Sunday, October 26, 2014
   
Text Size

Search our Site or Google

Welcome, Guest
Please Login or Register.    Lost Password?
Where the rest of the stuff goes

Go to bottomPage: 12345
TOPIC: Google is CHANGING
#22215
Re: Google is CHANGING 1 Year, 8 Months ago Karma: 75
Jeff Nielson wrote:
The other aspect of this "social-networking" which I find so insidious/destructive is one of the few areas of "New World Order" theorizing which I find to be plausible/convincing: breaking down not only the "family unit", but the "Community".

Think about it: if we weren't CHAINED to our computers for so many hours a day, how much MORE personal, real, human contact would most of us be having in our lives?

With "forums" like this where there is the exchange of ideas which goes beyond-the-superficial; we can argue that the VALUE of such contact outweighs the cost of less interaction with friends/family/local community.

However, with Facebook, Twitter, and any othe social-networking which should surface; there is no "gain" to outweigh the loss. Surrendering privacy, and providing endless amounts of personal data, WASTING huge amounts of time in trivial small-talk with strangers...and our local, personal (tribal) bonds grow weaker and weaker.

Certainly as parents (and/or grand-parents) we need to be at least trying to warn/educate the children in our own family-trees to avoid these intellectual/social CANCERS.




Jeff Nielson wrote:
The other aspect of this "social-networking" which I find so insidious/destructive is one of the few areas of "New World Order" theorizing which I find to be plausible/convincing: breaking down not only the "family unit", but the "Community".

Think about it: if we weren't CHAINED to our computers for so many hours a day, how much MORE personal, real, human contact would most of us be having in our lives?

With "forums" like this where there is the exchange of ideas which goes beyond-the-superficial; we can argue that the VALUE of such contact outweighs the cost of less interaction with friends/family/local community.

However, with Facebook, Twitter, and any othe social-networking which should surface; there is no "gain" to outweigh the loss. Surrendering privacy, and providing endless amounts of personal data, WASTING huge amounts of time in trivial small-talk with strangers...and our local, personal (tribal) bonds grow weaker and weaker.

Certainly as parents (and/or grand-parents) we need to be at least trying to warn/educate the children in our own family-trees to avoid these intellectual/social CANCERS.




Your comments make me want to get up and cheer! And do a little jig. Point by point you have articulated many of my own thoughts about it, thoughts that have been building in my mind for years. You have articulated some of my own thoughts better than I have been able to do myself. Thank you for taking the time to do this!

I mentioned the example of taking a hike earlier and reporting about in it via twitter. Perhaps unsuccessfully, I was trying to convey some irony. You just had a completely non-synthetic experience wherein you potentially communed with nature, enjoyed natural beauty, spent time with the nature goddess, or whatever, and you then create a SYNTHETIC reality out of it by blabbing a few nearly meaningless words about it to the ENTIRE world.

The experience of taking the nature hike, particularly with another living, breathing human being who can appreciate it as well, appeals to me. Tweeting about it, on the other hand, is like taking a gourmet meal fresh out of the oven and making a TV dinner out of it.
agau121
Mid-Tier Producer
Posts: 665
graphgraph
User Offline Click here to see the profile of this user
Last Edit: 2013/02/19 12:46 By agau121.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
 
#22223
Re: Google is CHANGING 1 Year, 8 Months ago Karma: 263
While Samix may view Twitter as a lesser-evil; to me it's just as destructive. Note how the propaganda machine hypes Twitter (here in the West). We are now continually bombarded with what "famous" people have "Tweeted"; when almost without exception the content of those "Tweets" is no more notable than reporting they had passed wind (in fact, perhaps it's the same thing?).

The goal here is something I utterly despise: the mindless "Hero worship" in Western societies. After a century of egalitarianism, and promoting the ideal of "equality"; now we see the propaganda machine getting VERY hierarchical.

There are the Little People, and then there are our Betters. Why would we want to waste time in personal contact with our neighbours when we could have our eyes locked on our computer screens -- hoping our favorite "celebrities" will be good enough to share their opinion on today's weather???



This is one of the many virtues of forums: no Hierarchy. The only difference is that some of us are much more long-winded than others...

Jeff Nielson
Admin
Posts: 13369
graph
User Offline Click here to see the profile of this user
Last Edit: 2013/02/19 19:22 By Jeff Nielson.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
 
#22225
Re: Google is CHANGING 1 Year, 8 Months ago Karma: 75
Jeff Nielson wrote:
We are now continually bombarded with what "famous" people have "Tweeted"; when almost without exception the content of those "Tweets" is no more notable than reporting they had passed wind (in fact, perhaps it's the same thing?).

The goal here is something I utterly despise: the mindless "Hero worship" in Western societies. After a century of egalitarianism, and promoting the ideal of "equality"; now we see the propaganda machine getting VERY hierarchical.


On the other hand, there are some people who claim that twitter and other forms of social media are the great equalizers because ANYONE can broadcast whatever jibber jabber he wants to at any moment 24/7. I mentioned my friend of mine earlier who is a web master at a major high-profile university. He is a strong advocate (evangelist?) of twitter and has taken the attitude with me that I'm like some old has been, as if I'm living like an Amish person shunning technology because I will not tweet my thoughts instead of having a personal discussion with him via email. He seems to think that Twitter is empowering to people, that somehow it is a glorious improvement in communications that I simply must, must, must learn to use or be left behind in the dust. Whatever. I simply do not like it and do not like BROADCASTING every thought I have.

While he is the most enthusiastic user of twitter I have ever known--in fact really the only user I can identify as a person I also know personally--he also pokes fun at people who only follow celebrities, so he certainly is not participating in the celebrity phenomenon that you describe. He acts as if--and I am in no position to render my own judgment--there is an entirely unseen groovy world that exists on twitter that I will only discover if I join in and start tweet, tweet, tweeting. I don't get it.

He recently suggested that I should tweet some thought that I had articulated to him in an email. My reply was, "And reading it on Twitter would make it how many times more meaningful to you?"

His reply was:

"Not more meaningful! Just that it wouldn't be cluttering my inbox - it would become part of the daily sea of fly-by information and tidbits. Everything in its place. Email is for 'This needs your attention/response.' Social nets for 'Stuff I'll skim for a while when and if I have time.'"

I take this to mean that he does not wish to share information and thoughts. Perhaps I am out of line, perhaps I am mistaken, but I seem to remember that in the past people would share newspaper clippings and talk on the phone and exchange ideas and recommend books to each other or whatever. Apparently some people now expect that we say everything to the whole world or not say it at all and say it in 140 character or less in Orwellian newspeak, which creeps me out.

And even if Twitter were not a form of newspeak, I would not use it simply because I do not wish to have some unseen third party, and possibly a fourth party, monitoring and permanently archiving everything I say.
agau121
Mid-Tier Producer
Posts: 665
graphgraph
User Offline Click here to see the profile of this user
The administrator has disabled public write access.
 
#22227
Re: Google is CHANGING 1 Year, 8 Months ago Karma: 168
While Samix may view Twitter as a lesser-evil; to me it's just as destructive. Note how the propaganda machine hypes Twitter (here in the West). We are now continually bombarded with what "famous" people have "Tweeted"; when almost without exception the content of those "Tweets" is no more notable than reporting they had passed wind (in fact, perhaps it's the same thing?).
I agree Jeff, this is part of twitter that I find adds no value and is useless, my worthy application of twitter would be something like this

1) There is a protest and the leaders of the protest make a tweet account and everyone in the protest follows it, then the government sends in some thugs to turn the protest violent, the leaders can quickly tweet and make everyone aware of this plot, or tell them to move towards X or chant "NO VIOLENCE"

2) In a war zone a jouro running around with his phone can quickly tweet updates (if the regime has not shut down internet completely)

3) A school or an organization tweeting about "School is closed tomorrow"

I agree that the most despicable tweets are a celebrity tweeting in the morning "Woke up from a bad hangover after last nights party" and a million followers going "get well soon", "Poor baby lets have a prayer meet for him/her"(lol)
samix
Mid-Tier Producer
Posts: 1564
graphgraph
User Offline Click here to see the profile of this user
The administrator has disabled public write access.
 
#22233
Re: Google is CHANGING 1 Year, 8 Months ago Karma: 263
samix wrote:
While Samix may view Twitter as a lesser-evil; to me it's just as destructive. Note how the propaganda machine hypes Twitter (here in the West). We are now continually bombarded with what "famous" people have "Tweeted"; when almost without exception the content of those "Tweets" is no more notable than reporting they had passed wind (in fact, perhaps it's the same thing?).
I agree Jeff, this is part of twitter that I find adds no value and is useless, my worthy application of twitter would be something like this

1) There is a protest and the leaders of the protest make a tweet account and everyone in the protest follows it, then the government sends in some thugs to turn the protest violent, the leaders can quickly tweet and make everyone aware of this plot, or tell them to move towards X or chant "NO VIOLENCE"

2) In a war zone a jouro running around with his phone can quickly tweet updates (if the regime has not shut down internet completely)

3) A school or an organization tweeting about "School is closed tomorrow"

I agree that the most despicable tweets are a celebrity tweeting in the morning "Woke up from a bad hangover after last nights party" and a million followers going "get well soon", "Poor baby lets have a prayer meet for him/her"(lol)



Agreed Samix.

It's not that Twitter doesn't have POTENTIALLY valid uses. It's that what is being used (and heavily promoted) generally has less-than-zero social utlility.

Jeff Nielson
Admin
Posts: 13369
graph
User Offline Click here to see the profile of this user
The administrator has disabled public write access.
 
#22234
Re: Google is CHANGING 1 Year, 8 Months ago Karma: 263
agau121 wrote:

...On the other hand, there are some people who claim that twitter and other forms of social media are the great equalizers because ANYONE can broadcast whatever jibber jabber he wants to at any moment 24/7. I mentioned my friend of mine earlier who is a web master at a major high-profile university. He is a strong advocate (evangelist?) of twitter and has taken the attitude with me that I'm like some old has been, as if I'm living like an Amish person shunning technology because I will not tweet my thoughts instead of having a personal discussion with him via email...

He recently suggested that I should tweet some thought that I had articulated to him in an email. My reply was, "And reading it on Twitter would make it how many times more meaningful to you?"

His reply was:

"Not more meaningful! Just that it wouldn't be cluttering my inbox - it would become part of the daily sea of fly-by information and tidbits.
Everything in its place. Email is for 'This needs your attention/response.' Social nets for 'Stuff I'll skim for a while when and if I have time.'"




Thanks for the detaile anecdote, as it allows me to illustrate a broader point. Why would any Independent Thinker ever need a "Facebook"?

Let me quote your Facebook-lover, who states his reason for enslaving himself to Facebook is to have a "daily sea of fly-by information and tidbits". In making this casual remark he has both revealed the deficiency of Facebook, and the principal delusion of Facebook-users.

A "daily sea of fly-by information and tidbits" is precisely what Facebook is all about. And of what possible use can "tidbits" and "fly-by information" be to us? Indeed, it is precisely because of the sound-bite (intellectually-stunted) manner in which information is now packaged and presented to us that we live in societies of educated idiots.

Sum-up everything these EI's (educated idiots) "know", and we find it is nothing but one, large compendium of a "daily sea of fly-by information and tidbits". Lots of (superficial) trivia, but zero comprehension of any (significant) aspect of the world around us.

The Facebook Delusion is that users can utilize such sites as "one-stop shops" to keep their 'fingers on the pulse'...of the universe. LOL!!! While your friend may pooh-pooh celebrity gossip, and may even PARROT items of genuine interest occasionally (and accidentally); I'm going to go out on a limb and "assume" that this friend has seldom-if-ever come to you with any Truths which he has been able to construct himself via his endless hours of Facebook-surfing.

Note that not only are such sites enormous time-wasters; but they are also insidious propagnda tools. Maybe your own friend is invulnerable to being assimilated into the hero-worship world of celebrity gossip. However, most of us have at least some (intellectual) "guilty pleasures": materials we consume on the net which we know waste our time. But like most "temptation" if it's not dangled in front of us we can avoid giving in to such indulgences. Facebook is the "shiny bead" you dangle in front of a monkey to distract him/her from anything else they were doing. And because it's so superficial, it gives very little in return.

Worse, many of us have biases -- which (like temptation) can be fed/inflamed by dangling some quasi hate-literature in front of us. With such an aggressive/insidious propaganda machine; the WORST thing which people can do is to give it a (more or less) unfiltered platform from which to broadcast into our minds on a daily basis.

More learning. Less "media". And zero "social media".


Jeff Nielson
Admin
Posts: 13369
graph
User Offline Click here to see the profile of this user
Last Edit: 2013/02/20 11:55 By Jeff Nielson.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
 
#22262
Re: Google is CHANGING 1 Year, 8 Months ago Karma: 75
Uuhhhh. My friend and I have been having this extended email "discussion" about social media and google and privacy. Below are some cut and pastes of his comments. I have no particular comment myself at this point, but his thoughts reflect a certain mentality that seems foreign and unsettling to me. I have no way of knowing if this will be of interest to anyone else, so please simply disregard this post if it is of no interest to you.

"I'm curious to know why you think you have privacy. I'm also curious to know what you think privacy is (many people talk about it without a clear idea of exactly what they think they're protecting or why private is better than public). You are taking pretty extreme measures, but the fact is that privacy died a long time ago. Your credit card company knows far more about you. The amount of information I could dig up on you would probably scare you to death, despite your actions to secure 'privacy.' I personally think that privacy is an outmoded notion, and that most people who try to protect privacy have no idea how public they already are. I also think that being part of 'aggregate data' is nothing to be scared of. The benefits of living in public vastly outweigh any negatives."

"Google only studies my stream for keywords so it can serve me relevant ads, which I ignore anyway. It doesn't creep me out - I simply couldn't care less. And truth be known, I'm glad I get served ads for ukuleles rather than makeup."

In response to me saying that I had NEVER read ANYTHING that that someone tweeted that would make it worthwhile to continue to read it or follow them:

"And that's true for every senator and congressperson on twitter, every leftist intellectual, every journalist... ? You don't want to read what the Dalai Lama or Deepak Chopra says on Twitter or G+? There is almost NO interesting person remaining on earth who isn't posting regularly on social nets. You honestly have no interest in what they have to say, or the links they suggest that you read?"
agau121
Mid-Tier Producer
Posts: 665
graphgraph
User Offline Click here to see the profile of this user
The administrator has disabled public write access.
 
#22335
Re: Google is CHANGING 1 Year, 8 Months ago Karma: 263
Thanks again to those who passed along ALTERNATE search-engines to Google.



While writing today's commentary, I tried to Google a phrase (mostly for laughs) which I knew would have many, many entries backing any legitimate search:

gold miners are reporting "record profits"

I tried Google, and got nothing but irrelevant crap. Then I did the same search at DuckDuckGo, and the following item came up near the top of the list. Needless to say, especially because of the source, I knew I had found the perfect link to use in today's commentary...



Will Gold Miners Finally Get Some Respect?
www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2012/02/24/w...t-some-respect/print

Jeff Nielson
Admin
Posts: 13369
graph
User Offline Click here to see the profile of this user
The administrator has disabled public write access.
 
#22563
Re: Google is CHANGING 1 Year, 7 Months ago Karma: 263
I've been using DuckDuckGo as my new search-engine to avoid the Google Octopus -- but apparently with little real effect. While it's somewhat easier to do my searching; I'm finding that my anti-spyware is picking-up at least as many tracking cookies as before, possibly more.



So we may be able to avoid using Google (at least somewhat), but that doesn't mean we can avoid it watching us...

Jeff Nielson
Admin
Posts: 13369
graph
User Offline Click here to see the profile of this user
The administrator has disabled public write access.
 
#22567
Re: Google is CHANGING 1 Year, 7 Months ago Karma: 168
duckduckgo.com does not track donttrack.us/ It may be tracking cookies set up by sites that you visit once duckduckgo redirects you.

Here is some info on how you can stop being tracked fixtracking.com/
samix
Mid-Tier Producer
Posts: 1564
graphgraph
User Offline Click here to see the profile of this user
The administrator has disabled public write access.
 
Go to topPage: 12345

Disclaimer:

BullionBullsCanada.com is not a registered investment advisor - Stock information is for educational purposes ONLY. Bullion Bulls Canada does not make "buy" or "sell" recommendations for any company. Rather, we seek to find and identify Canadian companies who we see as having good growth potential. It is up to individual investors to do their own "due diligence" or to consult with their financial advisor - to determine whether any particular company is a suitable investment for themselves.

Login Form