Jump to content

The Internet is Dying - Is It Worth Saving?


RealMarkDeneen
 Share

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, JJkizak said:

The You Tube car repair videos are fascinating.

JJK

The YouTube Travel and live-cams are also amazing! I have virtually walked, hiked, biked, and taken trams, trains, and buses to places I've been before which brings back incredible memories. Heck, I have bookmarked 6 live-cams in Amsterdam alone! 😮

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Marvel said:

The internet is more like a living/breathing public library (I still like libraries).

 

Juxtaposed to Mark's criticism, I'd say the Internet is life, itself.  Live it.  Do good with it. 

 

You are given the power to help millions of people with a fraction of the effort it would have taken 50 years ago.

 

Of course, there are also the devils out there, using it as a tool to exploit more efficiently than they could before.

 

Would you rather cede your ability to help people because of the devils?  If so, the devils win.

 

God puts it out there.  What you do from there is who you are.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/2/2022 at 3:21 AM, Marvel said:

The internet is more like a living/breathing public library filled with playboy, Cosmopolitan and popular mechanics magazines (I still like libraries).

 

yeah, pretty much this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Change Paradox

 

Polls consistently tell us that nearly everyone wants “change,” and yet change rarely comes. When it does come, it consistently involves “something more” and almost never “something less.” New features can be added to civilization, but rarely subtracted from the status quo. Subtraction is intolerable.

 

This paradox pretty much explains why there is no meaningful reaction yet to "environmental destruction coupled with climate change" that is leading to mass extinction. Mankind will embrace change by ADDITION, but consistently reject change by REDUCTION. That is apparently why all the current CC actions involve intense additions to industrialization and no reductions of industrialization.

 

Is it reasonable to therefore assume from this paradox that all manifested phenomena are positive, and never negative? TV? Robots? Air Travel? Nuclear Bombs? Internet? Smartphones? Self-driving cars? Bioweapons? Mega-Yachts? Dams? Sugary Drinks? Uber? AirBnB? This would mean all material implementation was good for humanity and never harmful. But then, that begs the question, how have we come so close to destroying the Earth if all change is positive?

 

It's hard to square that circle.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's too much worry about what everyone else wants.  If they want more cheese on their fries, learn to make peace with that.  There's still plenty of safe space left in the world if you just can't handle different wants and opinions. You can even exit the grid and be ignorantly blissful.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, RealMarkDeneen said:

Polls consistently tell us that nearly everyone wants “change,” and yet change rarely comes. When it does come, it consistently involves “something more” and almost never “something less.” New features can be added to civilization, but rarely subtracted from the status quo. Subtraction is intolerable.

I'll tell you where I saw change geared towards "less" and that was on Facebook. I joined in December 2016 and about a year later they started a campaign to keep false information from circulating on there...before then folks (and bots) shared alot of crap that wasn't true.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Woofers and Tweeters said:

This thread makes me wonder why we focus in on the doom and gloom when we are young and as we age, and what can we do about it. 

Not me. I'm an optimist although I do see things in terms of peaks and valleys in our existence....Getting back to the internet, I do think trends are going in the right direction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Zen Traveler said:

Not me. I'm an optimist although I do see things in terms of peaks and valleys in our existence....Getting back to the internet, I do think trends are going in the right direction.

There needs to be a change. The search engines and social sites keep us in echo rooms and delivers information that "they" want to promote as facts, even when they're not facts or even what  information that we were seeking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Woofers and Tweeters said:

There needs to be a change. The search engines and social sites keep us in echo rooms and delivers information that "they" want to promote as facts, even when they're not facts or even what  information that we were seeking.

I dunno about that.  Actual "facts" are facts in the Information Age we live in. I also trust sources that actually have responsible Editors involved and have to abide with FCC Regulations. I admit there are problems with algorithms that are troublesome, but as I mentioned above they are trying to make changes on some platforms. As of now these are free market platforms although I do see areas where it may be prudent for government intervention. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Zen Traveler said:

I dunno about that.  Actual "facts" are facts in the Information Age we live in. I also trust sources that actually have responsible Editors involved and have to abide with FCC Regulations. I admit there are problems with algorithms that are troublesome, but as I mentioned above they are trying to make changes on some platforms. As of now these are free market platforms although I do see areas where it may be prudent for government intervention. 

Yes, facts are facts. Maybe you didn't catch how I said "they".

All too often, the information that is mooed is not facts, but many accept it as fact. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Woofers and Tweeters said:

Yes, facts are facts. Maybe you didn't catch how I said "they".

All too often, the information that is mooed is not facts, but many accept it as fact. 

I can dig it. That's why I always say pay attention to the actual players and official sources and not the pundits or internet opinion. I also think/stated those that have to abide by FCC Regulations and have fact-checking editors have more credibility. Otoh, if they are always in court for promoting falsehoods those need to be avoided.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Internet: Do you act upon it, or is it acting upon you? Is it your tool, or are you its tool?

 

Where did the formation capital come from? In which direction does the wealth (ROI) flow?

 

Who formulates the operational and structural rules of use?

 

Do you consume it, or are you the product being consumed?

 

Is it gloomy to ponder the question, or gloomy to ignore it?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, RealMarkDeneen said:

The Internet: Do you act upon it, or is it acting upon you? Is it your tool, or are you its tool?

My guess both, but I don't purposefully engage or give reviews. On Facebook I'm real surprised I don't get many ads and unwanted content. YouTube is my goto entertainment source and I watch mostly Travel videos along with educational religious material--that is where I see most of the target ads including from Klipsch.

 

26 minutes ago, RealMarkDeneen said:

 

Where did the formation capital come from? In which direction does the wealth (ROI) flow?

Dunno but I don't pay for it.

26 minutes ago, RealMarkDeneen said:

 

Who formulates the operational and structural rules of use?

I'm pretty sure Google and Facebook. 

26 minutes ago, RealMarkDeneen said:

 

Do you consume it, or are you the product being consumed?

Again, both but within my comfort level and pleasure.

26 minutes ago, RealMarkDeneen said:

 

Is it gloomy to ponder the question, or gloomy to ignore it?

 

For me? Neither. Fwiw, I joined Facebook to discuss politics and sadly found others don't. One of the evidently changed dynamics there is they no longer are a majority of American's prime "News" sources whereas 6 years ago they seemed to be. That's my take...

 

Btw, I also like Google Maps for a myriad of reasons but realize some entity is tracking me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Zen Traveler said:

My guess both, but I don't purposefully engage or give reviews. On Facebook I'm real surprised I don't get many ads and unwanted content. YouTube is my goto entertainment source and I watch mostly Travel videos along with educational religious material--that is where I see most of the target ads including from Klipsch.

 

Dunno but I don't pay for it.

I'm pretty sure Google and Facebook. 

Again, both but within my comfort level and pleasure.

For me? Neither. Fwiw, I joined Facebook to discuss politics and sadly found others don't. One of the evidently changed dynamics there is they no longer are a majority of American's prime "News" sources whereas 6 years ago they seemed to be. That's my take...

 

Btw, I also like Google Maps for a myriad of reasons but realize some entity is tracking me.

The "Police" have a song just for you called "Every where you walk I am watching you"

JJK

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/1/2022 at 8:39 AM, RealMarkDeneen said:

 

If I were able to plan my own last words, I'd probably choose something like this: "I wish I had seen the folly of it all when I wass 20 instead of 70."

 

On a related note, Joe Walsh put it pretty succinctly when he said, “I had a lot more fun being 20 in the Seventies than I’m having being 70 in the Twenties.”

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for the Internet and news, that raises lots more questions.

 

How does an individual at the end of the pipe - where news exits - validate the content?

Since the source of all this news content is for-profit companies, aren't they focused on producing the highest profit news at the expense of  the lowest, or unprofitable news? How does "profitability" intersect with your ranking of what is important to know about? The more effort a company puts into verifying a news story, the less profitable it becomes. Which way will they lean - towards more, or towards less profit?

 

Isn't news really just "gossip"? The foundation underlying most news "stories" is: "somebody said something." It's not like math or a scientific principle that can be tested independantly. It's a series of "claims" that are made by someone, and then regurgitated into the public bullhorn.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, RealMarkDeneen said:

How does an individual at the end of the pipe - where news exits - validate the content?

I consider the actual sources involved and/or where the info is coming from. Court documents, transcripts, and reports going through a known editorial process...Of course, there are speculative things that sometimes take time to come to fruition. Otoh, recognizing the difference between opinion, facts and entities with more historically reliable material goes a long way in my book. {Note: We also have access to real-time events thanks to the internet. }

 

One thing that Facebook did to clean up its act was to put an "i" link to see where the Information was coming from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...