0:06 Essam, help me out! My phone's fried. I warned you that'd happen. Fine, what now? I won't wait till one of the kids gets up and buys one for me! You don't have to wait. The kids won't get up any time soon. I'll handle it myself. I'm thinking of buying a phone... a mobile phone for around 30 thousand, Manal, my wife. Have you lost it? Lost it? I'm bringing the ads right to us. Come look at this. What's this? It actually pulled up an ad for a 30-thousand-pound phone. That's because Facebook's algorithms are insane. They track what everyone's interested in, what they're searching for,
0:51 what they want. They listen to what they're saying, then they show them ads. And I'm using all that to my advantage. It really keeps showing me phone ads. I know! You're married to a genius. I know everything. Essam, then why are you getting ads for belly dance suits? I-I was just looking up regular suits...for work but the stupid algorithm thought I meant belly dance suits You know, sometimes the ads aren't accurate. Okay, and what about these flower ads? I was thinking of planting some flowers here to set the mood a little, you know? But you've never even thought of bringing me a flower. If I survive the night, I'll bring you tons of flowers, honey.
1:38 In the end, the flower's for you. Then why am I also seeing weird ads for apartments... for secret marriages? That's not meant for me. That's for my scumbag friend Maher. He's marrying a second wife. And Maher was also the one searching for the book 'How to Cheat on Your Wife and Make Friends'? No, I was the one searching for that book, because I was thinking of cutting ties with Maher, and I only wanted the "make friends" part of the book. And what's with these "professional marital infidelity tools"? Social media... is one big illusion. It destroys friendships, ruins relationships, and tears us apart. It makes us lost. Wake up, people! Wake up! Are you cheating on me, Essam?!
2:26 Manal, you've got it all wrong. This thing is stupid and glitches out. I would never cheat on you. Ok, then... I'm thinking of getting a cleaver, trash bags, and anti-fingerprint gloves, Essam, my husband. Don't listen to her! Hello dear viewers and welcome to a new episode of El-Daheeh. This time, my friend, you're the one who's taking me places, and off to 2025 we go. "Could we tone down the jokes and get to the point?" Alright, let me take you back to 2025 when a study by Global Web Index was published and it presents some terrifying statistics. The moment you pick up your phone and open any social media platform,
3:12 this study says you're one of 5.24 billion users worldwide. That's 64% of humanity, more than half the planet's population, all using this invention. And they don't just take a glance, my friend. Let me tell you that the average daily use of social media is no less than 2 hours and 21 minutes a day. These numbers prove that this isn't just another successful invention, but rather the most successful invention. It's the invention that's changing humanity. American author Erik Qualman sums it up by saying "Social media isn't a fad, it's a fundamental shift in the way we communicate." So far, so good. The invention is successful, its users keep growing. If someone just looked at those numbers without having ever used Facebook, they'd think its quality must be getting better and better, which is why more people keep using it,
3:57 making it even more successful. But in fact, it's the exact opposite. The quality is declining. If you compare Facebook now to the old days, the difference is huge. Remember when you'd open Facebook and see "Ghandour feels happy with 5 others" and random news feed stuff? It was all about your friends, relatives, and pages you'd actually chosen to follow, and things you genuinely cared about. Nothing was forced onto you on that platform whose whole purpose was connecting people, so users could see what they actually chose to see. Now, between every scroll and the next, there are ads, strangers, products you don't want, endless AI videos of potatoes yelling at you to put them in the air fryer instead of deep frying them. It's a random, annoying mess summed up by The Guardian writer, Tory Shepherd
4:44 who says it's now less likely that you find an old school friend on Facebook because Facebook has replaced them with an ad for Shein underwear. "So this happens to everyone? I thought it was just my timeline. I mean not finding old friends... Everyone's busy with his own life now." I watch your reels. All of them. That Facebook mess happens to us all. And it's not just on Facebook, it's all over the internet. So much so that in 2023, the American Dialect Society selected "enshittification" as Word of the Year. If I translated it to Arabic, YouTube might block the video. so let's call it platform decay. Defined in the dictionary as the gradual degradation in the quality of a service specifically that of an online platform. And according to Macquarie Dictionary, that word wasn't just named Word of the Year, it won People's Choice Award.
5:30 It captured how furious people are with social media and what it's become. To understand the story of Facebook and other platforms that decayed over time, why they ended up like this, and how they're still thriving despite it, we need to talk about the man who coined the term: Journalist Cory Doctorow, a technology-focused journalist who published a book in 2025 titled 'Enshittification', trying to answer all these questions. If we go back to the pre-Mark Zuckerberg era, everyone was on MySpace. If you remember it, congratulations, you're ancient. If you don't, it was basically Facebook's grandfather. At the time, it was owned by billionaire Rupert Murdoch and his giant media company. Truth is, MySpace was full of problems ads everywhere, creepy people, random scammers, hackers... basically, everyone was exposed.
6:17 So when Mark Zuckerberg showed up and started promoting Facebook, he used MySpace's weaknesses to his advantage. He promised everything would be better: "privacy is our first concern, a calm interface, no ads." If only we could see the future, a lot would've changed! And to make that switch easier, Mark created a tool that let users import their messages and friends from MySpace to Facebook with a single click. Back then, Facebook was still new and losing money. And as you know, in this day and age, any successful business has to spend a lot of cash early on to dominate the market first, then figure out profits later. That's how it went. Users started flocking in rapidly. By 2008, Facebook had reached the same number of users as MySpace. That's when investors noticed and poured money into Mark's business so he could create more features and attract more users.
7:04 Notice, my friend, that at that point, the biggest winner was you, the user. You were sitting back while billionaires fought each other to please you. Both funded by billionaires. In economic terms, the surplus value was flowing from investors to users. After that, Facebook turned to news outlets and brands, saying, "Everyone's already here, come post your news and products, and I'll show them to people for free. I'll give you real organic reach." Media companies and businesses loved hearing that, so they became completely dependent on Facebook to reach audiences. The platform became paradise for businesses. Websites found the whole thing insanely profitable, millions of followers from across the globe. So websites started publishing content directly on Facebook. This was the first phase of enshittification:
7:50 everyone was happy, users and business partners alike. B2B, B2C. Everyone was glad. B2V, not so much. Business-to-Venture...I came up with that. Ever since I joined the board, I've shown them no mercy. I ask for an Extraordinary General Meeting every other day. Anyway, investors were still burning cash, pampering users until they were fully hooked. Time to harvest all their efforts. Mark realized everyone was already hooked. Everyone was in his grip. Users couldn't leave the platform because all their friends are there. Businesses couldn't leave because all their customers were there too. So the platform played the long game.
8:37 That's the second phase of enshittification. The platform started eyeing the money of publishers and businesses who posted ads. Mark started tweaking the algorithm that decides who sees what and when, so the surplus value that once benefited users would now benefit publishers and businesses instead. Facebook started believing that branded content and pages mattered far more than updates from your actual friends. What good is knowing Mohamed doesn't likes FRIENDS? Take a look at company ads instead. Learn something useful like...Shein underwear prices perhaps. "But why are companies doing this to us? Why don't they just stop it?!" It's very likely that you, me, and the companies are all victims here. Mark isn't prioritizing companies' interests over yours, he sees you and the companies as customers. He's trying to keep them hooked, so they become fully dependent on him.
9:24 To do that, he needs to collect as much data about us as possible, legally or illegally, it doesn't matter. Everything Facebook once criticized MySpace for doing, it eventually did the same, one way or another: data collection, surveillance, all of it. Sam Altman's doing the same thing. "We won't show ads." Oh, surely they will. "It's a non-profit company." Like hell it is. There's no such thing as a non-profit company. If a company can make money, it's a for-profit one. A non-profit company is simply one that can't make money so they say, "We're a non-profit." They all worship the bucks. Anyway, Mark realized he had an advantage over traditional advertising. Normally, ads pop up to everyone. You might print 5,000 flyers and only get one customer out of them. If you sell women's products, with every billboard you put up, 50% of the people aren't interested. You're reaching the wrong audience. Facebook realized this was its superpower.
10:12 They don't just know the users' gender, they know what country they're in, what neighborhood they live in, what they're like, their habits and interests. So companies can advertise on the platform, and ensure the ads reach the target audience. For example, a company selling weight loss products would go to Facebook and specify who they want to reach, the gender and the age range. Basically, the company's wish is Facebook's command: "I want my customers to be women, between 25 and 34, living in Nasr City, single, posting lots of selfies, so we know they care about their looks, and who have been lately been sharing videos about diet plans. Preferably, they should have that 'I'll change my life tomorrow' kind of mindset." And Mark says, "Here you go, the target audience you requested." Mark became a mediator, a liaison between anyone trying to market for something
11:03 and anyone looking to buy that product. Then, Mark started filling your newsfeed with ads for products you had barely even thought about. And instead of being the platform built for you to connect with friends, it became a tool to make money for shareholders. But as you know, what goes around comes around. Once Mark realized companies had become completely dependent on Facebook, he activated the toll gate mode. "Want people to see your content? Pay up! Want to convert your personal account into a business account? Sure. But now the deal is simple: Pay, and your content gets seen. Don't pay, and you get no reach." And followers became just like age, just a number. That's why we started seeing that glowing blue "Boost Post" button. Mark's basically saying, "Why are you being stingy with your brilliant words? If I could write something this great, I would've written it in letters of gold. Spend some money, man. Promote it. People should know! Let them know how much you prefer winter to summer!"
11:49 Little by little, Mark kept replacing organic reach with sponsored posts. And now, welcome to the third and final stage of enshittification. In stage three, the surplus value moves further away from the users and is devoted solely to shareholders. Anyone holding Meta stock is the beneficiary. They're the ones being served. RIP screen slaves. This is where we see the effects of enshittification on everyone else. Advertisers and users alike become tools for one purpose: raising the stock price. That's what matters most. Facebook's profit in 2025 was $60 billion. At this point, you might ask an obvious question: "If that's really how it works, and they're still providing a shitty service, why don't we just leave?" Well, my friend, I'd like to introduce you to an important term:
12:35 Switching Costs. Mark Zuckerberg built a very tall wall around us. If you delete Facebook today, you don't just lose an account. You lose photos, memories, old messages from people you may never speak to again. You lose contact with people who won't know how to reach you. Sometimes, you even lose groups and connections that could help you find work. So most of us are stuck. "We could all unite, move somewhere else together, and just like Mark imported MySpace users, some enlightened genius in Silicon Valley could build the next big thing." But there's a problem. Surely you've tried organizing a simple outing and faced a problem called Getting everyone coordinated and moving to a new platform requires almost impossible levels of coordination.
13:21 Anyone who's ever suggested a group outing in a WhatsApp or Facebook group knows exactly how that story ends. Six people see it, and only one person reacts with an annoying emoji praying to God knows what. "Come on, man, let's hang out." If your friends are in, you'll probably be the one canceling the whole night. We're all on Facebook, because...we're all on Facebook. This is called the Network Effect. And of course, none of this happened naturally. As we were getting used to Facebook, Facebook was actively trying to reduce competition. Mark heard your idea about that bright young Silicon Valley kid. And he remembered very well what he did to MySpace. So now the policy is simple: No new company gets access to your photos or memories on Facebook. Your content stays on Facebook. Taking it elsewhere is considered an intellectual property violation.
14:06 "Sure, they're your photos, and your content, but it's my platform, and I let you in for free." "So, Abo Hmeed, does that mean Facebook will turn into a deserted place and eventually a new generation with different preferences will come along, encouraging us to leave it for something else?" Well, my friend, the answer is no. Facebook's algorithm tries to keep you just short of your pain point. In simpler terms, it never pushes you all the way. It keeps going until the moment you're about to snap, then backs off just enough. They're testing how bad the service can get while still retaining just enough value to keep you coming back. The best proof of that is that you still use it. Even if there are apps you like more than Facebook, Facebook has placed itself at the center between users like you, content creators like me, and advertisers trying to sell things.
14:54 Facebook benefits from everyone. "Yes, Abo Hmeed, I know that saying: 'If you're not paying for the product, then you're the product.'" Exactly. Who taught you that? "Facebook, of course. Oh, you're right! That's enshittification! What exactly do you want from us, Mark?" Unfortunately, my friend, the problem isn't Mark or Facebook. You might learn later that the problem is in El-Daheeh. After all, El-Daheeh has network effects too. It's not about Facebook. It's capitalism. Listen to me, I'm starting to sound like you. When a company has the power to monopolize, it usually does. It's a world of sharks out there. Look at the bigger picture. Take Amazon for instance. It went through the same stages of enshittification. In the first stage, it burned cash and offered services almost at the cost price, with little or no profit, just to be cheap and attract users.
15:40 Discounts, offers, slap a color on any Friday and get a deal, next-day and same-day deliveries, Noon used to have them delivered in 15 minutes! Up to this point, customers and advertisers were happy. All was well. Then came stage two. Amazon started favoring advertisers. Brands that pay get promoted, even if higher-rated products exist. The seller's interests began to outweigh the customer's interests. Amazon is no longer a neutral middleman. Then came stage three. Amazon started making its own products. Those products might even be of lower quality, but now Amazon has to promote its products instead of competitors'. You can end up getting lost while searching for what you actually want. And honestly, most people don't search very thoroughly. They just pick what pops up first. Amazon even started adding junk fees: Extra charges that suddenly appear when you're already at checkout.
16:25 You've already chosen the product, and want it. The product is for 2,000, but those extra fees add up to a total of 4,000, no biggie. What are you so upset for? That's nothing. Don't be so cheap! Now, look at Google, the internet king. You'll find the same pattern. Stage one: by far the best search engine around. Stage two: ads started appearing before search results. They keep making it harder to tell what's actually an ad and what isn't. Tiny labels, barely noticeable. Websites then have to play the SEO game, use the tricks needed to rank higher in search. Then came stage three, where everything fell apart. Google stopped caring about you and the websites. Instead, it takes content from websites, summarizes it in a box, which is Gemini that gives you the full answer right there on the search page without you ever opening the site. If it were the other way around,
17:11 you wouldn't have heard the end of the copyright fuss. OpenAI was furious when it learned DeepSeek had been learning from their language models. Well, where did you get those models in the first place? From human knowledge of course! And that's very dangerous because when websites lose traffic, they'll shut down. So no new content gets made. And when there's no new content, Google ends up summarizing its own summaries. Then we'll enter a loop of outdated information and digital nonsense. And no matter how hard you try to find an exception to the rule, save it because they all follow enshittification. The same thing applies to Twitter, now X, and TikTok, which is now American-owned. -Wanna know an even bigger one? -"No body shaming, please!" I meant a bigger problem, my friend. Don't take it personally. This issue has grown beyond platforms and the internet. It's spreading to most things that rely on computers or anything that use chips to be connected to the internet. Places like Whole Foods and Amazon replaced price tags with digital screens.
18:00 That's phase one: impressing you with clean electronic displays. "That's an ecosystem. We're all about sustainability. No more paper waste." Then phase two begins: the betrayal. The price for a canned tuna says 50 on the screen, as you reach for it, it suddenly jumps to 70. "The Fed got the tuna?" Well, companies will start using AI to change prices thousands of times a day, trying to find the highest price you'd be willing to pay for that product before you decide it's too much and walk away. And eventually, prices may no longer be based on supply and demand alone. They could be based on who you are and how much money you have. The system studies you. If the system knows you're in a hurry, it'll charge you more. If it knows you're well-off and will buy the products, no matter how expensive it'll charge you extra. You'll have probably agreed to that in the terms and conditions no one reads! I wish to live and see the day you actually read those terms and conditions.
18:46 If you found any violations, you won't do a thing. You know how much an international call costs? And this isn't limited to tech companies. If you're lucky enough to buy a BMW or a Mercedes, you'll discover that the car isn't truly a full option one unless you pay more. For example, the seat heaters feat... "Sounds great, Abo Hmeed. You know, I used to warm up the seat some other way... And for free. You bought the car with the seat heater feature, and driver-assist systems as well, congrats. After all, you already paid for them, it's a full options car. But there's a condition to having access to them: a monthly subscription. It is a full options car. It has the features. But in order to enjoy them, you have to pay. Since the car is connected to the internet,
19:31 the company can remotely enable the enshittification. "Abo Hmeed, that's not realistic. If I could afford a Tesla, I wouldn't mind paying a subscription." It's not just cars, my friend. Look at the printer you have. Many printers won't work unless you're using ink from the manufacturer's brand. If you try to be slick and buy a cheaper third-party kind, like those who fill the water dispenser with tap water, the printer will catch that different ink you used. It'll block you out, "Sorry boss, not printing today. I don't feel like printing today." -Ready for another surprise? -"Hit me." I did as I was told. -"What was that, Abo Hmeed?" -My very own enshittification. It's the natural progression. At first, I burned cash, posted on my own channel and built an audience. Then I improved the content to attract sponsors, ads, and platforms.
20:17 Eventually, I dominated YouTube and content creation. No new faces can break through anymore. Everyone just gives up and watches El-Daheeh. Insurance, telecommunications and electronics companies want to advertise, sure. Then comes phase three: Enjoy. "Stop it, Abo Hmeed. You're being silly. You're comparing yourself to Mark and Jeff Bezos? You're not even close to them. Now, finish the episode." -Where was I? -"A surprise, you funny man. Just carry on, I beg you." Oh yeah, I remember. I was about to give you another example of products getting worse over time. There's a smart bassinet called Snoo. Parents pay around $1,700 for it. Because it's a smart crib. It has features that rock the baby and help them sleep. After people had bought the crib that costs a fortune,
21:04 the company decides to take away those perks. The features that came with the crib suddenly required a $20 monthly subscription. If you don't pay, the smart crib becomes a crib, nothing more than a wooden frame with a mattress, not worth $1,700. The company just sits there waiting for your $20 payment every month to reactivate the feature. Sometimes a company sells you a service-dependent product, and after you'd bought, let's say the car, the company goes bankrupt. You'd be paying a subscription for a non existing company. You're stuck with it. -"No after-sale service?" -There wasn't any service before sale! The whole world is ripping you off. Don't turn into a smarty-pants when it comes to that innocent L.L.C. "Now, Abo Hmeed, what should we do? Is it too late to fight the enshittification?
21:50 Have all services become...well...shitty?" I have the solution, my friend. One word: The fediverse is a blend of the words "Federation" and "Universe." And it's not a product. It's closer to what we call a protocol. A protocol is a set of rules that different parties agree on so they can communicate with one another. The simplest example is email. If you use Hotmail and I use Gmail, we can still exchange messages. There's no such thing as "Gmail users can only message Gmail users." But that's exactly how WhatsApp works: you can only chat with other WhatsApp users. Facebook content is visible only to Facebook users. So the obvious question becomes: Why can't Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube work more like the email where anyone on whichever platform can view anyone else's content,
22:38 and even interact with it? "That's actually a brilliant idea. You should join Alabakera show." That's not my thing. I just pass the knowledge along, forward the information. It's not just a theory. It's an already existing protocol. There are already many applications using this approach. If you've heard of Mastodon or Lemmy, they aren't merely competitors. They're part of the federation. These platforms consist of thousands of independent servers. Those servers use a protocol called ActivityPub, which allows everyone to communicate with each other, just like email protocols. "And how does that solve enshittification? It's all I can think about." It takes away the platform's biggest weapon: keeping users trapped inside. Imagine having actual means to leave Facebook,
23:23 where you can take your data, your photos, and followers with you to another platform without losing contact with anyone. Once a company knows you can leave at any moment, it'll start playing nice and treating you better. It'll stop bombarding you with annoying ads. In short, when monopolies disappear, competition returns to platforms, and the competitive edge will go to those who provide the best service to users. Bring back the great market, the invisible hand, and all those ideas that would make Adam Smith happy. Let's make the old economists proud. Remember when they used to say "the customer is always right"? Why isn't that a thing anymore? But here's the important question: what would force Facebook to adopt this protocol? Facebook itself hasn't yet, but Threads, owned by Meta, has joined this protocol. And that was a very important step,
24:09 because everything you're used to on social media now has a free alternative supported by donations instead of ads. If you're looking for a Twitter alternative for micro-blogging, there's Mastodon, and platforms like Pleroma and Misskey. If you're looking for an Instagram alternative for photo sharing, there's PixelFed. It has the same interface but without its algorithms. A YouTube alternative for video hosting is PeerTube. You can upload your videos and no one can take them down randomly. A Reddit alternative for link sharing is Lemmy. It's open to discussions from different communities. This has become so significant that even giants like Meta's Threads have started experimenting with the fediverse. They've already begun allowing some public profiles to interact with ActivityPub. Which means that even the big companies and the corporate giants are starting to realize that the future may lie in open networks,
24:55 not the digital prisons they've kept us locked inside for years. But keep in mind, my friend, that when giant corporations start exploring that federation idea, like Threads for example, it's not because they've suddenly become kindhearted, or had a moral awakening. It's simply because the idea has become powerful, and these companies are smart and experienced. They see that this could very well become the future reality. That federation can be the future of the market. They aren't joining these protocols to throw in the towel, they're joining to explore and see how they can profit from them. The goal isn't for Facebook to come down from its throne, and unwillingly join the fediverse. The goal is to minimize the chances of a Facebook-like situation ever happening again. We want a world governed by protocols, so we're not betting on the good of the giant,
25:42 but we're making sure that won't happen again. Instead of social platforms being like a land we rent from a landlord, we want to achieve web socialism, with all platforms available to everyone, with shared rules that assure we can leave whenever we want. That way, if a platform starts mistreating you, you can take your friends and leave. That's when we will be set free from that billionaire who woke up one morning, realized he owns Twitter, and decided to rename it X, or that other billionaire who forces everyone to write in gibberish lest we upset his precious criteria. Every platform on the fediverse has its own algorithm. It's your call. If you like the algorithms, enjoy the platform. If not, don't waste your time. You can easily pack up your data and go elsewhere. That's when the great companies will bend over backwards to please you. "But Abo Hmeed, let me ask you: can the fediverse actually succeed?
26:27 Or is this gonna end up like environmental and feminist conferences? You know...they say they got a list of recommendations everyone ignores later, while patting themselves on the back for holding the conference and enjoying the buffet. Then comes Mr. Trump and overturns these recommendations." That, my friend, is the million-dollar question. Zuckerberg has probably left after hearing that figure. So how do we know whether the fediverse can actually work? As always, answers about the future are usually found in history. Facebook itself rose because people eventually got tired of MySpace and jumped at the mention of a better alternative. Today we're putting up with Facebook's problems, but efforts to build alternatives continue every day, despite Facebook's fierce resistance. The European Union has been introducing new regulations in the cadre of
27:14 and obligates platforms that want to do business there to follow certain protocols. For example, they forced Apple to switch from Lightning to USB-C connectors, in a great victory for every phone shop around the block. And perhaps the most encouraging thing is what's known as the Lindy Effect or, in other terms, old is gold. For immortal things like ideas, books, and technologies, their expected lifespan increases the longer they've already survived. A book that's been in print for 50 years will likely remain around for another 50 years. But a trend that's only been around for a week will probably disappear the following week. I can list all the trends of the moment, but they'll be irrelevant shortly. Today, what connects us to the internet are platforms. The platforms we use today are all relatively new.
28:01 They appear, grow, and eventually die, only to be replaced by something else. But what's been around for more than 50 years is email Email has survived till now not because it's a platform, but because it's a protocol. It's not owned by a single company. Still, don't get too optimistic. The fediverse could very much fail. The fediverse needs servers, storage spaces and bandwidth. It also needs moderation, technical support, spam control, etc. And the biggest question in history, for anyone trying to build anything: who's going to pay for all this? Who's going to fund it? If the money comes from donors, it isn't reliable. They can withdraw at any time. If it has subscriptions, why would people leave a free product for it? And if it comes from advertising, then we're back to square one. If funding comes from a giant corporation
28:47 claiming it wants to support young minds, rest assured it won't stay generous for long. Sooner or later, it will show its true face. And that soft takeover of the protocol will always remain a possibility. And of course, current platforms are actively fighting the fediverse. Even when Mark Zuckerberg made Threads compatible, it probably wasn't out of goodwill. He was applying the Triple E strategy: Join the game, gain influence, then change the rules to serve his own interests, sly like a wolf in sheep's clothing. Imagine watching a game when suddenly the players on the opposing team switched to jerseys identical to yours. At the end of the game, the ref called off the match and announced the other team as the winner. "Abo Hmeed, translate this paragraph into Arabic." Here's an example. In the mid '90s, there was a browser called Netscape. It was the shark of the internet world.
29:33 It dominated the web. So what did Microsoft do? Embrace. Test the waters. That's good. Then, they introduced a browser you're familiar with, Internet Explorer. If you went on it right now, you'll find news of a rising star: Frank Sinatra, and a new James Cameron movie called Titanic that'll be a great hit. At that time, both browsers supported the same web language. That's how Microsoft entered the game. Then started stage two: Extend. Microsoft added its own codes, ActiveX. The codes made websites look better on Internet Explorer alone. Stage three: Extinguish. They connected their old browser to Windows, the operating system running on 90% of the world's computers at the time. All that was for free. "I never liked Mark Zuckerberg. I was glad Jeff Bezos had to pay that huge alimony.
30:19 I like Bill Gates. He's kind and respectable. I've been living off his cracks and serial numbers for ages." You're so naive! You think you get these cracks to enjoy the service for free? Companies do that so you get used to their programs. You get that free service to get hooked. So when you work at a firm, it has to pay for that subscription. You wanna convince me they don't know what you're doing? Nor can they lock you out? Microsoft did the same with Netscape. Over time, Microsoft marginalized Netscape People forgot all about it. All that was revealed in the U.S. Department of Justice's interrogations. Some sources, though unreliable, say that Bill Gates cried during the interrogations because they wanted to split his company. "They wanted to separate Micro from Soft?" The fediverse won't replace Facebook overnight. It will probably exist as a strong alternative,
31:06 a great option to those who're sick of the algorithm’s grip. Just as email survived, although it could've been replaced, the fediverse will survive as a protocol that guarantees we won't be slaves to one company. True success doesn't lie in dominating, but in making it easier to break free from large platforms. That is enough to make these companies respect users since losing you is a very probable risk. The open web isn't a trend. It is the cornerstone of the internet. Last but not least, don't forget to watch the old episodes and the new ones. Check the sources below and subscribe if you're on YouTube. Check out other programs as well from time to time to know why you love this program. See you, my friend. "Hold on, Abo Hmeed. Where's the joke?" Well, you need to pay a subscription for that, $20 a month. In a couple of months, I'll only upload one episode a week.
31:52 "Damn you, Abo Hmeed, you greedy man!"
