Take a look at this article: Wired News: The World? Your Oyster? Why Not?
It's something that I have to wonder about - we have all this damn information floating around "a series of tubes" and yet it seems to have achieved far less than what it potentially could.
What could it do? We should be able to know more about everything than we do now. The knowledge of all people, including Americans, should have vastly increased as a result. From this new knowledge, people should be more able to solve long-term problems such as poverty.
Are we solving poverty? Perhaps. However, either the media's focus on it is increasing or Africa appears to growing poorer and poorer. Does more knowledge mean more solutions? Or just more **** to wade through? Who knows. But something more should be happening as a result of the internet - it does have that power.
Thursday, March 15, 2007
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
Lenses
Got contact lenses last Saturday!
These are brilliant - feel like an entirely different person. Well, not entirely, but you know, I feel able to do things that I normally couldn't, due to the fragile nature of glasses.
Some would say that the contacts' labourious and tedious cleaning process would be a major drawback, but I don't think so. It is a careful, delicate ritual that I perform at dawn and after sunset, one that makes me feel like a master surgeon or technician, and allows me to practice staying as calm as I can.
These are brilliant - feel like an entirely different person. Well, not entirely, but you know, I feel able to do things that I normally couldn't, due to the fragile nature of glasses.
Some would say that the contacts' labourious and tedious cleaning process would be a major drawback, but I don't think so. It is a careful, delicate ritual that I perform at dawn and after sunset, one that makes me feel like a master surgeon or technician, and allows me to practice staying as calm as I can.
The Swiss are a-coming!!!
Apparently, the Swiss recently managed to invade their aggressive, barbarian neighbour of Liechtenstein.
A few Swiss soldiers, doing their traditional long walks across the countryside managed to lose their way and enter the principality accidentally. This was not, as one would so dearly love to believe, an act of aggression by a nation deeply frustrated at its neutrality and its recognition as a clean, tidy, democratic,tax-haven.
The joke that's doing the rounds now is that, unlike their US counterparts, the Swiss managed to realise their mistake, retreat gracefully, and apologise to the ruler of the invaded nation.
A few Swiss soldiers, doing their traditional long walks across the countryside managed to lose their way and enter the principality accidentally. This was not, as one would so dearly love to believe, an act of aggression by a nation deeply frustrated at its neutrality and its recognition as a clean, tidy, democratic,tax-haven.
The joke that's doing the rounds now is that, unlike their US counterparts, the Swiss managed to realise their mistake, retreat gracefully, and apologise to the ruler of the invaded nation.
Conservapedia
Check out this website:
Main Page - Conservapedia
Conservapedia defines itself as the antithesis to that bastion of knowledge, Wikipedia. It makes the very observant note that Wikipedia is unwholesome and un-Christian, and is overwhelmingly controlled by those darned liberals.
Okay - let's take a look at this thing. It's a bit sparse, obviously due to those leftist pop-up propaganda windows that appear when you surf the net. It's got a nice list of the US Presidents - take a look at this segment from GWB's own page:
Hey, not too far from the truth right? I mean, the fact that executive salaries have increased means that ordinary people are doing well, doesn't it? And Bush did ... try to help ... suggested ... passed ... allowed the Democrats to pass ... never mind.
To be fair, it is changing - the article on Clinton has improved over the one week I've been looking at it. And they eventually got an article on Kennedy, though that is quite short.
But the thing is, will it match Wikipedia? And is the whole user-created, crowd-controlled content just stupid, like Alex Beam says in the NY Times?
Well, as I said to a friend in an email:
Believe Wikipedia. It is based on the theories of economics: the same unseen hand described by Adam Smith that drives markets controls Wikipedia. People's own individual interests in making sure information about what they like and know about is correct will, when such a vast group of people are involved, produce a net force of correct, unbiased information. It is comparable to the idea that you get your bread to the highest quality and cheapest price not because the baker is kind enough to do so: it is because the baker wants to earn a living and edge out competitors.
Anyways, if you do get the chance to edit something, just don't try to be a complete idiot and give out false info, cos you're ruining the essays and projects of a whole generation of school children.
Main Page - Conservapedia
Conservapedia defines itself as the antithesis to that bastion of knowledge, Wikipedia. It makes the very observant note that Wikipedia is unwholesome and un-Christian, and is overwhelmingly controlled by those darned liberals.
Okay - let's take a look at this thing. It's a bit sparse, obviously due to those leftist pop-up propaganda windows that appear when you surf the net. It's got a nice list of the US Presidents - take a look at this segment from GWB's own page:
Economic issues
Though the liberal media continues to disparage Bush's handling of the economy, they often neglect to report the many aspects of the economy that Bush has improved. For example, during his term Exxon Mobile has posted the largest profit of any company in a signle year, and executive salaries have greatly increased as well [5]. This is due to changes in the stock market that lead to a record high in 2006, recovering from the Clinton years which lead to the lowest point of the stock market in January 2000 AD since the great depression of 1929 AD, and "Companies are churning out double-digit profit growth" currently.[6] Even the working class is benefiting from the Bush economy, as unemployment hits an all time low in March 2007.[7] Bush worked with Democrats to raise the minimum wage to a more livable level.[8]
Hey, not too far from the truth right? I mean, the fact that executive salaries have increased means that ordinary people are doing well, doesn't it? And Bush did ... try to help ... suggested ... passed ... allowed the Democrats to pass ... never mind.
To be fair, it is changing - the article on Clinton has improved over the one week I've been looking at it. And they eventually got an article on Kennedy, though that is quite short.
But the thing is, will it match Wikipedia? And is the whole user-created, crowd-controlled content just stupid, like Alex Beam says in the NY Times?
Well, as I said to a friend in an email:
Believe Wikipedia. It is based on the theories of economics: the same unseen hand described by Adam Smith that drives markets controls Wikipedia. People's own individual interests in making sure information about what they like and know about is correct will, when such a vast group of people are involved, produce a net force of correct, unbiased information. It is comparable to the idea that you get your bread to the highest quality and cheapest price not because the baker is kind enough to do so: it is because the baker wants to earn a living and edge out competitors.
Anyways, if you do get the chance to edit something, just don't try to be a complete idiot and give out false info, cos you're ruining the essays and projects of a whole generation of school children.
Saturday, March 03, 2007
Eyes
Having worn glasses since the tender age of 8, I thought it would be time to get contacts. So I went to an opticians today. I knew my eyesight was bad, but I didn't know it was this bad. I have myopia, and the glasses I wear have around strength -4 or so. But as I had my eyes tested, I was told I could see 30% of what I should be seeing. It ain't funny at all. For years, I've slowly been getting eyes that seem to weaken in their focusing ability. Just one more step downward I guess.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
