How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 More information Than We Need...   [ Page: 1  2  3  ]
 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

More information Than We Need...

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


25 posted 05-12-2010 03:25 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

LOL...you're beginning to be like Obama in many respects....doubletalking comes to mind after your last statement.
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


26 posted 05-12-2010 03:52 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


I don’t know Mike, maybe I am like Obama.

I certainly agree that technology and the rise of portable media devices allows the easy transfer and access to misinformation, to the detriment of real information. Does that threaten democracy? I think it does. Is it worth talking about? Well it sure beats discussing the technical capabilities of individual devices that can (or can’t) be used to access misinformation.

Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


27 posted 05-12-2010 03:57 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

I think the thing that threatens democracy is government censorship.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


28 posted 05-12-2010 04:23 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Grinch, he spoke of access to information, not transfer. You are trying to make the case that your IPod can carry misinformation...as long as you load it in there first! Please....

Obama stood in front of students and flat-out lied about (1) where misinformation  is coming from and (2) that he didn't know how to use them. By all means continue to twist away. It doesn't change his actions a whit.

Nor does it change  that it is a precursor to future actions...
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


29 posted 05-12-2010 05:07 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


quote:
Grinch, he spoke of access to information, not transfer. You are trying to make the case that your IPod can carry misinformation...as long as you load it in there first! Please....


I think you’re a little confused Mike, technology can do that.



The interweb is a means of transferring and accessing information, an ipod is a device to access information and also a means to transfer it.

You can access misinformation using either of them. What you‘re doing Mike is conflating the means of transfer with the method of access and defining access as interweb connectivity. It might sound good but it’s technically incorrect.

I read the bit you posted:

And meanwhile, you’re coming of age in a 24/7 media environment that bombards us with all kinds of content and exposes us to all kinds of arguments, some of which don’t always rank that high on the truth meter. And with iPods and iPads; and Xboxes  and PlayStations — none of which I know how to work — (laughter) — information becomes a distraction, a diversion, a form of entertainment, rather than a tool of empowerment, rather than the means of emancipation. So all of this is not only putting pressure on you; it’s putting new pressure on our country and on our democracy

Replace ‘iPads’ with ‘newspapers’ Mike and the point he’s making is exactly the same. Can you access the interweb through a newspaper? Heck no, but you can access misinformation.

quote:
I think the thing that threatens democracy is government censorship


How would that work Denise, how could your government censor the information you have access to?

.
threadbear
Senior Member
since 07-10-2008
Posts 729
Indy


30 posted 05-12-2010 05:10 PM       View Profile for threadbear   Email threadbear   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for threadbear

Ya know of another nation
who says unfettered access to the internet is dangerous?
China of course.
threadbear
Senior Member
since 07-10-2008
Posts 729
Indy


31 posted 05-12-2010 05:16 PM       View Profile for threadbear   Email threadbear   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for threadbear

Grinch, you asked Denise how could the government restrict information?
By applying the concept of 'fair'
toward access.
The Net Neutrality act would actually limit the providers on what they could, if their broadcasts aren't  ahem...balanced, or fair.
This control can be done inthe form of a tax, like Cap and Tax, where usage is penalized.  They could limit specific content by making the product too expensive for the cable companies to carry as an option.  

in Radio, the Fairness Doctrine's reintroduction would do the trick since AM radio is dominated with conservative talk shows.  The term fair and social justice comes to mind, as a target for Obama to strive for, and that means the free exchange of information.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


32 posted 05-12-2010 05:19 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



quote:
    
And meanwhile, you’re coming of age in a 24/7 media environment that bombards us with all kinds of content and exposes us to all kinds of arguments, some of which don’t always rank that high on the truth meter. And with iPods and iPads; and Xboxes  and PlayStations — none of which I know how to work — (laughter) — information becomes a distraction, a diversion, a form of entertainment, rather than a tool of empowerment, rather than the means of emancipation. So all of this is not only putting pressure on you; it’s putting new pressure on our country and on our democracy.http://blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdaily/2010/05/09/obama-in-247-media-world-information-becomes-a-distraction/



     This is a statement about information and information overload.

     From this statement about information and information overload, which, by the way, is true, you have made a series of conjectures and assumptions which have ended you up in your familiar and comfortable place, saying the same familiar and comfortable things over again.  Where have you seen The President make any statements in favor of restrictions on the flow of information or in favor of censorship?

     President Bush, on the other hand, classified or restricted access to how much previously open source data?

     Bush restricted how much data?

     Obama restricted how much data?

     Your objections to Bush's actual restriction were?

     And your fantasies about the potential for President Obama's possible future restrictions that are supported by exactly what actions on his part are?

     And you account for the differences between these two situations in which way, exactly?
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


33 posted 05-12-2010 05:24 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Replace ‘iPads’ with ‘newspapers’ Mike and the point he’s making is exactly the same.

h, but that's the rub, isn't it? You have to go out and buy a paper or have it delivered to you. Add that to the fact that you would need millions of newspapers to match even a fraction of the information available at your computer fingertips and you can see why he goes after IPods (erroneously) and the others. He doesn't want all that information out there, available to everyone, especially what may go against him, personally or politically. He calls it dangerous to the country. Actually, it's dangerous to him. That's the bottom line.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


34 posted 05-12-2010 05:27 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Nice of you to appear, Bob.

I;ll ask you the same question I asked LR and didn't get an answer for.

Do you think too much information, even when some of it is bad, is bad for democracy and the country? Should it perhaps be controlled?
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


35 posted 05-12-2010 05:29 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch

quote:
The Net Neutrality act would actually limit the providers on what they could, if their broadcasts aren't  ahem...balanced, or fair.


Net neutrality?

You’re kidding right? The concept of net neutrality is the exact opposite of censorship:

Network neutrality (also net neutrality, Internet neutrality) is a principle proposed for user access networks participating in the Internet that advocates no restrictions by Internet Service Providers or governments on content, sites, or platforms, on the kinds of equipment that may be attached, and on the modes of communication allowed, as well as communication that unreasonably degrades other traffic.

.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


36 posted 05-12-2010 05:41 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch

quote:
You have to go out and buy a paper or have it delivered to you.


The interweb is free Mike? And the guy reading this in an internet café, library or at work hasn’t gone out?

OK so you think Obama was talking about accessing electronic media - like podcasts Mike? Those, sometimes pernicious, electronic snippets you can access on your ipod?


Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


37 posted 05-12-2010 05:56 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Playing dumb is not your forte, grinch. You know exactly Obama was talking about. Yes, he could have mentioned newspapers, tv shows, tape recorders or a myriad of other means. Instead he chose items that all had one great similarity...they accessed the internet. That's his problem, the internet, not the daily paper. That's where this discontent, this misinformation, this contrasting info of his actions and that is where he thinks the "threat to democracy" lies.

And the guy reading this in an internet café, library or at work hasn’t gone out?

You continue to surprise with comments like that coming from an intelligent man.
threadbear
Senior Member
since 07-10-2008
Posts 729
Indy


38 posted 05-12-2010 05:56 PM       View Profile for threadbear   Email threadbear   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for threadbear

never never quote wikipedia
on an explanation of a political concept in current debate.

They leave off anything that raise issues of fairness.
But I'm too tired to debate Net Neutrality today.  Let it play out, you'll see the applications are far more dangerous than the plan itself.  Enforcement of said policies, and the power reverting back to the government for enforcement, when the net isn't owned by anybody.  Free market system.

What you listed was just one of many provisions within the plan.  
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


39 posted 05-12-2010 06:09 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


quote:
never never quote wikipedia
on an explanation of a political concept in current debate.


It saved me the effort of explaining why I think you were wrong, I’d have quoted Fox news if they had an equally succinct and equally correct explanation of the concept.

Net neutrality is a subject I know quite a bit about Threadbear, I’d be more than happy to discuss your idea that it’s a tool for censorship. Where would you like to start? It’s late here but I’ll look forward to reading your thoughts and discussing it tomorrow.

.
threadbear
Senior Member
since 07-10-2008
Posts 729
Indy


40 posted 05-12-2010 06:13 PM       View Profile for threadbear   Email threadbear   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for threadbear

Hey Grinch, that's cool:  start a new topic thread and I'll read up on it in the meantime.  I am reacting to the pros/cons from Politico on the subject.  

I agree with your FOX assessment:  they'v failed to discuss this topic with any clarity.  
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


41 posted 05-12-2010 06:16 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



quote:

Ya know of another nation
who says unfettered access to the internet is dangerous?
China of course.



     This is begging the question.

     What do you mean "another" nation?

     What do you mean when you suggest that this nation has suggested such a policy?  Where do you get this stuff?

     I certainly agree that bad information drives out good information in the same way that counterfeit money drives out good money.  That doesn't mean that it's okay to set up censorship for information, though frankly I'm not entirely thrilled that it's as easy as it is to find plans for building your own A-Bombs as easily available as they are, or that people can find out how to weaponize anthrax or make sarin gas as easily as it's apparently possible to do so.  Nor am I thrilled that there's as easy an access to certain kinds of pornography — say child pornography, for example — as there is.  That's apparently part of the price we pay for our ambivalence about the open market and freedom from censorship in general.  I accept that.

     Even more easily do I accept that when it comes to political speech, which the previous material might possibly be considered in some distant way a sub-set of, the canary in the mine of free and uncensored speech as it were.

     That's my thought, at any rate.

     And I don't see any particular evidence that's been supplied by anybody here that suggests that the President is in some sort of basic disagreement with those thoughts.  Certainly, I haven't seen him express any thoughts about censorship in the ways that any of my Radical Right Wing friends have been suggesting.

     If he says that we suffer from information overload, so what?  Do you disagree?  It's certainly a likely theory, and near as I can tell, the brain is set up like a filtering system, so that it presents less and less material to awareness the more conscious the material becomes.  It screens out lots of basic information from conscious awareness most of the time, and presents the conscious mind only with the barest minimum that it needs for what the earlier pre-conscious stages consider necessary for survival.  Most of the time, folks aren't even aware of the blood pressure or digestive processes that happen within the body, and sometimes not even of disease processes that can be life-threatening, let alone be aware of material like sounds the brain is processing in the distant environment, and many images unless they happen to be swiftly moving ones from the top of the visual field, most of the time.

     Because of some of the cultural assumptions the brain is content to make, it is mostly unwilling to revisit assumptions already made, most of the time, and will tend to throw out current evidence if it is conflict with previously made decisions.  The brain already filters out most information well before it arrives at consciousness anyway.

     What The President is saying here is not anything radical or new, folks.  Nor do I hear The President offering these comments  as a trial balloon for the government to whittle access to information down further.  The Republicans, in case you weren't looking, already did that during the last administration.  


     The horse is gone, folks.  The Freedom of Information act has been all but gutted already.  The government has been encouraged to classify heavy breathing and the direction in which we believe gravity tends to function.

     That would be down.

      Since the Bush Administration, you may well have a difficult time getting information that sensitive out of the government ever again.  It's classified.  I don't remember that any of you Radical Right Wing folks did much except cheer about that.  I'm perfectly willing to be corrected, with appropriate citations, of course, that might indicate that you were upset at the roll-back of our freedoms at that time; these would give your upset at the recent statements by our Democratic President quoted by Mike at the beginning of this thread a certain authority that they seem otherwise to lack.

     That would suggest that you were upset at the issue of censorship — which is worth the upset, no matter which party does the censoring — and not simply because the guy who made the statements was a Democrat, and not because the statements were clearly about restriction of free speech.

     That I did not see.  Perhaps you might point out those words.
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


42 posted 05-12-2010 06:31 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


Last post before bedtime.

quote:
instead he chose items that all had one great similarity...they accessed the internet.


No he didn’t Mike, not in the quote you posted, two of the devices don’t even connect directly to the internet, a fact you’ve been trying to highlight throughout this thread – remember? So where’s the similarity with regard to the internet? The only connection that the devices have is that they can all access electronic media and misinformation.

.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


43 posted 05-12-2010 06:33 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

"Information is putting new pressure on our country and our democracy"

What The President is saying here is not anything radical or new, folks.

Oh, really???


Would you care to answer my question, Bob? It's not a difficult one and doesn't require War and Peace to answer it.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


44 posted 05-12-2010 06:38 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

No he didn’t Mike, not in the quote you posted, two of the devices don’t even connect directly to the internet


Well, hallelujah!!!! You finally acknowledge they don't instead of making excuses for his illegitimate  use of them. Get some rest. You need it  
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


45 posted 05-12-2010 07:04 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     If you mean

quote:

Do you think too much information, even when some of it is bad, is bad for democracy and the country? Should it perhaps be controlled?




     No.  It should not be controlled.

     How do you account for the Restrictions that the Republicans put on previously open information when they cracked down on the Freedom of information act and classified greatly increased the amount of censorship on data available to the public from the government?

     Given your stance on this here, why does it seem to break down when the censorship is Republican, even when the material was previously freely available?
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


46 posted 05-13-2010 10:24 AM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch

quote:
Well, hallelujah!!!! You finally acknowledge they don't instead of making excuses for his illegitimate  use of them.


Odd use of the word finally Mike, I acknowledged the fact in my first post in reply to this:

quote:
Can I get CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, blogs, opinion sites ot any other areas where this "misinformation" Obama refers to, on a PlayStation or XBox?


My reply:

quote:
You can surf the interweb on a PS3, and a Wii straight out of the box – they both have built in browsers – the last time I checked the xbox 360 was the odd one out, you could load a browser and surf the web but it didn’t come with one.


Perhaps the word you were looking for was “initially”, but even then you’re on rocky ground - you can access electronic media on them all and that’s the only claim Obama made.

.
threadbear
Senior Member
since 07-10-2008
Posts 729
Indy


47 posted 05-13-2010 11:13 AM       View Profile for threadbear   Email threadbear   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for threadbear

Bob, if Obama was more
transparent
we wouldn't have to SPECULATE on his motives for controlling dissenting opinion.
But he's attacked everyone who's attacked him and many who haven't.  
He's an idealogue who wants to apparently stiffle opposition in any way possible:  thru Gibbs, thru fear mongering, thru demonization, thru passage of laws his administration has suggested.
It would be nice to be able to hold him to his word of Pre Election promises.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


48 posted 05-13-2010 05:48 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



quote:

if Obama was more
transparent
we wouldn't have to SPECULATE on his motives for controlling dissenting opinion.
But he's attacked everyone who's attacked him and many who haven't.  
He's an idealogue who wants to apparently stiffle opposition in any way possible:  thru Gibbs, thru fear mongering, thru demonization, thru passage of laws his administration has suggested.
It would be nice to be able to hold him to his word of Pre Election promises.



     More transparent than he is, more transparent than President Bush, more transparent than what, Mike?:  You use a comparative without offering a benchmark.  Anybody can be more transparent than they are.  A reading of the gospels will give you a quick understanding of that.  The ten commandments cause quarrels — is that Though shalt not Kill or Thou Shalt not Murder?

     As far as comparison to Bush, I leave that one to you and I wait with bated breath to see what you have to say there.  

     Mr. Gibbs is the White House Press secretary.  It's his job to talk back.  Why you would think he is either more or less than a press secretary is beyond me.  Why you believe that he would allow lies and distortions to go by is beyond me as well, especially considering the amount of time Republican Administrations going back at least as far as Nixon have spent attacking "the media" when "the media" didn't back the Republican party line.  Especially when the last Administration made its preference for Fox known, and Fox made a point of skewing its coverage.

     It is the job of the administration to get laws through that it feels will help the country, and indeed, one might well argue, this is the reason that the country elected not only a Democratic Administration, but a Democratic Congress as well.  To suggest that this is some sort of rotten thing the Administration is doing to spite the people seems to me to be slightly disingenuous.  This is what they were elected for.  That and the fact that the electorate seemed deeply upset with the way that the Republicans had been managing things.

     Now it's understood that the Republicans would wish to steer things in another direction.  The Republicans are for the present the loyal opposition, to borrow a phrase from the Brits, and you, as a member of that opposition, would certainly see things differently.  But to suggest that the party in power is off base because they are exercising power does seem to me to be a bit silly.  Why else would they be in politics, for the free beer?

     Fear Mongering?

     I'm sorry, but I simply don't see that.  I see two constituencies with two distinct sets of fears, and I see each party attempting to address the fears of their own constituency.  Being a Liberal myself, I certainly see my own fears as more important because it seems clear to me that the stakes are higher — population collapse, famine, massive water shortages and wars.

     I understand that those on the right see things differently, and that my concerns seem to be fear mongering from where they, and you, Mike, are sitting.

     I wish there might be some way we could find that would enable us to actually measure the reality of these worries that we have, left and right, and set out a useful and objectively agreed upon list in order of their importance so we could go about tackling them.  As an occasional asthmatic, for example, you might imagine that breathing is pretty much at the top of my own personal list.  Where it might be for the CEO of BP is anybody's guess.

     I will confide that I'm very attached to breathing, though, and I'm frankly rather resistant to folks who try to make me compromise on the issue so they can have more profits.  And I really do like money, too.  Really.

     On the whole, while I too have issues with The President, and certainly with his policy about Gitmo and his failure to address The PATRIOT ACT, I understand that the country is not obligated to agree with me, and they are by and large happier with the man than I am.  And he seems to be doing a pretty good job for Republican Lite.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


49 posted 05-13-2010 08:21 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer


     More transparent than he is, more transparent than President Bush, more transparent than what, Mike?:  You use a comparative without offering a benchmark.  


Actually, Bob, if you'll check, I didn't make that comment. Threadbare did. Perhaps you would care to address that comment to him? I can understand tossing an accusation at me is fun stuff for you, but at least be sure it's something I said, ok?
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> More information Than We Need...   [ Page: 1  2  3  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors