The Internet Is Saving Culture, Not Killing It • Hacker News Board

Re: The Internet Is Saving Culture, Not Killing It

#11

Post by eduren » Thu, Mar 16, 2017, 2:40 PM UTC

wu-ikkyu wrote: post #10

eduren wrote: post #8

The way I've come to view culture is that it is a byproduct of communication. Stick three people in a room and have them talk to each other, eventually they come to share a culture (a small one, but nonetheless significant to them)[1]. If it's indeed a byproduct, it follows that the amount of culture generated is directly proportional to the bandwidth/speed of that communication. In that interpretation, the internet…

>If it's indeed a byproduct, it follows that the amount of culture generated is directly proportional to the bandwidth/speed of that communication. I agree that the mediums of communication of a society have a significant effect on the culture the users, but is "culture" something that can really be objectively quantified? Perhaps it may be more accurate to say that the speed in which a culture lives is related to th…

Yeah you're right. It's not really quantifiable in a numbers sense. I was trying to say the same thing you are that the speed of the two things is related (directly proportional is the phrase I used).

Re: The Internet Is Saving Culture, Not Killing It

#12

Post by ska » Thu, Mar 16, 2017, 2:45 PM UTC

relics443 wrote: post #3

I feel like 200 years from now, our times will be viewed as something akin to the industrial revolution. Recency bias makes us feel as if we're more important in history, but 200 years is a long time. I'm sure there'll be another "revolution" or two in that time. And the people of that time will probably consider it to be the most pivotal revolution yet. History folks. It repeats itself.

So we've got the agricultural revolution about 10,000 years ago, then the industrial revolution about 200 years ago. I can't think of any other separate event of equal impact.

And you are suggesting that no only are we currently within a similar scale event (plausible, but hardly proven), and there will another two such magnitude events in the next 200 years?

Or are you noting that we, and future generations, will always think we are on the cusp of "great things" but for almost all cases will be wrong?

Re: The Internet Is Saving Culture, Not Killing It

#13

Post by treehau5 » Thu, Mar 16, 2017, 2:49 PM UTC

muninn_ wrote: post #2

I largely agree. The only thing that will remain constant is that the news today is absolutely terrible since it's trying to become entertainment and not what it should be: news.

I disagree with the whole notion of news itself. Thinking you can condense geopolitical, environmental, or scientific happenings into short, attention grabbing headlines and relay enough of the issues at play is crazy.

Now journalism, I agree with. But it requires time and investment.

Re: The Internet Is Saving Culture, Not Killing It

#14

Post by seppin » Thu, Mar 16, 2017, 2:53 PM UTC

padobson wrote: post #4

You only have to spend a little time consuming digital media to understand that products that rely on advertisements for income suck. As soon as subscription services started offering ad-free versions of their product, I started buying them. I'm not saying it's the best way forward, but would it kill Twitter and Facebook and Snap to experiment with some of these models? It's working for content creators, why should s…

> I'm not saying it's the best way forward, but would it kill Twitter and Facebook and Snap to experiment with some of these models?

Any possible competitor would need to embrace this model, as Ads only at a very large scale.

Re: The Internet Is Saving Culture, Not Killing It

#15

Post by scandox » Thu, Mar 16, 2017, 2:53 PM UTC

M_Grey wrote: post #6

"Wenn ich Kultur höre ... entsichere ich meine Browning!" Terrible play, questionable subject matter and worse fans, but still... a good point. There's nothing wrong with culture as a concept to live through, but as a point of discussion it's akin to a discussion of religion or dreams.

Except he didn't mean it that way. He wasn't saying "don't bore with me your particular views on culture". He was saying "if you have to analyse culture then you're a pernicious misfit and probably a Jew".

So I think we need a better shorthand for this - just so we all know what we're really saying.

Re: The Internet Is Saving Culture, Not Killing It

#16

Post by StreakyCobra » Thu, Mar 16, 2017, 2:55 PM UTC

ska wrote: post #12

relics443 wrote: post #3

I feel like 200 years from now, our times will be viewed as something akin to the industrial revolution. Recency bias makes us feel as if we're more important in history, but 200 years is a long time. I'm sure there'll be another "revolution" or two in that time. And the people of that time will probably consider it to be the most pivotal revolution yet. History folks. It repeats itself.

So we've got the agricultural revolution about 10,000 years ago, then the industrial revolution about 200 years ago. I can't think of any other separate event of equal impact. And you are suggesting that no only are we currently within a similar scale event (plausible, but hardly proven), and there will another two such magnitude events in the next 200 years? Or are you noting that we, and future generations, will al…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_revolution

Re: The Internet Is Saving Culture, Not Killing It

#17

Post by WJW » Thu, Mar 16, 2017, 2:57 PM UTC

ska wrote: post #12

relics443 wrote: post #3

I feel like 200 years from now, our times will be viewed as something akin to the industrial revolution. Recency bias makes us feel as if we're more important in history, but 200 years is a long time. I'm sure there'll be another "revolution" or two in that time. And the people of that time will probably consider it to be the most pivotal revolution yet. History folks. It repeats itself.

So we've got the agricultural revolution about 10,000 years ago, then the industrial revolution about 200 years ago. I can't think of any other separate event of equal impact. And you are suggesting that no only are we currently within a similar scale event (plausible, but hardly proven), and there will another two such magnitude events in the next 200 years? Or are you noting that we, and future generations, will al…

I think it is more likely that in 10,000 years we will see the "internet revolution" as part of the industrial revolution. It's only because we're in it that we can see it as separate things.

For example, we now speak of a single "agricultural revolution", where in reality it would have spanned hundreds of years of had several different periods (discovering plants, discovering cattle, etc).

Re: The Internet Is Saving Culture, Not Killing It

#18

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Mar 16, 2017, 3:00 PM UTC

scandox wrote: post #15

M_Grey wrote: post #6

"Wenn ich Kultur höre ... entsichere ich meine Browning!" Terrible play, questionable subject matter and worse fans, but still... a good point. There's nothing wrong with culture as a concept to live through, but as a point of discussion it's akin to a discussion of religion or dreams.

Except he didn't mean it that way. He wasn't saying "don't bore with me your particular views on culture". He was saying "if you have to analyse culture then you're a pernicious misfit and probably a Jew". So I think we need a better shorthand for this - just so we all know what we're really saying.

[deleted]

Re: The Internet Is Saving Culture, Not Killing It

#19

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Mar 16, 2017, 3:00 PM UTC

ideonexus wrote: post #9

tldr; We've all become patrons of the arts through micro-transactions. Ten years ago, I donated regularly to charities that would enable micro-funding for people living in third-world countries. A $10 donation would buy some chickens for a woman in South America, who could turn a profit on the eggs and eventually pay the loan back. I thought it was a fantastic idea. Today, I find I'm funding everyone's projects. I pa…

[deleted]

Re: The Internet Is Saving Culture, Not Killing It

#20

Post by scotu » Thu, Mar 16, 2017, 3:05 PM UTC

padobson wrote: post #4

You only have to spend a little time consuming digital media to understand that products that rely on advertisements for income suck. As soon as subscription services started offering ad-free versions of their product, I started buying them. I'm not saying it's the best way forward, but would it kill Twitter and Facebook and Snap to experiment with some of these models? It's working for content creators, why should s…

I think it wouldn't work, simply because they need network effect to work and not enough people see any monetary value in that kind of service (fb, twitter, snap) (although many are kind of addicted to it -> they are not deleting their facebook account and use it a lot of time, but if it was paid they wouldn't have used it in the first place)