One of the reported problems with the internet is that entirely too much information is being "created". Much of the information on the internet is simply a repeat of information from somewhere else. Additionally, much of the original content is written by people with no academic credibility, designed for a small number of friends within their social group, and not fit for consumption by the general public. While one line of thought is the desire to preserve, consume, and understand the vast amounts of information available from “everyone” that is connected, another line of thought contends that there is very little information of true value on the internet. Of course all of this depends on your definition of value and your purposes in utilizing and or publishing to the internet.
The assignment for this course adds to the ever growing collection of random unchecked thought and information being generated on the internet. Take for example the post that you are reading at this very moment. I have made several broad general statements that many of you will readily agree with. However, just because you agree doesn’t make them true.
Who is it that has “reported” this problem? Who are they to determine what the problems of the internet are?
Why is a duplication of information a bad thing? Would it be better to have the information stored in one place that everyone has access to rather than have the same information posted on a million different websites taking up hard drive space on internet servers all over the world? Or does a multitude of duplication ensure that the information is available and easier to find for all parties interested in consuming the information?
Who exactly is it that thinks that everything on the internet should be preserved? Is it enough that you or I think that way, or should someone more important with the power to preserve the information be convinced of this?
Who thinks that the majority (and again define majority) of information is not worth saving? If some of the information was carefully preserved while the majority was discarded, who then would determine what is “of true value” and “fit for consumption by the general public”?
Depending on what other topics arise during the course of the semester, I may attempt to answer (or at least provide reference to the arguments for and against these statements) some of these questions with my own opinions. OR, I might simply continue to post my own random mostly uneducated thoughts, conveniently passing them off to the general public as solid facts simply because the internet allows me to do that!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment