Yes, you are right. It is a representation of the human participants as a whole within the parameters that the internet resides under. Either a representation or a direct example of a part of the complete human picture.

I'm not so sure I would agree that the internet is any sort of representation or reflection of humanity on whole. Unless you're taking into account that a vast amount of content and interfacing that your average unconscious consumer is just part of the human experience.. Data mining, targeted ads, content created to meet deceptive ends or to simply influence an idle mind. I don't identify with any of these few examples of parts of my experience as a natural being.

I believe energetic entities are able to hang out in cyberspace. Intensions set by humans that have been affirmed enough times to take on their own life as vampiric impulse, time, money, thought feeders/eaters. The net is certainly a "place" at this point, places typically become inhabited over time. Like I said earlier though, all of this seems to be opt-in or opt-out; I choose to opt-out. ^This particular avenue of thought really gets me hung up when I start thinking about algorithm based dating apps and the consequences of allowing tech to act as fate, or simply play cupid for the night.

At my most level headed, I'm comfortable to concede that the internet is neutral and it's all about how it's wielded. It's just that EVERYONE is wielding it now.. Pedro used the example of the knife as a tool. I think this is a great metaphor! Why do we have such a large percent of the population handing this knife to their children on a daily basis?! Who are these children being raised by screens? What does their future look like? They are being pacified by an agent of chaos; an endless influential possibility. My soul quivers at toddlers with tablets. Browsing babes. Internet infants.

So tell me, do you all truly believe a child exposed to constant content at the behest of a flustered parent does this developing mind justice? If we are talking about whether humanity will be helped or hurt, THIS is the true crux in my view.

"It's the parents choice, people shouldn't be so careless etc etc" Yah, but parents choose to circumcise baby boys and the kid doesn't get a say in the matter. These kids don't get a say in what's being dropped in front of them either. We aren't far from seeing the true outcome of this style of parental convenience.

I see what you are saying but I definitely take a more causal stance. Humans caused the internet hence I see it as a representation of humanity. I'd like to separate myself and discard the aspects that I dont feel personally responsible for, but from an outside perspective I am a human and humans have created what we see online.

We all contribute to this forum. This forum is part of what the net is as a whole.

The complete picture of what the internet is today paints a worrying example of what annonimity and human nature can evolve into in many cases. But not all of it is negative. A lot of great benefits.

The only reason to worry about our children growing up in this new age is if we assume they will be like us. They wont, they will adapt to what they are presented with. They will represent humanity. It is us who will suffer if we cannot keep up with the changes.

I certainly don't know this!

you sure I'm a human on this end? I mean AI generated art is winning contests, so they say..

the rest of your post is pretty steeped in modernism that I can't relate to I guess

it doesn't seem to me that adapting to a constant stream of information that constantly becomes more intrenched in ulterior motives and agendas is going to better generations to come.

luddite_smashing_machinery_with_hammer.jpeg

the suffering will be done by those who don't even realize it. "man why am I so depressed?" they'll ask themselves. I don't have any worry not keeping up.

I think none of us are in a position to say what is better or worse for an entire generation...

Decades after its invention we must simply accept its existence, accept the good and bad sides, and preferably use the medium from its good side.

There is a very very interesting anime that also deals with this topic: Serial Experiments Lain.

Not sure of anything especially not online. But even if you are an AI, a human most likely programmed you. Even if you were a computer generated AI, a human most likely programmed that.

Any how, what I am writing is just another devil's advocate view on a topic I have not put much time or serious thought into.


If you ask me how I actually feel about the way the world is now the view point might be very different and I expect we would find many common grounds.

you can donate here:
https://www.dmt-nexus.me/donate.html

please do that but i assume it is out of pocket unless donations are covering the costs. from my experience forums ran on donations rarely cover the running costs, usually there are a couple of people footing 90% of the bill. forums do not cost loads to run though, but somebody is probably out of pocket somewhere, my guess would be traveler.

in my opinion it is a heavily censored and heavily manipulated version of humanity.

my thoughts exactly. i often talk about children on their devices. people tell me you can't take away their access to the internet but i argue we should take away the internets access to our children. the devices are being used to brainwash people, there is no logical argument against that, but because 95% of people don't know it they can't see anything but pleasure there, so they let their children clack away for hours at a time getting addicted to their 2 second dopamine hits.
my children are all grown up now but if i had children now i would not allow them to use a smart phone until they understand the aspects of human psychology that are involved with it, the same aspects that are understood in detail by the people who put these things out there to the public.

Only the mainstream internet is so obviously manipulated and censored. Tor browser opens the rest of the box. Even us here are enjoying a very free and unregulated corner of the web. Just look at the freedom we have to discuss incriminating subjects. If I was to search in the right places I think I could draw a complete picture of humanity.

As an experiment. Try to think of an aspect of humanity right now. As obscure or as old world as you want. Now use your search engine/browser of choice and see if you cannot find it represented on the web.

I think it should be noted and acknowledged that the people which are being judged here likely are unaware of the observations that we've made here. To make such observations one would need to be intentionally focused on increasing awareness with emphasis on self-awareness. How many people do we think have this as a conscious priority? Probably very few on the whole of things. I'm not sure how much we can blame people for what they don't know and for being victims of circumstance.

One love

The fact that it is a virtual, largely anonymous playfield contradicts the idea that the internet is a perfectly honest representation of humanity for me. If i get into an argument with someone on social media, it is far more likely to go pear shaped than if we were discussing face to face in the "real" world.



Well the internet is here and it ain't going anywhere soon. Rather than worrying about kids being on the internet too much, we should be teaching them how to use it safely and in a way that can be beneficial to them.



https://www.unicef.org/p...opportunities-and-build

I get that, completely. So we then say that your behaviour before social media was different to your possible behaviour now with social media? But why should that be considered artificial? It is just not an honest representation of how you were before the internet. It is a perfect representation of how you are now.

People from the past would say a society with free speech without punishment is not an honest representation of humanity. Because in their world punishment would be swift and unavoidable for saying the wrong thing.

When projectile weapons and suits of armour were created the interactions between humans were not a perfectly honest representation of humanity before those weapons were developed. When stone castles became a thing people didn't have to be so diplomatic with their neighbours. The behaviour of humanity before nuclear armaments is not perfectly represented by the behaviour of humanity after the power to end everything was discovered.

With all development humanity changes. Since the internet we see a perfectly honest representation of a humanity that has this tool available.

Unless that is true, we have been poorly representing humanity since we first chipped flint knives and discovered fire.

No, i am saying, that due to the nature of the medium, my behaviour on the internet can be different to when i am interacting face to face with a person. There is eye contact, facial expressions, body language, the possibilty to touch one and other. There is more nuance. On the internet there are words, emojis , memes to communicate with. Therefore for me at present that is not an accurate way to represent myself.
To be honest, i probably look cooler on the internet. In real life i'm a bit of a sad twat...

Well, I'm still struggling to understand how we decide what is true human behaviour and what is artificial. I cant see how anything we do could be artificial. Everything is a perfectly true representation of humanity within whatever parameters are current.

I think that we are getting confused by semantics. You are talking about artificiality whereas i am talking about accuracy.

Just to humour me, let's say I died and there actually was a judgement to answer for. Do you think god would say to me 'Oh, dont worry about the way you behaved on social media, I know that wasn't a representation of who you really were'?

Well it depends what you were doing on social media. If you were running a dark net paedophile ring, he would probably be a bit miffed. But if you were pushed into a pointless online argument with a stranger by an algorithm and you ended up insulting each other, i'm sure that he'd give you a pass.

EDIT, i'll give you another example of inaccuracies on social media. I know someone who is always posting extinction rebellion stuff on facebook. If social media was to be believed, and that's all the info that you have, then this guy is a saint. He cares. A lot. But he snorts bucketloads of cocaine which is'nt a very eco friendly drug and he keeps going of on planes on holiday a few times a year. QED social media is not an accurate reflection of how we really are.

So that is exactly my point. His hypocritical behaviour on social media is a perfect representation of how he behaves given the parameters of the platform. IE: able to present a false image when the audience have no means to dispute it.


You're definitely right hug, we are debating semantics. I'll leave a simplified synopsis of my original thought at least. The internet is a true representation of how humanity can behave given the parameters that the platform provides. In your example there, deceit and manipulated self image.

It does not show a false image of how humanity behaves without the internet. It shows a true image of how humanity behaves when it can get away with it.

I like to think of what Wittgenstein shared in the Tractatus: a picture (representation) of a thing is not the thing itself.

And a copy of a copy has mutations or augmentation each time it's copied, removing it from the original picture.

One love