Over the past few years I’ve had an uncomfortable sense that someone, or something, has been tinkering with my brain, remapping the neural circuitry, reprogramming the memory. My mind isn’t going—so far as I can tell—but it’s changing. I’m not thinking the way I used to think. I can feel it most strongly when I’m reading. Immersing myself in a book or a lengthy article used to be easy. My mind would get caught up in the narrative or the turns of the argument, and I’d spend hours strolling through long stretches of prose. That’s rarely the case anymore. Now my concentration often starts to drift after two or three pages. I get fidgety, lose the thread, begin looking for something else to do. I feel as if I’m always dragging my wayward brain back to the text. The deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle.
Highlighted by
arohlfs
What if I do all my reading on the web not so much because the way I read has changed, i.e. I’m just seeking convenience, but because the way I THINK has changed?”
Highlighted by
oakcliff214
What if I do all my reading on the web not so much because the way I read has changed, i.e. I’m just seeking convenience, but because the way I THINK has changed?”
Highlighted by
oakcliff214
I can feel it, too. Over the past few years I’ve had an uncomfortable sense that someone, or something, has been tinkering with my brain, remapping the neural circuitry, reprogramming the memory. My mind isn’t going—so far as I can tell—but it’s changing. I’m not thinking the way I used to think. I can feel it most strongly when I’m reading. Immersing myself in a book or a lengthy article used to be easy. My mind would get caught up in the narrative or the turns of the argument, and I’d spend hours strolling through long stretches of prose. That’s rarely the case anymore. Now my concentration often starts to drift after two or three pages. I get fidgety, lose the thread, begin looking for something else to do. I feel as if I’m always dragging my wayward brain back to the text. The deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle.
I think I know what’s going on ...
Highlighted by
treyf22
Wolf worries that the style of reading promoted by the Net, a style that puts “efficiency” and “immediacy” above all else, may be weakening our capacity for the kind of deep reading that emerged when an earlier technology, the printing press, made long and complex works of prose commonplace. When we read online, she says, we tend to become “mere decoders of information.” Our ability to interpret text, to make the rich mental connections that form when we read deeply and without distraction, remains largely disengaged.
Highlighted by
avanelk
What if I do all my reading on the web not so much because the way I read has changed, i.e. I’m just seeking convenience, but because the way I THINK has changed?”
Highlighted by
oakcliff214
When the Net absorbs a medium, that medium is re-created in the Net’s image. It injects the medium’s content with hyperlinks, blinking ads, and other digital gewgaws, and it surrounds the content with the content of all the other media it has absorbed. A new e-mail message, for instance, may announce its arrival as we’re glancing over the latest headlines at a newspaper’s site. The result is to scatter our attention and diffuse our concentration.
Highlighted by
tswicegood
When the Net absorbs a medium, that medium is re-created in the Net’s image. It injects the medium’s content with hyperlinks, blinking ads, and other digital gewgaws, and it surrounds the content with the content of all the other media it has absorbed. A new e-mail message, for instance, may announce its arrival as we’re glancing over the latest headlines at a newspaper’s site. The result is to scatter our attention and diffuse our concentration
Highlighted by
tswicegood
What if I do all my reading on the web not so much because the way I read has changed, i.e. I’m just seeking convenience, but because the way I THINK has changed?”
Highlighted by
oakcliff214
We are not only
what we read
Highlighted by
angelw
We are not only
what we read
Highlighted by
angelw
For me, as for others, the Net is becoming a universal medium, the conduit for most of the information that flows through my eyes and ears and into my mind
Highlighted by
oakcliff214
For me, as for others, the Net is becoming a universal medium, the conduit for most of the information that flows through my eyes and ears and into my mind
Highlighted by
oakcliff214
What if I do all my reading on the web not so much because the way I read has changed, i.e. I’m just seeking convenience, but because the way I THINK has changed?”
Highlighted by
oakcliff214
For me, as for others, the Net is becoming a universal medium, the conduit for most of the information that flows through my eyes and ears and into my mind
Highlighted by
oakcliff214
For me, as for others, the Net is becoming a universal medium, the conduit for most of the information that flows through my eyes and ears and into my mind
Highlighted by
oakcliff214
s likely as not to be foraging in the Web’s info-thickets’reading and writing e-mails, scanning headlin
Highlighted by
oakcliff214
“What if I do all my reading on the web not so much because the way I read has changed, i.e. I’m just seeking convenience, but because the way I THINK has changed?”
Highlighted by
oakcliff214
But the machine had a subtler effect on his work. One of Nietzsche’s friends, a composer, noticed a change in the style of his writing. His already terse prose had become even tighter, more telegraphic. “Perhaps you will through this instrument even take to a new idiom,” the friend wrote in a letter, noting that, in his own work, his “‘thoughts’ in music and language often depend on the quality of pen and paper.”
Highlighted by
meganpoore
For me, as for others, the Net is becoming a universal medium, the conduit for most of the information that flows through my eyes and ears and into my mind
Highlighted by
oakcliff214
What if I do all my reading on the web not so much because the way I read has changed, i.e. I’m just seeking convenience, but because the way I THINK has changed?”
Highlighted by
oakcliff214
For me, as for others, the Net is becoming a universal medium, the conduit for most of the information that flows through my eyes and ears and into my mind
Highlighted by
oakcliff214
For me, as for others, the Net is becoming a universal medium, the conduit for most of the information that flows through my eyes and ears and into my mind
Highlighted by
oakcliff214
For me, as for others, the Net is becoming a universal medium, the conduit for most of the information that flows through my eyes and ears and into my mind
Highlighted by
oakcliff214
Perhaps you will through this instrument even take to a new idiom
Highlighted by
balinjdl
What if I do all my reading on the web not so much because the way I read has changed, i.e. I’m just seeking convenience, but because the way I THINK has changed?”
Highlighted by
oakcliff214
What if I do all my reading on the web not so much because the way I read has changed, i.e. I’m just seeking convenience, but because the way I THINK has changed?”
Highlighted by
oakcliff214
“What if I do all my reading on the web not so much because the way I read has changed, i.e. I’m just seeking convenience, but because the way I THINK has changed?”
Highlighted by
oakcliff214
“What if I do all my reading on the web not so much because the way I read has changed, i.e. I’m just seeking convenience, but because the way I THINK has changed?”
Highlighted by
oakcliff214
“What if I do all my reading on the web not so much because the way I read has changed, i.e. I’m just seeking convenience, but because the way I THINK has changed?”
Highlighted by
oakcliff214
“What if I do all my reading on the web not so much because the way I read has changed, i.e. I’m just seeking convenience, but because the way I THINK has changed?”
Highlighted by
oakcliff214
“What if I do all my reading on the web not so much because the way I read has changed, i.e. I’m just seeking convenience, but because the way I THINK has changed?”
Highlighted by
oakcliff214
July/August 2008 Atlantic Monthly
What the Internet is doing to our brains
by Nicholas Carr
Is Google Making Us Stupid?
Highlighted by
akoyako
What the Internet is doing to our brains
Highlighted by
jeff-milw
on 2008-06-18 by
lawfully
power or lack of it of abstraction
on 2008-07-18 by
marchs
nice. first site outside diigo i found a sticky note on :-D
on 2008-07-28 by
korinuo
Interesting: Who is our internet patrol online? Google? Facebook? Peers? What do you think?
on 2008-08-01 by
dcyuhas
There's some irony here. The author describes the inability to read books or long articles IN A LONG ARTICLE.
on 2009-01-12 by
r4ph4el
@dave He didn't say he read his own article... ;-)
Dave beat me to the irony of the long article!
on 2009-03-05 by
oline73
re: long article-- how many people had trouble staying focused while they read? anyone stop to check e-mail in the middle? or update facebook? I think that sort of proves his point.
on 2009-04-21 by
ahammel
I am using this page as a discussion topic for my debate students. Google Scholar has helped correct some "easy way out" mentalities in my class, and Diigo, too, is supporting scholarly discussions in class.
I love it when people blame technology for their bad habits.
Is Google Making Us Stupid?
Highlighted by
stanz1959
Is Google Making Us Stupid?
Highlighted by
webby_duck
Dave, stop. Stop, will you? Stop, Dave. Will you stop, Dave?” So the supercomputer HAL pleads with the implacable astronaut Dave Bowman
in a famous and weirdly poignant scene toward the end of
Stanley Kubrick’s
2001: A Space Odyssey. Bowman, having nearly been sent to a deep-space death by the malfunctioning machine, is calmly, coldly disconnecting the memory circuits that control its artificial “ brain. “Dave, my mind is going,” HAL says, forlornly. “I can feel it. I can feel it.”
Highlighted by
greenfrog
"Dave, stop. Stop, will you? Stop, Dave. Will you stop, Dave?” So the supercomputer HAL pleads with the implacable astronaut Dave Bowman in a famous and weirdly poignant scene toward the end of Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey. Bowman, having nearly been sent to a deep-space death by the malfunctioning machine, is calmly, coldly disconnecting the memory circuits that control its artificial »
brain. “Dave, my mind is going,” HAL says, forlornly. “I can feel it. I can feel it.”
Highlighted by
teron2007
Dave, stop. Stop, will you? Stop, Dave. Will you stop, Dave?” So the supercomputer HAL pleads with the implacable astronaut Dave Bowman
in a famous and weirdly poignant scene toward the end of
Stanley Kubrick’s
2001: A Space Odyssey. Bowman, having nearly been sent to a deep-space death by the malfunctioning machine, is calmly, coldly disconnecting the memory circuits that control its artificial “ brain. “Dave, my mind is going,” HAL says, forlornly. “I can feel it. I can feel it.”
Highlighted by
alishagordon
ne, is calmly, coldly disconnecting the m
Highlighted by
josephndenton
In a
paper published in 1936, the British mathematician
Alan Turing
proved that a digital computer, which at the time existed only as a
theoretical machine, could be programmed to perform the function of any other
information-processing device. And that’s what we’re seeing today. The Internet,
an immeasurably powerful computing system, is subsuming most of our other
intellectual technologies. It’s becoming our map and our clock, our printing
press and our typewriter, our calculator and our telephone, and our radio and
TV.
Highlighted by
theranger
deep-space death by the malfunctioning machine, is calmly, coldly disconnecting
the memory
Highlighted by
sghazar
“Dave, my mind is going,” HAL says, forlornly. “I can feel it. I can feel it.
Highlighted by
academicdave
My mind isn’t going—so far as I can tell—but it’s changing. I’m not thinking the way I used to think. I can feel it most strongly when I’m reading. Immersing myself in a book or a lengthy article used to be easy. My mind would get caught up in the narrative or the turns of the argument, and I’d spend hours strolling through long stretches of prose. That’s rarely the case anymore. Now my concentration often starts to drift after two or three pages. I get fidgety, lose the thread, begin looking for something else to do. I feel as if I’m always dragging my wayward brain back to the text. The deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle.
Highlighted by
andrewbrucesmith
I’m not thinking the way I used to think.
Highlighted by
prettyflower
I’m not thinking the way I used to think. I can feel it most strongly when I’m reading. Immersing myself in a book or a lengthy article used to be easy. My mind would get caught up in the narrative or the turns of the argument, and I’d spend hours strolling through long stretches of prose. That’s rarely the case anymore. Now my concentration often starts to drift after two or three pages. I get fidgety, lose the thread, begin looking for something else to do. I feel as if I’m always dragging my wayward brain back to the text. The deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle.
Highlighted by
niharm
Immersing myself in a book or a lengthy article used to be easy.
Highlighted by
sarahsutter
Immersing myself in a book or a lengthy article used to be easy
Highlighted by
sarahsutter
Over the past few years I’ve had an uncomfortable sense that someone, or something, has been tinkering with my brain, remapping the neural circuitry, reprogramming the memory.
Highlighted by
slpowelson
Over the past few years I’ve had an uncomfortable sense that someone, or
something, has been tinkering with my brain
Highlighted by
honormoorman
I agree with this sentiment
Over the past few years I’ve had an uncomfortable sense that someone, or something, has been tinkering with my brain, remapping the neural circuitry, reprogramming the memory.
Highlighted by
serendipitina
I can feel it, too. Over the past few years I’ve had an uncomfortable sense that someone, or something, has been tinkering with my brain, remapping the neural circuitry, reprogramming the memory. My mind isn’t going—so far as I can tell—but it’s changing. I’m not thinking the way I used to think. I can feel it most strongly when I’m reading.
Highlighted by
orangeturtle411
had an uncomfortable sen
Highlighted by
cmg543
Over the past few years I’ve had an uncomfortable sense that someone, or something, has been tinkering with my brain, remapping the neural circuitry, reprogramming the memory. My mind isn’t going—so far as I can tell—but it’s changing. I’m not thinking the way I used to think. I can feel it most strongly when I’m reading. Immersing myself in a book or a lengthy article used to be easy. My mind would get caught up in the narrative or the turns of the argument, and I’d spend hours strolling through long stretches of prose. That’s rarely the case anymore. Now my concentration often starts to drift after two or three pages.
Highlighted by
s0793898
I can feel it, too. Over the past few years I’ve had an uncomfortable sense that
someone, or something, has been tinkering with my brain, remapping the neural
circuitry, reprogramming the memory.
Highlighted by
honormoorman
That’s rarely the case anymore. Now my concentration often starts to drift after two or three pages. I get fidgety, lose the thread, begin looking for something else to do.
Highlighted by
wenzloff
concentration often starts to drift
Highlighted by
sarahsutter
concentration often starts to drift
Highlighted by
sarahsutter
Now my concentration often starts to drift after two or three pages
Highlighted by
zinzinzinnia
remapping the neural circuitry, reprogramming the memory.
Highlighted by
ltogioka
I’m not thinking the way I used to think.
Highlighted by
marianbonita
My mind isn’t going—so far as I can tell—but it’s changing. I’m not thinking the way I used to think
Highlighted by
phdumper
Now my concentration often starts to drift after two or three pages. I get fidgety, lose the thread, begin looking for something else to do. I feel as if I’m always dragging my wayward brain back to the text. The deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle.
Highlighted by
prettyflower
My mind isn’t going—so far as I can tell—but it’s changing. I’m not thinking the way I used to think. I can feel it most strongly when I’m reading. Immersing myself in a book or a lengthy article used to be easy. My mind would get caught up in the narrative or the turns of the argument, and I’d spend hours strolling through long stretches of prose. That’s rarely the case anymore. Now my concentration often starts to drift after two or three pages. I get fidgety, lose the thread, begin looking for something else to do. I feel as if I’m always dragging my wayward brain back to the text. The deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle.
Highlighted by
etown2890
Immersing myself in a book or a lengthy article used to be easy.
Highlighted by
marianbonita
I can feel it most strongly when I’m reading. Immersing myself in a book or a lengthy article used to be easy. My mind would get caught up in the narrative or the turns of the argument, and I’d spend hours strolling through long stretches of prose. That’s rarely the case anymore. Now my concentration often starts to drift after two or three pages. I get fidgety, lose the thread, begin looking for something else to do. I feel as if I’m always dragging my wayward brain back to the text. The deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle.
Highlighted by
rlfilipkowski
I feel as if I’m always dragging my wayward brain back to the text. The deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle.
Highlighted by
caitxsith
The deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle.
Highlighted by
beahgo
The deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle.
Highlighted by
persei
Now my concentration often starts to drift after two or three pages. I get
fidgety, lose the thread, begin looking for something else to do. I feel as if
I’m always dragging my wayward brain back to the text. The deep reading that
used to come naturally has become a struggle.
Highlighted by
theranger
concentration often starts to drift after two or three pages
Highlighted by
mjc239
Now my concentration often starts to drift after two or three pages.
Highlighted by
jimwenz
Now my concentration often starts to drift after two or three pages. I get fidgety, lose the thread, begin looking for something else to do.
Highlighted by
jtkatavich
Now my concentration often starts to drift after two or three pages. I get fidgety, lose the thread, begin looking for something else to do. I feel as if I’m always dragging my wayward brain back to the text. The deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle.
Highlighted by
oline73
on 2009-11-18 by
oline73
We are only going to find more of this thanks to twitter.
I think I know what’s going on. For more than a decade now, I’ve been spending a lot of time online, searching and surfing and sometimes adding to the great databases of the Internet. The Web has been a godsend to me as a writer. Research that once required days in the stacks or periodical rooms of libraries can now be done in minutes. A few Google searches, some quick clicks on hyperlinks, and I’ve got the telltale fact or pithy quote I was after. Even when I’m not working, I’m as likely as not to be foraging in the Web’s info-thickets—reading and writing e-mails, scanning headlines and blog posts, watching videos and listening to podcasts, or just tripping from link to link to link. (Unlike footnotes, to which they’re sometimes likened, hyperlinks don’t merely point to related works; they propel you toward them.)
Highlighted by
sjptech08
Now my concentration often starts to drift after two or three pages
Highlighted by
mollyclancy
Now my concentration often starts to drift after two or three pages. I get fidgety, lose the thread, begin looking for something else to do. I feel as if I’m always dragging my wayward brain back to the text. The deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle.
Highlighted by
ltogioka
. For more than a decade now, I’ve been spending a lot of time online, searching and surfing and s
Highlighted by
missmeliosky
Now my concentration often starts to drift after two or three pages
Highlighted by
apaster
I think I know what’s going on
Highlighted by
wenzloff
feel as if I’m always dragging my wayward brain back to the text. The deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle.
Highlighted by
dmrsci
The deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle.
Highlighted by
tomkrieglstein
The deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle.
Highlighted by
academicdave
The deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle
Highlighted by
gummby
The deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle.
Highlighted by
pinkcar22
The deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle.
Highlighted by
alishagordon
. The deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle.
Highlighted by
orangeturtle411
Research that once required days in the stacks or periodical rooms of libraries can now be done in minute
Highlighted by
caitxsith
The deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle.
Highlighted by
mfunkhou
A few Google searches, some quick clicks on hyperlinks, and I’ve got the telltale fact or pithy quote
Highlighted by
wenzloff
I think I know what’s going on. For more than a decade now, I’ve been spending a lot of time online, searching and surfing and sometimes adding to the great databases of the Internet. The Web has been a godsend to me as a writer.
Highlighted by
ko01bps
For more than a decade now, I’ve been spending a lot of time online, searching and surfing and sometimes adding to the great databases of the Internet. The Web has been a godsend to me as a writer.
Highlighted by
webenito
The Web has been a godsend to me as a writer.
Highlighted by
ltogioka
Research that once required days in the stacks or periodical rooms of libraries
can now be done in minutes. A few Google searches, some quick clicks on
hyperlinks, and I’ve got the telltale fact or pithy quote I was after.
Highlighted by
theranger
The Web has been a godsend to me as a writer.
Highlighted by
marianbonita
Web has been a godsend to me as a writer
Highlighted by
phdumper
(Unlike footnotes, to which they’re sometimes likened, hyperlinks don’t merely point to related works; they propel you toward them.)
Highlighted by
andrewbrucesmith
(Unlike footnotes, to which they’re sometimes likened, hyperlinks don’t merely point to related works; they propel you toward them.)
Highlighted by
willrich
I’ve got the telltale fact or pithy quote I was after. Even when I’m not working, I’m as likely as not to be foraging in the Web’s info-thickets’reading and
Highlighted by
jimwenz
the Net is becoming a universal medium, the conduit for most of the information that flows through my eyes and ears and into my mind
Highlighted by
luisalberola
the Net is becoming a universal medium
Highlighted by
willrich
For me, as for others, the Net is becoming a universal medium, the conduit for most of the information that flows through my eyes and ears and into my mind.
Highlighted by
prettyflower
(Unlike footnotes, to which they’re sometimes likened, hyperlinks don’t merely point to related works; they propel you toward them.)
Highlighted by
marianbonita
(Unlike footnotes, to which they’re sometimes likened, hyperlinks don’t merely point to related works; they propel you toward them.)
Highlighted by
orangeturtle411
And what the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation
Highlighted by
margolis
hyperlinks don’t merely point to related works; they propel you toward them.)
Highlighted by
carlaarena
media are not just passive channels of information. They supply the stuff of
thought, but they also shape the process of thought.
Highlighted by
angelw
on 2009-09-09 by
angelw
um..I think that leads to the question---who owns the media.
No one owns the media, the media has become a channel for any person to make what they want of it.
Print, TV, and digital media do shape our collective thinking process (think elections!). What the Internet does to a much greater extent is connect people with the opinion they want to hear. THe shades of what truth is are very much gray: it's in the eye of the beholder. On the flip side, the Internet also connects people with information and experts about what they are motivated to learn. It's the ultimate personnalized learning for kids! Good or bad...
media are not just passive channels of information. They supply the stuff of
thought, but they also shape the process of thought.
Highlighted by
jimbeau
on 2008-09-30 by
jimbeau
This contention needs more than pointing to. It needs to be established as true.
For me, as for others, the Net is becoming a universal medium, the conduit for most of the information that flows through my eyes and ears and into my mind.
Highlighted by
oakcliff214
Net is becoming a universal medium
Highlighted by
mjc239
media are not just passive channels of information
Highlighted by
sarahsutter
media are not just passive channels of information. They supply the stuff of thought, but they also shape the process of thought.
Highlighted by
sarahsutter
As the media theorist Marshall McLuhan pointed out in the 1960s, media are not just passive channels of information. They supply the stuff of thought, but they also shape the process of thought.
Highlighted by
caweldude
As the media theorist Marshall McLuhan pointed out in the 1960s, media are not just passive channels of information. They supply the stuff of thought, but they also shape the process of thought. And what the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation.
Highlighted by
akochan
As the media theorist Marshall McLuhan pointed out in the 1960s, media are not just passive channels of information. They supply the stuff of thought, but they also shape the process of thought
Highlighted by
beahgo
As the media theorist Marshall McLuhan pointed out in the 1960s, media are not just passive channels of information. They supply the stuff of thought, but they also shape the process of thought.
Highlighted by
andrewbrucesmith
For me, as for others, the Net is becoming a universal medium, the conduit for most of the information that flows through my eyes and ears and into my mind. The advantages of having immediate access to such an incredibly rich store of information are many, and they’ve been widely described and duly applauded.
Highlighted by
mbmccorm
universal medium, the conduit for most of the information that flows through my eyes and ears and into my mind
Highlighted by
phdumper
shape the process of thought
Highlighted by
sarahsutter
but they also shape the process of thought.
Highlighted by
zinzinzinnia
As the media theorist Marshall McLuhan pointed out in the 1960s, media are not just passive channels of information. They supply the stuff of thought, but they also shape the process of thought. And what the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation.
Highlighted by
oneran
They supply the stuff of thought, but they also shape the process of thought. And what the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation.
Highlighted by
willrich
The advantages of having immediate access to such an incredibly rich store of information are many, and they’ve been widely described and duly applauded.
Highlighted by
orangeturtle411
chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation.
Highlighted by
sarahsutter
what the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation. My mind now expects to take in information the way the Net distributes it: in a swiftly moving stream of particles. Once I was a scuba diver in the sea of words. Now I zip along the surface like a guy on a Jet Ski.
Highlighted by
wroush
And what the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation.
Highlighted by
leifhar
The perfect recall of silicon memory,”
Highlighted by
mjc239
nd what the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation. My mind now expects to take in information the way the Net distributes it: in a swiftly moving stream of particles
Highlighted by
caitxsith
Once I was a scuba diver in the sea of words. Now I zip along the surface like a guy on a Jet Ski.
Highlighted by
lsoldevila
Once I was a scuba diver in the sea of words. Now I zip along the surface like a guy on a Jet Ski.
Highlighted by
lsoldevila
“The perfect recall of silicon memory,”
Wired’s Clive Thompson
has written, “can be an enormous boon to
thinking.”
Highlighted by
s0793898
“can be an enormous boon to thinking
Highlighted by
mjc239
Once I was a scuba diver in the sea of words. Now I zip along the surface like a guy on a Jet Ski.
Highlighted by
lawfully
Once I was a scuba diver in the sea of words. Now I zip along the surface like a guy on a Jet Ski.
Highlighted by
rafaribas
media are not just passive channels of information. They supply the stuff of thought, but they also shape the process of thought.
Highlighted by
tomkrieglstein
media are not just passive channels of information. They supply the stuff of thought, but they also shape the process of thought.
Highlighted by
marianbonita
As the media theorist
Marshall McLuhan pointed out in the 1960s, media are not just
passive channels of information. They supply the stuff of thought, but they also
shape the process of thought. And what the Net seems to be doing is chipping
away my capacity for concentration and contemplation. My mind now expects to
take in information the way the Net distributes it: in a swiftly moving stream
of particles. Once I was a scuba diver in the sea of words. Now I zip along the
surface like a guy on a Jet Ski.
Highlighted by
theranger
As the media theorist
Marshall
McLuhan pointed out in the 1960s, media are not just passive channels of information. They supply the stuff of thought, but they also shape the process of thought. And what the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation. My mind now expects to take in information the way the Net distributes it: in a swiftly moving stream of particles. Once I was a scuba diver in the sea of words. Now I zip along the surface like a guy on a Jet Ski.
Highlighted by
s0793898
As the media theorist
Marshall
McLuhan pointed out in the 1960s, media are not just passive channels of information. They supply the stuff of thought, but they also shape the process of thought. And what the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation.
Highlighted by
veeman60
media are not just passive channels of information. They supply the stuff of thought, but they also shape the process of thought.
Highlighted by
rkatclu
They supply the stuff of thought, but they also shape the process of thought.
Highlighted by
mjc239
media are not just passive channels of information. They supply the stuff of thought, but they also shape the process of thought
Highlighted by
phdumper
the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation
Highlighted by
marianbonita
And what the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation. My mind now expects to take in information the way the Net distributes it: in a swiftly moving stream of particles. Once I was a scuba diver in the sea of words. Now I zip along the surface like a guy on a Jet Ski.
Highlighted by
tomkrieglstein
And what the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation.
Highlighted by
professorphat
And what the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation.
Highlighted by
rlfilipkowski
recently confessed
Highlighted by
akipta
on 2008-06-21 by
akipta
Read Scott Karp's comment on Carr's quote: http://publishing2.com/2008/06/17/connecting-the-dots-of-the-web-revolution/#more-1105
@Allison - thanks for the link to this as I throughly enjoyed his reponse!
They supply the stuff of thought, but they also shape the process of thought. And what the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation. My mind now expects to take in information the way the Net distributes it: in a swiftly moving stream of particles. Once I was a scuba diver in the sea of words. Now I zip along the surface like a guy on a Jet Ski.
Highlighted by
carlaarena
chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation
Highlighted by
rkatclu
And what the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation. My mind now expects to take in information the way the Net distributes it: in a swiftly moving stream of particles. Once I was a scuba diver in the sea of words. Now I zip along the surface like a guy on a Jet Ski.
Highlighted by
jmaxer
And what the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation. My mind now expects to take in information the way the Net distributes it: in a swiftly moving stream of particles.
Highlighted by
mbmccorm
My mind now expects to take in information the way the Net distributes it: in a
swiftly moving stream of particles. Once I was a scuba diver in the sea of
words. Now I zip along the surface like a guy on a Jet Ski.
Highlighted by
mjc239
The more they use the Web, the more they have to fight to stay focused on long
pieces of writing.
Highlighted by
demetri
on 2008-06-20 by
demetri
Is this true for you? I don't think I've lost the ability to focus in depth, I think I've gained the ability to access a whole lot more information.
on 2008-06-21 by
akipta
The more I read Nicholas Carr, the more I have to fight to stay focused on Nicholas Carr.
I do not agree with this sentiment one bit. I have become so much MORE focussed on longer pieces of writing since viewing them online. Particularly now that tools such as Diigo and Digg exist. These tools make a long (and sometimes unsubstantiated, as we can see here) piece of writing a lot easier to consume. And so what if I graze through the information meadow? At least then I take it on - I'm just not the type of person that can read reams and reams in one go. But I can bet anyone that I'm more intelligent since the advent of Google and the like than I would have been without - having to rely on my lacking library services.
on 2009-08-31 by
gummby
Well, this isn't an argument for or against the webs ability to shape or contribute to the growth of an intellectual. However, I do agree that my focus hasn't been noticeably affected. If anything, I only have just become more aware of the things that truly do and do not intrigue me. I run across passages on the web every day in which I lose focus rather easily. Except, I have also found e-books and other passages online that I tear right through.
My mind now expects to take in information the way the Net distributes it: in a swiftly moving stream of particles.
Highlighted by
orangeturtle411
The more they use the Web, the more they have to fight to stay focused on long pieces of writing.
Highlighted by
leifhar
I was a scuba diver in the sea of words. Now I zip along the surface like a guy on a Jet Ski.
Highlighted by
in-diigo
Once I was a scuba diver in the sea of words. Now I zip along the surface like a guy on a Jet Ski.
Highlighted by
phdumper
the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation. My mind now expects to take in information the way the Net distributes it: in a swiftly moving stream of particles.
Highlighted by
niharm
The more they use the Web, the more they have to fight to
stay focused on long
pieces of
writing.
Highlighted by
beth05202
not the only one
Highlighted by
phdumper
What if I do all my reading on the web not so much because the way I read has changed, i.e. I’m just seeking convenience, but because the way I THINK has changed?”
Highlighted by
willrich
—literary types, most of them—many say they’re having similar experiences
Highlighted by
s0793898
The more they use the Web, the more they have to fight to stay focused on long pieces of writing.
Highlighted by
veeman60
. The more they use the Web, the more they have to fight to stay focused on long pieces of writing
Highlighted by
jmaxer
“What if I do all my reading on the web not so much because the way I read has changed, i.e. I’m just seeking convenience, but because the way I THINK has changed?”
Highlighted by
caitxsith
I mention my troubles with reading to friends and acquaintances—literary types, most of them—many say they’re having similar experiences. The more they use the Web, the more they have to fight to stay focused on long pieces of writing. Some of the bloggers I follow have also begun mentioning the phenomenon. Scott Karp, who writes a blog about online media, recently confessed that he has stopped reading books altogether. “I was a lit major in college, and used to be [a] voracious book reader,” he wrote. “What happened?” He speculates on the answer: “What if I do all my reading on the web not so much because the way I read has changed, i.e. I’m just seeking convenience, but because the way I THINK has changed?”
Highlighted by
niharm
I was a lit major in college
Highlighted by
jasonmkern
“I now have almost totally lost the ability to read and absorb a longish article on the web or in print
Highlighted by
markcmarino
his mental habits
Highlighted by
akochan
I was a lit major in college, and used to be [a] voracious book reader,”
Highlighted by
ltogioka
“What if I do all my reading on the web not so much because the way I read has changed, i.e. I’m just seeking convenience, but because the way I THINK has changed?”
Highlighted by
s0793898
He speculates on the answer: “What if I do all my reading on the web not so much because the way I read has changed, i.e. I’m just seeking convenience, but because the way I THINK has changed?”
Highlighted by
veeman60
I’m just seeking convenience, but because the way I THINK has changed?”
Highlighted by
jimwenz
His thinking, he said, has taken on a “staccato” quality, reflecting the way he quickly scans short passages of text from many sources online.
Highlighted by
andrewbrucesmith
Bruce Friedman, who
blogs regularly about the use of computers in medicine, also has described
how the Internet has altered his mental habits. “I now have almost totally lost
the ability to read and absorb a longish article on the web or in print,” he
wrote earlier this year. A pathologist who has long been on the faculty of the
University of Michigan Medical School, Friedman elaborated on his comment in a
telephone conversation with me. His thinking, he said, has taken on a “staccato”
quality, reflecting the way he quickly scans short passages of text from many
sources online. “I can’t read
War and Peace anymore,” he admitted. “I’ve
lost the ability to do that. Even a blog post of more than three or four
paragraphs is too much to absorb. I skim it.”
Highlighted by
theranger
“staccato” quality, reflecting the way he quickly scans short passages of text from many sources online
Highlighted by
sarahsutter
“I can’t read
War and Peace anymore,” he admitted. “I’ve lost the ability to do that. Even a blog post of more than three or four paragraphs is too much to absorb. I skim it.”
Highlighted by
leifhar
I now have almost totally lost the ability to read and absorb a longish article on the web or in print,
Highlighted by
apaster
“I now have almost totally lost the ability to read and absorb a longish article on the web or in print,”
Highlighted by
pinkfenix
the Internet has altered his mental habits. “I now have almost totally lost the ability to read and absorb a longish article on the web or in print,”
Highlighted by
jmaxer
ability to read and absorb a longish article on the web or in print,” he wrote earlier this year. A pathologist who has long been on the faculty of the University of Michigan Medical School, Friedman elaborated on his comment in a telephone conversation with me. His thinking, he said, has taken on a “staccato” quality, reflecting the way he quickly scans short passages of text from many sources online. “I can’t read
War and Peace anymore,” he admitted. “I’ve lost the ability to do that. Even a blog post of more than three or four paragraphs is too much to absorb. I skim it.”
Highlighted by
smccord402
Even a blog post of more than three or four paragraphs is too much to absorb. I skim it.
Highlighted by
rafaribas
“I’ve lost the ability to do that. Even a blog post of more than three or four paragraphs is too much to absorb. I skim it.”
Highlighted by
prettyflower
pathologist who has lon
Highlighted by
jimwenz
His thinking, he said, has taken on a “staccato” quality
Highlighted by
rlfilipkowski
Anecdotes alone don’t prove much.
Highlighted by
kiberens
we still await the long-term neurological and psychological experiments that will provide a definitive picture of how Internet use affects cognition.
Highlighted by
willrich
As part of the five-year research program, the scholars examined computer logs documenting the behavior of visitors to two popular research sites, one operated by the British Library and one by a U.K. educational consortium, that provide access to journal articles, e-books, and other sources of written information. They found that people using the sites exhibited “a form of skimming activity,” hopping from one source to another and rarely returning to any source they’d already visited. They typically read no more than one or two pages of an article or book before they would “bounce” out to another site. Sometimes they’d save a long article, but there’s no evidence that they ever went back and actually read it.
Highlighted by
dxbjack
Anecdotes alone don’t prove much. And we still await the
long-term neurological and
Highlighted by
oakcliff214
reflecting the way he quickly scans short passages of text from many sources online.
Highlighted by
jmaxer
recently published study of online research habits,
Highlighted by
persei
But a recently published study of online research habits, conducted by scholars from University College London, suggests that we may well be in the midst of a sea change in the way we read and think.
Highlighted by
andrewbrucesmith
“I can’t read
War and Peace anymore,” he admitted. “I’ve lost the ability to do that. Even a blog post of more than three or four paragraphs is too much to absorb. I skim it.”
Highlighted by
s0793898
I’ve lost the ability to do that
Highlighted by
veeman60
“I’ve lost the ability to do that. Even a blog post of more than three or four paragraphs is too much to absorb. I skim it.”
Highlighted by
kschilling12
we may well be in the midst of a sea change in the way we read and think.
Highlighted by
willrich
we may well be in the midst of a sea change in the way we read and think
Highlighted by
akochan
too much to absorb.
Highlighted by
rkatclu
we still await the long-term neurological and psychological experiments that
will provide a definitive picture of how Internet use affects cognition.
Highlighted by
mjc239
As part of the five-year research program, the scholars examined computer logs documenting the behavior of visitors to two popular research sites,
Highlighted by
prettyflower
one operated by the British Library and one by a U.K. educational consortium, that provide access to journal articles, e-books, and other sources of written information. They found that people using the sites exhibited “a form of skimming activity,” hopping from one source to another and rarely returning to any source they’d already visited. They typically read no more than one or two pages of an article or book before they would “bounce” out to another site.
Highlighted by
wenzloff
But a recently published
study of online research habits , conducted by scholars from
University College London, suggests that we may well be in the midst of a sea
change in the way we read and think. As part of the five-year research program,
the scholars examined computer logs documenting the behavior of visitors to two
popular research sites, one operated by the British Library and one by a U.K.
educational consortium, that provide access to journal articles, e-books, and
other sources of written information. They found that people using the sites
exhibited “a form of skimming activity,” hopping from one source to another and
rarely returning to any source they’d already visited. They typically read no
more than one or two pages of an article or book before they would “bounce” out
to another site. Sometimes they’d save a long article, but there’s no evidence
that they ever went back and actually read it.
Highlighted by
theranger
They found that people using the sites exhibited “a form of skimming activity,” hopping from one source to another and rarely returning to any source they’d already visited.
Highlighted by
persei
They found that people using the sites exhibited “a form of skimming activity,”
hopping from one source to another and rarely returning to any source they’d
already visited.
Highlighted by
demetri
But a recently
published
study
of online research habits , conducted by scholars from University College London, suggests that
we may well be in the midst of a sea change in the way
we read and think.
Highlighted by
cgreenhow
suggests that we may well be in the midst of a sea change in the way we read and think.
Highlighted by
rlfilipkowski
They found that people using the sites exhibited “a form of skimming activity,” hopping from one source to another and rarely returning to any source they’d already visited. They typically read no more than one or two pages of an article or book before they would “bounce” out to another site. Sometimes they’d save a long article, but there’s no evidence that they ever went back and actually read it. The authors of the study report:
Highlighted by
prettyflower
It is clear that users are not reading online in the traditional sense; indeed there are signs that new forms of “reading” are emerging as users “power browse” horizontally through titles, contents pages and abstracts going for quick wins. It almost seems that they go online to avoid reading in the traditional sense.
Highlighted by
hennis
They found that people using the sites exhibited “a form of skimming activity,” hopping from one source to another and rarely returning to any source they’d already visited. They typically read no more than one or two pages of an article or book before they would “bounce” out to another site
Highlighted by
ethelo
They found that people using the sites exhibited “a form of skimming activity,” hopping from one source to another and rarely returning to any source they’d already visited. They typically read no more than one or two pages of an article or book before they would “bounce” out to another sit
Highlighted by
phdumper
It is clear that users are not reading online in the traditional sense; indeed there are signs that new forms of “reading” are emerging as users “power browse” horizontally through titles, contents pages and abstracts going for quick wins. It almost seems that they go online to avoid reading in the traditional sense.
Highlighted by
willrich
It is clear that users are not reading online in the traditional sense; indeed there are signs that new forms of “reading” are emerging as users “power browse” horizontally through titles, contents pages and abstracts going for quick wins. It almost seems that they go online to avoid reading in the traditional sense.
Highlighted by
beahgo
It is clear that users are not reading online in the traditional sense; indeed there are signs that new forms of “reading” are emerging as users “power browse” horizontally through titles, contents pages and abstracts going for quick wins. It almost seems that they go online to avoid reading in the traditional sense.
Highlighted by
fred1st
They typically read no more than one or two pages of an article or book before they would “bounce” out to another site
Highlighted by
jimwenz
They typically read no more than one or two pages of an article or book before they would “bounce” out to another site.
Highlighted by
rlfilipkowski
It is clear that users are not reading online in the traditional sense; indeed there are signs that new forms of “reading” are emerging as users “power browse” horizontally through titles, contents pages and abstracts going for quick wins. It almost seems that they go online to avoid reading in the traditional sense.
Highlighted by
oneran
They typically read no more than one or two pages of an article or book before
they would “bounce” out to another site. Sometimes they’d save a long article,
but there’s no evidence that they ever went back and actually read it. The
authors of the study report:
Highlighted by
ytorres
before they would “bounce” out to another site
Highlighted by
mollyclancy
we may well be reading more today than we did in the 1970s or 1980s, when television was our medium of choice.
Highlighted by
eyalnow
they go online to avoid reading in the traditional sense.
Highlighted by
sarahsutter
But it’s a different kind of reading, and behind it lies a different kind of thinking—perhaps even a new sense of the self. “We are not only
what we read,” says Maryanne Wolf, a developmental psychologist at Tufts University and the author of
Proust and the Squid: The Story and Science of the Reading Brain. “We are
how we read.” Wolf worries that the style of reading promoted by the Net, a style that puts “efficiency” and “immediacy” above all else, may be weakening our capacity for the kind of deep reading that emerged when an earlier technology, the printing press, made long and complex works of prose commonplace.
Highlighted by
braddo
they go online to avoid reading in the traditional sense.
Highlighted by
prettyflower
It is clear that users are not reading online in the traditional sense; indeed there are signs that new forms of “reading” are emerging as users “power browse” horizontally through titles, contents pages and abstracts going for quick wins. It almost seems that they go online to avoid reading in the traditional sense.
Highlighted by
academicdave
It is clear that users are not reading online in the traditional sense; indeed there are signs that new forms of “reading” are emerging as users “power browse” horizontally through titles, contents pages and abstracts going for quick wins. It almost seems that they go online to avoid reading in the traditional sense.
Highlighted by
ethelo
It is clear that users are not reading online in the traditional sense; indeed there are signs that new forms of “reading” are emerging as users “power browse” horizontally through titles, contents pages and abstracts going for quick wins. It almost seems that they go online to avoid reading in the traditional sense.
Highlighted by
tomkrieglstein
It is clear that users are not reading online in the traditional sense; indeed there are signs that new forms of “reading” are emerging as users “power browse” horizontally through titles, contents pages and abstracts going for quick wins. It almost seems that they go online to avoid reading in the traditional sense.
Highlighted by
marianbonita
It is clear that users are not reading online in the traditional sense; indeed there are signs that new forms of “reading” are emerging as users “power browse” horizontally through titles, contents pages and abstracts going for quick wins. It almost seems that they go online to avoid reading in the traditional sense.
Highlighted by
s0793898
It is clear that users are not reading online in the traditional sense; indeed there are signs that new forms of “reading” are emerging as users “power browse” horizontally through titles, contents pages and abstracts going for quick wins. It almost seems that they go online to avoid reading in the traditional sense.
Highlighted by
orangeturtle411
It is clear that users are not reading online in the traditional sense; indeed there are signs that new forms of “reading” are emerging as users “power browse” horizontally through titles, contents pages and abstracts going for quick wins. It almost seems that they go online to avoid reading in the traditional sense.
Highlighted by
jmaxer
we may well be reading more today than we did in the 1970s or 1980s, when television was our medium of choice. But it’s a different kind of reading, and behind it lies a different kind of thinking—perhaps even a new sense of the self.
Highlighted by
andrewbrucesmith
we may well be reading more today than we did in the 1970s or 1980s, when television was our medium of choice. But it’s a different kind of reading, and behind it lies a different kind of thinking—perhaps even a new sense of the self.
Highlighted by
rafaribas
“power browse” horizontally through titles, contents pages and abstracts going for quick wins.
Highlighted by
veeman60
But it’s a different kind of reading, and behind it lies a different kind of thinking—perhaps even a new sense of the self.
Highlighted by
kiberens
Wolf worries that the style of reading promoted by the Net, a style that puts “efficiency” and “immediacy” above all else, may be weakening our capacity for the kind of deep reading that emerged when an earlier technology, the printing press, made long and complex works of prose commonplace. When we read online, she says, we tend to become “mere decoders of information.” Our ability to interpret text, to make the rich mental connections that form when we read deeply and without distraction, remains largely disengaged.
Highlighted by
hennis
We are not only
what we read,
Highlighted by
sarahsutter
It almost seems that they go online to avoid reading in the traditional sense.
Highlighted by
evansaysblah
“power browse” horizontally through titles, contents pages and abstracts going for quick wins
Highlighted by
carlaarena
We are
how we read.”
Highlighted by
jimbeau
on 2008-09-30 by
jimbeau
This seems an important point.
on 2009-02-11 by
jarceo
yes.
if we read well we learn well...
about 14 hours ago by
jbear95
You really think it's an important point. Not to be snarky, but I would say so. I mean, it is discussing how we read and what we read.
“We are
how we read.” Wolf worries that the style of reading promoted by the Net, a style that puts “efficiency” and “immediacy” above all else, may be weakening our capacity for the kind of deep reading that emerged when an earlier technology, the printing press, made long and complex works of prose commonplace.
Highlighted by
rosekrans13
Thanks to the ubiquity of text on the Internet, not to mention the popularity of
text-messaging on cell phones, we may well be reading more today than we did in
the 1970s or 1980s, when television was our medium of choice. But it’s a
different kind of reading, and behind it lies a different kind of
thinking—perhaps even a new sense of the self.
Highlighted by
beca1116
Thanks to the ubiquity of text on the Internet, not to mention the popularity of text-messaging on cell phones, we may well be reading more today than we did in the 1970s or 1980s, when television was our medium of choice. But it’s a different kind of reading, and behind it lies a different kind of thinking—perhaps even a new sense of the self.
Highlighted by
jmaxer
“efficiency” and “immediacy” above all else,
Highlighted by
sarahsutter
Wolf worries that the style of reading promoted by the Net, a style that puts “efficiency” and “immediacy” above all else, may be weakening our capacity for the kind of deep reading that emerged when an earlier technology, the printing press, made long and complex works of prose commonplace. When we read online, she says, we tend to become “mere decoders of information.” Our ability to interpret text, to make the rich mental connections that form when we read deeply and without distraction, remains largely disengaged.
Highlighted by
willrich
we may well be reading more today than we did in the 1970s or 1980s, when television was our medium of choice. But it’s a different kind of reading, and behind it lies a different kind of thinking
Highlighted by
jimwenz
we may well be reading more today than we did in the 1970s or 1980s, when television was our medium of choice. But it’s a different kind of reading,
Highlighted by
tomkrieglstein
we may well be reading more today than we did in the 1970s or 1980s, when
television was our medium of choice.
Highlighted by
mjc239
Thanks to the ubiquity of text on the Internet, not to mention the popularity of text-messaging on cell phones, we may well be reading more today than we did in the 1970s or 1980s, when television was our medium of choice. But it’s a different kind of reading, and behind it lies a different kind of thinking—perhaps even a new sense of the self
Highlighted by
phdumper
we may well be reading more today than we did in the 1970s or 1980s
Highlighted by
ltogioka
But it’s a different kind of reading, and behind it lies a different kind of thinking—perhaps even a new sense of the self.
Highlighted by
marianbonita
different kind of reading, and behind it lies a different kind of thinking
Highlighted by
mjc239
and behind it lies a different kind of thinking—perhaps even a new sense of the self
Highlighted by
ethelo
a different kind of reading
Highlighted by
ethelo
But it’s a different kind of reading, and behind it lies a different kind of thinking
Highlighted by
rlfilipkowski
television was our medium of choice
Highlighted by
mbmccorm
we tend to become “mere decoders of information.” Our ability to interpret text, to make the rich mental connections that form when we read deeply and without distraction, remains largely disengaged.
Highlighted by
sarahsutter
When we read online, she says, we tend to become “mere decoders of information.” Our ability to interpret text, to make the rich mental connections that form when we read deeply and without distraction, remains largely disengaged.
Highlighted by
fred1st
. When we read online, she says, we tend to become “mere decoders of information.” Our ability to interpret text, to make the rich mental connections that form when we read deeply and without distraction, remains largely disengaged.
Highlighted by
beahgo
Our ability to interpret text, to make the rich mental connections that form when we read deeply and without distraction, remains largely disengaged.
Highlighted by
urbansprawls
We are
how we read.” Wolf worries that the style of reading promoted by the Net, a style that puts “efficiency” and “immediacy” above all else, may be weakening our capacity for the kind of deep reading that emerged when an earlier technology, the printing press, made long and complex works of prose commonplace
Highlighted by
rlfilipkowski
“We are
how we read.
Highlighted by
veeman60
“We are
how we read.” Wolf worries that the style of reading promoted by the Net, a style that puts “efficiency” and “immediacy” above all else, may be weakening our capacity for the kind of deep reading that emerged when an earlier technology, the printing press, made long and complex works of prose commonplace. When we read online, she says, we tend to become “mere decoders of information.” Our ability to interpret text, to make the rich mental connections that form when we read deeply and without distraction, remains largely disengaged.
Highlighted by
jmaxer
Our ability to interpret text, to make the rich mental connections that form when we read deeply and without distraction, remains largely disengaged.
Highlighted by
prettyflower
Wolf worries that the style of reading promoted by the Net, a style that puts “efficiency” and “immediacy” above all else, may be weakening our capacity for the kind of deep reading that emerged when an earlier technology, the printing press, made long and complex works of prose commonplace. When we read online, she says, we tend to become “mere decoders of information.” Our ability to interpret text, to make the rich mental connections that form when we read deeply and without distraction, remains largely disengaged.
Highlighted by
jbear95
We are not only
what we read
Highlighted by
carlaarena
Experiments demonstrate that readers of ideograms, such as the Chinese, develop a mental circuitry for reading that is very different from the circuitry found in those of us whose written language employs an alphabet.
Highlighted by
eyalnow
deep reading
Highlighted by
ethelo
Reading, explains Wolf, is not an instinctive skill for human beings. It’s not etched into our genes the way speech is. We have to teach our minds how to translate the symbolic characters we see into the language we understand. And the media or other technologies we use in learning and practicing the craft of reading play an important part in shaping the neural circuits inside our brains.
Highlighted by
fred1st
It is clear that users are not reading online in the traditional sense; indeed there are signs that new forms of “reading” are emerging as users “power browse” horizontally through titles, contents pages and abstracts going for quick wins. It almost seems that they go online to avoid reading in the traditional sense.
Highlighted by
niharm
Wolf worries that the style of reading promoted by the Net, a style that puts “efficiency” and “immediacy” above all else, may be weakening our capacity for the kind of deep reading that emerged when an earlier technology, the printing press, made long and complex works of prose commonplace
Highlighted by
carlaarena
an earlier technology
Highlighted by
rkatclu
When we read online, she says, we tend to become “mere decoders of information.” Our ability to interpret text, to make the rich mental connections that form when we read deeply and without distraction, remains largely disengaged.
Highlighted by
rlfilipkowski
media or other technologies we use in learning and practicing the craft of reading play an important part in shaping the neural circuits inside our brains.
Highlighted by
sarahsutter
And the media or other technologies we use in learning and practicing the craft of reading play an important part in shaping the neural circuits inside our brains
Highlighted by
beahgo
mere decoders of information
Highlighted by
veeman60
Our ability to interpret text, to make the rich mental connections that form when we read deeply and without distraction, remains largely disengaged.
Highlighted by
sworden
Our ability to interpret text, to make the rich mental connections that form
when we read deeply and without distraction, remains largely disengaged.
Highlighted by
mjc239
Our ability to interpret text, to make the rich mental connections that form when we read deeply and without distraction, remains largely disengaged
Highlighted by
jasonhbuck
We can expect as well that the circuits woven by our use of the Net will be different from those woven by our reading of books and other printed works.
Highlighted by
eyalnow
Our ability to interpret text, to make the rich mental connections that form when we read deeply and without distraction, remains largely disengaged
Highlighted by
phdumper
Experiments demonstrate that readers of ideograms, such as the Chinese, develop a mental circuitry for reading that is very different from the circuitry found in those of us whose written language employs an alphabet.
Highlighted by
lawfully
Reading, explains Wolf, is not an instinctive skill for human beings. It’s not etched into our genes the way speech is. We have to teach our minds how to translate the symbolic characters we see into the language we understand.
Highlighted by
tomkrieglstein
Our ability to interpret text, to make the rich mental connections that form when we read deeply and without distraction, remains largely disengaged.
Highlighted by
carlaarena
Reading, explains Wolf, is not an instinctive skill for human beings.
Highlighted by
veeman60
We have to teach our minds how to translate the symbolic characters we see into
the language we understand
Highlighted by
mjc239
We can expect as well that the circuits woven by our use of the Net will be different from those woven by our reading of books and other printed works.
Highlighted by
willrich
the circuits woven by our use of the Net will be different from those woven by our reading of books and other printed works.
Highlighted by
rafaribas
How does this affect the way we teach?
on 2008-07-28 by
korinuo
A good reference is: Penskys article on Digital Natives and Digital Inmigrants, look it up in any schorlarly database.
on 2008-09-30 by
jimbeau
Reading on the Internet is not as different as reading Chinese--and I'd like to see those experiments. My thought is that one might find that individual differences in 'wiring' inside a culture might be greater than the differences across two cultures. And 'wiring' is a metaphor, is it not?
important part in shaping the neural circuits inside our brains
Highlighted by
mjc239
And the media or other technologies we use in learning and practicing the craft of reading play an important part in shaping the neural circuits inside our brains
Highlighted by
phdumper
Experiments demonstrate that readers of ideograms, such as the Chinese, develop a mental circuitry for reading that is very different from the circuitry found in those of us whose written language employs an alphabet.
Highlighted by
marianbonita
Friedrich Nietzsche bought a typewriter
Highlighted by
tmarch
Sometime in 1882, Friedrich Nietzsche bought a typewriter—a Malling-Hansen Writing Ball, to be precise. His vision was failing, and keeping his eyes focused on a page had become exhausting and painful, often bringing on crushing headaches. He had been forced to curtail his writing, and he feared that he would soon have to give it up. The typewriter rescued him, at least for a time. Once he had mastered touch-typing, he was able to write with his eyes closed, using only the tips of his fingers. Words could once again flow from his mind to the page.
Highlighted by
andrewbrucesmith
We can expect as well that the circuits woven by our use of the Net will be different from those woven by our reading of books and other printed works.
Highlighted by
rlfilipkowski
Sometime in 1882, Friedrich Nietzsche bought a typewriter
Highlighted by
s0793898
“‘thoughts’ in music and language often depend on the quality of pen and paper.”
Highlighted by
braddo
But the machine had a subtler effect on his work. One of Nietzsche’s friends, a composer, noticed a change in the style of his writing. His already terse prose had become even tighter, more telegraphic. “Perhaps you will through this instrument even take to a new idiom,” the friend wrote in a letter, noting that, in his own work, his “‘thoughts’ in music and language often depend on the quality of pen and paper.”
Highlighted by
meganpoore
The typewriter rescued him, at least for a time. Once he had mastered touch-typing, he was able to write with his eyes closed, using only the tips of his fingers. Words could once again flow from his mind to the page.
Highlighted by
jbear95
The typewriter rescued him, at least for a time. Once he had mastered touch-typing, he was able to write with his eyes closed
Highlighted by
s0793898
from arguments to aphorisms, from thoughts to puns, from rhetoric to telegram style.
Highlighted by
braddo
“You are right,” Nietzsche replied, “our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts.” Under the sway of the machine, writes the German media scholar Friedrich A. Kittler, Nietzsche’s prose “changed from arguments to aphorisms, from thoughts to puns, from rhetoric to telegram style.”
Highlighted by
andrewbrucesmith
You are right,” Nietzsche replied, “our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts.”
Highlighted by
beahgo
One of Nietzsche’s friends, a composer, noticed a change in the style of his writing
Highlighted by
rlfilipkowski
“You are right,” Nietzsche replied, “our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts.”
Highlighted by
caweldude
“our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts.”
Highlighted by
lawfully
But the machine had a subtler effect on his work. One of Nietzsche’s friends, a composer, noticed a change in the style of his writing. His already terse prose had become even tighter, more telegraphic. “Perhaps you will through this instrument even take to a new idiom,” the friend wrote in a letter, noting that, in his own work, his “‘thoughts’ in music and language often depend on the quality of pen and paper.”
Highlighted by
s0793898
noticed a change in the style of his writing
Highlighted by
ltogioka
But the machine had a subtler effect on his work. One of Nietzsche’s friends, a composer, noticed a change in the style of his writing. His already terse prose had become even tighter, more telegraphic. “Perhaps you will through this instrument even take to a new idiom,” the friend wrote in a letter, noting that, in his own work, his “‘thoughts’ in music and language often depend on the quality of pen and paper.”
Also see:
(July 1982)
"The process works this way. When I sit down to write a letter or start the first draft of an article, I simply type on the keyboard and the words appear on the screen..." By James Fallows
“You are right,” Nietzsche replied, “our writing
equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts.” Under the sway of the
machine, writes the German media scholar Friedrich
A. Kittler , Nietzsche’s prose “changed from arguments to aphorisms, from thoughts to puns, from rhetoric to telegram style.”
Highlighted by
orangeturtle411
“You are right,” Nietzsche replied, “our writing
equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts.” Under the sway of the
machine, writes the German media scholar
Friedrich
A. Kittler , Nietzsche’s prose “changed from arguments to aphorisms, from thoughts to puns, from rhetoric to telegram style.”
Highlighted by
meganpoore
His already terse prose had become even tighter, more telegraphic
Highlighted by
mjc239
noticed a change in the style of his writing
Highlighted by
mjc239
Under the sway of the machine, writes the German media scholar Friedrich A. Kittler, Nietzsche’s prose “changed from arguments to aphorisms, from thoughts to puns, from rhetoric to telegram style.”
Highlighted by
lawfully
“You are right,” Nietzsche replied, “our writing
equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts.”
Highlighted by
prettyflower
Nietzsche’s prose “changed from arguments to aphorisms, from thoughts to puns, from rhetoric to telegram style.”
Highlighted by
sarahsutter
Under the sway of the machine, writes the German media scholar Friedrich A. Kittler, Nietzsche’s prose “changed from arguments to aphorisms, from thoughts to puns, from rhetoric to telegram style.”
Highlighted by
layneheiny
“‘thoughts’ in music and language often depend on the quality of pen and paper.”
Highlighted by
marianbonita
“‘thoughts’ in music and language often depend on the quality of pen and paper.”
Highlighted by
theranger
“You are right,” Nietzsche replied, “our writing
equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts.”
Highlighted by
tomkrieglstein
our writing
equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts.
Highlighted by
veeman60
“our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts.”
Highlighted by
mjc239
our writing
equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts.”
Highlighted by
marianbonita
“You are right,” Nietzsche replied, “our writing
equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts.” Under the sway of the
machine, writes the German media scholar
Friedrich
A. Kittler , Nietzsche’s prose “changed from arguments to aphorisms, from thoughts to puns, from rhetoric to telegram style.”
Highlighted by
s0793898
changed from arguments to aphorisms, from thoughts to puns, from rhetoric to telegram style
Highlighted by
jimmy87
As we use what the sociologist Daniel Bell has called our “intellectual technologies”—the tools that extend our mental rather than our physical capacities—we inevitably begin to take on the qualities of those technologies.
Highlighted by
eyalnow
“The brain,” according to Olds, “has the ability to reprogram itself on the fly, altering the way it functions.”
Highlighted by
lawfully
Thanks to the ubiquity of text on the Internet, not to mention the popularity of text-messaging on cell phones, we may well be reading more today than we did in the 1970s or 1980s, when television was our medium of choice. But it’s a different kind of reading, and behind it lies a different kind of thinking—perhaps even a new sense of the self.
Highlighted by
ecoinvestigator
The human brain is almost infinitely malleable. People used to think that our mental meshwork, the dense connections formed among the 100 billion or so neurons inside our skulls, was largely fixed by the time we reached adulthood. But brain researchers have discovered that that’s not the case. James Olds, a professor of neuroscience who directs the Krasnow Institute for Advanced Study at George Mason University, says that even the adult mind “is very plastic.” Nerve cells routinely break old connections and form new ones. “The brain,” according to Olds, “has the ability to reprogram itself on the fly, altering the way it functions.”
Highlighted by
jmaxer
The human brain is almost infinitely malleable. People used to think that our
mental meshwork, the dense connections formed among the 100 billion or so
neurons inside our skulls, was largely fixed by the time we reached adulthood.
But brain researchers have discovered that that’s not the case. James Olds, a
professor of neuroscience who directs the Krasnow Institute for Advanced Study
at George Mason University, says that even the adult mind “is very plastic.”
Nerve cells routinely break old connections and form new ones. “The brain,”
according to Olds, “has the ability to reprogram itself on the fly, altering the
way it functions.”
Highlighted by
fox3ja
human brain is almost infinitely malleable.
Highlighted by
mjc239
As we use what the sociologist Daniel Bell has called our “intellectual technologies”—the tools that extend our mental rather than our physical capacities—we inevitably begin to take on the qualities of those technologies.
Highlighted by
kblades
As we use what the sociologist Daniel Bell has called our “intellectual technologies”—the tools that extend our mental rather than our physical capacities—we inevitably begin to take on the qualities of those technologies.
Highlighted by
willrich
“I can’t read
War and Peace anymore,” he admitted. “I’ve lost the ability to do that.
Highlighted by
ecoinvestigator
The human brain is almost infinitely malleable. People used to think that our mental meshwork, the dense connections formed among the 100 billion or so neurons inside our skulls, was largely fixed by the time we reached adulthood. But brain researchers have discovered that that’s not the case. James Olds, a professor of neuroscience who directs the Krasnow Institute for Advanced Study at George Mason University, says that even the adult mind “is very plastic.”
Highlighted by
jbear95
In
Technics and Civilization, the historian and cultural critic Lewis Mumford described how the clock “disassociated time from human events and helped create the belief in an independent world of mathematically measurable sequences.” The “abstract framework of divided time” became “the point of reference for both action and thought.”
Highlighted by
braddo
The human brain is almost infinitely malleable
Highlighted by
phdumper
“intellectual technologies”—the tools that extend our mental rather than our physical capacities—we inevitably begin to take on the qualities of those technologies.
Highlighted by
sarahsutter
The human brain is almost infinitely malleable. People used to think that our mental meshwork, the dense connections formed among the 100 billion or so neurons inside our skulls, was largely fixed by the time we reached adulthood. But brain researchers have discovered that that’s not the case
Highlighted by
carlaarena
says that even the adult mind “is very plastic
Highlighted by
rlfilipkowski
The mechanical clock, which came into common use in the 14th century, provides a compelling example.
Highlighted by
akochan
on 2008-06-25 by
akochan
In Japan, clock time did not belong to individuals, so how the sense of clock time is adapted in a society very much depends on the existing social relations, etc. For example, in an office situation, even it's 6 pm which signals the end of working time, you have to read the environment who is leaving and who is still there to judge your timing for leaving the office. Re: Present and Past article "Japan Time."
Very interesting insight. It reminds me that a lot of what we're talking about is cultural. Thanks, Asako.
“The brain,” according to Olds, “has the ability to reprogram itself on the
fly, altering the way it functions.”
Highlighted by
mjc239
“The brain,” according to Olds, “has the ability to reprogram itself on the fly, altering the way it functions.”
Highlighted by
s0793898
The clock’s methodical ticking helped bring into being the scientific mind and the scientific man.
Highlighted by
jahardman
the tools that extend our mental rather than our physical capacities—we
inevitably begin to take on the qualities of those technologies.
Highlighted by
mjc239
As we use what the sociologist Daniel Bell has called our “intellectual technologies”—the tools that extend our mental rather than our physical capacities—we inevitably begin to take on the qualities of those technologies.
Highlighted by
s0793898
intellectual technologies
Highlighted by
phdumper
a rejection of those direct experiences
Highlighted by
lawfully
rejection of those direct experiences that formed the basis for, and indeed constituted, the old reality
Highlighted by
sarahsutter
the conception of the world that emerged from the widespread use of timekeeping instruments “remains an impoverished version of the older one, for it rests on a rejection of those direct experiences that formed the basis for, and indeed constituted, the old reality.”
Highlighted by
tswicegood
Joseph
Weizenbaum observed in his 1976 book,
Computer Power and Human Reason: From Judgment to Calculation, the conception of the world that emerged from the widespread use of timekeeping instruments
Highlighted by
tomkrieglstein
The clock’s methodical ticking helped bring into being the scientific mind and
the scientific man. But it also took something away. As the late MIT computer
scientist
Joseph Weizenbaum observed in his 1976 book,
Computer
Power and Human Reason: From Judgment to Calculation, the conception of the
world that emerged from the widespread use of timekeeping instruments “remains
an impoverished version of the older one, for it rests on a rejection of those
direct experiences that formed the basis for, and indeed constituted, the old
reality.” In deciding when to eat, to work, to sleep, to rise, we stopped
listening to our senses and started obeying the clock.
Highlighted by
theranger
The clock’s methodical ticking helped bring into being
the scientific mind and the scientific man. But it also took something away. As
the late MIT computer scientist
Joseph
Weizenbaum observed in his 1976 book,
Computer Power and Human Reason: From Judgment to Calculation, the conception of the world that emerged from the widespread use of timekeeping instruments “remains an impoverished version of the older one, for it rests on a rejection of those direct experiences that formed the basis for, and indeed constituted, the old reality.” In deciding when to eat, to work, to sleep, to rise, we stopped listening to our senses and started obeying the clock.
Highlighted by
s0793898
In deciding when to eat, to work, to sleep, to rise, we stopped listening to our
senses and started obeying the clock.
Highlighted by
mnixonbv
on 2008-07-19 by
mnixonbv
Still trying to figure out the sticky note thing. I agree it was nice to find Diigo annotations outside of Diigo.
on 2008-08-01 by
dcyuhas
In the approx 2 years that I've been using diigo, this is the first annotated article I've encountered. Unless there's a tidal wave of new diigo users (highly unlikely) diigo will be just another failed experiment.
In deciding when to eat, to work, to sleep, to rise, we stopped listening to our senses and started obeying the clock.
Highlighted by
tswicegood
In deciding when to eat, to work, to sleep, to rise, we stopped listening to our senses and started obeying the clock.
Highlighted by
tomkrieglstein
at a biological level.
Highlighted by
lawfully
we stopped listening to our senses and started obeying the clock.
Highlighted by
rlfilipkowski
The Internet promises to have particularly far-reaching effects on cognition.
Highlighted by
willrich
In deciding when to eat, to work, to sleep, to rise, we stopped listening to our senses and started obeying the clock
Highlighted by
orangeturtle411
adaptation occurs also at a biological level.
Highlighted by
sarahsutter
When the mechanical clock arrived, people began thinking of their brains as operating “like clockwork.” Today, in the age of software, we have come to think of them as operating “like computers.”
Highlighted by
tomkrieglstein
ocessing device. And that’s what we’re seeing today. The Internet, an immeasurably powerful computing system, is subsuming most of our other intellectual technologies. It’s becoming our map and our clock, our printing press and our typewriter, our calculator and our telephone, and our radio
Highlighted by
jahardman
The Internet, an immeasurably powerful computing system, is subsuming most of our other intellectual technologies. It’s becoming our map and our clock, our printing press and our typewriter, our calculator and our telephone, and our radio and TV.
Highlighted by
willrich
But the changes, neuroscience tells us, go much deeper than metaphor. Thanks to our brain’s plasticity, the adaptation occurs also at a biological level.
Highlighted by
academicdave
When the Net absorbs a medium, that medium is re-created in the Net’s image.
Highlighted by
eyalnow
Thanks to our brain’s plasticity, the adaptation occurs also at a biological
level.
Highlighted by
mjc239
on 2009-07-28 by
sbowers
Turing had a huge role in winning WWII. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_turing
It’s becoming our map and our clock, our printing press and our typewriter, our calculator and our telephone, and our radio and TV.
Highlighted by
caitxsith
It’s becoming our map and our clock, our printing press and our typewriter, our calculator and our telephone, and our radio and TV.
Highlighted by
wenzloff
The Internet promises to have particularly far-reaching
effects on cognition. In a
paper published in 1936, the British mathematician
Alan
Turing proved that a digital computer, which at the time existed only as a theoretical machine, could be programmed to perform the function of any other information-processing device. And that’s what we’re seeing today. The Internet, an immeasurably powerful computing system, is subsuming most of our other intellectual technologies. It’s becoming our map and our clock, our printing press and our typewriter, our calculator and our telephone, and our radio and TV.
Highlighted by
orangeturtle411
hen the Net absorbs a medium, that medium is re-created in the Net’s image. It injects the medium’s content with hyperlinks, blinking ads, and other digital gewgaws, and it surrounds the content with the content of all the other media it has absorbed. A new e-mail message, for instance, may announce its arrival as we’re glancing over the latest headlines at a newspaper’s site. The result is to scatter our attention and diffuse our concentration.
Highlighted by
pjhiggins
This shows me that new skills are necessary, or in the least, old ones need to be reconstituted. What jobs or tasks become prioritized? Can we not turn off all of our notifiers and our distractors while we indeed focus on what needs to be done? These are skills, not just simple behaviors.
The Internet, an immeasurably powerful computing system, is subsuming most of our other intellectual technologies. It’s becoming our map and our clock, our printing press and our typewriter, our calculator and our telephone, and our radio and TV.
Highlighted by
s0793898
scatter our attention and diffuse our concentration.
Highlighted by
sarahsutter
The result is to scatter our attention and diffuse our concentration.
Highlighted by
mwesch
A new e-mail message, for instance, may announce its
arrival as we’re glancing over the latest headlines at a newspaper’s site. The
result is to scatter our attention and diffuse our concentration.
Highlighted by
beth05202
When the Net absorbs a medium, that medium is re-created in the Net’s image. It injects the medium’s content with hyperlinks, blinking ads, and other digital gewgaws, and it surrounds the content with the content of all the other media it has absorbed. A new e-mail message, for instance, may announce its arrival as we’re glancing over the latest headlines at a newspaper’s site. The result is to scatter our attention and diffuse our concentration.
Highlighted by
jmaxer
Television programs add text crawls and pop-up ads, and magazines and newspapers shorten their articles, introduce capsule summaries, and crowd their pages with easy-to-browse info-snippets. When, in March of this year,
TheNew York Times decided to devote the second and third pages of every edition to article abstracts, its design director, Tom Bodkin, explained that the “shortcuts” would give harried readers a quick “taste” of the day’s news, sparing them the “less efficient” method of actually turning the pages and reading the articles. Old media have little choice but to play by the new-media rules.
Highlighted by
lawfully
traditional media have to adapt to the audience’s new expectations.
Highlighted by
sarahsutter
When the Net absorbs a medium, that medium is re-created in the Net’s image.
Highlighted by
mjc239
When the Net absorbs a medium, that medium is re-created in the Net’s image. It
injects the medium’s content with hyperlinks, blinking ads, and other digital
gewgaws, and it surrounds the content with the content of all the other media it
has absorbed. A new e-mail message, for instance, may announce its arrival as
we’re glancing over the latest headlines at a newspaper’s site. The result is to
scatter our attention and diffuse our concentration.
Highlighted by
theranger
When the Net absorbs a medium, that medium is re-created in the Net’s image.
Highlighted by
orangeturtle411
When the Net absorbs a medium, that medium is re-created in the Net’s image. It injects the medium’s content with hyperlinks, blinking ads, and other digital gewgaws, and it surrounds the content with the content of all the other media it has absorbed. A new e-mail message, for instance, may announce its arrival as we’re glancing over the latest headlines at a newspaper’s site. The result is to scatter our attention and diffuse our concentration.
Highlighted by
s0793898
content with hyperlinks, blinking ads, and other digital gewgaws
Highlighted by
mjc239
A new e-mail message, for instance, may announce its arrival as we’re glancing over the latest headlines at a newspaper’s site. The result is to scatter our attention and diffuse our concentration.
Highlighted by
tomkrieglstein
When the Net absorbs a medium, that medium is re-created in the Net’s image
Highlighted by
phdumper
When, in March of this year,
TheNew York Times decided to devote the second and third pages of every edition to article abstracts, its design director, Tom Bodkin, explained that the “shortcuts” would give harried readers a quick “taste” of the day’s news, sparing them the “less efficient” method of actually turning the pages and reading the articles.
Highlighted by
zinzinzinnia
The result is to scatter our attention and diffuse our concentration.
Highlighted by
rlfilipkowski
The result is to scatter our attention and diffuse our concentration
Highlighted by
rkatclu
The Net’s influence doesn’t end at the edges of a computer screen, either. As people’s minds become attuned to the crazy quilt of Internet media, traditional media have to adapt to the audience’s new expectations.
Highlighted by
jmaxer
The Net’s influence doesn’t end at the edges of a computer screen, either. As people’s minds become attuned to the crazy quilt of Internet media, traditional media have to adapt to the audience’s new expectations
Highlighted by
apaster
he crazy quilt of Internet media
Highlighted by
bkbriankelly
The Net’s influence doesn’t end at the edges of a computer screen, either. As
people’s minds become attuned to the crazy quilt of Internet media, traditional
media have to adapt to the audience’s new expectations. Television programs add
text crawls and pop-up ads, and magazines and newspapers shorten their articles,
introduce capsule summaries, and crowd their pages with easy-to-browse
info-snippets.
Highlighted by
theranger
As people’s minds become attuned to the crazy quilt of Internet media,
traditional media have to adapt
Highlighted by
mjc239
Old media have little choice but to play by the new-media rules.
Highlighted by
rafaribas
traditional media have to adapt to the audience’s new expectations
Highlighted by
ltogioka
About the same time that Nietzsche started using his typewriter, an earnest young man named Frederick Winslow Taylor carried a stopwatch into the Midvale Steel plant in Philadelphia and began a historic series of experiments aimed at improving the efficiency of the plant’s machinists. With the approval of Midvale’s owners, he recruited a group of factory hands, set them to work on various metalworking machines, and recorded and timed their every movement as well as the operations of the machines. By breaking down every job into a sequence of small, discrete steps and then testing different ways of performing each one, Taylor created a set of precise instructions—an “algorithm,” we might say today—for how each worker should work. Midvale’s employees grumbled about the strict new regime, claiming that it turned them into little more than automatons, but the factory’s productivity soared.
Highlighted by
tswicegood
Yet, for all that’s been written about the Net, there’s been little consideration of how, exactly, it’s reprogramming us. The Net’s intellectual ethic remains obscure.
Highlighted by
willrich
Television programs add text crawls and pop-up ads, and magazines and newspapers
shorten their articles, introduce capsule summaries, and crowd their pages with
easy-to-browse info-snippets
Highlighted by
mjc239
Old media have little choice but to play by the new-media rules.
Highlighted by
caweldude
Old media have little choice but to play by the new-media rules.
Highlighted by
mwesch
Television programs add text crawls and pop-up ads, and magazines and newspapers shorten their articles, introduce capsule summaries, and crowd their pages with easy-to-browse info-snippets. When, in March of this year,
TheNew York Times decided to devote the second and third pages of every edition to
article abstracts , its design director, Tom Bodkin, explained that the “shortcuts” would give harried readers a quick “taste” of the day’s news, sparing them the “less efficient” method of actually turning the pages and reading the articles. Old media have little choice but to play by the new-media rules.
Highlighted by
s0793898
little consideration of how, exactly, it’s reprogramming us
Highlighted by
sarahsutter
The Net’s intellectual ethic remains obscure.
Highlighted by
rafaribas
Great discussion topic...
Never has a communications system played so many roles in our lives—or exerted such broad influence over our thoughts—as the Internet does today. Yet, for all that’s been written about the Net, there’s been little consideration of how, exactly, it’s reprogramming us.
Highlighted by
jasnazmak
A new e-mail message, for instance, may announce its arrival as we’re glancing over the latest headlines at a newspaper’s site. The result is to scatter our attention and diffuse our concentration.
Highlighted by
briancsmith
Yet, for all that’s been written about the Net, there’s been little consideration of how, exactly, it’s reprogramming us.
Highlighted by
mwesch
Never has a communications system played so many roles in our lives—or exerted such broad influence over our thoughts—as the Internet does today.
Highlighted by
anikautd
Yet, for all that’s been written about the Net, there’s been little consideration of how, exactly, it’s reprogramming us.
Highlighted by
anikautd
Old media have little choice but to play by the new-media rules.
Highlighted by
rlfilipkowski
Frederick Winslow Taylor
Highlighted by
lawfully
Old media have little choice but to play by the new-media rules.
Highlighted by
mfunkhou
Old media have little choice but to play by the new-media rules.
Highlighted by
traveller2008
Such as traditional encyclopedias trying to compete with wikipedia by letting user contribute to content
Old media have little choice but to play by the new-media rules.
Highlighted by
orangeturtle411
bout the same time that Nietzsche started using his typewriter, an earnest young man named Frederick Winslow Taylor carried a stopwatch into the Midvale Steel plant in Philadelphia and began a historic series of experiments aimed at improving the efficiency of the plant’s machinists.
Highlighted by
jasnazmak
Never has a communications system played so many roles in our lives
Highlighted by
ltogioka
Never has a communications system played so many roles in our lives—or exerted such broad influence over our thoughts—as the Internet does today. Yet, for all that’s been written about the Net, there’s been little consideration of how, exactly, it’s reprogramming us. The Net’s intellectual ethic remains obscure.
Highlighted by
s0793898
More than a hundred years after the invention of the steam engine, the Industrial Revolution had at last found its philosophy and its philosopher.
Highlighted by
tswicegood
Frederick Winslow Taylor carried a stopwatch into the Midvale Steel plant in Philadelphia and began a historic series of experiments aimed at improving the efficiency of the plant’s machinists
Highlighted by
tomkrieglstein
claiming that it turned them into little more than automatons, but the factory’s
productivity soared.
Highlighted by
mnixonbv
on 2008-07-19 by
mnixonbv
Is this what we've all become? Is this our future as we skim and scan for information and move along before reaching the end of an article or book?
By breaking down every job into a sequence of small, discrete steps and then
testing different ways of performing each one, Taylor created a set of precise
instructions—an “algorithm,” we might say today—for how each worker should work.
Highlighted by
mjc239
Taylor’s tight industrial choreography—his “system,” as he liked to call it—was embraced by manufacturers throughout the country and, in time, around the world.
Highlighted by
jasnazmak
productivity soared.
Highlighted by
mjc239
“In the past the man has been first,” he declared; “in the future the system must be first.”
Highlighted by
sarahsutter
Once his system was applied to all acts of manual labor, Taylor assured his followers, it would bring about a restructuring not only of industry but of society, creating a utopia of perfect efficiency. “In the past the man has been first,” he declared; “in the future the system must be first.”
Highlighted by
jasnazmak
The Internet is a machine designed for the efficient and automated collection, transmission, and manipulation of information, and its legions of programmers are intent on finding the “one best method”—the perfect algorithm—to carry out every mental movement of what we’ve come to describe as “knowledge work.”
Highlighted by
willrich
Taylor’s system is still very much with us; it remains the ethic of industrial manufacturing.
Highlighted by
akochan
“In the past the man has been first,” he declared; “in the future the system must be first.”
Highlighted by
mwesch
y. “In the past the man has been first,” he declared; “in the future the system must be first.”
Highlighted by
caitxsith
Taylor’s ethic is beginning to govern the realm of the mind as well
Highlighted by
sarahsutter
Taylor assured his followers, it would bring about a restructuring not only of industry but of society, creating a utopia of perfect efficiency
Highlighted by
tomkrieglstein
the gradual substitution of science for rule of thumb throughout the mechanic arts.
Highlighted by
rlfilipkowski
“In the past the man has been first,” he declared; “in the future the system must be first.”
Highlighted by
tomkrieglstein
Once his system was applied to all acts of manual labor, Taylor assured his
followers, it would bring about a restructuring not only of industry but of
society, creating a utopia of perfect efficiency. “In the past the man has been
first,” he declared; “in the future the system must be first.”
Highlighted by
mjc239
Google, says its chief executive, Eric Schmidt, is “a company that’s founded around the science of measurement,” and it is striving to “systematize everything” it does.
Highlighted by
eyalnow
Google’s headquarters, in Mountain View, California—the Googleplex—is the Internet’s high church, and the religion practiced inside its walls is Taylorism. Google, says its chief executive, Eric Schmidt, is “a company that’s founded around the science of measurement,”
Highlighted by
andrewbrucesmith
Taylor’s system is still very much with us
Highlighted by
arossett
“In the past the man has been first,” he declared; “in the future the system must be first.”
Highlighted by
jasonhbuck
This is one of the scariest thoughts in the entire article. When the system become first and foremost people will loose the ability to think and reason for themselves. They will look to the system to think for them.
“In the past the man has been first,” he declared; “in the future the system must be first.”
Highlighted by
mfunkhou
oogle’s headquarters, in Mountain View, California—the Googleplex—is the Internet’s high church, and the religion practiced inside its walls is Taylorism.
Highlighted by
akochan
on 2008-06-25 by
akochan
It also freed us from taylorism thinking at where we are???
The Internet is a machine designed for the efficient and automated collection, transmission, and manipulation of information, and its legions of programmers are intent on finding the “one best method”—the perfect algorithm—to carry out every mental movement of what we’ve come to describe as “knowledge work.”
Highlighted by
prettyflower
to carry out every mental movement of what we’ve come to describe as “knowledge work.”
Highlighted by
wenzloff
nd it is striving to “systematize everything” it does. Drawing on the terabytes of behavioral data it collects through its search engine and other sites, it carries out thousands of experiments a day, according to the
Harvard Business Review, and it uses the results to refine the algorithms that increasingly control how people find information and extract meaning from it. What Taylor did for the work of the hand, Google is doing for the work of the mind.
Highlighted by
andrewbrucesmith
Taylor’s ethic is beginning to govern the realm of the mind as well.
Highlighted by
rlfilipkowski
Google, says its chief executive, Eric Schmidt, is “a company that’s founded around the science of measurement,” and it is striving to “systematize everything” it does.
Highlighted by
jasnazmak
Internet is a machine designed for the efficient and automated collection,
transmission, and manipulation of information
Highlighted by
mjc239
The Internet is a machine designed for the efficient and automated collection, transmission, and manipulation of information, and its legions of programmers are intent on finding the “one best method”—the perfect algorithm—to carry out every mental movement of what we’ve come to describe as “knowledge work.”
Highlighted by
phdumper
The Internet is a machine designed for the efficient and automated collection, transmission, and manipulation of information, and its legions of programmers are intent on finding the “one best method”—the perfect algorithm—to carry out every mental movement of what we’ve come to describe as “knowledge work.”
Highlighted by
rlfilipkowski
refine the algorithms that increasingly control how people find information and extract meaning from it
Highlighted by
sarahsutter
The Internet is a machine designed for the efficient and automated collection, transmission, and manipulation of information, and its legions of programmers are intent on finding the “one best method”—the perfect algorithm—to carry out every mental movement of what we’ve come to describe as “knowledge work.”
Highlighted by
s0793898
What Taylor did for the work of the hand, Google is doing for the work of the mind.
Highlighted by
rosekrans13
What Taylor did for the work of the hand, Google is doing for the work of the mind.
Highlighted by
lawfully
Google, says its chief executive, Eric Schmidt, is “a company that’s founded around the science of measurement,”
Highlighted by
tomkrieglstein
What Taylor did for the work of the hand, Google is doing for the work of the mind.
Highlighted by
caweldude
“understands exactly what you mean and gives you back exactly what you want.”
Highlighted by
sarahsutter
“For us, working on search is a way to work on artificial intelligence.”
Highlighted by
tswicegood
Google, says its chief executive, Eric Schmidt, is “a company that’s founded around the science of measurement,” and it is striving to “systematize everything” it does. Drawing on the terabytes of behavioral data it collects through its search engine and other sites, it carries out thousands of experiments a day, according to the
Harvard Business Review, and it uses the results to refine the algorithms that increasingly control how people find information and extract meaning from it. What Taylor did for the work of the hand, Google is doing for the work of the mind.
Highlighted by
s0793898
What Taylor did for the work of the hand, Google is doing for the work of the mind.
Highlighted by
tomkrieglstein
Last year, Page told a convention of scientists that Google is “really trying to build artificial intelligence and to do it on a large scale.”
Highlighted by
tswicegood
It seeks to develop “the perfect search engine,” which it defines as something that “understands exactly what you mean and gives you back exactly what you want.”
Highlighted by
prettyflower
The more pieces of information we can “access” and the faster we can extract their gist, the more productive we become as thinkers.
Highlighted by
mwesch
The company has declared that its mission is “to organize the world’s
information and make it universally accessible and useful.” It seeks to develop
“the perfect search engine,” which it defines as something that “understands
exactly what you mean and gives you back exactly what you want.” In Google’s
view, information is a kind of commodity, a utilitarian resource that can be
mined and processed with industrial efficiency. The more pieces of information
we can “access” and the faster we can extract their gist, the more productive we
become as thinkers.
Highlighted by
theranger
“to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and
useful.”
Highlighted by
mjc239
In Google’s view, information is a kind of commodity, a utilitarian resource that can be mined and processed with industrial efficiency. The more pieces of information we can “access” and the faster we can extract their gist, the more productive we become as thinkers.
Highlighted by
jmaxer
“understands exactly what you mean and gives you back exactly what you want.”
Highlighted by
mjc239
It seeks to develop “the perfect search engine,” which it defines as something that “understands exactly what you mean and gives you back exactly what you want.”
Highlighted by
phdumper
information is a kind of commodity
Highlighted by
mjc239
In Google’s view, information is a kind of commodity, a utilitarian resource that can be mined and processed with industrial efficiency. The more pieces of information we can “access” and the faster we can extract their gist, the more productive we become as thinkers.
Highlighted by
rlfilipkowski
“Certainly if you had all the world’s information directly attached to your brain, or an artificial brain that was smarter than your brain, you’d be better off.”
Highlighted by
zinzinzinnia
Sergey Brin and Larry Page, the gifted young men who founded Google while
pursuing doctoral degrees in computer science at Stanford, speak frequently of
their desire to turn their search engine into an artificial intelligence, a
HAL-like machine that might be connected directly to our brains. “The ultimate
search engine is something as smart as people—or smarter,” Page said in a speech
a few years back. “For us, working on search is a way to work on artificial
intelligence.”
Highlighted by
theranger
Where does it end? Sergey Brin and Larry Page, the gifted young men who founded
Google while pursuing doctoral degrees in computer science at Stanford, speak
frequently of their desire to turn their search engine into an artificial
intelligence, a HAL-like machine that might be connected directly to our brains.
“The ultimate search engine is something as smart as people—or smarter,” Page
said in a speech a few years back. “For us, working on search is a way to work
on artificial intelligence.” In a
2004 interview with Newsweek, Brin said, “Certainly if
you had all the world’s information directly attached to your brain, or an
artificial brain that was smarter than your brain, you’d be better off.” Last
year, Page told a convention of scientists that Google is “really trying to
build artificial intelligence and to do it on a large scale.”
Highlighted by
beca1116
“The ultimate search engine is something as smart as people—or
smarter,” Page said in a speech a few years back. “For us, working on search is
a way to work on artificial intelligence.” In a
2004 interview with
Newsweek, Brin said, “Certainly if you had all the world’s information directly attached to your brain, or an artificial brain that was smarter than your brain, you’d be better off.” Last year, Page told a convention of scientists that Google is “really trying to build artificial intelligence and to do it on a large scale.”
Highlighted by
etown2890
Last year, Page told a convention of scientists that Google is “really trying to build artificial intelligence and to do it on a large scale.”
Highlighted by
jasnazmak
Google is “really trying to build artificial intelligence and to do it on a large scale.”
Highlighted by
mwesch
“Certainly if you had all the world’s information directly attached to your brain, or an artificial brain that was smarter than your brain, you’d be better off.”
Highlighted by
prettyflower
a HAL-like machine
Highlighted by
phdumper
“Certainly if you had all the world’s information directly attached to your brain, or an artificial brain that was smarter than your brain, you’d be better off.” Last year, Page told a convention of scientists that Google is “really trying to build artificial intelligence and to do it on a large scale.”
Highlighted by
tomkrieglstein
Still, their easy assumption that we’d all “be better off” if our brains were supplemented, or even replaced, by an artificial intelligence is unsettling. It suggests a belief that intelligence is the output of a mechanical process, a series of discrete steps that can be isolated, measured, and optimized.
Highlighted by
eyalnow
unsettling. It suggests a belief that intelligence is the output of a mechanical process, a series of discrete steps that can be isolated, measured, and optimized.
Highlighted by
braddo
“Certainly if you had all the world’s information directly attached to your
brain, or an artificial brain that was smarter than your brain, you’d be better
off.”
Highlighted by
mjc239
there’s little place for the fuzziness of contemplation. Ambiguity is not an opening for insight but a bug to be fixed. The human brain is just an outdated computer that needs a faster processor and a bigger hard drive.
Highlighted by
andrewbrucesmith
In Google’s world, the world we enter when we go online, there’s little place for the fuzziness of contemplation. Ambiguity is not an opening for insight but a bug to be fixed. The human brain is just an outdated computer that needs a faster processor and a bigger hard drive.
Highlighted by
willrich
a mechanical process, a series of discrete steps that can be isolated, measured, and optimized.
Highlighted by
sarahsutter
In Google’s world, the world we enter when we go online, there’s little place for the fuzziness of contemplation.
Highlighted by
kiberens
Ambiguity is not an opening for insight but a bug to be fixed.
Highlighted by
kiberens
The idea that our minds should operate as high-speed data-processing machines is not only built into the workings of the Internet, it is the network’s reigning business model as well. The faster we surf across the Web—the more links we click and pages we view—the more opportunities Google and other companies gain to collect information about us and to feed us advertisements. Most of the proprietors of the commercial Internet have a financial stake in collecting the crumbs of data we leave behind as we flit from link to link—the more crumbs, the better. The last thing these companies want is to encourage leisurely reading or slow, concentrated thought. It’s in their economic interest to drive us to distraction.
Highlighted by
willrich
Such an ambition is a natural one, even an admirable one, for a pair of math whizzes with vast quantities of cash at their disposal and a small army of computer scientists in their employ. A fundamentally scientific enterprise, Google is motivated by a desire to use technology, in Eric Schmidt’s words, “to solve problems that have never been solved before,” and artificial intelligence is the hardest problem out there. Why wouldn’t Brin and Page want to be the ones to crack it?
Highlighted by
orangeturtle411
It suggests a belief that intelligence is the output of a mechanical process, a series of discrete steps that can be isolated, measured, and optimized.
Highlighted by
jasnazmak
Ambiguity is not an opening for insight but a bug to be fixed.
Highlighted by
lawfully
Still, their easy assumption that we’d all “be better off” if our brains were supplemented, or even replaced, by an artificial intelligence is unsettling.
Highlighted by
prettyflower
The human brain is just an outdated computer that needs a faster processor and a bigger hard drive.
Highlighted by
lawfully
In Google’s world, the world we enter when we go online, there’s little place for the fuzziness of contemplation. Ambiguity is not an opening for insight but a bug to be fixed. The human brain is just an outdated computer that needs a faster processor and a bigger hard drive.
Highlighted by
teddn13
there’s little place for the fuzziness of contemplation.
Highlighted by
mwesch
Just as there’s a tendency to glorify technological progress, there’s a countertendency to expect the worst of every new tool or machine. In Plato’s
Phaedrus, Socrates bemoaned the development of writing.
Highlighted by
benkraal
till, their easy assumption that we’d all “be better off” if our brains were supplemented, or even replaced, by an artificial intelligence is unsettling. It suggests a belief that intelligence is the output of a mechanical process, a series of discrete steps that can be isolated, measured, and optimized.
Highlighted by
academicdave
Still, their easy assumption that we’d all “be better off” if our brains were supplemented, or even replaced, by an artificial intelligence is unsettling. It suggests a belief that intelligence is the output of a mechanical process, a series of discrete steps that can be isolated, measured, and optimized.
Highlighted by
etown2890
heir easy assumption that we’d all “be better off” if our brains were supplemented, or even replaced, by an artificial intelligence is unsettling. It suggests a belief that intelligence is the output of a mechanical process, a series of discrete steps that can be isolated, measured, and optimized
Highlighted by
bkbriankelly
The faster we surf across the Web—the more links we click and pages we view—the more opportunities Google and other companies gain to collect information about us and to feed us advertisements
Highlighted by
margolis
on 2008-08-08 by
margolis
This might be the really substential argument here. The economic incentive for making our attention span shorter.
Facebook has been very successful combating this. Google can't get into Facebook accounts, so everyone's comments, pictures, etc. are not being used for commerce.
on 2009-10-14 by
blumey
It's ironic that people shred their private data, guard their ss#, but don't think twice about their browsing history. And it doesn't matter if google know it's *you* (and they usually do). You're giving away the secrets they want. They can commidify your actions, and you can't collect directly. But they'll digitize the entire print world for you.
he human brain is just an outdated computer that needs a faster processor and a bigger hard drive.
Highlighted by
caitxsith
It suggests a belief that intelligence is the output of a mechanical process, a series of discrete steps that can be isolated, measured, and optimized.
Highlighted by
tomkrieglstein
Still, their easy assumption that we’d all “be better off” if our brains were
supplemented, or even replaced, by an artificial intelligence is unsettling. It
suggests a belief that intelligence is the output of a mechanical process, a
series of discrete steps that can be isolated, measured, and optimized. In
Google’s world, the world we enter when we go online, there’s little place for
the fuzziness of contemplation. Ambiguity is not an opening for insight but a
bug to be fixed. The human brain is just an outdated computer that needs a
faster processor and a bigger hard drive.
Highlighted by
theranger
Still, their easy assumption that we’d all “be better off” if our brains were supplemented, or even replaced, by an artificial intelligence is unsettling.
Highlighted by
rlfilipkowski
Still, their easy assumption that we’d all “be better off” if our brains were supplemented, or even replaced, by an artificial intelligence is unsettling. It suggests a belief that intelligence is the output of a mechanical process, a series of discrete steps that can be isolated, measured, and optimized. In Google’s world, the world we enter when we go online, there’s little place for the fuzziness of contemplation. Ambiguity is not an opening for insight but a bug to be fixed. The human brain is just an outdated computer that needs a faster processor and a bigger hard drive.
Highlighted by
orangeturtle411
It suggests a belief that intelligence is the output of a mechanical process, a
series of discrete steps that can be isolated, measured, and optimized.
Highlighted by
mjc239
The idea that our minds should operate as high-speed data-processing machines is not only built into the workings of the Internet, it is the network’s reigning business model as well.
Highlighted by
mwesch
or even replaced
Highlighted by
phdumper
And because they would be able to “receive a quantity of information without proper instruction,” they would “be thought very knowledgeable when they are for the most part quite ignorant.”
Highlighted by
tswicegood
Still, their easy assumption that we’d all “be better off” if our brains were supplemented, or even replaced, by an artificial intelligence is unsettling. It suggests a belief that intelligence is the output of a mechanical process, a series of discrete steps that can be isolated, measured, and optimized. In Google’s world, the world we enter when we go online, there’s little place for the fuzziness of contemplation. Ambiguity is not an opening for insight but a bug to be fixed. The human brain is just an outdated computer that needs a faster processor and a bigger hard drive.
Highlighted by
s0793898
It suggests a belief that intelligence is the output of a mechanical process, a series of discrete steps that can be isolated, measured, and optimized. In Google’s world, the world we enter when we go online, there’s little place for the fuzziness of contemplation. Ambiguity is not an opening for insight but a bug to be fixed. The human brain is just an outdated computer that needs a faster processor and a bigger hard drive.
Highlighted by
iburt7
“our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts.”
Highlighted by
akenyg
The faster we surf across the Web—the more links we click and pages we view—the more opportunities Google and other companies gain to collect information about us and to feed us advertisements. Most of the proprietors of the commercial Internet have a financial stake in collecting the crumbs of data we leave behind as we flit from link to link—the more crumbs, the better. The last thing these companies want is to encourage leisurely reading or slow, concentrated thought. It’s in their economic interest to drive us to distraction.
Highlighted by
jasnazmak
The human brain is just an outdated computer that needs a faster processor and a bigger hard drive.
Highlighted by
tomkrieglstein
Maybe I’m just a worrywart. Just as there’s a tendency to glorify technological progress, there’s a countertendency to expect the worst of every new tool or machine.
Highlighted by
eyalnow
Just as there’s a tendency to glorify technological progress, there’s a countertendency to expect the worst of every new tool or machine.
Highlighted by
eyalnow
“filled with the conceit of wisdom instead of real wisdom.”
Highlighted by
tswicegood
In Google’s world, the world we enter when we go online, there’s little place for the fuzziness of contemplation. Ambiguity is not an opening for insight but a bug to be fixed. The human brain is just an outdated computer that needs a faster processor and a bigger hard drive.
Highlighted by
rkatclu
Ambiguity is not an opening for insight but a bug to be fixed.
Highlighted by
rlfilipkowski
Still, their easy assumption that we’d all “be better off” if our brains were supplemented, or even replaced, by an artificial intelligence is unsettling. It suggests a belief that intelligence is the output of a mechanical process, a series of discrete steps that can be isolated, measured, and optimized. In Google’s world, the world we enter when we go online, there’s little place for the fuzziness of contemplation. Ambiguity is not an opening for insight but a bug to be fixed. The human brain is just an outdated computer that needs a faster processor and a bigger hard drive.
Highlighted by
carlaarena
He feared that, as people came to rely on the written word as a substitute for the knowledge they used to carry inside their heads, they would, in the words of one of the dialogue’s characters, “cease to exercise their memory and become forgetful.”
Highlighted by
braddo
He couldn’t foresee the many ways that writing and reading would
Highlighted by
tswicegood
He couldn’t foresee the many ways that writing and reading would serve to spread information, spur fresh ideas, and expand human knowledge (if not wisdom).
Highlighted by
benkraal
The idea that our minds should operate as high-speed data-processing machines is not only built into the workings of the Internet, it is the network’s reigning business model as w
Highlighted by
bkbriankelly
It’s in their economic interest to drive us to distraction.
Highlighted by
lawfully
expand human knowledge (if not wisdom).
Highlighted by
tswicegood
The faster we surf across the Web—the more links we click and pages we view—the more opportunities Google and other companies gain to collect information about us and to feed us advertisements.
Highlighted by
tomkrieglstein
e Web—the more links we click and pages we view—the more opportunities Google and other companies gain to collect information about us and to feed us advertisements. Most of the proprietors of the commercial Internet have a financial stake in collecting the crumbs of data we leave behind as we
Highlighted by
bkbriankelly
The faster we surf across the Web—the more links we click and pages we view—the
more opportunities Google and other companies gain to collect information about
us and to feed us advertisements.
Highlighted by
mjc239
In Plato’s
Phaedrus, Socrates bemoaned the development of writing. He feared that, as people came to rely on the written word as a substitute for the knowledge they used to carry inside their heads, they would, in the words of one of the dialogue’s characters, “cease to exercise their memory and become forgetful.”
Highlighted by
jasnazmak
he last thing these companies want is to encourage leisurely reading or slow, concentrated thought. It’s in their economic interest to drive us to distraction.
Highlighted by
bkbriankelly
The last thing these companies want is to encourage leisurely reading or slow, concentrated thought. It’s in their economic interest to drive us to distraction.
Highlighted by
tomkrieglstein
“cease to exercise their memory and become forgetful.”
Highlighted by
lawfully
Socrates bemoaned the development of writing. He feared that, as people came to rely on the written word as a substitute for the knowledge they used to carry inside their heads, they would, in the words of one of the dialogue’s characters, “cease to exercise their memory and become forgetful.
Highlighted by
markcmarino
The last thing these companies want is to encourage leisurely reading or slow, concentrated thought. It’s in their economic interest to drive us to distraction.
Highlighted by
veeman60
In Plato’s
Phaedrus, Socrates bemoaned the development of writing. He feared that, as people came to rely on the written word as a substitute for the knowledge they used to carry inside their heads, they would, in the words of one of the dialogue’s characters, “cease to exercise their memory and become forgetful.”
Highlighted by
wenzloff
He feared that, as people came to rely on the written word as a substitute for the knowledge they used to carry inside their heads, they would, in the words of one of the dialogue’s characters, “cease to exercise their memory and become forgetful.
Highlighted by
caitxsith
“be thought very knowledgeable when they are for the most part quite ignorant
Highlighted by
sarahsutter
The last thing these companies want is to encourage leisurely reading or slow,
concentrated thought. It’s in their economic interest to drive us to
distraction.
Highlighted by
mjc239
The last thing these companies want is to encourage leisurely reading or slow, concentrated thought. It’s in their economic interest to drive us to distraction.
Highlighted by
rlfilipkowski
The last thing these companies want is to encourage leisurely reading or slow, concentrated thought.
Highlighted by
rkatclu
It’s in their economic interest to drive us to distraction.
Highlighted by
jasonhbuck
The last thing these companies want is to encourage leisurely reading or slow, concentrated thought. It’s in their economic interest to drive us to distraction.
Highlighted by
phdumper
there’s a countertendency to expect the worst of every new tool or machine.
Highlighted by
ltogioka
The last thing these companies want is to encourage leisurely reading or slow, concentrated thought. It’s in their economic interest to drive us to distraction.
Highlighted by
s0793898
aybe I’m just a worrywart. Just as there’s a tendency to glorify technological
progress, there’s a countertendency to expect the worst of every new tool or
machine. In Plato’s
Phaedrus, Socrates bemoaned the development of writing. He
feared that, as people came to rely on the written word as a substitute for the
knowledge they used to carry inside their heads, they would, in the words of one
of the dialogue’s characters, “cease to exercise their memory and become
forgetful.” And because they would be able to “receive a quantity of information
without proper instruction,” they would “be thought very knowledgeable when they
are for the most part quite ignorant.” They would be “filled with the conceit of
wisdom instead of real wisdom.” Socrates wasn’t wrong—the new technology did
often have the effects he feared—but he was shortsighted
Highlighted by
beca1116
In Plato’s
Phaedrus, Socrates bemoaned the development of writing. He feared that, as people came to rely on the written word as a substitute for the knowledge they used to carry inside their heads, they would, in the words of one of the dialogue’s characters, “cease to exercise their memory and become forgetful.” And because they would be able to “receive a quantity of information without proper instruction,” they would “be thought very knowledgeable when they are for the most part quite ignorant.” They would be “filled with the conceit of wisdom instead of real wisdom.”
Highlighted by
tomkrieglstein
In Plato’s
Phaedrus, Socrates bemoaned the development of writing. He feared that, as people came to rely on the written word as a substitute for the knowledge they used to carry inside their heads, they would, in the words of one of the dialogue’s characters, “cease to exercise their memory and become forgetful.” And because they would be able to “receive a quantity of information without proper instruction,” they would “be thought very knowledgeable when they are for the most part quite ignorant.” They would be “filled with the conceit of wisdom instead of real wisdom.”
Highlighted by
veeman60
In Plato’s
Phaedrus, Socrates bemoaned the development of writing. He feared that, as people came to rely on the written word as a substitute for the knowledge they used to carry inside their heads
Highlighted by
hamacleod
The Italian humanist Hieronimo Squarciafico worried that the easy availability of books would lead to intellectual laziness, making men “less studious” and weakening their minds.
Highlighted by
rosekrans13
Socrates bemoaned the development of writing.
Highlighted by
mjc239
It’s in their economic interest to drive us to distraction.
Highlighted by
carlaarena
In Plato’s
Phaedrus, Socrates bemoaned the development of writing. He feared that, as people came to rely on the written word as a substitute for the knowledge they used to carry inside their heads, they would, in the words of one of the dialogue’s characters, “cease to exercise their memory and become forgetful.” And because they would be able to “receive a quantity of information without proper instruction,” they would “be thought very knowledgeable when they are for the most part quite ignorant.”
Highlighted by
iburt7
In Plato’s
Phaedrus, Socrates bemoaned the development of writing. He feared that, as people came to rely on the written word as a substitute for the knowledge they used to carry inside their heads, they would, in the words of one of the dialogue’s characters, “cease to exercise their memory and become forgetful.” And because they would be able to “receive a quantity of information without proper instruction,” they would “be thought very knowledgeable when they are for the most part quite ignorant.” They would be “filled with the conceit of wisdom instead of real wisdom.” Socrates wasn’t wrong—the new technology did often have the effects he feared—but he was shortsighted. He couldn’t foresee the many ways that writing and reading would serve to spread information, spur fresh ideas, and expand human knowledge (if not wisdom).
Highlighted by
orangeturtle411
they would “be thought very knowledgeable when they are for the most part quite ignorant.” They would be “filled with the conceit of wisdom instead of real wisdom.”
Highlighted by
hamacleod
The Italian humanist Hieronimo Squarciafico worried that the easy availability of books would lead to intellectual laziness, making men “less studious” and weakening their minds.
Highlighted by
jasnazmak
The Italian humanist Hieronimo
Squarciafico worried that the easy availability of books would lead to
intellectual laziness, making men “less studious” and weakening their minds.
Others argued that cheaply printed books and broadsheets would undermine
religious authority, demean the work of scholars and scribes, and spread
sedition and debauchery.
Highlighted by
jimwenz
The Italian humanist Hieronimo
Squarciafico worried that the easy availability of books would lead to
intellectual laziness, making men “less studious” and weakening their minds.
Others argued that cheaply printed books and broadsheets would undermine
religious authority, demean the work of scholars and scribes, and spread
sedition and debauchery.
Highlighted by
wenzloff
So, yes, you should be skeptical of my skepticism.
Highlighted by
eyalnow
Socrates wasn’t wrong—the new technology did often have the effects he feared—but he was shortsighted
Highlighted by
rkatclu
couldn’t foresee the many ways that writing and reading would serve to spread
information, spur fresh ideas, and expand human knowledge (if not wisdom).
Highlighted by
mjc239
The kind of deep reading that a sequence of printed pages promotes is valuable not just for the knowledge we acquire from the author’s words but for the intellectual vibrations those words set off within our own minds.
Highlighted by
willrich
The arrival of Gutenberg’s printing press, in the 15th
century, set off another round of teeth gnashing. The Italian humanist Hieronimo
Squarciafico worried that the easy availability of books would lead to
intellectual laziness, making men “less studious” and weakening their minds.
Others argued that cheaply printed books and broadsheets would undermine
religious authority, demean the work of scholars and scribes, and spread
sedition and debauchery
Highlighted by
tomkrieglstein
Most of the proprietors of the commercial Internet have a financial stake in collecting the crumbs of data we leave behind as we flit from link to link—the more crumbs, the better. The last thing these companies want is to encourage leisurely reading or slow, concentrated thought. It’s in their economic interest to drive us to distraction.
Highlighted by
briancsmith
human knowledge (if not wisdom)
Highlighted by
phdumper
The Italian humanist Hieronimo
Squarciafico worried that the easy availability of books would lead to
intellectual laziness, making men “less studious” and weakening their minds.
Highlighted by
veeman60
Gutenberg’s printing press, in the 15th century
Highlighted by
mjc239
The arrival of Gutenberg’s printing press, in the 15th century, set off another
round of teeth gnashing. The Italian humanist Hieronimo Squarciafico worried
that the easy availability of books would lead to intellectual laziness, making
men “less studious” and weakening their minds.
Highlighted by
ytorres
easy availability of books would lead to intellectual laziness, making men “less
studious” and weakening their minds.
Highlighted by
mjc239
The arrival of Gutenberg’s printing press, in the 15th
century, set off another round of teeth gnashing. The Italian humanist Hieronimo
Squarciafico worried that the easy availability of books would lead to
intellectual laziness, making men “less studious” and weakening their minds.
Others argued that cheaply printed books and broadsheets would undermine
religious authority, demean the work of scholars and scribes, and spread
sedition and debauchery. As New York University professor
Clay Shirky notes, “Most of the arguments made against the printing press were correct, even prescient.” But, again, the doomsayers were unable to imagine the myriad blessings that the printed word would deliver.
Highlighted by
s0793898
The Italian humanist Hieronimo
Squarciafico worried that the easy availability of books would lead to
intellectual laziness, making men “less studious” and weakening their minds.
Others argued that cheaply printed books and broadsheets would undermine
religious authority, demean the work of scholars and scribes, and spread
sedition and debauchery. As New York University professor
Clay Shirky notes, “Most of the arguments made against the printing press were correct, even prescient
Highlighted by
iburt7
undermine religious authority, demean the work of scholars and scribes, and
spread sedition and debauchery
Highlighted by
mjc239
argued that cheaply printed books and broadsheets would undermine religious
authority, demean the work of scholars and scribes, and spread sedition and
debauchery. As New York University professor
Clay Shirky
notes, “Most of the arguments made against the printing press were correct, even
prescient.” But, again, the doomsayers were unable to imagine the myriad
blessings t
Highlighted by
lcaldera1
Then again, the Net isn’t the alphabet, and although it may replace the printing press, it produces something altogether different. The kind of deep reading that a sequence of printed pages promotes is valuable not just for the knowledge we acquire from the author’s words but for the intellectual vibrations those words set off within our own minds.
Highlighted by
jasnazmak
In the quiet spaces opened up by the sustained, undistracted reading of a book, or by any other act of contemplation, for that matter, we make our own associations, draw our own inferences and analogies, foster our own ideas. Deep reading, as Maryanne Wolf argues, is indistinguishable from deep thinking.
Highlighted by
sarahsutter
the Net isn’t the alphabet, and although it may replace the printing press, it produces something altogether different. The kind of deep reading that a sequence of printed pages promotes is valuable not just for the knowledge we acquire from the author’s words but for the intellectual vibrations those words set off within our own minds
Highlighted by
rhcp027
Most of the arguments made against the printing press were correct, even prescient.” But, again, the doomsayers were unable to imagine the myriad blessings that the printed word would deliver.
Highlighted by
orangeturtle411
deep reading
Highlighted by
mwesch
The kind of deep reading that a sequence of printed pages promotes is valuable not just for the knowledge we acquire from the author’s words but for the intellectual vibrations those words set off within our own minds.
Highlighted by
caweldude
But, again, the doomsayers were unable to imagine the myriad blessings that the printed word would deliver.
Highlighted by
rlfilipkowski
Deep reading, as Maryanne Wolf argues, is indistinguishable from deep thinking.
Highlighted by
trinifar
Perhaps those who dismiss critics of the Internet as Luddites or nostalgists will be proved correct, and from our hyperactive, data-stoked minds will spring a golden age of intellectual discovery and universal wisdom.
Highlighted by
phdumper
Perhaps those who dismiss critics of the Internet as Luddites or nostalgists will be proved correct, and from our hyperactive, data-stoked minds will spring a golden age of intellectual discovery and universal wisdom.
Highlighted by
s0793898
produces something altogether different. The kind of deep reading that a sequence of printed pages promotes is valuable not just for the knowledge we acquire from the author’s words but for the intellectual vibrations those words set off within our own minds. In the quiet spaces opened up by the sustained, undistracted reading of a book, or by any other act of contemplation, for that matter
Highlighted by
bkbriankelly
And because they would be able to “receive a quantity of information without proper instruction,” they would “be thought very knowledgeable when they are for the most part quite ignorant.”
Highlighted by
briancsmith
The kind of deep reading that a sequence of printed pages promotes
Highlighted by
dmrsci
The kind of deep reading that a sequence of printed pages promotes is valuable
not just for the knowledge we acquire from the author’s words but for the
intellectual vibrations those words set off within our own minds. In the quiet
spaces opened up by the sustained, undistracted reading of a book, or by any
other act of contemplation, for that matter, we make our own associations, draw
our own inferences and analogies, foster our own ideas. Deep reading, as
Maryanne Wolf argues, is indistinguishable from deep thinking.
Highlighted by
theranger
The kind of deep reading that a sequence of printed pages promotes is valuable not just for the knowledge we acquire from the author’s words but for the intellectual vibrations those words set off within our own minds
Highlighted by
rlfilipkowski
They would be “filled with the conceit of wisdom instead of real wisdom.”
Highlighted by
briancsmith
a personally constructed and unique version of the entire heritage of the West
Highlighted by
gpendergraft
If we lose those quiet spaces, or fill them up with “content,” we will sacrifice something important not only in our selves but in our culture.
Highlighted by
markcmarino
intellectual vibrations
Highlighted by
dmrsci
The kind of deep reading that a sequence of printed pages promotes is valuable not just for the knowledge we acquire from the author’s words but for the intellectual vibrations those words set off within our own minds. In the quiet spaces opened up by the sustained, undistracted reading of a book, or by any other act of contemplation, for that matter, we make our own associations, draw our own inferences and analogies, foster our own ideas. Deep reading, as Maryanne Wolf argues, is indistinguishable from deep thinking.
Highlighted by
iburt7
The kind of deep reading that a sequence of printed pages promotes is valuable not just for the knowledge we acquire from the author’s words but for the intellectual vibrations those words set off within our own minds
Highlighted by
phdumper
In the quiet spaces opened up by the sustained, undistracted reading of a book, or by any other act of contemplation, for that matter, we make our own associations, draw our own inferences and analogies, foster our own ideas. Deep reading, as Maryanne Wolf argues, is indistinguishable from deep thinking.
Highlighted by
rlfilipkowski
He couldn’t foresee the many ways that writing and reading would serve to spread information, spur fresh ideas, and expand human knowledge (if not wisdom).
Highlighted by
briancsmith
Deep reading, as Maryanne Wolf argues, is indistinguishable from deep thinking.
Highlighted by
jimwenz
I come from a tradition of Western culture, in which the ideal (my ideal) was the complex, dense and “cathedral-like” structure of the highly educated and articulate personality—a man or woman who carried inside themselves a personally constructed and unique version of the entire heritage of the West. [But now] I see within us all (myself included) the replacement of complex inner density with a new kind of self—evolving under the pressure of information overload and the technology of the “instantly available.”
Highlighted by
jasnazmak
If we lose those quiet spaces, or fill them up with “content,” we will
sacrifice something important not only in our selves but in our culture. In a recent essay, the playwright Richard
Foreman eloquently described what’s at stake:
I come from a tradition of Western culture, in which the ideal (my
ideal) was the complex, dense and “cathedral-like” structure of the highly
educated and articulate personality—a man or woman who carried inside themselves
a personally constructed and unique version of the entire heritage of the West.
[But now] I see within us all (myself included) the replacement of complex inner
density with a new kind of self—evolving under the pressure of information
overload and the technology of the “instantly available.”
As we are drained of our “inner repertory of dense cultural inheritance,”
Foreman concluded, we risk turning into “‘pancake people’—spread wide and thin
as we connect with that vast network of information accessed by the mere touch
of a button.”
Highlighted by
rsoldring
Also see:
Dan Colman's "In Bed With the Word" - improtance of reading
James Harken - "Lost in Cyburbia" - history and description of "Network"
Deep reading, as Maryanne Wolf argues, is indistinguishable from deep thinking.
Highlighted by
mjc239
If we lose those quiet spaces, or fill them up with “content,” we will sacrifice something important not only in our selves but in
our culture
Highlighted by
ltogioka
Deep reading, as Maryanne Wolf argues, is indistinguishable from deep thinking.
Highlighted by
orangeturtle411
The kind of deep reading that a sequence of printed pages promotes is valuable not just for the knowledge we acquire from the author’s words but for the intellectual vibrations those words set off within our own minds. In the quiet spaces opened up by the sustained, undistracted reading of a book, or by any other act of contemplation, for that matter, we make our own associations, draw our own inferences and analogies, foster our own ideas. Deep reading, as Maryanne Wolf argues, is indistinguishable from deep thinking.
Highlighted by
carlaarena
In a recent essay, the playwright Richard
Foreman eloquently described what’s at stake:
I come from a tradition of Western culture, in which the ideal (my ideal) was the complex, dense and “cathedral-like” structure of the highly educated and articulate personality—a man or woman who carried inside themselves a personally constructed and unique version of the entire heritage of the West. [But now] I see within us all (myself included) the replacement of complex inner density with a new kind of self—evolving under the pressure of information overload and the technology of the “instantly available.”
Highlighted by
tomkrieglstein
as we come to rely on computers to mediate our understanding of the world, it is our own intelligence that flattens into artificial intelligence
Highlighted by
benkraal
I’m haunted by that scene in
2001. What makes it so poignant, and so weird, is the computer’s emotional response to the disassembly of its mind: its despair as one circuit after another goes dark, its childlike pleading with the astronaut—“I can feel it. I can feel it. I’m afraid”—and its final reversion to what can only be called a state of innocence. HAL’s outpouring of feeling contrasts with the emotionlessness that characterizes the human figures in the film, who go about their business with an almost robotic efficiency. Their thoughts and actions feel scripted, as if they’re following the steps of an algorithm. In the world of
2001, people have become so machinelike that the most human character turns out to be a machine. That’s the essence of Kubrick’s dark prophecy: as we come to rely on computers to mediate our understanding of the world, it is our own intelligence that flattens into artificial intelligence.
Highlighted by
terontech
I come from a tradition of Western culture, in which the ideal (my ideal) was the complex, dense and “cathedral-like” structure of the highly educated and articulate personality—a man or woman who carried inside themselves a personally constructed and unique version of the entire heritage of the West. [But now] I see within us all (myself included) the replacement of complex inner density with a new kind of self—evolving under the pressure of information overload and the technology of the “instantly available.
Highlighted by
veeman60
pancake people’—spread wide and thin as we connect with that vast network of information accessed by the mere touch of a button.”
Highlighted by
sarahsutter
“‘pancake people
Highlighted by
lawfully
If we lose those quiet spaces, or fill them up with “content,” we will sacrifice something important not only in our selves but in our culture.
Highlighted by
carlaarena
“‘pancake people’—spread wide and thin as we connect with that vast network of information accessed by the mere touch of a button.”
Highlighted by
jasnazmak
I come from a tradition of Western culture, in which the ideal (my ideal) was the complex, dense and “cathedral-like” structure of the highly educated and articulate personality—a man or woman who carried inside themselves a personally constructed and unique version of the entire heritage of the West. [But now] I see within us all (myself included) the replacement of complex inner density with a new kind of self—evolving under the pressure of information overload and the technology of the “instantly available.”
Highlighted by
carlaarena
under the pressure of information overload and the technology of the “instantly available
Highlighted by
phdumper
pread wide and thin
Highlighted by
ltogioka
we risk turning into “‘pancake people’—spread wide and thin as we connect with
that vast network of information accessed by the mere touch of a button.”
Highlighted by
theranger
the ideal (my ideal) was the complex, dense and “cathedral-like” structure of
the highly educated and articulate personality—a man or woman who carried inside
themselves a personally constructed and unique version of the entire heritage of
the West.
Highlighted by
jimbeau
on 2008-10-01 by
jimbeau
Yes, this is the ideal--but is there really anything about the Internet that hinders this?
I think it's the concept that "something's gotta give." It's tough to be expert in both the Canon AND the information that's available on the internet. There are only so many hours in a day...
we risk turning into “‘pancake people’
Highlighted by
mbmccorm
As we are drained of our “inner repertory of dense cultural inheritance,” Foreman concluded, we risk turning into “‘pancake people’—spread wide and thin as we connect with that vast network of information accessed by the mere touch of a button.”
Highlighted by
iburt7
as we come to rely on computers to mediate our understanding of the world, it is our own intelligence that flattens into artificial intelligence.
Highlighted by
sarahsutter
As we are drained of our “inner repertory of dense cultural inheritance,” Foreman concluded, we risk turning into “‘pancake people’—spread wide and thin as we connect with that vast network of information accessed by the mere touch of a button.”
Highlighted by
s0793898
I can feel it. I can feel it. I’m afraid
Highlighted by
mollyclancy
That’s the essence of Kubrick’s dark prophecy: as we come to rely on computers to mediate our understanding of the world, it is our own intelligence that flattens into artificial intelligence.
Highlighted by
caweldude
That’s the essence of Kubrick’s dark prophecy: as we come to rely on computers to mediate our understanding of the world, it is our own intelligence that flattens into artificial intelligence.
Highlighted by
mwesch
Their thoughts and actions feel scripted, as if they’re following the steps of an algorithm. In the world of
2001, people have become so machinelike that the most human character turns out to be a machine. That’s the essence of Kubrick’s dark prophecy: as we come to rely on computers to mediate our understanding of the world, it is our own intelligence that flattens into artificial intelligence.
Highlighted by
academicdave
as we come to rely on computers to mediate our understanding of the world, it is our own intelligence that flattens into artificial intelligence.
Highlighted by
markcmarino
I’m haunted by that scene in
2001. What makes it so poignant, and so weird, is the computer’s emotional response to the disassembly of its mind: its despair as one circuit after another goes dark, its childlike pleading with the astronaut—“I can feel it. I can feel it. I’m afraid”—and its final reversion to what can only be called a state of innocence. HAL’s outpouring of feeling contrasts with the emotionlessness that characterizes the human figures in the film, who go about their business with an almost robotic efficiency. Their thoughts and actions feel scripted, as if they’re following the steps of an algorithm. In the world of
2001, people have become so machinelike that the most human character turns out to be a machine. That’s the essence of Kubrick’s dark prophecy: as we come to rely on computers to mediate our understanding of the world, it is our own intelligence that flattens into artificial intelligence.
Highlighted by
s0793898
“I can feel it. I can feel it. I’m afraid”—and its final reversion to what can only be called a state of innocence
Highlighted by
oakcliff214
As we are drained of our “inner repertory of dense cultural inheritance,” Foreman concluded, we risk turning into “‘pancake people’—spread wide and thin as we connect with that vast network of information accessed by the mere touch of a button.”
Highlighted by
carlaarena
final reversion to what can only be called a state of innocence
Highlighted by
mjc239
as we come to rely on computers to mediate our understanding of the world, it is our own intelligence that flattens into artificial intelligence.
Highlighted by
alishagordon
as we come to rely on computers to mediate our understanding of the world, it
is our own intelligence that flattens into artificial intelligence.
Highlighted by
theranger
That’s the essence of Kubrick’s dark prophecy: as we come to rely on computers to mediate our understanding of the world, it is our own intelligence that flattens into artificial intelligence.
Highlighted by
oakcliff214
as we come to rely on computers to mediate our understanding of the world, it is
our own intelligence that flattens into artificial intelligence
Highlighted by
mjc239
Thanks to our brain’s plasticity, the adaptation occurs also at a biological level.
Highlighted by
ecoinvestigator
emotionlessness that characterizes the human figures in the film, who go about their business with an almost robotic efficiency. Their thoughts and actions feel scripted, as if they’re following the steps of an algorithm.
Highlighted by
briancsmith
information is a kind of commodity, a utilitarian resource that can be mined and processed with industrial efficiency. The more pieces of information we can “access” and the faster we can extract their gist, the more productive we become as thinkers
Highlighted by
rubyrubyruby
For those who still read books, this reminds me somewhat of Jean Baudrillard's 'The Ecstasy of Communication':
"Obscenity begins when there's no more spectacle, no more stage, no more theatre, no more illusions, when everything becomes immediately transparant, visible, exposed in the raw and inexorable light of information and communication. We no longer partake of the drama of alienation, but are in the ecstasy of communication."
Public Comment
on 2008-07-19 by mnixonbv
on 2008-07-23 by giggyg
on 2008-09-18 by kiberens
on 2008-09-20 by maxsenges
on 2008-10-13 by bodhi367
on 2009-09-02 by jimmy87