When we look at the world it is important to recognize that we are looking at the history of different civilizations, however, we all have a common story.
We are born and we die.
Today the story is the same but with more mobility in-between, however, we’ve not changed a dot and it is certain that we will go on making things that will change or existence.
With to days technology, we are on the threshold of not just a new Industrial revolution but changing how we exist and where we exist.
The outline of a mobile phone as we know has changed not just rural Africa and Asia – putting communities in touch, giving access to information and money it is now also creating Social media platforms which are in the process of disconnecting us from reality.
This week Facebook, Google, and Twitter appeared in front of Congress. After which it is obvious, that we are not asking the right questions yet, or we have not found any good answers just yet as to why our world is getting sicker and sicker and it’s not Einstine science as to why.
When it comes to the world we can not cure just one aspect of the sickness, we must address an array of inherited illness.
Our new technological world is removing the need to think, to read, to imagine, to function, to communicate, to earn respect, to know why is true or a false pleasure, to plan long-term.
In other words, the internet has been infected by the problems that we all suffer.
What is need is that we need to take our existence back, whether it be as consumers, as citizens, and say we actually want to have some say over how all of this technology works, because we’ve really given that over to the tech companies ( outside of China, for the rest of the world, there are five big tech companies who really run everything) that have little or no ethical interest in other than profit
Why?
Because before we become the product for internet service providers, no longer just customers. we need a social movement around this issues to stop us all being run by the same algorithms brains driven by different programs that are incapable of acting for the common good.
Greed, inequality, you name it, our political affiliation, based upon the top-level domain information of websites you visit, your sexual orientation, where you like to shop, your financial status, race, gender can now be figured out based on the information that they collect and use.
If we didn’t have the bullshit movies, TV shows and sports pumping fake feel-good emotions into our systems, we would all feel the great weight of our inaction in an era where we need to get off our fucking asses and take a stand.
All the world’s problems are not on the internet.
We’re not supposed to watch a screen that pumps fake feel-good emotions into us.
It is quite plausible in the not so distant future we will have nothing serious to contribute when the hype – intelligent software supersedes humanity with genomics, nanotechnology, and robotics. New computer chips specialized for AI will power how we engineer genes, proteins, materials. Quantum computing a million times quicker than present-day computers will change the fields of drug development, manufacturing, and material science.
It will all be very murky but the potential is truly staggering.
Its now or never that we harness all this technology for if a day comes that the final decision is left to a Robotic brain rest assured that,Hal 9000 VS Dave will come true.
The problem these day is that it has become so complicated that we are not communicating but disconnecting. Without a physical presence its impossible to communicate other than send a message.
When I say Happy New year to you without any physical input I could be a computer that is wishing you happy new year with no understanding of happiness or time.
Let’s start with the digital world of Communication.
Like any other technology it undeniably makes parts of life so much easier and is here to stay.
We are bombarded by information, thanks in large part to the internet and its allied technologies.
But exposure to unlimited information is not the same thing as the ability to capture it as knowledge or synthesize it as understanding.
“We are living in a state of perpetual distraction,”
Everything is moving so fast that we’ve got to adapt to it, keep up with it!
It takes all of one’s energy & speed to simply remain in one place while running.
But what sort of life is that? How much depth does it really have?
Yet the digital world constantly makes us break life into discrete, interchangeable bits that hurtle us forward so rapidly & inexorably that we simply don’t have time to stop & think. And before we know it, we’re unwilling & even unable to think. Not in any way that allows true self-awareness in any real context.
We are fast arriving at the point of confusion of information and personal knowledge.
There’s no app that makes you tolerant — it happens person by person.
Different media encourage different ways of thinking, and helped tie together a number of broad ideas for me regarding the evolution of human cognition and the influence of the tools we use.
On one hand the Internet is short-changing our brain power. It is making us shallower creatures, diverting our attention and fragmenting of our thoughts.
On the other it has made the information universes of all of us much larger.
It has and still is altering the way we read, and the way we pay attention.
Our relationship with technology is just beginning, but we do not need to be the slaves of the predominant technology like the smart phone or be lead by the hypnotic Internet, where portals lead us on from one text, image, or video to another while we’re being bombarded by messages, alerts, and feeds.
Not only are we thinking differently with different media, the Internet is frying our brains?
Reconfiguring our brains, we are also forging a “new intellectual ethic”.
Greater access to knowledge is not the same as greater knowledge.
– An ever-increasing plethora of facts & data is not the same as wisdom.
– Breadth of knowledge is not the same as depth of knowledge.
– Multitasking is not the same as complexity.
What are the consequences of new habits of mind that abandon sustained immersion and concentration for darting about, snagging bits of information? What is gained and what is lost?
“Is Google Making Us Stupid?”
It can be reshaped, and the way that we think can be reshaped, for good or for ill.
Thus, if the brain is trained to respond to & take pleasure in the faster pace of the digital world, it is reshaped to favor that approach to experiencing the world as a whole. More, it comes to crave that experience, as the body increasingly craves more of anything it’s trained to respond to pleasurably & positively. The more you use a drug, the more you need to sustain even the basic rush.
It comes at a price. As the media theorist Marshall McLuhan pointed out in the 1960s, media are not just passive channels of information. They supply the stuff of thought, but they also shape the process of thought. And what the Net seems to be doing is chipping away at our capacity for concentration and contemplation. Our mind now expects to take in information the way the Net distributes it: in a swiftly moving stream of particles.
Once you were a scuba diver in the sea of words. Now you zip along the surface like a guy on a Jet Ski.
The individual seeks out ‘virtual worlds’ that simplify interactions because the ‘real world’ is difficult to access, but when confronted with the ‘real world’ problems, that’s when the individual becomes turned off from dealing with their ‘real’ life, further perpetuating this vicious cycle towards isolation.”
Our future tools and tech may offer a new playing field, but we’re the same old players. Sure, we may wear robotic fighting exoskeletons — but we’re still going to war and falling in love and arguing with our moms.
When relationships become out of balance, would technology really fill the void or is it a vapid substitution?
While fully recognizes the usefulness of the Internet are we buying into the attractive fashionable modern viewpoint that just being exposed to a lot of information via technology will make us smart.
I am afraid not. There is a sleazy, materialist shallowness about it that most of us don’t enjoy called Porn.
Foraging in the Web’s info-thickets’reading and writing e-mails, scanning headlines and blog posts, watching videos and listening to podcasts, or just tripping from link to link to link. (Unlike footnotes, to which they’re sometimes likened, hyperlinks don’t merely point to related works; they propel you toward them.)
The Net is becoming a universal medium, the conduit for most of the information that flows through your eyes and ears and into your mind.
The advantages of having immediate access to such an incredibly rich store of information are many, and they’ve been widely described and duly applauded.
However it’s not communication.
Thinking, has taken on a “staccato” quality, reflecting the way we quickly scans short passages of text from many sources online.
“I can’t read War and Peace anymore, I’ve lost the ability to do that. Even a blog post of more than three or four paragraphs is too much to absorb. I skim it.” The deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle.
As our reliance on ever brighter and faster Internet content increases, a new force is taking hold across the culture of the Web-connected world, leading to changes in reading habits and even in human brains.
The Internet trends of today foreshadow the surfing, the teaching, learning, and thinking of tomorrow.
The picture of our intellectual future, rendered thoroughly, convincingly, and often beautifully
I suppose it all boils down to so long as we aren’t stupid enough to stop cultivating our individual minds regardless of technology changes, media itself will not make us stupid.
The wisest will still turn off the TV and other distractions when sustained concentration is called for, and they will understand the difference between various conditions and different kinds of media in general and will use each to its best advantage.
They though when the printed word was invented or the radio, or Television there would be adverse consequences. However none of these things has had the dire consequences that culture critics predicted, we have adapted in turn in some way to each of them, more or less successfully.
Then again if all knowledge ends up store in the Cloud along with our modern-day History. ( History illustrates our failures, and without history, we do not have the tools to create a successful future.) and we have deserts of Technology the art of communication will be lost to generations to come ruled by Holograms and Algorithms of the Internet.
But to think that we “learn” from history is somewhat of an illusion when you look around the world. I feel that we only learn selective elements in history and probably pay more attention to history when it cost resources such as time, money or material. Think of the number of times genocide has happened in our recorded history and despots–even today–continue genocidal practices falsely believing that their regime is justified.
The neurological effects of the Internet are still to come. This is why we should incorporating the best of the latest technology in a way that improves education.
Education is Communication.
Will we do anything? Are we capable of recognizing the dangers? We should be look at the world. We all living in our private clouds designed by The Smart Phone Communication.
If we want a more rewarding life we have to let the whole world know. (see previous posts)
I hope this post is not too long for you to leave a comment rather then pressing the like button.
The Internet’s impact on culture, business, and politics is vast, for sure.
It is becoming a bigger part of our lives everyday, making life more convenient but also taking away the human element of living in the moment and making relationships more superficial.
But where actually is it take us?
To answer that question is difficult, because the Internet is not simply a set of interconnecting links and protocols connecting packet switchednetworks, but it is also a construct of imagination, an inkblot test into which everybody projects their desires, fears and fantasies. Some see enlightenment and education. Others see pornography and gambling. Some see sharing and collaboration; others see e-commerce and profit.
The purpose of this post however is not to highlight all that the Internet has achieved or all that it will achieve.
It is to ask the question is it good for a Democratic World.?
We know that it is exposing Capitalism for what it is and Communism for what it wants, along with the comity of Nations. It is making us ask what a well-functioning democratic order requires.
It is creating a world people’s voice that could be manipulated in the extreme.
You might think with all the other problems the world faces this it is of little importance. You would be wrong as it is shaping the Future.
As a result of the Internet and other technological developments, many people are increasingly engaged in a process of “personalization” that limits their exposure to topics and points of view of their own choosing.
The growing power of consumers to “filter” what they see and the servers to dish up what they want you to see is from the standpoint of democracy, a mixed blessing.
But in a heterogeneous society, such a system requires something other than free, or publicly unrestricted, individual choices. Without shared experiences, a heterogeneous society will have a more difficult time addressing social problems and understanding one another.
People should be exposed to materials that they would not have chosen in advance.
As a matter of technological feasibility, our communications market is moving rapidly toward this apparently utopian picture which is a far cry from reality.
It is happening on the Internet where private corporate interests rule, money calls the shots, and we the people are seen as mere subjects to be controlled.
We are moving into “Corporatism which is the halfway point on the road to full-blown fascism.
Consider this: It is estimated that the 2016 presidential election in the USA could cost as much a $5 billion, more than double what was spent getting Obama re-elected in 2012.
We are allowing ourselves to become fearful, controlled, pacified zombies, Screen watchers.
The internet is introducing a system of perfect individual control reducing the importance of the “public sphere” and of common spaces in general. It is increasing people’s ability to wall themselves off from topics and opinions that they would prefer to avoid.
I am sure that if new technologies diminish the number of common spaces, and reduce, for many, the number of unanticipated, unchosen exposures, something important will have been lost.
Because the Internet has changed the quantity and range of information available to citizens, it directly influences how societies evaluate government performance—in all parts of the globe.
It is Changing Democratic Attitudes throughout the World.
It is altered the informational relationship between governments and their citizens.
In how information is packaged, how that information can be physically transmitted and the networks that determine who can send and receive those transmissions. This has meant the largest decentralization in communication capacity and increase in expressive capacity that we have ever seen in human history—particularly in nations where access to political information tended to be very limited, often due to strict government censorship of traditional media.
Thus, the expansion of the Internet has significant ramifications on the amount and type of information that individuals use to evaluate their governments.
The global nature of the Internet opens a larger window for individuals to better view how governments function in other countries, particularly the advanced democracies that are most visible on the Internet. This provides users with a more realistic and globally consistent scale by which to make comparative evaluations about how well their own government functions.
As a result, the Internet is playing a central role in shaping the political evaluations and resultant satisfaction that citizens have toward their governments.
This is significant because the impetus to act politically—from day-to-day civic activities to the more extreme cases of protest and revolution—begins in the minds of men and women.
An understanding of this mix will permit us to obtain a better sense of what makes for a well-functioning system of free expression and to address the serious dangers that are hidden within the Internet.
For example the creation of perfect and splendid isolation, or a process of getting over disagreements, or the undermining our values to the detriment of the all of us.
The reasons why the Internet is supposed to strengthen democracy include the following.
1.The Internet lowers the entry barriers to political participation.
2. It strengthens political dialogue.
3. It creates community.
4. It cannot be controlled by government.
5. It increases voting participation.
6. It permits closer communication with officials.
7. It spreads democracy world-wide.
In contrast, the Internet, far from helping democracy, is a threat to it precisely because the Internet is powerful and revolutionary, it also affects, and even destroys, all traditional institutions–including–democracy.
To deny this potential is to invite a backlash when the ignored problems eventually emerge.
So why will there be problems?
Because more than half of communications traffic is data rather than voice.
Because it has been liberated from the terror of the PC as its gateway into the world of Smart Phones.
Our smartphones have become Swiss army knife–like appliances that include a dictionary, calculator, web browser, email, Game Boy, appointment calendar, voice recorder, guitar tuner, weather forecaster, GPS, texter, tweeter, Facebook updater, and flashlight.
Because a politically disenfranchised digital underclass is emerging.
Because with the commercialization of the Internet things previously unreachable are now available through our personal computers.
Because cars will be chatting with highways. Suitcases will complain to airlines. Front doors will check in with police departments. Pacemakers will talk to hospitals. Television sets will connect to video servers. Keeping this aggregated information in the cloud allows researchers and developers to examine the data and identify “digital bio markers” to inform prevention, diagnoses and treatment in a constellation of brain and mental disorders that are now mostly defined by subjective symptoms.
Because it is making Politics More Expensive and Raise Entry Barriers.
Because it is making reasoned and informed political dialog more difficult.
Because it disconnects as much as it connects.
With the increase of smartphones in recent years many have all griped about the narcissism of people who spend all their time on social networks, text messaging at a dinner table or taking photos of the food they eat.
Because it is facilitating the International Manipulation of Domestic Politics.
Because it will essentially making the world a global village with vast deserts of highly visible inequalities which would not be possible without the internet.
And this is why ubiquitous, scalable technology such as the Internet must be part of the solution if we are to avoid an information-choked societies.
Because it is creating a mental fog or scrambled thinking in a kind of weird, impersonal cyber way.
Constant multitasking is taking its toll.
Although we think we’re doing several things at once, multitasking, this is a powerful and diabolical illusion. Ironically, multitasking makes us demonstrably less efficient. The flow of information can be overwhelming and lead to “paralysis by analysis.” Chronic multi-tasking can make us less productive, not more. Increased choices and uncertainty can lead to increased stress and anxiety.
Because it is causing fragmentation, increasing cost, and declining value of “hard” information. Our brains are busier than ever before. We’re assaulted with facts, pseudo facts, jibber-jabber, and rumour, all posing as information.
Make no mistake: email-, Facebook- and Twitter-checking constitute a neural addiction.
It’s naïve to cling to the image of the early Internet – – nonprofit, cooperative, and free.
You might say that the CONTROVERSY ITSELF is superficial; as the obvious reality is the internet and technology are not only here to stay, but constantly evolving and permeating more of our lives.
The real conversation should be how we can best use the Internet in smarter ways that help us to monitor and enhance the brain, and how can we actively prepare to manage information overload.
“Big Data” applications are becoming available and capable of helping personalize brain health tools at the individual level, based on both past data and information gathered over time. This, in turn, is already changing research and preventive health practices. Tablet-based screenings can be instrumental in diagnoses of Alzheimer’s and MCI.
Mobile devices are already entering the sports world, with cognitive tests for concussions. Institutions like AAA have begun large-scale web-based assessments and cognitive training that works on driver’s cognitive skills in order to become safer (and less expensive to insure) drivers.
Now, every new technology presents a fair set of challenges. It is important to note that these are quasi-universal features of modern life, not the type of conditions of disorders that our medical system is set up to address.
There is talk about how social networks and new devices like the Google Glass visor have diluted privacy, smart phone apps “turning us into sociopaths” and the danger of turning over our daily routines to new technology like Apple’s Siri digital assistant.
The trick will be in properly preparing and guiding people to adapt to the mental demands of a modern society. Fortunately it is us, not the Internet, who have a plastic and resilient brain.
My conclusion is that information does not necessarily weaken Democracy or the state but electronic voting will not strengthen democracy as it will be manipulated by Big data.
So is the internet good for the brain?
If the analytical and collaborative power of the internet is used properly to monitor and enhance brain functionality in a cost-effective, scalable manner the answer can be a resounding “yes”
At the moment it is having a negative impact on our societies having a polarizing effect on democracies. Although it has the capacity to bring people together, too often the associations formed online comprise self-selecting groups with little diversity of opinion.
Free speech on the Internet is not enough to ensure a healthy democracy. The conception of free speech emerging in today’s communications market emphasizes “an architecture of control…by which each of us can select a [customized] free-speech package.”
Google News feed filters out the information we receive. It is a product of what information we demand.
We should create twenty-first-century equivalents of the kinds of public spaces and institutions where diverse people will congregate.
If we are to avoid western democracy being hobbled by disengagement, falling turnout, and disconnection with citizens we must counter the growing power of consumers to “filter” what they “see” will create information ghettos and isolated citizens.
The Internet changes expectations. The Avaaz 41 million-strong online internet community is a prime example.
It lowers the economic and information cost of group formation and the internet lends itself to this type of direct connection, and hence is likely to create demands for more direct forms of democracy. But the way the Internet empowers people – by giving them huge choice over the information they receive – can make them less likely to engage in a free debate of ideas.
Why?
Because there will be neither leaders nor agendas to make Governments sit down with their detractors.
Citizens can use new media to avoid, rather than embrace, new ideas or common experiences.
The Internet, as a highly democratic and participatory medium, can perform democratic wonders. But the bien pensant e-Democracy consensus is wrong and dangerous if it thinks this will happen automatically. All of these facets are critical if we are to thrive at a human.
Like any other technology it undeniably makes parts of life so much easier and is here to stay.
Everything is moving so fast that we’ve got to adapt to it, keep up with it!
