Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
Hmm, well, I, for one, am a little disappointed by the unstimulating responses to what I thought was an extremely stimulating article (my opinion, obviously). Some people found it overdramatic and pretentious. That's fine. Not everyone has the same writing style, nor--again, in my opinion--should they have. I like words. I like encountering new ones. I even enjoy looking them up. Not everyone does. But that doesn't mean that Mr. Brin has to stop writing the way he writes. As I was reading, I was thinking that one of the things I like about what Brin brings to the table is a very broad and big picture, along with a prodigious possession of details and very specific information. I feel that one of his gifts as a writer about technological topics, which is quite rare, is that he not only possesses intellectual insight, he also has excellent intuitive insights, many of which have been well borne out--as his older works of fiction demonstrate. I appreciate your analysis, Mr. Brin, and the fun words, and your taking the time to share your well-informed opinion with those who enjoy it, like me.
Sorry not to be thrilled to my philosophical shoes. I think I've read this article before.
Nevertheless, I think the internet is on the whole positive. It has allowed more information to be distributed quickly to many more people. It has allowed inter-activity, more than any other medium. It has become a global network, linking the world together. It has reduced prices, in many different ways.
Since I consider most 'gatekeepers' to be almost useless, I do not bemoan their fate. They are for the most part gatekeepers for the people in power. Now authority has to be EARNED - like Glenn Greenwald or Mr. Stiglitz, we listen because they actually know something.
However, this whole airy debate about 'pessimism' and 'optimism' misses the material roots of opinions and struggle. The 'real' world of classes, sexes, nations and ethnicities is not going away - it is, after all, the ground on which the internet rests.
Both contentions have merit. But culturally the "distraction" function will eventually outweigh what is positive in the "web" phenomenon. Sub-mediocrity, as always, will prevail. On the other hand the "web" phenomenon is in fact energizing hitherto un=tapped synaptic patterns of brain activity which -- as they get consciously and unconsciously imbued by intelligent people -- which will leave a written legacy which will survive the drowning of American culture in a sea of sub-mediocrity. So sue me! rabbimeir
So says Harry Potter
& his eminence
Emmet
The searching
Sea Otter...
"Is the Web helping us evolve?"
Evolution is an incorrect and misleading paradigm in this context. I suppose the formulation is based on the common notion that evolution is natures way of making species better and better. That in turn makes the question a paraphrase of "Is the web making us better".
But that is not what evolution is about. Evolution is value neutral, not purposive; and so 'evolved' cannot be equated to 'improved'.
regards JakobA
Did someone say pretentious prose? This is a great topic but David Brin's primary objective, I think, is to impress rather than communicate. Had he written the whole piece in Latin it would have been more impressive and almost as informative for most of us. If Salon posts more writing like this in the future please accompany it with a cliff notes version.
Neither Google nor the Internet will decide who we are and where we are going. It is the evolution of human consciousness. In politics, the people decided the old ways did not work any longer so they voted for drastic change——a significant giant step in human consciousness. It's the gift the Founders gave us to use when we finally awakened from our snooze.
In technology, both Google and the Internet provide infinite resources whose processes originated from the creativity of human intelligence. These resources will continue to advance beyond the imagination of most of us alive today. As technology progresses, the Internet's dross will fall away, or will continue as a source of humor for the new milleniums. What we found funny they do not, and vice versa.
In science, our outer space discoveries are still in their infancy. Do you ever consider why we have a space program? Who can be bothered with what's out there when we can't even deal with what's right here? That's because we won't have to. The next generation will. There are people whose lives are entirely focussed on out there.
If we can slow down for a moment, take a look back in history, it's easy to see how the evolution of human consciousness is a process; and the process is speeding up. Pastor Rick Warren, a Southern Baptist with strong views about gay rights and abortion and other stuff, is giving the Invocation at the Presidential Inauguration. This two minute event has opened a historic dialog inconceivable just one year ago. Another result of waking up from our snooze, of "disagreeing without being disagreeable."
Google isn't making us smart or dumb. The Internet isn't liberating anything. It's never anything outside ourselves. Haven't you noticed we are producing more conscious children? They are more beautiful and more brilliant then ever. It's us. Humanity is liberating itself.
Cheers!
Watch the original "The Day the Earth Stood Still" and then watch the remake, if it is still in the theaters.
Evolution, or Devolution?
Get real.
Are people getting smarter or more stupid?
When you are dealing with stupid people, the best practice is to let them think they are really smart. Ask any con artist or salesman.
Read de Chardin's Phenomenon of Man.
It seems clear to me that the Internet, the World Wide Web, and Google, are an evolving brain covering the surface of the earth.
One question is whether one or more governments will appropriate a controlling function over Internet content and accessibility, similar to the various control functions of the human brain.
Another question is whether, if this "brain" is allowed to evolve (which will require millions/billions more programming hours and high-capacity computer chips), anything resembling an identifiable "consciousness" will emerge. If so, the ultimate mystery may be solved: the emergence of consciousness in the midst of matter.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
