There are numerous possible uses for the internet which is very often in the news. A side question would be is it getting more useful or has it plateau'd?
So what do you have to say?
I'd have to say you don't know how to spell.Philosophy Explorer wrote: βWed Jul 18, 2018 4:24 pm I would say it's useful for me.
There are numerous possible uses for the internet which is very often in the news. A side question would be is it getting more useful or has it plateau'd?
So what do you have to say?
PhilX
![]()
You finally caught me. Either that or I coined a new word.-1- wrote: βWed Jul 18, 2018 10:55 pmI'd have to say you don't know how to spell.Philosophy Explorer wrote: βWed Jul 18, 2018 4:24 pm I would say it's useful for me.
There are numerous possible uses for the internet which is very often in the news. A side question would be is it getting more useful or has it plateau'd?
So what do you have to say?
PhilX
![]()
Other than helping me to discover that, the Internet has not been very, very, very useful to me.
Now you're "it". Catch me if you can.Philosophy Explorer wrote: βWed Jul 18, 2018 10:59 pm
You finally caught me. Either that or I coined a new word.
PhilX
![]()
I think all that's happening is people's true natures are being expressed more freely - and it's none to pretty!Sir-Sister-of-Suck wrote: βSat Jul 21, 2018 2:39 amSocial media, in particular, has had a mostly negative impact on the way we act and think about things.
I was referring to the idea that it's making us more socially awkward. I'm sure it is making us more barbarous as well, but that's not what I had in mind.Greta wrote: βSat Jul 21, 2018 5:06 amI think all that's happening is people's true natures are being expressed more freely - and it's none to pretty!Sir-Sister-of-Suck wrote: βSat Jul 21, 2018 2:39 amSocial media, in particular, has had a mostly negative impact on the way we act and think about things.![]()
I've always been socially awkward and prefer expressing myself in writing so it's a positive for me if others are following suitSir-Sister-of-Suck wrote: βSat Jul 21, 2018 5:48 amI was referring to the idea that it's making us more socially awkward. I'm sure it is making us more barbarous as well, but that's not what I had in mind.Greta wrote: βSat Jul 21, 2018 5:06 amI think all that's happening is people's true natures are being expressed more freely - and it's none to pretty!Sir-Sister-of-Suck wrote: βSat Jul 21, 2018 2:39 amSocial media, in particular, has had a mostly negative impact on the way we act and think about things.![]()
Well maybe so, but don't you think it's worsening that condition? If a situation rolls around where you do want or need to socialize with people in real life, doesn't it make it harder to do that?Greta wrote: βSat Jul 21, 2018 11:40 pmI've always been socially awkward and prefer expressing myself in writing so it's a positive for me if others are following suitSir-Sister-of-Suck wrote: βSat Jul 21, 2018 5:48 amI was referring to the idea that it's making us more socially awkward. I'm sure it is making us more barbarous as well, but that's not what I had in mind.![]()
...Do you have a specific '50%' in mind, or just a totally indiscriminate 50% reduction in the human population? If it's the latter, I actually don't see how that would fix any social problems.As for the barbarity, I think that has more to do with the competition, aggravation and lifestyle threats associated with overpopulation. Thin us humans out by 50% and numerous pressing problems today, both locally and globally, would simply evaporate.
No loss, I'm older and done most of my socialising already. It's not a condition, it's a trait. Whatever, introversion IMO is a healthier state than extroversion in many ways. I think people should receive treatment for human dependency and fear of facing their own minds alone.Sir-Sister-of-Suck wrote: βSun Jul 22, 2018 2:00 amWell maybe so, but don't you think it's worsening that condition? If a situation rolls around where you do want or need to socialize with people in real life, doesn't it make it harder to do that?
Ideally 50% of every overcrowded city, doesn't matter which ones in terms of reducing pressure.Sir-Sister-of-Suck wrote:...Do you have a specific '50%' in mind, or just a totally indiscriminate 50% reduction in the human population? If it's the latter, I actually don't see how that would fix any social problems.As for the barbarity, I think that has more to do with the competition, aggravation and lifestyle threats associated with overpopulation. Thin us humans out by 50% and numerous pressing problems today, both locally and globally, would simply evaporate.