No post body was provided.
Was everyone stupid back then?
101–110 of 135 posts
Re: Was everyone stupid back then?
#102Earlier quoted context omitted.
Imagine saying this about writing, or the printing press. It's not just reductionist but cynical. Optimizing for outrage is a mass communication problem, not an internet problem, and unfolds roughly the same in every new medium from town criers on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_journalism
You guys have all missed the point of the comic. We still have social problems despite having a printing press, or radio, or internet. In fact, at root, we have the exact same social problems as existed prior to Gutenberg's birth. Poverty, war, man's inhumanity to man, tribalism, etc. Why have they not been solved? Because they are human problems. The problem is within us and the problem is us. It's who we are on an…
It seems to me that life today is a lot better then it was when the printing press was invented, and that the printing press probably has something to do with that.
Re: Was everyone stupid back then?
#103“Meanwhile, the poor Babel fish, by effectively removing all barriers to communication between different races and cultures, has caused more and bloodier wars than anything else in the history of creation.” Douglas Adams thought he was joking.
Funny quote and all (no sarcasm intended) but I don't think it's fair to imply that, if future wars are bloodier than the past, it would be because we lowered barriers to communication.
Being diplomatic can be about being a communication filter.
Re: Was everyone stupid back then?
#104A man came upon a social media site and asked the guard "How are the people on this site?" The guard asked in turn, "How were the people of your previous site?" The man responded "Cruel and vicious" The guard answered "So will you find them here."
Re: Was everyone stupid back then?
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's more than just culture divide. People being manipulated by giant propaganda networks to hate each other more and more and prevent progress from being made is an age old social _problem_. E: Removed comment about being a throwaway, appears to just be a new account. Sorry about that.
Quoted post unavailable.
No post body was provided.
Re: Was everyone stupid back then?
#106Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wouldn't say everyone, but there was a vocal, idealistic minority that had high hopes, that's true. > But also generally there was a belief that everyone was going to be smarter That still gets regurgitated: "Gen Z -> technology -> smarter." Utter bollocks, of course.
We aren't smarter for sure but we're less ignorant i'd say, if ignorance = unawareness of random facts (e.g. the weather, how old some actor is, if a store is open) now that we have devices capable of retrieving those facts at any time in our pockets. What to do with those facts, what facts actually matter, and what do they actually mean in the context of solving problems? Who knows really...
Would we (I'm of an older generation) have been less ignorant if I'd been carrying a pocket encyclopedia with me? Doesn't seem the appropriate word.
> if a store is open
Well, you don't need to tell if you plan ahead. That's how it used to be. Shops here opened from 9 to 6, except on Saturday (shorter), and never on a Sunday. There simply was no reason to look up opening hours. And if you needed something after 6, you had bad luck, or you asked the neighbours.
I don't think your examples work well, especially when you add in that there are actual flat-earthers around: not because it's Gen Z, but because of that handy device.
Re: Was everyone stupid back then?
#107Re: Was everyone stupid back then?
#108Before we go down the road of zero anonymity: When there’s no monetary cost to sending out and receiving information, regardless of the source and size then it shouldn’t be surprising that the noise to content ratio is high, with bad actors being the ones who benefit the most.
Perhaps we need to be smarter about metered and unmetered data?
Re: Was everyone stupid back then?
#109Earlier quoted context omitted.
Imagine saying this about writing, or the printing press. It's not just reductionist but cynical. Optimizing for outrage is a mass communication problem, not an internet problem, and unfolds roughly the same in every new medium from town criers on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_journalism
You guys have all missed the point of the comic. We still have social problems despite having a printing press, or radio, or internet. In fact, at root, we have the exact same social problems as existed prior to Gutenberg's birth. Poverty, war, man's inhumanity to man, tribalism, etc. Why have they not been solved? Because they are human problems. The problem is within us and the problem is us. It's who we are on an…
>> That's really the point of the comic. Wherever we go, there we are. It's still just us in a new place.
If that's the case it seems a poor choice of words for the child character in the comic to frame it as "Was everyone stupid back then?" followed quickly by affirmation, "So yes."
Re: Was everyone stupid back then?
#110Looking back, I guess the main point of why the early internet was so special wasn‘t because of cool new communications technology, but because of the self selection. In order to use BBSes or the early Internet, by definition you had to be above average curious, smart, rich, young (late night dialup tarrifs) and/or based in academia, as well as having a volunteering/cooperating mindset. We just managed to keep the ot…
The early internet still exists.
BBSes still exist. You can use them right now.
The early forums still exist, in some form or another. IRC is still there. A dedicated few keep gopher sites up and running.
Not everyone chose to leave them behind.
This isn't even a "all tens of us!" joke, there are tens of thousands of us.
$ telnet osuny.bell-labs.co 666 Trying 168.235.81.33... Connected to osuny.inri.net.
$ telnet bbs.iscabbs.com Trying 167.88.117.146... Connected to bbs.iscabbs.com.
Over 100 people logged into Particles yesterday.
It seems odd to mourn the death of a friend you no longer call, but who is still very much alive.