Forums / Discussion / Serious Debate

After all these crazy laws, and the government and the industries seeing the internet as a source of evil. I'd say no.

IMO. Everything that has a start has an end. And I think this is the internet's end. It's obvious we need to move on.

I know every person loves and snuggles the internet daily, but I think we've came to a halting point. As the governments don't want us to do these "evil acts" anymore. It's not like we have any control, either. As the government and it's laws are the highest of the political order hierarchy. They have master control of all the choices made by every person, while we do not. We are just seen as minors to them, with no respect to rights or rules to create ourselves.

There is really no point, the constant whining of the large industries (which is what keeps the economy alive in this modern-day generation) has proven that the internet may or may not destroy the economy and industry. Clearly, the government would not want another great economic depression (nor would you).

Imagine a world with where money is useless? Imagine barely being able to afford anything anymore. Imagine the world's lowest employment rates humanity has ever seen? This is what the government does NOT want.

Furthermore. Independent publishers are what seem to piss off the industry. They do not want the industry to die, and the government does not want to evolve the industry to the new-world style of indie publishing. They only see the Hollywood-fed industries as the only source of cash and money.

In short, the government has shown it's inability to change from old-world thinking yet again, just like most companies. They where raised by the old world, so they think it's right.

The only real way to remove this old-world thinking is to remove the permission of these older fine gentlemen from politics, which is frowned upon in the new-age thoughts. We want everyone to work and do whatever, we want freedom.

Which is what the old-world does not understand. The old world likes to have a world of racism, corruption, and hatred, which only new world thinking can save.

This is like racism, the old world saw the blacks as a target of hatred and refusal due to not being white. And it wasn't until the new world thoughts of anti-racists killed off this old world thinking.

And this is what we need to do to the internet, we need to show our new world advantages to the old world remains, we need them to adapt to change and accept defeat, we need to create a newer world that accepts the internet.

Even then, the power we have is little, so don't expect us to change their minds. Well, unless that power is stronger than the governments themselves, which is unlikely, unless a revolution happens. Should we start a in-country war? It's up to you.

~Filler

ITT:

Quite frankly, I'm not even sure if you know what you're talking about at all. So here, have some Wikipedia:

The Internet is a global system of interconnected computer networks that use the standard Internet protocol suite (TCP/IP) to link several billion devices worldwide. It is a network of networks that consists of millions of private, public, academic, business, and government networks of local to global scope, linked by a broad array of electronic, wireless, and optical networking technologies. The Internet carries an extensive range of information resources and services, such as the inter-linked hypertext documents and applications of the World Wide Web (WWW), the infrastructure to support email, and peer-to-peer networks for file sharing and telephony.

There is one- count it, one- way that this could "end", and that's the complete collapse of society as we know it. And if you've got some evidence of that on the horizon, then I'm wondering why you're wasting your time on a meme site when you should be booking your flight to Washington D.C.

I think what he's talking about is internet culture, not the internet itself, and how the government seeks to regulate and monitor it.

After all these crazy laws, and the government and the industries seeing the internet as a source of evil. I’d say no.

>believing the government and corporations

Rot in hell you stupid fucking shit.

geez mate, no need for hostility.

anyway, think of the internet as space, you can try as you might to control it, but it's too large to be fully controlled. and there's no reason to leave the internet to "dead" (even though it''s very VERY alive)

You want me to rot in hell? O.K, sure. I'll rot in hell right now.

Apparently, KYM doesn't care about the forum rules, as listed on number 6 is "Be friendly", which the site implies as "We want a forums to be welcoming place for both old and new users", and I'm sure "rot in hell you stupid fucking shit" is clearly obeying that rule by being welcoming to anyone.

(and yes, the typo "welcoming place for both old and new users"is actually there, go look at it)

Come on guys stay on topic, we just gotten serious debate guidelines up. The last thing you guys want is to completely ignore those guidelines days within announcement.

Jimmy has been warned by Tyrantrum for his misstep.

Please return to the topic now.

EDIT: looks like OP has deactivated… again. Good job, KYM.

After all these crazy laws, and the government and the industries seeing the internet as a source of evil. I’d say no.

You don't think the most valuable resource of the 21st century is worth saving? What?

IMO. Everything that has a start has an end. And I think this is the internet’s end. It’s obvious we need to move on.

If I had a penny for the number of times people have said things like this. The internet isn't about to go anywhere. It's vastly too strong of a global force.

Move on? Move on to what? The internet is the way of the future. The only path is forward. If any government stands in it's way, the internet will smash it over.

Governments won't be dominated by people who are stuck in the past forever. The internet will evolve and force the world to evolve with it before any governing body of one nation can slow it down. I say all this because this is exactly what has been happening for the past two decades.

internet may or may not destroy the economy and industry

Can you provide some sources for this? Because as someone who does work in e-commerce, I can only see the internet vastly improving commerce, not the other way around. Companies are adapting to take advantage of the Internets commercial benefits more and more as time goes on

Imagine a world with where money is useless? Imagine barely being able to afford anything anymore. Imagine the world’s lowest employment rates humanity has ever seen?

How is the internet causing this?

And this is what we need to do to the internet, we need to show our new world advantages to the old world remains, we need them to adapt to change and accept defeat, we need to create a newer world that accepts the internet.
Even then, the power we have is little, so don’t expect us to change their minds. Well, unless that power is stronger than the governments themselves, which is unlikely, unless a revolution happens. Should we start a in-country war?

Inspiring words, friend. But no. We don't need to start a civil war. We need to lead the capitalist world in the right direction by showing where the money lies: in new economic models and systems that truly favor modern online commerce. The young minds of the modern era need to build new innovations and inventions utilizing the power of the internet to show the older generations how its done.

The internet provides a solution to a basic human social need; fast and efficient long-distant communication. The only way it would come to an end would be if:

a) Some catastrophic energy crisis forces global society to revert to the pre-industrial stage.

or

b) Some other, even more efficient way of meeting the same need is found.

No the internet is so reliable and useful for not only the citizens but the companies and government. Mass easy to reach information and people. What companies want is to not lose money on the internet because its so unregulated. However this leads to these stupid copy-right laws that will only end up decreasing the people who talk and promote these companies essentially for free.

I'm not understanding your point at all. You want to shut down the internet--a global communications network which has enabled countless millions the ability to freely communicate, organize, boycott, and protest-because government and corporations have grown too powerful?

In essence, you want to overthrow the dictator by shutting down all communications and, effectively, censoring the public's ability to speak quickly and effectively. I think you might want to rethink your strategy.

The internet is quite the equalising force. Previously marginalised groups can have their voices heard, piracy is made all the more easy, as are organising group meetings, holding our leaders accountable for their actions, and accessing the archives of human knowledge. Quite frankly, Rupert Murdoch is probably terrified at how quickly his monopoly on information has broken up, now that we can access all of these alternative news sites. I doubt he likes Netflix that much.

However, this is not a one-way street. The ability for corporations and governments to spy us is facilitated: so much that a whole industry of selling off metadata has grown out of it. For this reason surveillance will be here to stay so long as we operate on the supply and demand model. Based on what you search online, companies will attempt to market you goods and services (yay AdBlock!).

This data is aggregated on a web of correlations: for instance, if it is shown that most people who buy Shick razors vote Republican, you might receive adverts for a party meeting after buying Shick razors online (p.720). Our current mode of regulation works on consent: you give permission for your information to be used. However this is ineffective as most of the time we have no idea what our data will be used for (p.723). It is truly consent in this case?

Data aggregation is performed by algorithms developed by programmers, however the algorithms constantly grow and take on new purposes due to data they accumulate (p.718). In this they may become opaque to the programmers themselves, and this is where it gets very troublesome. What I stated earlier about accountability becomes nought when suits can observe us and take our information, but we cannot see what it is used for. While the internet for the most part makes those in power more transparent, the balance is utterly lopsided in this case – against us!

I bet that at this stage the internet can be compared to the algorithms: even those who originally created it cannot shut it down. If I am not mistaken, it has no 'original' source that you can switch off. South Park's portrayal is what South Park does best: a joke. The internet has so many servers based in so many countries that it might as well have no 'body' at all. So I don't think it'll go away anytime soon.

However, a number of ethical issues must be discussed with the current and younger generation. Many of these tend to get rebuffed as 'meddling parent groups', but they are not entirely wrong. Each new medium brings with it certain conventions and practices that are only understood after a period of adaptation. For example, the oldest films are not nearly as 'tropey' and steeped in techniques such as camera angles and lighting as your modern day counterpart.

We are definitely on the way there, having had access to the internet for two decades now, but will need longer in order to fully unpack and understand this behemoth.

Source:http://www.unswlawjournal.unsw.edu.au/sites/default/files/t3_de_zwart_humphreys_and_van_dissel.pdf

I mean, I think that it is probably a futile effort to save it. Worth saving? Absolutely. Should people try? Absolutely. Is it going to help? We can dream.

That said, TRP makes me wonder sometimes /sarcasm

I think its important to remember that what we refer too as "the internet' is but a part of the actual internet formerly known as world wide web. And while the TPP will pretty much drive news, fandom, and dissent/criticism from the web, it would still persist.Though If would definitely devolve back into being used exclusively for military stuff as once the TPP passes, fans=criminals and half the world becomes a police state probably rivaled by North Korea and Airstrip One (Not to mention the Health and food issues). The rest of the internet would more likely still be used for thing like Steam and infrastructure (stuff that does not need the WWW to function,)

That said, the Web was an accident that transformed into the greatest ongoing experiment on how free speech works and if humanity is truly dedicated to this concept and the strength and will to defend it from those that seek to undermine it, because such freedom is worth saving

And while the TPP will pretty much drive news, fandom, and dissent/criticism from the web, it would still persist.Though If would definitely devolve back into being used exclusively for military stuff as once the TPP passes, fans=criminals and half the world becomes a police state probably rivaled by North Korea and Airstrip One (Not to mention the Health and food issues). The rest of the internet would more likely still be used for thing like Steam and infrastructure (stuff that does not need the WWW to function,)

HOLY SHIT DUDE, calm the fuck down! Don't get me wrong, there's some shady shit in there, but it's nowhere near that bad!

You're probably right, but I'd like to think people drew the SOPA/PIPA parallels for a good reason. We still have yet to see the whole document. Right now all we can do is wait and hope that enough representatives vote no on the thing.

The free exchange of ideas is immensely helpful for developing the growth of science, humanitarian ideals, and culture, on the large scale, as a whole, even if if it doesn't seem that way on a small scale. It wouldn't make sense to burn down a printing press that made a few copies of Mien Kamf (or however it's spelled, I'm too paranoid to google it) when it also printed hundreds of copies of Homer's Odyssey, Darwin's The Origin of The Species, The Bible, the Qur'an, Shakespeare's Hamlet, Euclid's Elements, and other works by George Orwell, Gregor Mendel, Dr. Seuss, Einstein, Kant, J. K. Rowling, and like, 50 million other people.