all 12 comments

[–]cisheteroscum 5 insightful - 4 fun5 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 4 fun -  (3 children)

127 A technological advance that appears not to threaten freedom often turns out to threaten it very seriously later on. For example, consider motorized transport. A walking man formerly could go where he pleased, go at his own pace without observing any traffic regulations, and was independent of technological support-systems. When motor vehicles were introduced they appeared to increase man’s freedom. They took no freedom away from the walking man, no one had to have an automobile if he didn’t want one, and anyone who did choose to buy an automobile could travel much faster and farther than a walking man. But the introduction of motorized transport soon changed society in such a way as to restrict greatly man’s freedom of locomotion. When automobiles became numerous, it became necessary to regulate their use extensively. In a car, especially in densely populated areas, one cannot just go where one likes at one’s own pace one’s movement is governed by the flow of traffic and by various traffic laws. One is tied down by various obligations: license requirements, driver test, renewing registration, insurance, maintenance required for safety, monthly payments on purchase price. Moreover, the use of motorized transport is no longer optional. Since the introduction of motorized transport the arrangement of our cities has changed in such a way that the majority of people no longer live within walking distance of their place of employment, shopping areas and recreational opportunities, so that they HAVE TO depend on the automobile for transportation. Or else they must use public transportation, in which case they have even less control over their own movement than when driving a car. Even the walker’s freedom is now greatly restricted. In the city he continually has to stop to wait for traffic lights that are designed mainly to serve auto traffic. In the country, motor traffic makes it dangerous and unpleasant to walk along the highway. (Note this important point that we have just illustrated with the case of motorized transport: When a new item of technology is introduced as an option that an individual can accept or not as he chooses, it does not necessarily REMAIN optional. In many cases the new technology changes society in such a way that people eventually find themselves FORCED to use it.)

[–]BlueFrost[S] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

What person said this? And I am appreciative of modern technology, I just don't like the pervasiveness of the digital revolution and internet part of it.

[–]cisheteroscum 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

What person said this?

A famous mathematician

[–]GeorgeCarlin 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Correct, i assume from here on. One "problem" in an ITIL-inspired sense ( Incident <-> Problem <-> Change) most of these systems tend to implement , humans need to interact with:

Most of them only get interconnected if somebody can first create a new market with it, then monopolize it to enslave and en-cage the users he catched. Resistance mostly is then futile because the mono- or oligopoles already are standing firm enough to be quite resilient.

Mostly it is even pointless then to discuss what aspect (metadata, personal data or even their money itself) they try to "steal" (in a sense of "hiding" it in a wall of text) from their slaves with this, but imho this is a really big problem in projecting and "monetizing" "new" ideas. Especially since dark-patterning sheeple has become too fucking easy .

We need a better construct for this problem to solve it in.

It usually is a good idea to strip this construct from possibly "unnecessary" assumptions, because false assumptions about reality tend to bite you in your ass the hardest and for "the longest time" from my experience.

[–]Node 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

You would have liked the 60s. As for those low-tech communities, they're out there. You can probably find them by starting on the internet.

[–]BlueFrost[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

What communities do you mean by "low-tech"? I said that I don't want to go as far as the Amish.

[–]Node 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Has anyone considered a community that is able to break away from the internet and do things in a relatively low-tech way?

What did YOU mean by "low-tech"? And why are you bringing up the Amish?

[–]BlueFrost[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I mean at a tech-level roughly like the 70s and 80s before the internet (or more accurately, the "web") became mainstream.

[–]Node 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

We didn't have computers as we think of them now until mid to late 80s. Late 90s is when the 'WWW' really started becoming a thing. "Cool site of the day" was probably relevant until close to the year 2000.

The author, known colloquially as Uncle Ted, has had some thoughts on this topic.

[–]Canbot 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Join the Amish.

[–]BlueFrost[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The Amish don't want to use any electricity or electronics at all. I don't want to go that far out, but I am mainly annoyed with digital and the internet taking over the world.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

You answered your own question.

So don't ask, answer.

Take responsibility and get some ass.

That IS IT.