|
|
Post by Andrusi on Dec 17, 2006 15:06:08 GMT -5
|
|
Keith Stack
Behind The Logo Team 
Cookin' M.C.s like a pound of bacon.
Posts: 2,532
|
Post by Keith Stack on Dec 17, 2006 15:39:46 GMT -5
Except those without internet access.
|
|
|
|
Post by Night the SR on Dec 17, 2006 16:05:50 GMT -5
Those people suck.
Even hobos can get on the internet all thanks to your local public library.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sz on Dec 17, 2006 16:33:58 GMT -5
I'm looking forward to Colbert's response to this.
|
|
|
|
Post by NeroKid on Dec 17, 2006 18:16:43 GMT -5
Except those without internet access. Yea they should have a version of time that's in print. Why hasn't anybody thought of this. Anyway all you sucks might be peope of the year. But I'M Mom's favorite robot. |
|
|
|
Post by hedgesmfg on Dec 17, 2006 22:32:48 GMT -5
...and I'M NOT Tim Burton!
...Well, I'm not ;_;
|
|
|
|
Post by Keith T. Hemari on Dec 17, 2006 23:00:14 GMT -5
I really like how the only alternative to having no life on-line is to have no life off-line.
Seriously? Television? Is that all you could come up with as what we are not doing on-line? How about going to sporting events, or attending church? What about nature trails, swimming, or even just going for rum-and-coke with the guys? What about the fact that a lot of what's done on-line can be done off-line too, though to a smaller extent, I'll grant.
Pfft, this is a joke. All they want is to get us cyber-geeks to buy Time magazine. I wonder how many people will fall for it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrusi on Dec 17, 2006 23:37:36 GMT -5
I think you're reading a wee bit much into that sentence.
|
|
|
|
Post by Keith T. Hemari on Dec 18, 2006 0:21:10 GMT -5
Perhaps, but it strikes a very sour chord in my mind.
*shrugs* I would expect, though, that Time magazine would write with better skill than that, but maybe they were trying to sound like an average Joe or something equally stupid. They even name-drop Wikipedia. Very clever. Not at all transparent. Nope. I hope whoever wrote that didn't actually get paid for it, 'cause they certainly don't deserve whatever they got.
I also like how they claim we "control the Information Age".. HA! Fat congressmen in office control the information age. What we get to do is in their vastly incompetent hands. "Our World" is really the world we're allowed to have. The power we have is directly proportional to the money we pay. Just like the off-line world, the rich have the power and the poor have to deal with the consequences of the actions of the rich.
Thank you, Time, I've just learned a new word: Pandering. You're not good at it. Go back to sucking up to mega-corporation icons and stop trying to pretend you have any grasp on the life of the average geek.
Meh, I never liked the whole "Person of the year" thing anyway.
|
|
SoNick Belmont
Behind The Logo Team
Thanks again to Jolly Joes for the avatar
Posts: 1,875
|
Post by SoNick Belmont on Dec 18, 2006 1:00:10 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Tenniru on Dec 19, 2006 18:46:20 GMT -5
HA! Fat congressmen in office control the information age. Those fat congressmen sure did a great job controlling the information age when they lost horribly in November. Yep, that sure was a great coverup on the "Macaca" thing, dissent blogs, and the like. They kept all that information about corrupt Republicans nice and under wraps. Yep. Oh, and the internet is so incredibly expensive and you can't make it anywhere unless you bribe everyone. How much did S. R. Sidarth pay to upload the George Allen "Macaca" video to YouTube? Now, how much did it hurt the Republicans? How, exactly, is Congress in control of the information age? Even in closed-press countries (even China), the governments can't keep a grasp on the information age. Even North Korea has numerous cell phone cameramen and people who just need to sneak back into South Korea and upload it. Knowledge and news will always get out as long as there's an internet. Bring down the internet and you'll see an extreme lack of productivity... not to mention a big enough outrage to bring the country to it's knees. "The government controls everything" philosophies make me bitter. I do think the person of the year is just a copout (TIME hasn't had a good one since '00), and maybe TIME was too afraid to do a bad guy (Ahneminajad, Al-Sadr, Kim Jong Il) or even something like Nancy Pelosi. I can see the amazing effect that Joe Personwithcomputerandcameraphone has had, though. It's something no previous generation has witnessed. |
|
|
|
Post by Kulock on Dec 19, 2006 18:59:39 GMT -5
By the way: Yay, subject!
OK, continue.
|
|
|
|
Post by Keith T. Hemari on Dec 19, 2006 19:04:08 GMT -5
HA! Fat congressmen in office control the information age. Those fat congressmen sure did a great job controlling the information age when they lost horribly in November. Yep, that sure was a great coverup on the "Macaca" thing, dissent blogs, and the like. They kept all that information about corrupt Republicans nice and under wraps. Yep. Oh, and the internet is so incredibly expensive and you can't make it anywhere unless you bribe everyone. How much did S. R. Sidarth pay to upload the George Allen "Macaca" video to YouTube? Now, how much did it hurt the Republicans? How, exactly, is Congress in control of the information age? Even in closed-press countries (even China), the governments can't keep a grasp on the information age. Even North Korea has numerous cell phone cameramen and people who just need to sneak back into South Korea and upload it. Knowledge and news will always get out as long as there's an internet. Bring down the internet and you'll see an extreme lack of productivity... not to mention a big enough outrage to bring the country to it's knees. "The government controls everything" philosophies make me bitter. I do think the person of the year is just a copout (TIME hasn't had a good one since '00), and maybe TIME was too afraid to do a bad guy (Ahneminajad, Al-Sadr, Kim Jong Il) or even something like Nancy Pelosi. I can see the amazing effect that Joe Personwithcomputerandcameraphone has had, though. It's something no previous generation has witnessed. Well we sure as hell don't have any power. People can talk about YouTube and Wikipedia all they want, but those only give the illusion of power. Without even the slightest second thought, both organizations would, more than likely, remove anything that they were told to by the government, especially if there was money and or litigation to back up such a demand. And if they refused? Both would be shut down faster than you could whine about it on LiveJournal. First amendment be damned. And all our pitiful whining wouldn't make the slightest difference, unless we could get some money on our side and it would take a lot of money. More than any of us combined could muster. And I seriously doubt people would be willing to put off their PS3 purchases for Wikipedia. We don't have power over the information age. No more than ants in an ant farm have power. Just because the people who are really in charge (Businesses, Rich People and the Government) haven't flushed us down the toilet yet doesn't mean they can't or wouldn't. As I said, the power we supposedly have is only power we are allowed through the negligence of the powers that be. When they stir, we become ants and get stepped on. |
|
Seph
Behind The Logo Team
Luigi and Marth for the win.
Posts: 3,390
|
Post by Seph on Dec 19, 2006 19:16:15 GMT -5
You're so needlessly pessimistic and overly paranoid. How, exactly, could the government shut down YouTube or Wikipedia if they wanted? Hmmm?
|
|
|
|
Post by Keith T. Hemari on Dec 19, 2006 19:45:10 GMT -5
Pessimistic, maybe, but I think of it as realism.
We don't have power. Do you have power? Show me your power. I didn't think so.
I have, in both posts, referred not only to the government, but to business and the wealthy. Something that seems to be overlooked both times. What I am saying here is that our power over this information is virtually nothing. We (in the US) have escaped, so far, only because noone has succeeded in finding a way to regulate the internet without blatantly breaching the First Amendment. But it will come. Give those groups a nice little multi-million dollar pledge and they would violate the whole damn constitution. Bush has gotten away with declaring war against the wishes of the UN. He's gotten away with illegally tapping into phone lines, so what's the shutting down of a website? That's all Wiki is, after all, a website. sure it's a complex one, but it's still just digital data. Digital data that can, by force, be removed.
All it would take would be a lawsuit from someone.. say, oh, Encyclopedia Brittanica, claiming that they're being plagiarized or that Wiki is damaging profits, or, and this could actually work, that their business is being complicated (and therefore suffering) due to the prevalence of misinformation on the site, and, if Brittanica wanted to put the money into it, Wiki would be gone, or so heavily buried in legal red tape that it would take itself down. These things aren't commercial, after all, there's no profits for Wiki to feed on. Just donations from those who support it. And, like I said, who's going to defend Wiki, when the latest Final Fantasy has just come out?
We, the average geek, at our little PCs, typing our thoughts on our LiveJournals and editing Wiki-entries don't actually have any power. We think we do, because we haven't been swatted yet. We live among sleeping giants who would step on us without the blink of an eye.
Maybe, in other countries, it's different. Maybe I'm just pessimistic, but I feel no power and have no power, myself. And from what I know of the communities I've been a part of, I doubt any of the geek world would ever come together to fight back. We're always too busy complaining about Sony, SEGA, Nintendo or Microsoft to notice.
|
|
Seph
Behind The Logo Team
Luigi and Marth for the win.
Posts: 3,390
|
Post by Seph on Dec 19, 2006 19:47:54 GMT -5
*votes*
Oh, wait, now you're going to tell me that the wealthy negate my vote and the government ignores it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Keith T. Hemari on Dec 19, 2006 19:51:42 GMT -5
Hey, guess what, you just voted for someone who is going to go to office and do whatever the people who paid for his election campaign tells him to. You just voted for a paid official. Now, let me see.. did you donate millions of dollars to his campaign? No? You aren't worth a rats patoo to him, then.
Your vote just went to someone who doesn't care about you or anything you want.
Remember, truth and politics are an oxymoron.
Edit: Further more, what do you think one man will do in congress? It takes a majority vote. Even if you claim that your man is honest, he will still be overwhelmed by the less-than-honest majority. Your vote is still wasted.
And, until I see some evidence to the otherwise, I still firmly believe that the special interest rules America. I have yet to see anything done for the average person. Maybe that's just here in Indiana (where we spend billions we don't have on a stadium that will benefit only businesses and the government, that no one wants, while our education system rots and our police departments have to merge to stay out of dept), but looking at the big picture, I don't see it being much better on the federal level either.
|
|
Seph
Behind The Logo Team
Luigi and Marth for the win.
Posts: 3,390
|
Post by Seph on Dec 19, 2006 19:57:22 GMT -5
What you say holds true to an extent-- and only to an extent. Wondering why the Congress was taken over by Democrats? Because the people-- the voters-- got tired of the people they were voting for and instead wanted something different. That's how it works; they have to appeal both to lobbyists, campaign donors, and voters all at the same time, with the latter truly holding the final judgment.
|
|
|
|
Post by Keith T. Hemari on Dec 19, 2006 20:03:53 GMT -5
What you say holds true to an extent-- and only to an extent. Wondering why the Congress was taken over by Democrats? Because the people-- the voters-- got tired of the people they were voting for and instead wanted something different. That's how it works; they have to appeal both to lobbyists, campaign donors, and voters all at the same time, with the latter truly holding the final judgment. And you foolishly believe that this 'something different' will be any better? I vote for improvement, not just a different kind of pain and suffering. Yes, please, I want thumb screws now. The rack was getting kind of uncomfortable. Go ahead, vote for whichever evil you want. I'll wait till I can vote for something that's actually good. |
|
Seph
Behind The Logo Team
Luigi and Marth for the win.
Posts: 3,390
|
Post by Seph on Dec 19, 2006 20:08:44 GMT -5
Everything after my quote looked blurry and full of murky pessimism and paranoia! I think I'll need to use my brights! ... no, still getting nothing.
Oh well, was probably just another post filled with mindless drivel about how all politicians are evil and how I'm a fool for thinking anyone could ever change anything. *shrug*
|
|
