words: | | The Internet has enabled customers and employees to be far more | informed and aware than ever before; companies trying to | depersonalize and reduce will die, while those trying to | personalize and communicate can win the loyalty of both. | | I doubt publicly traded companies are even capable of this, and | with the money printer constantly spinning, I'm sadly unsure they | need to be. | mistrial9 wrote: | on the one hand, denounce meme-level political analysis | ("Socialism"); then in the next breath, declare that the money- | printer is on, favoring Big Corp, and helplessly observe that | they will not and maybe cannot, do 6th grade level social | citizenship. OK! | netbioserror wrote: | >social citizenship | | Good god man, grow some self-awareness. | superq wrote: | This is a great comment for its unintentional humor. | skyechurch wrote: | >Whether delivering information, opinions, perspectives, | dissenting arguments or humorous asides, the human voice is | typically open, natural, uncontrived. | | At the present moment the human voice online is none of these | things, as the market pressures which led to the hated 80s | corporate speak are now felt by everyone - the risk one might | "lose subscriber" or that one could be "cancelled". If you want a | real human conversation now you have to use the abandonware IRL | protocol. | gbxyz wrote: | mods, I suggest adding (1999) to the post title. | [deleted] | polynomial wrote: | Wait, so the fundamental principle of the Cluetrain Manifesto is | that "Markets are conversations" and we've just invented the | greatest (in some sense of the word) conversational (literally: | chat) technology or all time? (or at least in in our relatively | short history) | | Can't even imagine what Rageboy would have had to say about all | this. | superq wrote: | read that way, pretty soon Alexa will order things you don't | need. (so, no change except for who's placing the order) | dredmorbius wrote: | "Cluetrain", J.P. Barlow's Manifesto, and ESR's Cathedral & | Bazaar were all influential and widely-lauded at the time, but | strike me now as various degrees of misguided and/or naive. | | All three documents were _highly_ aspirational, in that they | pointed to a vision of the world the authors _wanted_ to see, | though the specific mechanisms and implications were less than | clear, and over time, many dark and /or futile implications have | emerged. "Cluetrain" specifically is a bunch of fuzzy-but- | attractive-sounding aphorisms though with little in the way of | specific mechnisms for bringing them about, or even an | understanding of how media landscapes tend to be utterly | dominated by centralised, powerful, institutional (corporate, | governmental, religious, ideological) interests --- all the more | ironic as the authors themselves came from this space. | | My sense is that RMS's GNU Manifesto is an exception to this | tendency to failure: it painted a clear hazard, a specific | mechanism (copyleft), and a goal, all of which seem to have | largely stood the test of the intervening decades, and has | produced actual useful tangible results. | | Though one might argue that JPB's Manifesto has given us the EFF. | This hasn't _guaranteed_ the freedoms Barlow championed, and it | 's run up against the dark sides of his vision, but it does at | least _continue the fight_ , which it seems freedom and | democratic ideals _always_ entail. | | "Cluetrain" though seems far more like mush to me. | | (I'd really like to hear from those who disagree with that | assessment.) | colordrops wrote: | I found the name "cluetrain" itself a pretentious turnoff when | I first heard of it, and didn't bother reading it for a while. | After reading it I didn't feel like I gained anything of value. | CSMastermind wrote: | > were all influential and widely-lauded at the time, but | strike me now as various degrees of misguided and/or naive. | | See also the works of Ted Nelson for a similar vibe. | dredmorbius wrote: | * * * | cratermoon wrote: | > "Cluetrain" though seems far more like mush to me. | | Even after all these years, I have no real idea what Cluetrain | is about, other than "consumers now have an internet full of | information about products and services, companies will have to | change how they market and sell stuff" | hedgehog wrote: | That, and the idea that ordinary individuals have much closer | reach to a corporate marketing department than before. It all | seems sort of boring and obvious now but remember in the 90s | online shopping was mostly the digital equivalent to mail- | order catalogs, marketing was very one-way through major | media channels, etc, and stuff like the ideas in Cluetrain | were very far from mainstream at the time. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2023-07-03 23:01 UTC)