Decline …the internet.

In 1991 I was asked all the time about how to use the internet, not only by other students but professors at college. I decided to write a 48 page manual on how to use it to find information. I did use it as one of my projects to turn in for marks.

Shortly there after this was the explosion of the world wide web.

Now with phones, computers and every other device everyone is on the web. I find it is harder to find real information. It might even be the decline in human's as a population in general. Better said it might be showing what we really are.

Thoughts..

Just my 2 bits.

The way search engines & ISP's direct your results is sometimes a pain. There is jokes about googles second page being useless because nobody goes there but oft times it'll be 3rd or 4th page where you might find real, unsponsored, info.

There are still a host of .edu type sites that have real information and I'm a member of several large science journal / pubmed style websites where I can find things I need.

I use unfiltered web search engines that operate better than google in a lot of areas. I also have paid VPN subscriptions through work that get me into several countries where I can find better results than I can in my own.

I think the information is still available, but the way we access that information is becoming more clouded.

I guess it all depends on what you are looking for. In a way its like driving into a town with 50 billboards. Its all bright and flashy with the "most popular" things, but sometimes what you want is gonna be on a small signpost beside a shop.

Another example of catering to the lowest common denominator. If 99% of everyone that searches "gsvrnppl" then heads to "Facebook" on their second search… google is going to make every "gsvrnppl" search go to Facebook.

We are simply exposed to so much informatioon that was probably already there BEFORE the internet. BUt not as accessible information.

Okay, people say that this is an age of Explosion Of Information as well - "every second there is so much new informaion generated", but I doubt it. In my opinion, at least a part of it was already there - just not … "digested" as such.

On the other hand, I'm quite sure that at one point a new movement will arise, by people who want to go away from the internet. And go into a farmer's house. Doing farmwork everyday. It's so much more simple.
The positive of that is that as a farmer you neither have the time to get all of this information, nor is this information coming to you. At least as long as you *own* the land you are living on.

But my fear is that this overflow of information might merely lead into the building of computers and of AI to filter this out for us … and we, humanity, becoming so much dependend on these machines like in Wall-E.

My worst fear, though, is that something similar to Skynet will arise - even right now it becomes more and more difficult to define where google's or Apple's AI got which information from where, and where and how within its "branches" it is stored … We are giving LOTS of data to firms which are developing self-learning AIs with that - but in the end no-one knows what's ATUALLY happening "within" these AIs …

And add to that a self-learning virus created by criminals that breaks free on the internet … Imagine ALL internet nodes might become needed to be SHUT DOWN in order to cripple that virus …

Our FAR WORST failure is to NOT add Ethics to what Scientists and the IT industry are developing … We are still in some kind of "Wild West" age regardimng AI development … What will come out of it ?

"Ethics and Philosophy are for loosers", it seems … Just look at Microsoft, Monsanto, Face Book, Google, …

The answer is simple, in the early days most of the Internet was used by Universities and educated people to share information. There was very few commercial websites, even less "exhibit yourself social networks" websites too.

What happened is basically dilution of the information among all the other crap.

And there is also some statistics that suggest few people on the internet can actually read. For example, in the Quebec province of Canada, 50% of the population is illiterate (about half functional), I believe the stats is similar for all of Canada. In 2009, 77% of the population of the province had access to the Internet, today that's probably in the 90%. That would suggest that a good 50% of the people on the web can't read or write much.

The interwebz is like a magic potion that can be either a buff or debuff. It makes smart people smarter, and dumb people dumber.

I think it depends on what you are using the internet for and what you look for (if the focus here is on finding information). I also suspect ones intellectual ability and ability to think critically plays a big part (i.e. what Ripper alluded to).

Here are some broad things I find the internet very useful for and usually easy to find - looking up a capital of a country; what does Tetrachromacy mean; my driver gave me a KMODE_EXCEPTION error, what does it mean and how do I solved it?; recipe for sunflower seed pumpkin pie; and so on.

Then you get into more vague areas where you have to be careful about where the search engines might lead you. What is the difference between socialism and democratic socialism? Is group X a hate group? Do GMO foods cause cancer?

In short the more that bias and subjectivity can get into the answers/results the more care that is needed - as people will often not be aware of the bias involved (or not give enough emphasis to potential bias or further research what is presented).

Hence why information/knowledge in general, however it is gained, can be dangerous even for educated people. But I do see some more risk when it comes to search engines and various social media feeds - especially those that try to filter content to fit your online behaviors.

We want to confirm our own bias and tend to follow results that support our views and beliefs and avoid those that go against it. Studies have shown that the stronger a belief is held the more likely that emotion will over-rule logic even when faced with the facts.

Then of course there is all the information that is just wrong, the propaganda, the people who don't read and jump to conclusions, the people who pick and choose the stats and facts to support their own belief, and so on.

In short I think the internet just mirrors what has always existed but multiplied and made a lot more accessible. Even the idea that something like FB will filter content based on what "it" thinks you want to see. That is similar to surrounding yourself with like-minded friends or only watching certain news networks or reading only certain newspapers or magazines.

So I do not think it has declined but it can be more dangerous perhaps? Not sure on the right word, insidious perhaps? It is how people access, use, and comprehend the information that is more problematic IMO.

Originally Posted by wolfgrimdark
recipe for sunflower seed pumpkin pie

Eh?
Erm… If I ever visit wherever you are, I hope you'll bake some of that.

Thoughts?

I'd say you wanted help looking for information. What can't you find?

Information is not knowledge and the difference hasn't been acknowledged at large. We have information but little quality control for that information. Information has been distorted to serve a profit agenda or distorted because of censorship/trying to control the message so we have plenty of information but little of it has real value or merely shows us what others want us to think.