Turn off the internet!
-
Well it seemed like a good idea at the time, but look what's happened. Firstly everyone has dumbed down. In the same way that you don't need to be able to do arithmetic because a calculator is close by, now you don't need to know anything because Google is close by. Brazil? Wozzatt? Dunno, Google it. As well as becoming more stupid, it's making us more inward looking and vain. That's what Facebook is for, and if you ask me a good cure for world over-population would be to find out exactly who is on facebook and kill them. Then there'd be no more-touched up photographs or tumid biographies of dull lives clogging up the wires. As a commuter I get so depressed watching people nurturing their Facebook profile on their iPhones as if it were their life support. Twitter is a great place to voice your bigoted views and get ignored or occasionally incite an enraged storm. And as for the CodeProject Lounge, God, where do you start? Yes, I am aware of the irony of this post. I saw something on the TV recently about the 1950s. Were people happier? “I think so, they talked more.”
Regards, Rob Philpott.
I have been pondering this a lot lately. Many people are saying the same thing, that the Internet is making people ignorant. Indeed, someone discussed this with me only today. I think that the Internet has passed its best for a number of reasons: annoying adverts, censorship (often politically or irrationally motivated), annoying adverts, corporate web sites with cluttered pages full of rubbish (looking for the obvious and most important links is like looking for a needle in a haystack), annoying adverts, garbage download sites, annoying adverts, free software that isn't free, annoying adverts, non-downloadable content, annoying adverts, slow browsers with crashamatic plug-ins, annoying adverts, rude egotistical anti-social trolls on blogs, annoying adverts, search engines that find nothing but: trash, stolen content, corporate rubbish and annoying adverts .... . There can be no doubt, the Golden Age of the Internet is already over, it is now well into its Silver Age and heading towards an Age of Brass. :((
-
Well it seemed like a good idea at the time, but look what's happened. Firstly everyone has dumbed down. In the same way that you don't need to be able to do arithmetic because a calculator is close by, now you don't need to know anything because Google is close by. Brazil? Wozzatt? Dunno, Google it. As well as becoming more stupid, it's making us more inward looking and vain. That's what Facebook is for, and if you ask me a good cure for world over-population would be to find out exactly who is on facebook and kill them. Then there'd be no more-touched up photographs or tumid biographies of dull lives clogging up the wires. As a commuter I get so depressed watching people nurturing their Facebook profile on their iPhones as if it were their life support. Twitter is a great place to voice your bigoted views and get ignored or occasionally incite an enraged storm. And as for the CodeProject Lounge, God, where do you start? Yes, I am aware of the irony of this post. I saw something on the TV recently about the 1950s. Were people happier? “I think so, they talked more.”
Regards, Rob Philpott.
It's turned everyone into total wimps who can't even pull a sledge.
-
I have been pondering this a lot lately. Many people are saying the same thing, that the Internet is making people ignorant. Indeed, someone discussed this with me only today. I think that the Internet has passed its best for a number of reasons: annoying adverts, censorship (often politically or irrationally motivated), annoying adverts, corporate web sites with cluttered pages full of rubbish (looking for the obvious and most important links is like looking for a needle in a haystack), annoying adverts, garbage download sites, annoying adverts, free software that isn't free, annoying adverts, non-downloadable content, annoying adverts, slow browsers with crashamatic plug-ins, annoying adverts, rude egotistical anti-social trolls on blogs, annoying adverts, search engines that find nothing but: trash, stolen content, corporate rubbish and annoying adverts .... . There can be no doubt, the Golden Age of the Internet is already over, it is now well into its Silver Age and heading towards an Age of Brass. :((
Superbly put!
Regards, Rob Philpott.
-
It's turned everyone into total wimps who can't even pull a sledge.
You can't turn off a wheel, durrh....
Regards, Rob Philpott.
-
Stefan_Lang wrote:
Compared to university 30 years ago, it takes a lot less time to find relevant information, but that information is also very often unreliable and needs double-checking, or it isn't specifically suited to my case and needs adaption
Versus the university where there was only the single source and no way to check it at all.
Stefan_Lang wrote:
As for people really dumbing down, the one aspect that I noticed this happening, is grammar and orthography: especially young people spend so much time in forums, chat rooms, and on social networks, that they don't bother watching their typing
You are claiming that 30 years ago in social gatherings that young people used proper grammar? And were you attending parties where you gave spelling tests?
Stefan_Lang wrote:
Then again, this seems more like a generation problem: those who learned how to properly address your superiors, elders, and other people in spoken and written form before the advent of the internet may have trouble accepting the sloppy and casual internet communication style spilling over into real world communication.
Then again those who had very, very limited social mingling 30 years ago (or 50) might presume that absolutely everyone acted in one way, and thus with the internet they should now realize that there are many, many ways for people to act. And hopefully they might question their assumption about how people (everyone) acted 30/50 years ago.
jschell wrote:
Versus the university where there was only the single source and no way to check it at all.
There was no need to check because people didn't bother to publish articles and books unless they were truly relevant: the only way to provide information was to publish an article or book on paper, requiring a considerable amount of money and effort, and peer review. Moreover, resources used in an article or book were (supposed to be) quoted, so you did have a means to check related articles, it just took more effort to actually get your hands on and read them.
jschell wrote:
You are claiming that 30 years ago in social gatherings that young people used proper grammar?
Actually, yes. If you count the mostly scientific discussions via Ethernet. Of course, the same was not true for face to face social gatherings - but the verbal communication style used on such occasions did not spill over to written language. Not at first anyway. Today, the brunt of social exchange happens in written form, and the written form in this exchange mirrors the spoken exchange in face to face gatherings. Certainly not everywhere, but it appears to be spreading. Maybe what's bugging me most about this is that spoken communication includes gestures and facial expression, without which the conveyed meaning becomes blurred or ambiguous. I'm not saying this isn't also a problem with 'proper' formal writing, but at least by using a standardized formal language you exclude one source of misunderstandings.
jschell wrote:
And hopefully they might question their assumption about how people (everyone) acted 30/50 years ago.
I do. However, many (institutions, teachers) complain about the ongoing deterioration of student writing skills. Assuming this is a fact, I am pointing out the internet as a probable cause. IMHO.
-
You can't turn off a wheel, durrh....
Regards, Rob Philpott.
Rob Philpott wrote:
You can't turn off a wheel, durrh....
Accurate, and completely missing the point.
The wheel allowed people to do far more work for the same amount of effort. It revolutionized technology and how we lived. The internet allows people to find almost any information known to any human being. It is a multiplier for intellect, in the same way as the wheel is a multiplier for muscle. In addition, communication can take place across the entire globe, and have a permanency of at least a few years, often without the need for storing hundreds of paper documents per person.
It sounds like in the course of exploring the internet, you have discovered human social activity you find disagreeable. How you managed to avoid human social activity you find grossly disagreeable throughout elementary, middle school (if it was not subsumed into elementary or high school), high school and possibly college, university or other higher education, is completely beyond me. Or perhaps you've just never learned how to deal civily with people you dislike. But somehow, that people can do things, and have a right to do things, you dislike seems to have come as a shock, horror and surprise to you.
I have a few human social activities I find disagreeable, myself. They include acting like a spoiled child, and being an internet tough guy.
tl;dr - Welcome to the real world. Population: 7 billion...And you. -
Rob Philpott wrote:
You can't turn off a wheel, durrh....
Accurate, and completely missing the point.
The wheel allowed people to do far more work for the same amount of effort. It revolutionized technology and how we lived. The internet allows people to find almost any information known to any human being. It is a multiplier for intellect, in the same way as the wheel is a multiplier for muscle. In addition, communication can take place across the entire globe, and have a permanency of at least a few years, often without the need for storing hundreds of paper documents per person.
It sounds like in the course of exploring the internet, you have discovered human social activity you find disagreeable. How you managed to avoid human social activity you find grossly disagreeable throughout elementary, middle school (if it was not subsumed into elementary or high school), high school and possibly college, university or other higher education, is completely beyond me. Or perhaps you've just never learned how to deal civily with people you dislike. But somehow, that people can do things, and have a right to do things, you dislike seems to have come as a shock, horror and surprise to you.
I have a few human social activities I find disagreeable, myself. They include acting like a spoiled child, and being an internet tough guy.
tl;dr - Welcome to the real world. Population: 7 billion...And you.My God, are you for real? Of course I saw the point, yes very good and I'm sure what you've written will be up to the same intellectual standard as your last post - hence I can't be bothered to read it.
Regards, Rob Philpott.
-
My God, are you for real? Of course I saw the point, yes very good and I'm sure what you've written will be up to the same intellectual standard as your last post - hence I can't be bothered to read it.
Regards, Rob Philpott.
Rob Philpott wrote:
My God, are you for real? Of course I saw the point, yes very good and I'm sure what you've written will be up to the same intellectual standard as your last post - hence I can't be bothered to read it.
Aww. And I even included a tl;dr just for you. :)
-
Well it seemed like a good idea at the time, but look what's happened. Firstly everyone has dumbed down. In the same way that you don't need to be able to do arithmetic because a calculator is close by, now you don't need to know anything because Google is close by. Brazil? Wozzatt? Dunno, Google it. As well as becoming more stupid, it's making us more inward looking and vain. That's what Facebook is for, and if you ask me a good cure for world over-population would be to find out exactly who is on facebook and kill them. Then there'd be no more-touched up photographs or tumid biographies of dull lives clogging up the wires. As a commuter I get so depressed watching people nurturing their Facebook profile on their iPhones as if it were their life support. Twitter is a great place to voice your bigoted views and get ignored or occasionally incite an enraged storm. And as for the CodeProject Lounge, God, where do you start? Yes, I am aware of the irony of this post. I saw something on the TV recently about the 1950s. Were people happier? “I think so, they talked more.”
Regards, Rob Philpott.
Were people happier in the 50s? Or is it a dystopian memory based on old TV shows? In the 50s - We had polio, lead paint, McCarthyism, Jim Crow laws, domestic violence wasn't illegal, no air conditioning, no freeways (is that a plus or minus?), asbestos was a common household material, no clear air or clean water acts (rivers caught fire), atomic bomb drills (duck and cover). I could go on, but I'm glad I didn't have to live in the 50s.
-
jschell wrote:
Versus the university where there was only the single source and no way to check it at all.
There was no need to check because people didn't bother to publish articles and books unless they were truly relevant: the only way to provide information was to publish an article or book on paper, requiring a considerable amount of money and effort, and peer review. Moreover, resources used in an article or book were (supposed to be) quoted, so you did have a means to check related articles, it just took more effort to actually get your hands on and read them.
jschell wrote:
You are claiming that 30 years ago in social gatherings that young people used proper grammar?
Actually, yes. If you count the mostly scientific discussions via Ethernet. Of course, the same was not true for face to face social gatherings - but the verbal communication style used on such occasions did not spill over to written language. Not at first anyway. Today, the brunt of social exchange happens in written form, and the written form in this exchange mirrors the spoken exchange in face to face gatherings. Certainly not everywhere, but it appears to be spreading. Maybe what's bugging me most about this is that spoken communication includes gestures and facial expression, without which the conveyed meaning becomes blurred or ambiguous. I'm not saying this isn't also a problem with 'proper' formal writing, but at least by using a standardized formal language you exclude one source of misunderstandings.
jschell wrote:
And hopefully they might question their assumption about how people (everyone) acted 30/50 years ago.
I do. However, many (institutions, teachers) complain about the ongoing deterioration of student writing skills. Assuming this is a fact, I am pointing out the internet as a probable cause. IMHO.
Stefan_Lang wrote:
There was no need to check because people didn't bother to publish articles and books unless they were truly relevant
Which doesn't say anything about correctness. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chariots_of_the_Gods%3F[^] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jupiter_Effect[^] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Limits_to_Growth[^]
Stefan_Lang wrote:
Actually, yes. If you count the mostly scientific discussions via Ethernet.
30 years ago discussions on ethernet was limited to a very, very small subset of people. And 20 years ago the subset of people with access to ethernet was probably just a small fraction of those that had access to computers.
Stefan_Lang wrote:
I'm not saying this isn't also a problem with 'proper' formal writing, but at least by using a standardized formal language you exclude one source of misunderstandings.
And you base that assumption on what?
Stefan_Lang wrote:
However, many (institutions, teachers) complain about the ongoing deterioration of student writing skills.
Because of things like an much larger student population, lack of real information on writing skills from many years ago along with the vastly increased ability of everyone, including teachers, to complain about everything.
-
Stefan_Lang wrote:
There was no need to check because people didn't bother to publish articles and books unless they were truly relevant
Which doesn't say anything about correctness. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chariots_of_the_Gods%3F[^] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jupiter_Effect[^] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Limits_to_Growth[^]
Stefan_Lang wrote:
Actually, yes. If you count the mostly scientific discussions via Ethernet.
30 years ago discussions on ethernet was limited to a very, very small subset of people. And 20 years ago the subset of people with access to ethernet was probably just a small fraction of those that had access to computers.
Stefan_Lang wrote:
I'm not saying this isn't also a problem with 'proper' formal writing, but at least by using a standardized formal language you exclude one source of misunderstandings.
And you base that assumption on what?
Stefan_Lang wrote:
However, many (institutions, teachers) complain about the ongoing deterioration of student writing skills.
Because of things like an much larger student population, lack of real information on writing skills from many years ago along with the vastly increased ability of everyone, including teachers, to complain about everything.
My "assumptions" are based on actual studies, online discussions and articles. And on 20+ years of experience of reading contributions to public forums and discussion boards. It is really not hard to find scientifical work about this topic either:
A study investigated whether college students' writing skills have deteriorated in recent years. Writing samples from upper-level undergraduate or first-year graduate courses from 1956 (at a public university), 1965 (at a private university), and from 1978 and 1993 (at a private college) were examined. Samples were analyzed for errors in spelling, vocabulary, grammar, and punctuation as well as for style. Results indicated that college students' writing ability has declined.
(Abstract from An Examination of College Writing Skills: Have They Deteriorated?[^]) But anyway, I made my contribution to this topic in an attempt to describe my personal experience, not exact some scientifical proof. You are welcome to your own opinion. ;)
-
My "assumptions" are based on actual studies, online discussions and articles. And on 20+ years of experience of reading contributions to public forums and discussion boards. It is really not hard to find scientifical work about this topic either:
A study investigated whether college students' writing skills have deteriorated in recent years. Writing samples from upper-level undergraduate or first-year graduate courses from 1956 (at a public university), 1965 (at a private university), and from 1978 and 1993 (at a private college) were examined. Samples were analyzed for errors in spelling, vocabulary, grammar, and punctuation as well as for style. Results indicated that college students' writing ability has declined.
(Abstract from An Examination of College Writing Skills: Have They Deteriorated?[^]) But anyway, I made my contribution to this topic in an attempt to describe my personal experience, not exact some scientifical proof. You are welcome to your own opinion. ;)
Stefan_Lang wrote:
My "assumptions" are based on actual studies
The only assumption I asked about was that "formal writing" excluded misunderstandings (of some type unspecified by you.)
Stefan_Lang wrote:
It is really not hard to find scientifical work about this topic either:
Which would only be relevant if I questioned that people are claiming that skills are deteriorating. But I didn't. There is however a difference between that and evaluating the actual causes.
-
Stefan_Lang wrote:
My "assumptions" are based on actual studies
The only assumption I asked about was that "formal writing" excluded misunderstandings (of some type unspecified by you.)
Stefan_Lang wrote:
It is really not hard to find scientifical work about this topic either:
Which would only be relevant if I questioned that people are claiming that skills are deteriorating. But I didn't. There is however a difference between that and evaluating the actual causes.
jschell wrote:
The only assumption I asked about was that "formal writing" excluded misunderstandings
I don't consider that an assumption, it is a logical consequence: If informal writing wouldn't be a source of misunderstanding, then why is it so difficult to make computers understand spoken language? People use terms improperly all the time, sometimes because they don't bother to think a moment and find a more appropriate one, or because friends or a specific community uses that term in that sense, although people in general don't. Add to that typos, bad grammar and missing punctuation, and it gets really hard to decipher the actual meaning of a sentence or paragraph if you are not familiar with the writing style of the author. By "formal" I mean proper use of terms, punctuation, grammar and spelling. If all would be correct in all written postings, short messages, tweets, or other written information, there would be considerably less trouble understanding the messages correctly. That is not an assumption. Btw., punctuation saves lives: "Let's eat, grandpa" "Let's eat grandpa" ;)
-
Oh gawd, yes - I forgot speeling cheekers! :thumbsup: I would have real problems without them now - I have even one running in VS to check my comments! And the Google Chrome textbox one is superb, especially with the "Ask Google for suggestions" option turned on, which adds better correction options and checks the grammar at the same time. Unfortunately, I am posting this from Firefox, which is pants in that department...
The universe is composed of electrons, neutrons, protons and......morons. (ThePhantomUpvoter)
Quote:
I have even one running in VS to check my comments!
I need that - can you give me the name of that product please?
-
Quote:
I have even one running in VS to check my comments!
I need that - can you give me the name of that product please?
I can't seem to find the exact one I use in Extension Manager, Online Gallery, but it's "Spell Checker" by Roman Golovin and Michael Lehenl, but there seems to be a fork of it called Multi Language Spell Checker in the gallery. If you open the Extension Manager, click on "Online Gallery" and use the search in the top right for "Spell" you should find it quite easily. The only thing that annoyed was it underlined errors in red so they looked like compile problems, but there is a setting in "Options...Environment...Fonts and Colors" under "Display items", "Spelling error" to change that. It's pretty handy - comments and strings are all checked. :thumbsup:
The universe is composed of electrons, neutrons, protons and......morons. (ThePhantomUpvoter)
