Policing the Internet
Tech Central Station has an article about the 'information literacy movement' and why it's nonsense. The article's absolutely and unequivocally correct in its approach.
I've majored in research history for about five years now. There are a number of professors in my department, particularly Dr. Bennstein, who have an extremely low tolerance for Internet use of any kind when one is doing research, claiming that most information on the web is "introductory level information", "not subject to peer review", and otherwise unreliable in all respects.
Having worked with the Internet now for half of my life, and having read a lot of books in my twenty-two years, I take real issue with that. Either someone can find reliable information, or they can't. It doesn't matter if the information is in a book or stored on silicon and copper in some basement at Fordham University (like this information). If someone's too stupid to sort through information, forcing them to take eight hours to fail at sorting through printed books isn't going to make them any more intelligent than allowing them to sort through thousands upon thousands of webpages will. Stupid and lazy is stupid and lazy, no matter how slow or fast you do it.
The other problem with the Internet is that those crooked politicians want to legislate it and use their power to protect it, and protect everyone from hit. That's the job of the parent and the individual, gentle reader. The Internet may have started off as a government network, but now most of the developments, most of the bits and pieces, have been made by private companies and individuals. The Internet is the quintessential free market on information and services, and should be left as such.
Unfortunately, I see far more control from infofascists and government heavies in the years to come. It's a shame, too; as the capabilities increase exponentially, so will the artificial controls over them.
I've majored in research history for about five years now. There are a number of professors in my department, particularly Dr. Bennstein, who have an extremely low tolerance for Internet use of any kind when one is doing research, claiming that most information on the web is "introductory level information", "not subject to peer review", and otherwise unreliable in all respects.
Having worked with the Internet now for half of my life, and having read a lot of books in my twenty-two years, I take real issue with that. Either someone can find reliable information, or they can't. It doesn't matter if the information is in a book or stored on silicon and copper in some basement at Fordham University (like this information). If someone's too stupid to sort through information, forcing them to take eight hours to fail at sorting through printed books isn't going to make them any more intelligent than allowing them to sort through thousands upon thousands of webpages will. Stupid and lazy is stupid and lazy, no matter how slow or fast you do it.
The other problem with the Internet is that those crooked politicians want to legislate it and use their power to protect it, and protect everyone from hit. That's the job of the parent and the individual, gentle reader. The Internet may have started off as a government network, but now most of the developments, most of the bits and pieces, have been made by private companies and individuals. The Internet is the quintessential free market on information and services, and should be left as such.
Unfortunately, I see far more control from infofascists and government heavies in the years to come. It's a shame, too; as the capabilities increase exponentially, so will the artificial controls over them.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home