make me some tea: As much as I enjoy being able to read people's unwashed opinions on just about everything online, the downside to it is that I think that most people aren't willing or able to do that, and so they tend to seek out their own little comfortable echo chambers where any dissenters are quickly shouted down and purged.

LOUD NOISES!

make me some tea: As much as I enjoy being able to read people's unwashed opinions on just about everything online, the downside to it is that I think that most people aren't willing or able to do that, and so they tend to seek out their own little comfortable echo chambers where any dissenters are quickly shouted down and purged.

WHY ARE WE SHOUTING!?!

make me some tea: As much as I enjoy being able to read people's unwashed opinions on just about everything online, the downside to it is that I think that most people aren't willing or able to do that, and so they tend to seek out their own little comfortable echo chambers where any dissenters are quickly shouted down and purged.

make me some tea: This will not end well.

Just like this country when Obama's commie muslim gay agenda gets done raping it.

WTF Indeed: make me some tea: This will not end well.

Just like this country when Obama's commie muslim gay agenda gets done raping it.

This is Fartbongo's fault.

Approves!



Also approves

According to a new Rasmussen poll released today, 2 + 2 = 5. Anyone who disagrees is an undemocratic troll.

Ah the New York Times wistfully looking back at the time when no one questioned them and just took their word for it.

whither_apophis: Ah the New York Times wistfully looking back at the time when no one questioned them and just took their word for it.

Like their banging on war drums running up to Iraq.

You know, it's an interesting phenomenon. In the 'olden days', when writing could only be done on stone by artisans, it meant that only extremely important information was written down and saved. You had to be royalty to afford an engraver. With that, important writings could last thousands of years. With paper, more could be written, but it was more ephemeral - letters were still saved for only things worth spending money to send. Now, with digital correspondence, more is written than ever because there's no cost to writing it. But, at the same time, almost all of it is worthless. If anything, the current state of affairs means that the most important information is completely buried and lost in an avalanche of lolcats and racism.

I say otherwise.

This is not really some new phenomenon that appeared with the growth of the internet. It's been around a long time. It's just more commonplace now.

georgeyporgey: Approves!

[www.nndb.com image 261x370]

Also approves
[images.huffingtonpost.com image 450x338]

They're the experts! Stop asking questions!

/just cause you feel it doesn't mean it's there.

Fabric_Man: According to a new Rasmussen poll released today, 2 + 2 = 5. Anyone who disagrees is an undemocratic troll.

People that respond to Rasmussen polls would tend to say that.

We've gone from reasoned discussion to lies, hyperbole and witless portmanteux like "Rethulicans" and "Obummer".

Oh and a strange fixation with "gay".

The world, it appears, is being informed by 13 year old school children.

The internet truly has ruined everything.

CorporatePerson: [upload.wikimedia.org image 341x240]

/just cause you feel it doesn't mean it's there.

you do it to yourself (you do), just you and no one else.

Meanwhile, the climate scientists, evolutionary biologists, immunologists, cosmologists and neuropsychologists look over at the economists and as one say, "Welcome to the club" while the rest of academia looks over their collective shoulders nervously waiting for their turn.

They all proceed to go get hammered on strong booze in order to dull the pain of having to deal with so much stupid from so many people screaming at the top of their lungs.

Shaggy_C: You know, it's an interesting phenomenon. In the 'olden days', when writing could only be done on stone by artisans, it meant that only extremely important information was written down and saved. You had to be royalty to afford an engraver. With that, important writings could last thousands of years. With paper, more could be written, but it was more ephemeral - letters were still saved for only things worth spending money to send. Now, with digital correspondence, more is written than ever because there's no cost to writing it. But, at the same time, almost all of it is worthless. If anything, the current state of affairs means that the most important information is completely buried and lost in an avalanche of lolcats and racism.

Is your name Hideo Kojima, by any chance?

I'll say it again... the Information Age made more information available to more people. As the quantity grew, it included conflicting information, raising the need for the next step in the Information Age - the Reputation Age. You're already seeing it in social networks, spam filters, etc.; deciding which information is vital messages and which is unsolicited crap.

Shaggy_C: You know, it's an interesting phenomenon. In the 'olden days', when writing could only be done on stone by artisans, it meant that only extremely important information was written down and saved. You had to be royalty to afford an engraver. With that, important writings could last thousands of years. With paper, more could be written, but it was more ephemeral - letters were still saved for only things worth spending money to send. Now, with digital correspondence, more is written than ever because there's no cost to writing it. But, at the same time, almost all of it is worthless. If anything, the current state of affairs means that the most important information is completely buried and lost in an avalanche of lolcats and racism.

Most historians do cite the rise of the printing press as the beginning of the end for western civilization.

We could never hope to outlast the Mayans or Egyptians, with their great works preserved for posterity in stone carvings.

Meanwhile, observing the state of modern discourse,



approves.

/obscure?

Global warming thread, anyone?

whither_apophis: Ah the New York Times wistfully looking back at the time when no one questioned them and just took their word for it.

Pretty much this. Sure there are morons screaming their idiotic rants online, but I would think the morons carry less weight today than they did in the past. Biased op-eds or incorrect facts in the past were countered or redacted with a small buried blurb at the back of a paper or magazine. Today if you say something moronic or counter to the facts, you can expect to be called out on it quickly and publicly.

The net makes it easier for all information to receive exposure. This is a good thing.

People were self appointed geniuses long before the internet gave them a way to declare it to the world.

What's this guy's Fark handle?

MaliFinn: I'll say it again... the Information Age made more information available to more people. As the quantity grew, it included conflicting information, raising the need for the next step in the Information Age - the Reputation Age. You're already seeing it in social networks, spam filters, etc.; deciding which information is vital messages and which is unsolicited crap.

It's almost as if simply having information available isn't enough, and people actually need to understand said information for it to be useful. It's almost like countries will need to provide better education to their citizens to be competitive in the future.

Shaggy_C: You know, it's an interesting phenomenon. In the 'olden days', when writing could only be done on stone by artisans, it meant that only extremely important information was written down and saved. You had to be royalty to afford an engraver. With that, important writings could last thousands of years. With paper, more could be written, but it was more ephemeral - letters were still saved for only things worth spending money to send. Now, with digital correspondence, more is written than ever because there's no cost to writing it. But, at the same time, almost all of it is worthless. If anything, the current state of affairs means that the most important information is completely buried and lost in an avalanche of lolcats and racism.

Contents Under Pressure: We've gone from reasoned discussion to lies, hyperbole and witless portmanteux like "Rethulicans" and "Obummer".

Oh and a strange fixation with "gay".

The world, it appears, is being informed by 13 year old school children.

There are a lot or really stupid and witless plays on Obama's name but obummer isn't one of them. It so perfectly encapsulates the feeling he inspires. "Oh, bummer."

Also, I don't think there ever really was an age of 'reasoned discussion'.

IMJUSTGOINGTOLEAVETHISRIGHTHEREITHOUGHTITWOULDBERELEVENTTOTHECONVERSAT IONTHATWEARECURRENTLYHAVINGALSOIMSURPRISEDTHATNOBODYPOSTEDTHISALREADY! !11!!!!!Link (new window)
/That is a lot harder than it looks

saintc79: whither_apophis: Ah the New York Times wistfully looking back at the time when no one questioned them and just took their word for it.

Pretty much this. Sure there are morons screaming their idiotic rants online, but I would think the morons carry less weight today than they did in the past. Biased op-eds or incorrect facts in the past were countered or redacted with a small buried blurb at the back of a paper or magazine. Today if you say something moronic or counter to the facts, you can expect to be called out on it quickly and publicly.

The net makes it easier for all information to receive exposure. This is a good thing.

It also makes it easy to spread mass amounts of misinformation. For example I'm still getting emails about the OWS protestor who crapped on the US flag.

hitler