|
Post by shotbang on Jul 21, 2012 5:51:44 GMT
What extent do you feel that negative effects outweigh or stand as issues within the steam of current digital technologies and the internet?
While the obvious evolution of digital technology states that what is evolved is therefore more practical, superior, presents itself as the example of what needs to be followed, bought, converted, upgraded to not only keep up to date but for new or better use.
While this may ring true to a certain degree it also has room for disagreement.
I have many dislikes and things i don't agree or refuse to follow regarding current tech trends and the internet.
I would like to know a bit of how you feel on this subject this first before elaborating.
I will elaborate once I feel that you are interested in this topic.
(Another point I plan to bring up. Is life without or takedown of the internet. Are there active groups who entirely boycott the internet and others who plan to take it down? If so, what is their incentive?)
|
|
|
Post by Walker on Jul 21, 2012 23:41:20 GMT
Johann Most probably made the first "Anarchist Cookbook" with "Science of Revolutionary Warfare". Other anarchists have said "we use the tools of the master to destroy him with". My feelings on technology is that I use it, but am skeptical of its subversive use. Many felt that the Internet would herald a less controlling, more democratic environment. What appears is that it has brought the ability for more control and less need of democracy. I'm very critical of democracy, especially when used to justify the behaviors of a state, unions or business as somehow "good". It is just a decision-making form that often creates its own problems that also just as often downplay or are critical of individual initiative.
The current technology does sort of "empower" the individual in some ways by making it easier to connect with people for short communications. On the long term, it disassociates us from each other, makes us more separate and isolated, living more in a simulation of connection than real connection. For example, I like meeting people face-to-face to discuss and do things, even if it might be easier in ways to text or call someone to get what is desired done.
This is more a guideline on how I like to live life rather than some sort of rule. I make phone calls, I use the Internet, I carry a cellphone, I listen to music sometimes when I walk around, I take a car even if I'm saving a few minutes for repetitive travels (i.e. trip to the store to buy cigarettes).
I don't see technology as "neutral". Technology is part of our system of control. It creates a view that there is an objective truth to how reality is perceived, even when that "truth" is always changing given new evidence. What is more efficient on time and energy through the use of technology often also carries the consequence of slowing forgetting other ways of doing things that don't rely on technology. What seems like a freeing technology very often can be reconsidered into how to control people in new and/or different ways.
Anyways, I can't speak of how the future of technology will or should function or even if it should even be a part of our lives, but I do know it is with us now and we can and sometimes should use it to further our ends in the present.
|
|
|
Post by shotbang on Jul 23, 2012 19:54:54 GMT
I make use of common technologies but when it comes down to beening force fed these corporate hipster fashion accessories such as ipads, touchscreen phones and so on i just pretend they don't exist. I see no point. Most of them I find replusive and are a complete waste of money. They are not as economical or innovation as people think. They basicially gimmicks that work around size, navigation and speed features on technology that hasn't truely changed in the last given 10 years and I see little benefit anyways.
I'm just not a fan of how specific recent digital technologies have replaced what was considered to be existing in physical form, and how it globally isolates us into "false" simulations that underestimate the power or benefits of physical existence, under this forced pretext that they are more practical. Not just socially but this goes for deeper concepts of "technology" and "art" even relating to the current generation/globalization relating habitual or mediated forms of viewing or accessing (internet) content which seems to have left a dent somewhere.
Now obviously this form of technology (internet and computer) has given us show benefits that are useful for us especially when used to further our ends and other wise. The last 15+ years have shown this and the benefits of this medium which have improved and grown over time.
However the use of such tools really has tampered with some of the negative traits of this generation's (Gen-Y) characteristics. It could be said that self-entitled mentality, immaturity, lack of contribution towards creating art, entertainment in the same vein as previous generations, and clickeyness has really has proved not to work towards any form of collective rebellion (as where gen-x and prior gens this had existed for a long time) because now you have kids who were spoon-fed and habitually raised in a way to receive instant gratification and information which took away from other processes that could have collectively led this generation to be more of individualistic, and more rebellious.
The very nature of using the same tools, and the ease with which we all searching the same sites has a negative side which is that everything becomes standardized, we lose the colors, obscurities, we end up too similar to each other, which isn’t always a good thing. The ease in which something can be posted on something like Wikipedia or google, YouTube, etc.. Sometimes cheapens or renders it meaningless the content simply because of it it’s easy accessibility and context in some cases. I think being able to contain a given form it a VERY sacred thing.
When everything is all over the place in the way the internet is laid out it just cheapens it or just steals its exclusivity. It’s like when you see this endless list of bootleg videos for your favorite bands on YouTube. Nothing beats owning the ordering from the bootleg place that sells obscure bootleg cds.
While technology continues to do what it does there are a few things I don’t really compromise with:
Books (lack of physical attachment to a device, ability to flip pages, and roam), Music (Cd still better than lossless and distinctly much better than MP3s) Film (Photographic image has more meaning when not scanned and when created with analog photographic processes, movies are better watched on television from a superior source non compressed source or original film)
Art, Design and so is always has more value when done by hand. I considered even the google search for example reference/inspiration to be sin sometimes.
Some Questions:
Do find the following names: Google, Apple, Facebook, Wikipedia, Twitter, Myspace, Itunes, Youtube cringe worthy in “some” respect or/ and would want them at least taken down for a day?
Do feel that is sometimes ruins the nature of distributed work by just existing and being able to be accessed by people who don't necessarily deserve or are prepared to understand or appreciate it.
Do believe a large majority of message boards in new era tend to foster or perpetuate people towards certain codes of conversation and more rigid xenophobic and bully like attitudes towards people outside their group structure again bringing down this notion of “connectivity”?
Do believe "copyrighted material" is necessarily given better due through free downloading/viewing through in the main current medium as opposed to trade or "free exchange" through physical means such as: swap meeting, borrowing, photocopying, rewriting, or mail? Do you believe the latter has something to offer that outweighs the first method? Or they can both work or vice versa
Do feel that the internet nurtures free speech for the dumb which kind of devolves people
Would you ever boycott the internet for a given period of time? For a particular reason?
|
|
|
Post by Walker on Jul 27, 2012 9:46:39 GMT
I'm not very concerned with these names personally, though it would be of interest if they were taken down in some way.
This seems more like a Web 1.0 vs. Web 2.0 problem. Where the Internet and being computer savvy were seen as connected, while the new accessibility is seen as a dilution of the joy the old web offered. I am not concerned about this. It does make Internet users more passive consumers rather than active performers on the web. I am not a computer hacker or a programmer and have a slightly higher than average computer knowledge.
I enjoy phpBB styled message boards the most of all ways to interact on the web. Because this style has become outdated, I've scattered my interest quite a bit with no large focus on blogs, anarchist news sites, imageboards and other sites where some level of discussion can be had.
I mainly use the Internet to have anarchist discussions, keep up on news, share images and get video games. I'll go through phases where I view youtube, but usually this is to listen to music. I do very little filesharing, though I do share table top roleplaying games on occasion.
I prefer anti-copyright, piracy, public domain and then various types of copylefts. I think information sharing and computer based development is impeded by copyrights.
Not really. I feel when people were more bulletin board centric people were encouraged people to do their own research and engage in more stimulating conversations. Now with social media beyond bulletin boards, there is a larger acceptance of less interesting conversations, with people able to click "like" buttons or "vote" on comments rather than attempt to make their own comment. At first it seemed like a boon to have these buttons for discussion because short comments are annoying, but it seems the short comments still come, but aim to crowd please. This seems less encouraging of longer nuanced comments, which I tend to enjoy if not overly academic.
No.
|
|