|
The Web Is Making People Stupid, TWIMPS And Getting TWIMPSER |
|
|
Jon Awbrey |
|
Ï„á½° δΠμοι παθήματα μαθήματα γÎγονε
Group: Moderators
Posts: 6,783
Joined:
From: Meat Puppet Nation
Member No.: 5,619
|
It's all a plot by Alien Wiki-Φungi … Or maybe Ripofflichens … Or Groople … Some truly evil force like that … The fact that Sarah Palin gets any press at all is proof that the condition is terminal … Jon (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/hrmph.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies
MZMcBride |
|
Ãœber Member
Group: Regulars
Posts: 671
Joined:
Member No.: 10,962
|
QUOTE(The Joy @ Sat 27th February 2010, 3:58pm) QUOTE(RMHED @ Sat 27th February 2010, 3:35pm) The web isn't making people stupid, people have always been stupid, it's hardwired into humanity (and thus will ensure our timely destruction.)
Indeed. The Internet acts as a megaphone for people, both the stupid and the smart. It doesn't help that the quantity of information has increased with the help of the Internet, but at the expense of good quality information. You have to be a good detective with great information literacy to find the diamonds in the rough. The issue I have with a good portion of the criticism on this site is that, as you say, it's a symptom of the Internet (or the Information Age, I guess), while many people here blame individual components like Wikipedia. Wikipedia may be an example case, but it's hardly to blame for the giant shift that's been witnessed over the past fifteen to twenty years.
|
|
|
|
Jon Awbrey |
|
Ï„á½° δΠμοι παθήματα μαθήματα γÎγονε
Group: Moderators
Posts: 6,783
Joined:
From: Meat Puppet Nation
Member No.: 5,619
|
QUOTE(MZMcBride @ Sun 28th February 2010, 12:51am) QUOTE(The Joy @ Sat 27th February 2010, 3:58pm) QUOTE(RMHED @ Sat 27th February 2010, 3:35pm) The web isn't making people stupid, people have always been stupid, it's hardwired into humanity (and thus will ensure our timely destruction.)
Indeed. The Internet acts as a megaphone for people, both the stupid and the smart. It doesn't help that the quantity of information has increased with the help of the Internet, but at the expense of good quality information. You have to be a good detective with great information literacy to find the diamonds in the rough. The issue I have with a good portion of the criticism on this site is that, as you say, it's a symptom of the Internet (or the Information Age, I guess), while many people here blame individual components like Wikipedia. Wikipedia may be an example case, but it's hardly to blame for the giant shift that's been witnessed over the past fifteen to twenty years. ¤ sigh ¤I can't say it any better than this — George Saunders, The Braindead MegaphoneJon (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/dry.gif)
|
|
|
|
Jon Awbrey |
|
Ï„á½° δΠμοι παθήματα μαθήματα γÎγονε
Group: Moderators
Posts: 6,783
Joined:
From: Meat Puppet Nation
Member No.: 5,619
|
QUOTE(Jon Awbrey @ Sun 28th February 2010, 11:41am) QUOTE(MZMcBride @ Sun 28th February 2010, 12:51am) QUOTE(The Joy @ Sat 27th February 2010, 3:58pm) QUOTE(RMHED @ Sat 27th February 2010, 3:35pm) The web isn't making people stupid, people have always been stupid, it's hardwired into humanity (and thus will ensure our timely destruction.)
Indeed. The Internet acts as a megaphone for people, both the stupid and the smart. It doesn't help that the quantity of information has increased with the help of the Internet, but at the expense of good quality information. You have to be a good detective with great information literacy to find the diamonds in the rough. The issue I have with a good portion of the criticism on this site is that, as you say, it's a symptom of the Internet (or the Information Age, I guess), while many people here blame individual components like Wikipedia. Wikipedia may be an example case, but it's hardly to blame for the giant shift that's been witnessed over the past fifteen to twenty years. ¤ sigh ¤I can't say it any better than this — George Saunders, The Braindead MegaphoneJon (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/dry.gif) A few spare ergs in my brain-basket this morning, so maybe I'll try to unscramble the entropy thereof. There are indeed more general phenomena afoot here — that's the very reason for the existence of this Meta*Discussion Forum. What led me to open this thread, specifically, was that I had started noticing similar developments taking place at many different fora and e-gora across the web. Nothing new under the sun as far as human nature goes, of course, but it looks like there are specific technical factors on the rise that are blocking the best and catalyzing the worst in the way of critical, reflective, independent thought. So … what are those stupefying factors, exactly? Jon Awbrey
|
|
|
|
Milton Roe |
|
Known alias of J. Random Troll
Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,209
Joined:
Member No.: 5,156
|
QUOTE(Jon Awbrey @ Thu 4th March 2010, 8:44am) QUOTE(Jon Awbrey @ Sun 28th February 2010, 11:41am) QUOTE(MZMcBride @ Sun 28th February 2010, 12:51am) QUOTE(The Joy @ Sat 27th February 2010, 3:58pm) QUOTE(RMHED @ Sat 27th February 2010, 3:35pm) The web isn't making people stupid, people have always been stupid, it's hardwired into humanity (and thus will ensure our timely destruction.)
Indeed. The Internet acts as a megaphone for people, both the stupid and the smart. It doesn't help that the quantity of information has increased with the help of the Internet, but at the expense of good quality information. You have to be a good detective with great information literacy to find the diamonds in the rough. The issue I have with a good portion of the criticism on this site is that, as you say, it's a symptom of the Internet (or the Information Age, I guess), while many people here blame individual components like Wikipedia. Wikipedia may be an example case, but it's hardly to blame for the giant shift that's been witnessed over the past fifteen to twenty years. ¤ sigh ¤I can't say it any better than this — George Saunders, The Braindead MegaphoneJon (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/dry.gif) A few spare ergs in my brain-basket this morning, so maybe I'll try to unscramble the entropy thereof. There are indeed more general phenomena afoot here — that's the very reason for the existence of this Meta*Discussion Forum. What led me to open this thread, specifically, was that I had started noticing similar developments taking place at many different fora and e-gora across the web. Nothing new under the sun as far as human nature goes, of course, but it looks like there are specific technical factors on the rise that are blocking the best and catalyzing the worst in the way of critical, reflective, independent thought. So … what are those stupefying factors, exactly? Jon Awbrey Well, besides the usual complaint about e-"publishing"? Once upon a time, publishing was intimately connected with EDITING, because publishing was intrinically expensive. Involving as it did materials like paper and ink, and requiring a lot of skilled work from typesetters, printers, and the like, and then needing distribution costs for newspapers, magazines, journals, and books. Okay, so take away all the intrinsic material costs of publishing, or nearly all. Now suddenly, the EDITING becomes the most expensive part. So then, what happens that we start to get competition from e-published stuff that hasn't been edited at all, or has been inadequately edited? This would have been stupid or unlikely in the old days when good editing was only a fraction of publication costs, and was essential to picking out only the good stuff to publish, which was in turn intrinsically expensive to publish. Decouple these functions now, and you get replication of "printed" material, with no selection. The evolutionary process which once drove quality-improvement in the written word, now breaks down, because half the critical mechanism has been turned off. There's no selection of good material on the production end. Okay, now e-Malthus demands that there must be selection SOMEWHERE, since we can't read the garbage as fast as it appears on teh web. So where does that selection happen, now? Well, Google does it. Bing wants to do it. In large part, the buzz from popular interest does it. But that sort of thing amplifies pop culture and doesn't work so well for academics and knowledge. Hence the little demo the other day about pop culture articles vs. articles about weightier things on wikipedia. That's true of everyplace on the web. No solution for this do I see. It's been the case for thousands of years that people have resisted paying for pure information, even though information is actually most of what you buy, with most products. Instead, those who sold information were forced to package it up with something else, some material, and sell the material "thing." A book being the prime example-- you sell the physical book to get people to buy the novel, but if they can get the novel without having to buy the book, they'll steal the novel. It's the same with health advice. People will not pay what health advice is worth. If they would, doctors could make living talking to people on the phone, or sending them videotapes. Forget it. Even alternative people can't make a living doing that-- they have to sell fancy packaged nutritional supplements, or else go broke. Those supplements are basically information, but packed in a way that to get the information you have to buy the thing. The internet, with its capacity to reproduce and transmit "information," for closer and closer to nothing, has become the ultimate counterfeiter for what used to be the currency of knowledge. And per Gresham's Law of the Information Jungle, bad information is in the process of driving out good. Information inflation has now set in, and the currency is devalued. Attempts to establish gold standards for knowledge are resisted on every side. The idea that not everybody can (or should) print $100 bills, is held to be elitist. Ah, well. Back to making "things." If you think you're going to make a living by thinking, and selling your thoughts in print to somebody, you'd better think some more about that. (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/ermm.gif)
|
|
|
|
Jon Awbrey |
|
Ï„á½° δΠμοι παθήματα μαθήματα γÎγονε
Group: Moderators
Posts: 6,783
Joined:
From: Meat Puppet Nation
Member No.: 5,619
|
QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Thu 4th March 2010, 12:10pm) QUOTE(Jon Awbrey @ Thu 4th March 2010, 8:44am) A few spare ergs in my brain-basket this morning, so maybe I'll try to unscramble the entropy thereof.
There are indeed more general phenomena afoot here — that's the very reason for the existence of this Meta*Discussion Forum.
What led me to open this thread, specifically, was that I had started noticing similar developments taking place at many different fora and e-gora across the web. Nothing new under the sun as far as human nature goes, of course, but it looks like there are specific technical factors on the rise that are blocking the best and catalyzing the worst in the way of critical, reflective, independent thought.
So … what are those stupefying factors, exactly?
Jon Awbrey
Well, besides the usual complaint about e-"publishing"? Once upon a time, publishing was intimately connected with EDITING, because publishing was intrinsically expensive. Involving as it did materials like paper and ink, and requiring a lot of skilled work from typesetters, printers, and the like, and then needing distribution costs for newspapers, magazines, journals, and books. Okay, so take away all the intrinsic material costs of publishing, or nearly all. Now suddenly, the EDITING becomes the most expensive part. So then, what happens that we start to get competition from e-published stuff that hasn't been edited at all, or has been inadequately edited? This would have been stupid or unlikely in the old days when good editing was only a fraction of publication costs, and was essential to picking out only the good stuff to publish, which was in turn intrinsically expensive to publish. Decouple these functions now, and you get replication of "printed" material, with no selection. The evolutionary process which once drove quality-improvement in the written word, now breaks down, because half the critical mechanism has been turned off. There's no selection of good material on the production end. Okay, now e-Malthus demands that there must be selection SOMEWHERE, since we can't read the garbage as fast as it appears on teh web. So where does that selection happen, now? Well, Google does it. Bing wants to do it. In large part, the buzz from popular interest does it. But that sort of thing amplifies pop culture and doesn't work so well for academics and knowledge. Hence the little demo the other day about pop culture articles vs. articles about weightier things on wikipedia. That's true of everyplace on the web. No solution for this do I see. It's been the case for thousands of years that people have resisted paying for pure information, even though information is actually most of what you buy, with most products. Instead, those who sold information were forced to package it up with something else, some material, and sell the material "thing." A book being the prime example — you sell the physical book to get people to buy the novel, but if they can get the novel without having to buy the book, they'll steal the novel. It's the same with health advice. People will not pay what health advice is worth. If they would, doctors could make living talking to people on the phone, or sending them videotapes. Forget it. Even alternative people can't make a living doing that — they have to sell fancy packaged nutritional supplements, or else go broke. Those supplements are basically information, but packed in a way that to get the information you have to buy the thing. The internet, with its capacity to reproduce and transmit "information," for closer and closer to nothing, has become the ultimate counterfeiter for what used to be the currency of knowledge. And per Gresham's Law of the Information Jungle, bad information is in the process of driving out good. Information inflation has now set in, and the currency is devalued. Attempts to establish gold standards for knowledge are resisted on every side. The idea that not everybody can (or should) print $100 bills, is held to be elitist. Ah, well. Back to making "things." If you think you're going to make a living by thinking, and selling your thoughts in print to somebody, you'd better think some more about that. (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/ermm.gif) That's all, well, um, bad — but I was actually trying to talk about something else, something like the quality of communication in our so-called "community" sites. That's kind of what I meant by "fora and e-gora" — here I was searching for some word beside "discussion" since the owners of one site I had in mind go out of their way to stress that it's "not about discussion", even though they do have their own meta-discussion forum for doing just that. So I'm looking for those bug/features of system accident/design that catalyze the catatonia of genuine collaborative inquiry. Jon Awbrey
|
|
|
|
Posts in this topic
Jon Awbrey The Web Is Making People Stupid Text The web is just facilitating things for those who ... Jon Awbrey
The web is just facilitating things for those who... GlassBeadGame
The web is just facilitating things for those who... Cedric http://i527.photobucket.com/albums/cc358/WRCedric/... Moulton The Internet also tends to make some people intole... Jon Awbrey
The Internet also tends to make some people intol... Somey What I see happening is that the interwebs are tak... Text
Remember that these behaviours may also be fake.... Text
Since in a hobby the most tangible reward is the... Jon Awbrey Text,
You provide a few examples of different way... Text
The "why" people do things at the bott... Jon Awbrey
The "why" people do things at the bott... dogbiscuit
The thrust of my assertion is not merely that Dub... Milton Roe
I think it comes down to a fundamental loss of di... dogbiscuit
I mentioned Farm Town on facebook which might be... RDH(Ghost In The Machine) How can you possibly think weez bein stupified by ... Cock-up-over-conspiracy They are all in league with the Devil. Its Satan... thekohser Wasn't there talk of an Internet II, which wou... Random832
Wasn't there talk of an Internet II, which wo... Jon Awbrey
Wasn't there talk of an Internet II, which wo... Jon Awbrey In Other Snooz …
AAAI-2010 Workshop on Coll... CharlotteWebb
You see, the Workshop on Collaboratively-Built Kn... Jon Awbrey
Like virtually everything else, this is an area w... Jon Awbrey [color=dodgerblue][font=georgia][size=5]The Writin... Herschelkrustofsky Somey, what makes you so certain that 1984 was not... Jon Awbrey
Somey, what makes you so certain that [i]1984 was... Rhindle
Somey, what makes you so certain that [i]1984 was... Jon Awbrey
Somey, what makes you so certain that [i]1984 wa... RMHED
Oddly enough, this brings us back to a point that... Jon Awbrey
Oddly enough, this brings us back to a point tha... RMHED
[quote name='RMHED' post='223816' date='Sat 27th ... Jon Awbrey
So the cure is a hot bath + electrical appliance ... RMHED
[quote name='RMHED' post='223840' date='Sat 27th ... Jon Awbrey
The unconscious soul is solely conscious of its l... RMHED
The unconscious soul is solely conscious of its ... Zoloft
[quote name='Jon Awbrey' post='223852' date='Sun ... Jon Awbrey Reprising these comments for the sake of another d... Herschelkrustofsky
Somey, what makes you so certain that [i]1984 wa... Daniel Brandt
There are indeed more general phenomena afoot her... Milton Roe
[quote name='Jon Awbrey' post='224559' date='Thu ... SB_Johnny
[quote name='The Joy' post='223780' date='Sat 27t... Somey I'd probably still rather live in a pleasure-b... dogbiscuit One aspect of online communication that does lead ... dogbiscuit Another little thought that I had this morning whi... Milton Roe
Another little thought that I had this morning wh... Jon Awbrey In a complex society, people making decisions and ... Jon Awbrey Good grief, Milton, you really gotta stop sniffin ... Milton Roe
Good grief, Milton, you really gotta stop sniffin... papaya You know, Jon: this is part of the internet too. :... Jon Awbrey Let's face it, we are inundated with dullness ... papaya
Let's face it, we are inundated with dullness... Jon Awbrey
Let's face it, we are inundated with dullnes... ulsterman I really must reject the entire thesis implicit in... Jon Awbrey
I really must reject the entire thesis implicit i... Moulton It occurs to me that every generation has produced... Jon Awbrey
It occurs to me that every generation has produce... Jon Awbrey [font=georgia][size=5]The Web Is Bankrupting Schol... Jon Awbrey Do you believe me now?
Jon <_< Jon Awbrey Bumping up for the sake of a current discussion on... The Joy Assisted Living Today - How Social Media is Ruinin... Maunus People have managed to be incredibly stupid for mi... Zoloft
People have managed to be incredibly stupid for m... The Joy I learned in my book history class that the advent... Jon Awbrey
When all is said and done, of course, Socrates... Jon Awbrey
There are deeper meanings in these Socratic conce...
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
| |