Internet - too much, too fast, too unreliable?

  • Thread starter Evo
  • Start date
  • #26
22,089
3,289
Would it be wrong to hope that the last three disappeared?
No, it is my wish too :biggrin:
 
  • #27
100
1
I'm not sure how this relates but I think there should be more public intellectuals such as Chomsky, or back in the day Russell.

Fortunately we have Dawkins, Dennett, and obviously Chomsky.
internet was my intro to Chomsky.

don't know Dennett. think Dawkins is little more than an evangelical.
 
  • #28
100
1
Would it be wrong to hope that the last three disappeared?
i guess you haven't heard about google+

as for "shutting down the internet", isn't the gov able to remove names from the DNS registry?

i suspect that they can also pull most of the big guys down with just a phone call, too.
 
  • #29
6,265
1,280
Then I stop and realize that I'm sitting at my computer with dozens and dozens of news stories from around the world, that just happened within the last few minutes.
Back before the internet I went through a period where I read the newspaper every day. I was never so worked up about the insanity of the times as during that period.

Simply paying attention to the news makes you crazy. The bulk of the stories will be meaningless a year later.

When something really important happens everyone talks about it, so you're not in danger of missing any big news.
 
  • #30
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,213
177
When something really important happens everyone talks about it, so you're not in danger of missing any big news.
What about before something important happens? Do you vote retroactively?
 
  • #31
6,265
1,280
What about before something important happens? Do you vote retroactively?
I don't sweat elections much. I vote by party.
 
  • #32
Pengwuino
Gold Member
4,989
16
My influence is spreading.
 
  • #33
phyzguy
Science Advisor
4,650
1,586
It seems to me that, in addition to the things mentioned here, the internet (and the large number of cable TV stations) is also contributing to the very polarized attitudes we have now, at least in the US. I think that before having access to all of these sites, people would read a few newspapers or watch a few television stations for their news reports. These gave a relatively balanced approach to the news. Now, people seem to only get information from the sites that agree with them, and are only rarely exposed to an alternate viewpoint. In the past, I don't think political opinions were so highly polarized as they are today, and this may be the reason. Does anyone else feel this way?
 
  • #34
BobG
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
185
81
It seems to me that, in addition to the things mentioned here, the internet (and the large number of cable TV stations) is also contributing to the very polarized attitudes we have now, at least in the US. I think that before having access to all of these sites, people would read a few newspapers or watch a few television stations for their news reports. These gave a relatively balanced approach to the news. Now, people seem to only get information from the sites that agree with them, and are only rarely exposed to an alternate viewpoint. In the past, I don't think political opinions were so highly polarized as they are today, and this may be the reason. Does anyone else feel this way?
In the past, you probably interacted mostly with people you knew personally and most of you probably had similar backgrounds. There were probably only a few of your friends that had radically different views from yours, yet had enough other positive things about them that you still hung around them.

Even in situations where you would be most likely to encounter people with radically different views, such as school or a bar for example, it probably took a lot to get them to really forcefully spout off all of their views when they're interacting with people in person.

I think polarized political opinions are just a lot more obvious today.

Of course, the side effect is that making those polarized opinions more obvious makes it easier to form and organize polarized groups and the result is politicians that are more polarized than they have been in the past.
 
  • #35
184
1
internet was my intro to Chomsky.
Glad to hear that. Usually it's pourn that gets intro'd. Poor children, oversexed and underphuqed. Non sequiter you might say, but it is true.

don't know Dennett. think Dawkins is little more than an evangelical.
Dawkins has good reason to be angry.
 

Related Threads on Internet - too much, too fast, too unreliable?

  • Last Post
Replies
10
Views
611
  • Last Post
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
14
Views
684
  • Last Post
Replies
18
Views
10K
  • Last Post
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
32
Views
17K
  • Last Post
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • Last Post
Replies
14
Views
4K
Top