Posted on numerous fences around the world are the all-too-familiar words that forbid entrance: “No Trespassing”. These words apply not only to physically fenced in areas but also to abstract areas including personal space (private possessions, clothing, devices), commerce (copyrights, patents, trademarks), and social space (friendship circles, homes, social classes). The words restrict the freedom of outsiders while establishing what seem to be beneficial boundaries for the occupants.
A little more lighthearted article today, getting the soft stuff off my plate.
Society today is often shaped by advertising. Most advertising contains some truth and some lies, but because it’s on TV, the vast majority of people are passively absorbing info without really questioning all of it… Either that, or they don’t have a public channel to state their dissenting opinion. THANK YOU, INTERNET! Ads have caused a number of misconceptions or at least debatable points, so let’s have a look at a few.
Most information we gather every day is “cheap” – It takes mere seconds to digest and doesn’t exercise your mental muscles. You learn very little and don’t become much wiser. This information could come in large chunks such as rambling blog posts or short snippets of news articles. Short snippets are so easy that the reader wants and reads more until the same time has passed as having read a long blog post.
Why do people say “bad” is “good”? If you ever hang out with some dudes, and they’re talking about awesome stuff they did, sometimes, you’ll heart them call it “bad”. From a dictionary perspective, this makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. But they use it for the same reason people apply cuss words in places where it makes absolutely no sense to do so: to be evocative. They want to trigger strong emotions in people, and saying something is “good” doesn’t have that exclusivity that comes with being a “rebel”. This is very ironic because being good is more rebellious than being evil – the entire world teaches you to be evil, and thus it’s defiance to say “no”.
Evoking certain emotions may be understandable, but why the inverse of the actual goal? This makes no sense. And yet, people are constantly doing the opposite of what they should already know will accomplish their goals.
It’s interesting how opinions can be shaped from a simple title and a seemingly well-meaning article. The Guardian ran a headline yesterday saying Tim Berners-Lee calls for tighter regulation of online political advertising. The article was carefully framed so as to pointedly remark on Trump’s victory via the influence of “fake news”. They kindly included the link to the article, hoping you, the dope, wouldn’t bother reading it. Of course, if you actually clicked on the link to the article, you’d find the “regulation” call was a possibly-but-not-really implied suggestion buried under the heading Political advertising online needs transparency and understanding. And there was no mention of political elections. None. Big difference. No misquotes, just misrepresentation. But on that topic…
I don’t know about you, but when I sign up for a mailing list or some subscription, paying for it or not, I expect that they will send me content as they labeled it. I don’t expect to see news about dog shows in mailing list about electronics. I don’t expect to see endorsements for drugs in a magazine about what’s happening in the field of aviation. (And of course, when you read this blog, you can expect anything, because it’s freestyle.) I understand ads are necessary to support magazines and website hosting, but it seems when it comes to politics, people take exception. Not only that, they may employ the most round-about ways of tying it in to the labeled subject matter. Believe me, I can relate the price of tea in China to anything, but we need to draw the line somewhere. I guess people like Grant Faulkner, Executive Director of NanoWrimo thinks he can stretch it.
Life is kind of funny. If you stick around, sometimes you get to see it’s little bonuses. I recall staying late at a fireworks show once and seeing the grand finale, followed alittle later by some extras. Movies are supposed to have a climax at least three-quarters of the way in if not later. Dessert comes after dinner. On that note, the same can be said with ideas.
America: Land of the free, home of student debt. We love telling people they can do anything, but then we segregate like typical bias human beings. But honestly, if the doors are wide open and we still have a “deficiency” in “diversity” in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, how much of it is actually exclusivity and how much of it is based on misunderstandings of real human beings?
It is unfortunate that language tends to be polluted as time goes on. I’d like to discuss this, as well as the consequences. But first, let’s start with some meandering….
This evening, I started thinking about my situation on the internet (as if I could have a situation “on” the internet; there may be plenty of chairs online, but you can’t sit on any of them). My internet adventures have brought me into contact with many people and brought many more people into contact with me. On one hand, it’s somewhat unnerving to think thousands of eyes are seeing things I posted – some of which would probably be nice to go and erase. But since many people don’t go digging through internet records unless their actually trying to dig up dirt on people, it has become easier to rewrite one’s appearance on the net. On the other hand, thousands of people actually care to see what I’ve posted online. I’ve become a member of various forums and miscellaneous websites, and I have blogs several people follow. What would happen if I just “left”?