Public Service Internet monthly newsletter (June 2026)

Hands surround a white man's head while one of his own hands cover part of his saden face

We live in incredible times with such possibilities that is clear. Although its easily dismissed seeing the problems with single sign onGoogle chrome forcefully downloading 4gig of a LLM and why on earth is meta smart glasses selling so well, despite privacy worries?

To quote Buckminster Fuller “You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.

You are seeing aspects of this with the dailyshow solve a male loneliness battleKindle owners jail breaking their devices and Flickr.org proving death is not a edge case.


The fed up partners of AI workers

Ian thinks: Although the piece about the wives of AI skilled workers Wired magazine makes clear the wider sad effect of everything centring around AI, is causing huge problems for partners, friendships and families. The domination of AI in every conversation is something I have noticed more and more. Sad times indeed.

Wrapped in optimistic from Doctorow?

Ian thinks: This piece titled comrade trump sums up a lot of the points have made about the Trump effect. Of course, its all side effects of some of the worst political policy’s in decades (it can be argued). But Cory and others are right, this disruption to the order does provide a green light for public value alternatives. Also worth watching Cory from Republica this year which touches on these these themes.

AI likely won’t cure cancer any time soon

Ian thinks: One of the biggest claims about AI is it will solve cancer. This episode breaks down the claims and puts everything in perspective. The idea of AI solving cancer gets thrown around a lot and its not just a lie but also takes resources away from existing efforts which shocked me.

The Fediverse built a bigger tent

Ian thinks: I didn’t get much time to be involved in this years Fediforum but Laurens, covered the event and pulls some good ties between it and 2mr.social. The interesting point is how its become a bigger tent for much more than the technology of the activitypub. Having the green party give a keynote and even larger conversations about sovereignty from American traditional social media; is a clear sign of maturity.

Ai psychosis one of many stories

Ian thinks: This is one so many true stories of the ongoing problem of AI psychosis. Its unreal but so dangerous. The analysis afterwards is good but doesn’t go into enough depth. You might look at it and shrug but the recent research isnt looking good either, with AI frying our brains in other ways.

The market certainly will not solve everything

Ian thinks: With the insanity of predication markets comes a crypto driven site called Dare market. Its exactly like Black Mirror’s common people. But comes from the madness of the memecoin era when people would do outrageous things to convince people to buy their memecoins. A time of corruption, foolishness and rug pulls.

Are you paying attention to the words coming out of my mouth?

Ian thinks: 404 interview the highly rated Natasha Dow Schüll, who’s excellent book Addicted by design, I quote a lot. Its great to see how relevant her book is during social media addiction then and now prediction markets. If you haven’t read her book go do it! I also noticed a lot uptick in this space with Mozillatech wont save us and even Jon Oliver talking about prediction markets (not available outside the USA, so here is a reaction video).

Jumping on the European sovereignty bandwagon

Ian thinks: When W Social jumped into the limelight and claimed to be the only European social network to fill a void. Many of us couldn’t believe what we were seeing. Elena’s uncovering post cuts the cord on the whole shambles which is W Social and is a clear reminder to work together not alone in darkness.

Designing for after the feed

Ian thinks: The New_public live events are always worth watching even before I started working for them. Tackling the AI monster with human and public thoughts is a good start for a conversation about a future most of us would rather make happen.

How I Became an Apocaloptimist?

Ian thinks: I recently watched the full titled  AI Doc: Or How I Became an Apocaloptimist. Watching with my partner and friends raised an interesting discussion. The AI doc really tears down the binary wall of AI boosters and doomers, with some practical suggestions we can all do.


Like this newsletter? Find the monthly archive here

Misunderstanding dating apps from a far

"i saw you on tinder" Trastevere 2014

Tinder, tinder, Bloody Tinder!

Even now people keep going on about Tinder…

In the past I have been pretty down on Tinder and to be fair I still am, but its true people do meet, hit it off and even get married via Tinder. Of course I say the Birthday paradox is in play.

dating-against-humanity-48-638

The thing I keep hearing from people (usually in relationships) is tinder IS dating apps. When I tell them there is a new dating app/service every month, they never believe me. At a party on the weekend I tried to put into words why I use OkCupid and recommend other services over Tinder (yes I know they are owned by the same people).

The point I made is that unless you both swipe right, you can’t talk or get to know each other. Thats ignoring the fact men are more likely to swipe right, profiles are mainly pictures with little text and you can’t see the next person (grass is always greener beyond the swipe) unless you make a decision one way or another (gamification).

I insist the system of tinder encourages or even dictates playful interactions. This is fine if you like playing but not ideal if not. Its clear people are using Tinder to fill their time when bored or playing around with friends.

The tinder/hot or not system is setup that way, and the human behaviour follows suit. Don’t get me wrong, sometimes it can work the other way but Tinder is strongly built with this mentality in mind. I am reminded of addiction by design, simple as this – tinder is built to maximum shallow activity. There’s no other way around that unless you pay them money.

Other services have similar systems (OkCupid has likes, POF has meetme, etc) but each one of theses have the ability to just see a user and message them. This subverts the tinder behavior but requires more effort like getting over your fear of rejection.

The key point I’m making is each service is different and requires a different way to look at it. For example Bumble although it does have the hot or not dynamic, the system is set up to give the women the control. As a result the behavior of the users is quite different?

It’s a mistake to think of Tinder as the de-facto dating app. It would be like thinking McDonalds was the de-facto of restaurants from those who are vegan!

Now that’s one scary thought, I think we would all agree?

I won’t even dig into why all these people with partners always want to get wrapped up in their single friends lives? Thats best left alone…