social networks (facebook, myspace, AIM, MSN,...): a threat to humanity?

[jam uh weezy]

nobody is talking about facebooks use by corporations as an advertising medium and a pool for marketing knowledge.....what a better way to gather information on the minds and habits of consumers than to get them to market their own personalities?

facebook is cool and all, but i highly doubt any significance anyone in this thread is attaching too it. unless it is used a medium to organize other real-world interactions(egypt??), it is largely a waste of time, and 90% of the content that people display on it is irrelevant. i also have little faith in the intentions of people who operate the site.

it's not all bad vibes tho. i like to see peoples' pictures and stuff they've been up too.

 

[girlygrrl]

I'm not a big fan of Facebook spying on my web browsing, I block it out with adblock plus so that it doesn't track my movements across the web.

I do think that social networking makes things superficial on some levels, but more real on other levels.

I have met many of my real-life friends online.

But then I have noticed a disconnect when I hang out with certain people who are more interested in texting or doing FB on their phone than it engaging in face-to-face interactions.

So I think it is a double-edged sword, it certainly changes how we communicate, sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse. But I have met people in many other countries online who I'd never have had the pleasure to meet if the internet hadn't existed.

 

[fernsal1]

as humans evolve intellectually technology will only improve

 

[Talksick]

My only problem with social networking sites is that they can be used to fracture dissident groups in a more violent future period of time. Governments and militaries will know exactly who to kill to break up effective human resistance networks.

Straight up. It takes away cop work. All they have to do is bust somebody and then look them up on FB or MS and find all their know associates. It's total rubbish, and that is why I don't use either of them.

 

[Belisarius]

Social networks are a threat like movable type was a threat.

Technology from the telegraph onward has been moving towards tying humanity more closely together (in terms of raw data, anyway); we should really be over the surprise by now. I'm also ever-surprised at how vociferously many attack social networking while swearing that, say, their cell phones (devices I personally despise) are utterly indispensable--which in essence perform exactly the same function.

But, as the Russians say, nichevo.

 

[modern buddha]

^ I say it's mostly the harm that is leaking from social networking sites versus the harm leaking from their cell phones. I believe both are dispensable; however, I still have a cell phone for emergencies and contact. More often than not, it's forgotten at home. I cannot speak for much since I have deleted all of social networking and hardly use a phone, but being a hypocrite on similar social functions is part of the world we live in.

 

[sssssssssss]

its the revolution of this generation and the best thing thats happened since columbus found the new world.

when historians look back at our culture they are going to go to search engine statistics. everyone searches exactly what they are thinking and it appears to be private.

u can relate to people easier. the world has literally become flattened from a comminucation and information spreading perspective.

people that are still clinging onto the past are being cancers to society and seem to be chasing something they think will give them happiness.
facebook is much deeper than browsing through pictures of your friends as you judge them.
its interconnecting everyone more easily and fufils your social need.

since women got equal rights and therefore dont need a guy to provide resources for them anymore, do people really need to get married anymore?

 

[Pythagoras]

its the revolution of this generation and the best thing thats happened since columbus found the new world.

I think many might question that assertion. I think the Enlightenment might trump facebook, at least in my book

people that are still clinging onto the past are being cancers to society and seem to be chasing something they think will give them happiness

I think this thread demonstrates that people have legitimate concerns - hardly cancerous Luddites as you would have them tarred, and what is wrong with people chasing something they think will bring them happiness?

I find your statements somewhat obtuse.

 

[girlygrrl]

social networks are good for looking up pictures of your exes. lol

 

[sssssssssss]

I think many might question that assertion. I think the Enlightenment might trump facebook, at least in my book




I think this thread demonstrates that people have legitimate concerns - hardly cancerous Luddites as you would have them tarred, and what is wrong with people chasing something they think will bring them happiness?

I find your statements somewhat obtuse.

the enlightment was a spread of new ideas.
social networks give birth to a new era of a means of spreading ideas... well actually the internet did, social networs just organized it.

of course you can look at them at face-value and say that they are just a way for people to secretly creep on people.

but an idea can now be spread globally faster than ever before. naturally people are going to litter the internet with junk just like tv, and thats what youll find if you search for it. but there are other communities devoted to sharing ideas and bettering their minds as well.

I say that they are cancerous because they do not want to adapt to the new change and its hard for them to see the big picture. then when they tweet all their nuerotic complaints, its like setting a digital wildfire in the the mind of everyone that has access to the internet. so the people that do see how positive this phenomena is get frustrated by all the ones trying to protest it. if all you search for is junk on the web then thats all you know of it to be.

social networks are good for looking up pictures of your exes. lol

yeah.

 

[Pythagoras]

^^

The thread, and peoples posts have been on social networking, not the internet. The internet is a revolutionary achievement for which I have a wide range of uses.

To me It has instrumental value. Am I cancerous for pointing out that instrumental technology can be both a force for good, but equally a source for great harm? The very fact we are discussing this via the enabling technology of the internet seems to me to preclude the prevalence of thertechno-Luddites you fear.

 

[sssssssssss]

Yeah thats true. I guess with any such place of transferring ideas it can go both ways depending on how you use/take it. I think they are positive though. It offers you more of a wide range of people to relate to instead of just the physical geographic region youre located on.

So if you feel like no one around you sometimes can relate to you, one can always use the internet.

 

[modern buddha]

^^

The thread, and peoples posts have been on social networking, not the internet. The internet is a revolutionary achievement for which I have a wide range of uses.

To me It has instrumental value. Am I cancerous for pointing out that instrumental technology can be both a force for good, but equally a source for great harm? The very fact we are discussing this via the enabling technology of the internet seems to me to preclude the prevalence of thertechno-Luddites you fear.

Exactly. The Internet / social networks do not cause "cancerous" circumstances, the people using these things cause the "cancer".

It's not the gun that kills, but the person using the gun.

 

[sssssssssss]

Exactly. The Internet / social networks do not cause "cancerous" circumstances, the people using these things cause the "cancer".

It's not the gun that kills, but the person using the gun.

I think i ment to say it amplifies both extremes.
Now you can spread a 'true' and 'false' idea for efficiently and effectively.

 

[Jabberwocky]

One man's meat, another man's poison.

Do i believe social media enhances lives? But of course.

Is anyone's life being diminished by their participation of social media? But of course.

Impact on the society as a whole? I'll have to get back to you on that. Telegraph, radio, television, etc were matters of concern until they were so ubiquitous that they were beyond anyone's ability to analyze. I don't know the gains for individual social media abstainers as opposed to big time participants. I'd like to think social media will be a bonus added sort of thing for a long time to come and never become a social prerequisite, but that isn't likely to be the case, sadly.

 

[CXC]

ssssssssshh

its the revolution of this generation and the best thing thats happened since columbus found the new world.

I didn't know that the discovery of the new world by Colombus was such a good thing. Doesn't it depend on how you look at things and which viewpoint you are applying?

u can relate to people easier.

Is that because you don't actually need to look at 'em (or even hear 'em) to communicate and make contact?

, do people really need to get married anymore?

Nah, changing your social status on facebook to 'married' (without actually getting married) is fully satisfying for nearly everyone nowadays, except for those 'cancers of society' who cling onto the past ofcourse ;-)

facebook is much deeper than browsing through pictures of your friends as you judge them.
its interconnecting everyone more easily and fufils your social need.

You've convinced me! I'm finally about to open a facebook account :-D

 

[kaywholed]

is *insert new technology* a threat to society?

eg. books, cars, planes, guns, computers, iPods, etc...

 

[Talksick]

its the revolution of this generation and the best thing thats happened since columbus found the new world.

I didn't think I would ever hear(or read) those words put together. I hope you are being sarcastic. For one Columbus was a fucking slave driver, and he was a shitty explorer too. He landed almost 8,000 miles off course and now every American seems to lick his asshole. Secondly, that fat fagot was not the first to explore the New World. There are runes carved into multiple locations across America that predate Columbus by a long ways. It is believed that the Knights Templar came with the Vikings through Newfoundland in 1000AD, and that they mapped out parts of the New World(not sure if this is fact). Runes have been found in America that predate Columbus by a couple hundred years.

 

[sssssssssss]

^^^ i meant the internet.
but yeah
the internet is a milestone in the advancement of knowledge.
it makes the world flatter

just like when columbus joined the two hemispheres together he joined two seperate worlds as one
even if it was done in a not so caring way.... it still happened.
sorry the action was put to columbus's name.
as long as it happened it doesnt really matter who did it.

 

[Talksick]

Columbus didn't do shit. You shouldn't give that bumbling fool so much credit. He thought he landed in India for Christ sake. Hence the term Indian for Native Americans. I guess he's about as influential as some Chemistry drop-out who may some day find a cure for cancer by accident.