The internet?

[Ben No.3]

With all happening, we see the many faces of the internet. It appears everything has two sides:

-Anonymity and fearlessness of persecution

-Access to all information and constant flow of misinformation

-The pushing of start ups (for example through kick starter) and the total dominance of a few companies

-A political tool for the people directly and huge heavily funded campaigns, and of course even terrorist organisations

-The biggest anarchic experiment and the most tools to create total conformity between customer and company

 

And so on and so on...

 

The question is of course how are we to handle the Internet? Should we ban misinformation? Should we allow internet tracking? Should we force the biggest internet companies to split up, breaking their monopolies?

And so on and so on....

 

Essentially, the question we have to face is what we want the internet to be and who we want in control of it.

[Guard Dog]

I say we shut the whole thing down. Think about it. If you woke up tomorrow and there is no internet then:

• We'll be much more productive at work. I don't know about all of you but I waste at least an hour a day just reading what you guys are up to.
• There will be rewards for the actual accumulation of knowledge in your head again. We have the answer to every question from "How many centimeters is 12 inches" to "How do I build an atomic bomb" right in our pocket. You don't even need the Mr. Know-it-All guys around anymore. 
• Encyclopedia salesman will be a valid career choice again!
• You whiny little b-----s will have to learn how to use a library, card catalogue, a micro-fiche machine, and the Dewey f-----g Decimal system  if you want to learn something. Muah ha ha! Now you will know pain!
• When was the last time one of you actually wrote a letter? Better dust off the old stationary box! Plus the pen and ink people will get more business.
• Newspapers and the mainstream media will have the monopoly on political discourse again. They will be happy about that.
• Pornography will be left to the professionals again, not three teenagers with a cell phone camera and no idea what they are doing.

 

I could go on but I think I've laid out a convincing argument here. The internet must die!

 

Opinions paid for by the Association of Unemployed Encyclopedia Salesmen and do not necessarily reflect those of Guard Dog.

Edited February 27, 2017 by Guard Dog

[Heijoushin]

Dude, that's heavy topic.

 

Should we ban misinformation?

No.

a) Who decides what's "misinformation"?

b) What happens to freedom of speech?

 

I do however think that people need to stop being so gullible, and take everything that they read online with a pinch of salt. Perhaps they should teach a course in schools about being more cynical and critical of information.

 

Should we allow internet tracking?

No. People have their right to privacy.

 

As much as I agree that anonymity leads to trolling and people acting like douchebags, I don't want to see the internet "policed" like in China.

 

On the other hand, I do worry about the damage done to so many industries. Anything that can be digitalized (books, games, movies, music etc.) can be uploaded, and distributed freely. Because of that, so many creative people (authors, artists and developers) find it harder to make a living. I really don't have a solution to that one...

 

Heh, I almost agree with Guard Dog. But without the internet, how would we have crowdfunded Pillars of Eternity 2?

[Lexx]

Without the internet I wouldn't be able to effectively ship meds and medical technic to your hospitals in about a day time. :>

[Malcador]

Hard to ban misinformation. Just need people to be calm when reading things and be suspicious of things that fit perfectly with their views. That'd make for a good start.

 

Internet can make you hate people what with scumbags being emboldened online and all but isn't too bad.

Edited February 27, 2017 by Malcador

[Hurlshort]

As Malc said, the only way to 'ban' misinformation would be to seriously limit the amount of information out there. Basically that is asking to halt progress because people are too lazy to think critically about the information that is being pushed out. Sounds like a bad solution. Standing in the way of progress is always a good way to end up on the wrong side of the history books.

 

Reminds me of that Mcdonalds guy who doesn't want to raise the minimum wage and threatens to just hire robots. Hire robots! That's called progress. It also creates better jobs, fry cook is a tough profession, but someone is going to need to maintain those robots and that is going to boost jobs somewhere else.  

[213374U]

When was the last time one of you actually wrote a letter? Better dust off the old stationary box! Plus the pen and ink people will get more business.

 

I was already fairly convinced by your argumentation up to this point, but this sold me. I actually wrote a letter to a girl not too long ago, fountain pen and all. She replied through Whatsapp. fml

 

Where do I sign your (online, ofc) petition?

[Guard Dog]

  I'll mail it to you

[Chilloutman]

what is point of this thread? censoring internet?

[Meshugger]

"How do we control people?", the thread.

[Chilloutman]

"How do we control people?", the thread.

 

ah ok, I feel at home already

[Guard Dog]

"How do we control people?", the thread.

You Sir, have the gift of being able to cut through the BS and get right to the heart of the matter. And I salute you for it!

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

We should make viewing porn mandatory at least weekly, with a lottery that determines what you end up with.

[Gfted1]

We should make viewing porn mandatory at least weekly, with a lottery that determines what you end up with.

There's an old saying in the village where I come from: "Before you make any important decisions, ****."

 

EDIT: Huh, the medical term for self pleasuring is censored.

[Azdeus]

Really? Wankers.

[kirottu]

 

We should make viewing porn mandatory at least weekly, with a lottery that determines what you end up with.

There's an old saying in the village where I come from: "Before you make any important decisions, ****."

 

EDIT: Huh, the medical term for self pleasuring is censored.

 

 

If you're going to play chess do you do it just once before the match or do you do it before every move?  

[Gfted1]

Mind = blown

[HoonDing]

Lain chan will make Internet great again.

[rjshae]

The internet of things will soon be cramming misinformation into your every open orifice. We'll wonder what we ever did without it.

[Tigranes]

As Malc said, the only way to 'ban' misinformation would be to seriously limit the amount of information out there. Basically that is asking to halt progress because people are too lazy to think critically about the information that is being pushed out. Sounds like a bad solution. Standing in the way of progress is always a good way to end up on the wrong side of the history books.

 

Reminds me of that Mcdonalds guy who doesn't want to raise the minimum wage and threatens to just hire robots. Hire robots! That's called progress. It also creates better jobs, fry cook is a tough profession, but someone is going to need to maintain those robots and that is going to boost jobs somewhere else.  

 

Having more information does not inherently equal progress. That is an assumption grounded in faith that when enough people are provided with enough information, on average, people are rational and reasonable enough to figure out what is right and wrong. That is an assumption liberal political philosophy could never actually prove, at a fundamental level; and at a specific level, we still do not know which contexts that actually happens in, and there is plenty of evidence that it may not be happening in, say, voting decisions.

 

Just saying "that sounds like anti progress you wouldn't want to be anti progress would you" is just throwing in words that people usually don't want to fight, and letting it do the work instead of making a real argument. And it is exactly that kind of unthinking optimism that has actually contributed to where we are now: "give the people all the info", we said, "it'll work itself out".

[BruceVC]

Dude, that's heavy topic.

 

Should we ban misinformation?

No.

a) Who decides what's "misinformation"?

b) What happens to freedom of speech?

 

 

 

 

 

"How do we control people?", the thread.

You Sir, have the gift of being able to cut through the BS and get right to the heart of the matter. And I salute you for it!

 

 

@Heijoushin and GD

The question of "misinformation "  on the Internet and fake news can be difficult to qualify and even more difficult to control 

 

I know at times this deluge of information available to us can be overwhelming and some of us ask questions like " who can we trust ", " what is real and what is fake " and so on

 

I have an obvious and clear solution, it is imperative that global committees are established where people like me will decide what information is relevant and what is true. I dont want confusion and doubt, I know exactly what is " real  " and what is " misinformation " 

 

If we can make this a universal  law then the world will become a much easier place to navigate....vote for me for Global Internet Information Minister !!!!

 

[Pidesco]

Here is the internet:

 

[Chilloutman]

The internet of things will soon be cramming misinformation into your every open orifice. We'll wonder what we ever did without it.

 

Its only your choice how much you let internet affect your life, I for one doesn't have any social media and I can't be more happy about it. And I am sure my fridge will stay internet free forever

[aluminiumtrioxid]

Huh, the medical term for self pleasuring is censored.

 

But I can write "whore" down with no problem. :slowclap:

 

As Malc said, the only way to 'ban' misinformation would be to seriously limit the amount of information out there. Basically that is asking to halt progress because people are too lazy to think critically about the information that is being pushed out. Sounds like a bad solution. Standing in the way of progress is always a good way to end up on the wrong side of the history books.

 

On the other hand, nuking the internet would kill off 4chan, so... still a net positive overall?

[Blarghagh]

Question to OP - why is the knee-jerk reaction to ban and regulate freedom rather than trying to educate people on misinformation? I used to kneejerk that way, and I realized it's because I thought people were too dumb to educate - which is a highly cynical view for someone supposedly wanting the best for everyone and believing in the possibility of a Utopia where everyone works together.