I like most of this take. But I don't think that the google section hit all the marks.<p>> The PageRank algorithm measures the importance of each node within the graph, based on the number incoming relationships<p>Google search being "great" wrecked the fun of stumbling to the information. The only place where you still get some sense of the nostalgia of discovery is going down the rabbit hole on a topic on wikipedia. And though it's close, it's a bit sterile and contrived. The problem is as less of us cataloged the web the popularity contest didn't make sense... now we have 10 page articles for a recipe and that's sort of sad.
At the risk of sounding like a cryptobro, could we have something like a proof of work or a web of trust for posts?<p>So you could vote on if you think something was authored by a human? At least the cost for a spam post would not be virtually zero like now.<p>I'm sure people have thought about this, are there any viable solutions?