Been pondering how the internet has changed my life

[Charltonc]

The internet just costs me money from cigars, hobbies, online shopping etc....

But there is alot of free porn...

Very true cannot debate this.

[PigFish]

I will try to keep this apolitical.

The advent of the internet has made the control of information by a centralized source, or sources almost impossible. Controlling information is a key to tyranny... which I am ardently against. I think that the forces that control a balance between tyranny and freedom have been dealt a 'silver bullet' blow by the internet. Freedom requires a free media. The internet is as close to a truly free media as we have ever seen. The power of the common man to communicate is now almost unlimited. The ability that it grants him/her to seek out his own answers in his own time is priceless. We all have global voices. All we need to do is blog.

I think the internet is the equivalent to an atom bomb against a centralized media and those hell bent on information control. That is why governments are attempting to control it.

It has its risks, but freedom is never free!

-Piggy

[Puros Y Vino]

I will try to keep this apolitical.

The advent of the internet has made the control of information by a centralized source, or sources almost impossible. Controlling information is a key to tyranny... which I am ardently against. I think that the forces that control a balance between tyranny and freedom have been dealt a 'silver bullet' blow by the internet. Freedom requires a free media. The internet is as close to a truly free media as we have ever seen. The power of the common man to communicate is now almost unlimited. The ability that it grants him/her to seek out his own answers in his own time is priceless. We all have global voices. All we need to do is blog.

I think the internet is the equivalent to an atom bomb against a centralized media and those hell bent on information control. That is why governments are attempting to control it.

It has its risks, but freedom is never free!

-Piggy

Well put Ray. I agree. Most of the "Mainstream Media" is owned by a handful of corporations. What is "news" is up to them. The Internet was supposed to be a true "Fifth column" since the media has pretty much sold out. Just today Google announced that they are getting a lot of take down requests from Governments. Google Censorship Article. Sadly, they've admitted to accommodating 50% of the requests. The Internet as we knew it is going to become Cable TV. It is going to be regulated to death. We already cannot access information based on source IP's. For instance, Hulu.com not is not available in Canada. Their servers do reverse lookups on requesting IP's. They check the IP's against GEO IP databases and bang.. You are either let in or booted out. Anything controversial is going to be copyright flagged and removed from sight. The whole "copyright" crackdown is an exercise is excising and censoring information in general.

[Fuzz AI]

Just recently Fairfax Media announced a major restructure of their business with the closure of 2 printing plants, cutting approx 1900 jobs. The Sydney Morning Herald, the one newspaper that I was always willing to buy and read, will now be re-formatted from it's broadsheet format into a "compact" tabloid format. This is a result of flagging newspaper sales due to more readers going online for their news fix.

The Buggles may have said, "video killed the radio star", but the internet is killing print media. Maybe it's just me, but I don't like that.

[OZCUBAN]

I will try to keep this apolitical.

The advent of the internet has made the control of information by a centralized source, or sources almost impossible. Controlling information is a key to tyranny... which I am ardently against. I think that the forces that control a balance between tyranny and freedom have been dealt a 'silver bullet' blow by the internet. Freedom requires a free media. The internet is as close to a truly free media as we have ever seen. The power of the common man to communicate is now almost unlimited. The ability that it grants him/her to seek out his own answers in his own time is priceless. We all have global voices. All we need to do is blog.

I think the internet is the equivalent to an atom bomb against a centralized media and those hell bent on information control. That is why governments are attempting to control it.

It has its risks, but freedom is never free!

Very well articulated my friend

-Piggy

[OZCUBAN]

Just recently Fairfax Media announced a major restructure of their business with the closure of 2 printing plants, cutting approx 1900 jobs. The Sydney Morning Herald, the one newspaper that I was always willing to buy and read, will now be re-formatted from it's broadsheet format into a "compact" tabloid format. This is a result of flagging newspaper sales due to more readers going online for their news fix.

The Buggles may have said, "video killed the radio star", but the internet is killing print media. Maybe it's just me, but I don't like that.

Well said Fuzz and Others

This a really relevant thread ,thx Canadian Beaver

The Internet for me has been mainly a positive thing ,the discovery of a great forum such as this ..PRICELESS .

This forum articulates what is good with humanity in this cold technical age

But alas it has come at a price, as a Printer I am witnessing the death of a major player in the events of human history ,yes Printing.

This Industry has been under attack for some time now and since the GFC has been brought to its knees,now only the strong will survive

Digital is the way of the future ,that is undeniable ,but I believe traditional methods should still have a niche ,as they provide quality in a more substantive way

I still love curling up with a good (paper book) ,even though I possess both

Cheers OZ

[Rehman]

Book publishing's doing all right, even with Kindle & Co. (Sorry if my references are outdated, I'm not into this tech thing.) Indeed, Amazon et al say the Internet has been very good for book sales, which is understandable. It's newspapers that are going down - and good riddance, I say, for all the reasons mentioned above.

But, I also say, the newmedia wouldn't be worth diddly if the old media had done their job right. Revolutions tend not to seek to fix what isn't broken. A corporatised, agenda-driven, politically blinkered and partisan media is literally not worth the paper it's printed on. But I don't see the newmedia doing any better. There are opinions, yes, great billowing drifts of it. But where's the information? Aside from a flamboyant event like WikiLeaks, there's not a lot out there that truly sheds light on the dark corners...

...but I speak as one who has fallen off the information superhighway. (As evidenced by my use of that term; so 1995!)

[Puros Y Vino]

But alas it has come at a price, as a Printer I am witnessing the death of a major player in the events of human history ,yes Printing.

This Industry has been under attack for some time now and since the GFC has been brought to its knees,now only the strong will survive

Digital is the way of the future ,that is undeniable ,but I believe traditional methods should still have a niche ,as they provide quality in a more substantive way

I still love curling up with a good (paper book) ,even though I possess both

Cheers OZ

As an IT guy that has been overlooking data storage and integrity in datacentres I offer this up. As good as storage has become in terms of file systems, redundancy and resiliency it is still unproven in terms of archival effectiveness. There is no digital asset more than 50 years old. Yet paper documents have existed for hundreds of years. Stone tablets; millenia. Those 1's and 0's are susceptible to the whim's of storage mediums and their manufacturers. Sure you might have that floppy disk from high school with your essays on it. You might have burned CD's of your data too. Bad news, they will degraged in 10 - 15 years. Hard drives will eventually stop working too as they have a finite lifespan. The same goes with tape storage. Not to mention that hard and tape drive mechanics and buses change every 5 - 10 years. A well kept piece of paper, safeguarded from fire, water and physical desecration can last 100's of years. I've managed Terabytes of information on Storage Area Networks. Which are pretty much the pinnacle of modern digital storage. Disk arrays bonded by high' speed interfaces, low level RAID speed and redundancy, file systems that are resilient to crashes, instant snapshots of volumes from one part of the SAN to another. Despite it's benefits it can be wiped out in so many ways. From bad code, malicious intent, fire, water and in the worst case an EMP. It happened once in 1859 which is far from the "digital age" but the damage was severe. See here. Print may not rise to it's former glory but it will still be needed. Companies that do not do periodic printouts of key data to paper or microfiche could be in for a shocker if they incur a severe data loss.

[canadianbeaver]

oh god, this is like asking what the invention of the wheel did for humanity in 1000AD.

In my original post, I was not really asking how the internet changed humanity, the world etc. That is kind of obvious. I was talking about how it changed MY LIFE, like this forum and my fascination with cigars, my new drawing style etc.

So maybe the topic grew and grew to more interesting and detailed info. Such is the way the internet works...

[PigFish]

In my original post, I was not really asking how the internet changed humanity, the world etc. That is kind of obvious. I was talking about how it changed MY LIFE, like this forum and my fascination with cigars, my new drawing style etc.

So maybe the topic grew and grew to more interesting and detailed info. Such is the way the internet works...

The internet has introduced me to many of my friends. Sorting through the Gaussian of people from classy to classless, I have a niche and coterie of folks I call my friends. This is one such place.

While this is certainly important to me, my freedom is more so. I think the internet and alternative media may very well be the savior of my country. That too is personal, important and worth discussing by me. That is why I took the conversation in that direction.

I do tend to cut away at the facade of things and get to meat of it. If I have contributed in taking the topic on a tangent, I am sorry about that.

I was actually quite inspired by Bundy's post on paper verses digital storage means. I tend to see that with a bit of a spin as well. I too have a affinity for paper! I read better from print and there is no replacement for books as I see it. Having seen Ozzy's work in print and when I consider the loss; it would be a great one.

But book are collections of thoughts. If those thoughts are no longer taught, are not considered relevant by the population, then the measure of time that they may be archived is not really relevant. It takes but one generation to surrender liberty that has been fought for by many generations! If the Bible is no longer read, or if the Constitution or prevailing law is ignored, not taught, nor respected, it matters little if it is well archived. Knowledge must be passed from person to person to remain alive and allow history to be carried forth from parent to child. Filtering such knowledge, amending it, changing it, rewriting it etcetera, exposes us to the risk of repeating past mistakes, or compelling our children to make the same mistakes we did.

To summarize, it is not the archival of information that is important, it is the availability of information to the population that is important, at least that is how I see it.

People will have different outlooks on who controls media and what messages are being conveyed. I don't want to get into that except that bias in media is clear as I see it. Media, being a private enterprise can certainly be as biased as they wish as media outlets are private property. I can now navigate around them. I can find information with many biases and read them all and draw my own conclusion. My reliance on the objectivity of anther has been betrayed and I have replaced the perpetrators.

I post and read on sites like this one... and that is a great fringe benefit!

Cheers. -Piggy

[canadianbeaver]

No need to apologize when discussing stuff like this - ever.

[Rehman]

To summarize, it is not the archival of information that is important, it is the availability of information to the population that is important, at least that is how I see it.

Piggy, if I may - it's the quality of information that's most important.

Back in the day, this ideal was aspired to (it was never truly attainable, but it was an ideal upheld) by peer review and editorial oversight. Ideas had to be kicked around among different minds before being sent out to scare the horses. They were subject to critique, to plane down their splinters and polish them. Editors, on their part, were the very nemeses of the censors so many have become. While censorship sought to conceal, editing sought to clarify. Censorship covers with black marker ink; editing is ink eradicator.

The outcome of this would have been (or should've, or could've, if I'd had my way), the publication and dissemination of accurate, verifiable and educative information in the convenient and digestible form of a daily summary - the newspaper. For this to have worked, media professionals had to be trusted by their readers. That trust was hard-earned, and its loss has been, I feel, both a cause and a consequence of the Internet's unbounded freedom of expression.

Yes, of course the press has to be free - of control and suppression, oppression, repression and depression. But of quality control?

[PigFish]

Piggy, if I may - it's the quality of information that's most important.

Back in the day, this ideal was aspired to (it was never truly attainable, but it was an ideal upheld) by peer review and editorial oversight. Ideas had to be kicked around among different minds before being sent out to scare the horses. They were subject to critique, to plane down their splinters and polish them. Editors, on their part, were the very nemeses of the censors so many have become. While censorship sought to conceal, editing sought to clarify. Censorship covers with black marker ink; editing is ink eradicator.

The outcome of this would have been (or should've, or could've, if I'd had my way), the publication and dissemination of accurate, verifiable and educative information in the convenient and digestible form of a daily summary - the newspaper. For this to have worked, media professionals had to be trusted by their readers. That trust was hard-earned, and its loss has been, I feel, both a cause and a consequence of the Internet's unbounded freedom of expression.

Yes, of course the press has to be free - of control and suppression, oppression, repression and depression. But of quality control?

I disagree with you here somewhat amigo but in fairness we may be skinning the same cat, or again maybe not.

I see a bias in what I refer to as 'centralized media.' You may or may not see the same. It is this bias that has caused the forfeiture of readership, IMHO. We may also see a different villain in the bias but I hesitate to go their for the sake of the thread.

The editor is an efficiency expert, PR person and liaison between the reader and the publications owner. Sometime he (she) is a censor, and sometimes a pseudo-pundit. Since readers are often aligned as a majority, I find that many of these factors add up to point, or lead the bias. News in fact should have no bias at all, but once there is a goal to pander to readers, or any other party, the bias bus runs predominantly in one direction.

I see the news as op-ed pieces now, largely controlled by the editor, or someone with another title acting as editor. The op-ed pages are often surrogates for political parties. I can accept op-ed pages being biased. That is why you read them! But when hard news gets a spin, or is ignored if it cuts to advertisers, or political friends, then the media outlet is useless to me.

Controlling content, or content quality as you say is a double edged sword. When you open the door, the wrong dogs may come home! Controlling content to fit the space, to be more efficient, to keep a readers interest is one thing. To control content to attempt to bias the news itself is flat out wrong! (IMHO)

Readership of print media in my country has fallen because once respected publications are now straw-men for political parties. I will leave this intentionally vague as I want not to startle the snakes in the grass here.

Frankly, since I am of the opposite bias to many of these publications, I see the loss of their business share by their own hand somewhat amusing. I know that this sentiment may separates us further but I see no reason that we must argue about it. I respect your opinion and admire how well you wrote it.

There is a harsh reality in the marketability of the ugly person in the dating market. Their options are limited. Many papers have become ugly dates! Even though they have opened internet outlets, the bias in their reporting has caused them a loss of readership. They decline at their own hands. I cannot blame the internet for this but I acknowledge your point. This is not a cut and dry case as it may be in cellulose film. Ugly pictures don't cause people from buying film! However an 'ugly' bias will cause people from buying a paper!

Frankly I see this as a net gain. I see the free market choosing. I see a hand attempting to control it being slapped down and I am appreciative for it.

Cheers mate. I enjoyed the conversation. -the Pig

[khomeinist]

piggy.... master of the unwarranted correlation!

Sorry but are conservative papers selling well? Decreased consumer demand is due to political ideology?

The dynamics of media change have little to do with tired left/right politics. I think the ideological glasses need a new prescription mate! If you look at the history of internet growth in the 90s, you will see that much of the desire to keep things 'free' came from Left Libertarians. I agree that there are forces that want to censor and control information, but to suggest that those forces are derived solely from your straw-man liberal adversary is a rather fallacious argument.

My apologies for contributing to the hijack....

pigz and I agree on my cigars. probably not much else. but that makes for somewhat amusing banter.....

[PigFish]

piggy.... master of the unwarranted correlation!

Sorry but are conservative papers selling well? Decreased consumer demand is due to political ideology?

The dynamics of media change have little to do with tired left/right politics. I think the ideological glasses need a new prescription mate! If you look at the history of internet growth in the 90s, you will see that much of the desire to keep things 'free' came from Left Libertarians. I agree that there are forces that want to censor and control information, but to suggest that those forces are derived solely from your straw-man liberal adversary is a rather fallacious argument.

My apologies for contributing to the hijack....

pigz and I agree on my cigars. probably not much else. but that makes for somewhat amusing banter.....

... left libertarian, like jumbo shrimp; an oxymoron! Cheers! -Piggy

Oh, we do agree on guns mate. Don't forget guns, you are right on those (pun intended)!!! -LOL

[LGC]

Wasted time on cigar boards, fishing boards, and porn!!!!!

[Rehman]

Me too, Ray. That was very well said. Yes, we're skinning the same cat - or at least examining the same beast from different perspectives! And so it goes, though, as Kurt Vonnegut used to say. Where we once were, where we thought we were going, here we are.

Today, I think, a Partagas Lusitania. Or a Trinidad REx. You know, sinking ships, extinction and such...

Cheers, everyone!

[PigFish]

Me too, Ray. That was very well said. Yes, we're skinning the same cat - or at least examining the same beast from different perspectives! And so it goes, though, as Kurt Vonnegut used to say. Where we once were, where we thought we were going, here we are.

Today, I think, a Partagas Lusitania. Or a Trinidad REx. You know, sinking ships, extinction and such...

Cheers, everyone!

... I'll see your Lusi and raise you!!! ...But I cannot!!! -LOL I too am going to pick a nice stogie and contemplate the way things are. Cheers. You too Kommie!!! Cheers!

I am feeling BBF'ed. A BBF it will be!

-Ray

[ZinZan]

Lovely banter Rehman and Piggy.