A lot has been written about the potential for a technological riff between the 'haves' and 'have nots'. I believe instead this riff will divide the media-addicts and those strong enough to overcome or avoid media-addiction.
The interesting thing about those who read and write to slashdot regarding this story is their tension between media-craving and media-disgust. The majority of respondents, by virtue of reading the site itself, are in some way addicted to news and information. Notably they are loathe to hear of corporate conglomerates taking control, despite the fact that they likely pay $50+ monthly cable bills to these very corporations.
Media companies have exclusively the interest of their consumers in mind whenever they do anything. This is economic law. They give the masses - and we're all part of the masses despite whatever intellectual tricks we use to convince ourselves otherwise - what the masses demand. Substitution of one sub-media for another ("underground" music instead of "popular" music) does not free yourself, ultimately the happy-go-lucky Media Inc. will figure out your shifting preferences and deliver it to you in any form you're willing to pay for. And you WILL be willing to pay for it.
1. People are led to believe they are happy.
2. People think they are happy.
--
C. People are happy.
This seems to be a form of begging the question. You assume that people are convinced they are happy, which is what you are trying to conclude. Such an assumption is fallacious.
In addition, the point is not merely about happiness, but a need for society to recognize higher ideals and be thoughtful them. For instance, our children are often excused for their behavior because "it's just the way they are." They are allowed to proceed carelessly in their schoolwork, relieved from maintaining social grace and manners, view art, music, books, and movies in terms of their 'coolness' - another word for popularity - and generally make arbitrary decisions regarding their values and beliefs. Parents and teachers take the role of chaos managers, not advisors or fountains of wisdom. Such guidance is generally unfashionable and force - required arts classes, enforced reading assignments, required piano lessons - is strictly forbidden. This is but one example of modern difficulties with values.
Once again the supposed "Big Thinkers" of modern times whirl and drone producing little more than the textual form of sound-bite cliches.
Society has been disenfranchised from true art as its participants unknowingly absorb pop-philosophies like an adolescent absorbs Britney Spears songs. The middle class has become a vulgar beast; devoid of aesthetic, dominated by utilitarianism, repeatedly pummeled with theoretical psychobabble, and unable to find happiness in their SUVs and 60" televisions. Robbed of their faculties by an education system - manipulated and initially infected by higher powers for whatever reason, including, possibly, a misperception of the good - the commoner of today has suffered grave wounds to his soul.
Meanwhile, disgruntled reactionaries have protested, proclaiming art for the sake of art, blazing wild trails into pits of deeper meaninglessness, and desperately trying to piece together the confusion. They recognize the hopelessness felt in their peers and themselves, and now they have short circuited. Convention is muddled by chaos: class, style, aesthetics - willed out of existence.
So-called "Information Arts" is but another realm for those reacting against convention to explore. Not a new 'movement' or revelation, but the technologists' equivalent to avant-garde cinema, abstract art, and post-modernist literature. The programmer who considers himself the artistic equivalent of Da Vinci is a true madman. Not to say that programming doesn't require clever ingenuity, but I do suggest it lacks the enriching, meaningful quality of a true art.
Didn't Apple deliver the GUI? Apple is another wild card in the whole issue anyways. Though many will be hard pressed to take it seriously, Apple is making huge strides with their new systems (iMac, iBook, G3, G4, etc.) and there are still hundreds of millions of people on the planet (in the country even) that are still not wired... I see the whole notion of supply/demand being obliterated by the fact that supply will become endless (at least in this industry) and demand will be not for simple products but for incredible products -- which will be non-existent as long as one entity (MS) has the power.
The Linux community had started out pretty nicely but has lost its way as of late. Forget trying to compete with Microsoft or out-do their work. Find a place for Linux and a reason for it to exist and all will be fine. I believe the future of Computer Operating Systems will be customization. No, not desktops and pretty icon shit, *real* customization. Think about smart houses needing software to run them and cars and fast food, and grocery stores, and digital paper and everything! So there will be people whose soul occupation is made by molding and shaping computer operating systems for others. This is where Linux can grow into something bigger...
Slashdot Mirror
A lot has been written about the potential for a technological riff between the 'haves' and 'have nots'. I believe instead this riff will divide the media-addicts and those strong enough to overcome or avoid media-addiction.
The interesting thing about those who read and write to slashdot regarding this story is their tension between media-craving and media-disgust. The majority of respondents, by virtue of reading the site itself, are in some way addicted to news and information. Notably they are loathe to hear of corporate conglomerates taking control, despite the fact that they likely pay $50+ monthly cable bills to these very corporations.
Media companies have exclusively the interest of their consumers in mind whenever they do anything. This is economic law. They give the masses - and we're all part of the masses despite whatever intellectual tricks we use to convince ourselves otherwise - what the masses demand. Substitution of one sub-media for another ("underground" music instead of "popular" music) does not free yourself, ultimately the happy-go-lucky Media Inc. will figure out your shifting preferences and deliver it to you in any form you're willing to pay for. And you WILL be willing to pay for it.
Your argument seems to be fallacious.
1. People are led to believe they are happy.
2. People think they are happy.
--
C. People are happy.
This seems to be a form of begging the question. You assume that people are convinced they are happy, which is what you are trying to conclude. Such an assumption is fallacious.
In addition, the point is not merely about happiness, but a need for society to recognize higher ideals and be thoughtful them. For instance, our children are often excused for their behavior because "it's just the way they are." They are allowed to proceed carelessly in their schoolwork, relieved from maintaining social grace and manners, view art, music, books, and movies in terms of their 'coolness' - another word for popularity - and generally make arbitrary decisions regarding their values and beliefs. Parents and teachers take the role of chaos managers, not advisors or fountains of wisdom. Such guidance is generally unfashionable and force - required arts classes, enforced reading assignments, required piano lessons - is strictly forbidden. This is but one example of modern difficulties with values.
Once again the supposed "Big Thinkers" of modern times whirl and drone producing little more than the textual form of sound-bite cliches.
Society has been disenfranchised from true art as its participants unknowingly absorb pop-philosophies like an adolescent absorbs Britney Spears songs. The middle class has become a vulgar beast; devoid of aesthetic, dominated by utilitarianism, repeatedly pummeled with theoretical psychobabble, and unable to find happiness in their SUVs and 60" televisions. Robbed of their faculties by an education system - manipulated and initially infected by higher powers for whatever reason, including, possibly, a misperception of the good - the commoner of today has suffered grave wounds to his soul.
Meanwhile, disgruntled reactionaries have protested, proclaiming art for the sake of art, blazing wild trails into pits of deeper meaninglessness, and desperately trying to piece together the confusion. They recognize the hopelessness felt in their peers and themselves, and now they have short circuited. Convention is muddled by chaos: class, style, aesthetics - willed out of existence.
So-called "Information Arts" is but another realm for those reacting against convention to explore. Not a new 'movement' or revelation, but the technologists' equivalent to avant-garde cinema, abstract art, and post-modernist literature. The programmer who considers himself the artistic equivalent of Da Vinci is a true madman. Not to say that programming doesn't require clever ingenuity, but I do suggest it lacks the enriching, meaningful quality of a true art.
Anything for free!
Soon it will be!
Anything for free!
Matter compiler for me!
Didn't Apple deliver the GUI? Apple is another wild card in the whole issue anyways. Though many will be hard pressed to take it seriously, Apple is making huge strides with their new systems (iMac, iBook, G3, G4, etc.) and there are still hundreds of millions of people on the planet (in the country even) that are still not wired... I see the whole notion of supply/demand being obliterated by the fact that supply will become endless (at least in this industry) and demand will be not for simple products but for incredible products -- which will be non-existent as long as one entity (MS) has the power.
The Linux community had started out pretty nicely but has lost its way as of late. Forget trying to compete with Microsoft or out-do their work. Find a place for Linux and a reason for it to exist and all will be fine. I believe the future of Computer Operating Systems will be customization. No, not desktops and pretty icon shit, *real* customization. Think about smart houses needing software to run them and cars and fast food, and grocery stores, and digital paper and everything! So there will be people whose soul occupation is made by molding and shaping computer operating systems for others. This is where Linux can grow into something bigger...