gugălești? problema'i că Google'i centralizat, adică trebe să('ți) vândă aduri ca să existe ca mașină de căutare, c'așa'i în capitalism. și dacă mai au nevoie de bani, mai fac o "selecție" pt. cei care plătesc, pe care ți'o servesc.
Soluția la rahatu' ăsta i'o metodă P2P (ca DC++ sau ca Bittorrent) de căutare, descentralizată, distribuită, democratică, gratuită, incontrolabilă, pe scurt, comunistă, ia d'aci: YaCy.
și computeru' tău poa' să ia parte, te bagi? să crape cocalaru' dă inimă rea. ori trăim în timp ori ce?
Blogurile sunt un mod de a comunica. Ce au ele diferit de alte mijloace media (ziare, TV) e că ți se poate replica, fără să poți controla replica asta în vreun fel, adică blogurile nu sunt read-only.
Sunt diferite nivele de a replica:
Unu'i comentariu', care'i stocat alături de blogu' comentat.
Altu'i trackbacku' care stochează comentariu' pe blogu' comentatorului da' anunță și pe cititoru' blogului comentat că există o replică/comentariu la ce citește. Cu alte cuvinte, un trackback asigură comunicarea în ambele sensuri între două bloguri.
Calitatea unui trackback e superioară unui comentariu pt. că poate fi reeditat până la forma considerată clară de cel care'l scrie și pen'că dispune de mai mult spațiu decât un comentariu, spațiu care permite o replică mai stufoasă.
Observ că bloggerii la care am făcut recent trackback au refuzat să'l accepte la destinație, motivu': pt. că's trackbackuri critice (în sens intelectual) la adresa intrării respective.
Asta spune câteva lucruri:
1. despre receptorii care'au șters activ trackbackurile mele recente către ei:
a. că nu vor ca cititorii lor să știe că există o replică la ce'au scris; asta e lașitate comună, șopârlism, piticism cultural; pe lângă faptu' că prin asta receptorii demonstrează că nu's calificați să vorbească'n numele democrației sau toleranței pt. că'i pe șleau că le displace, în fapt, și una și alta.
b. că nu'și dau seama că propriii lor cititori or să fie dezamăgiți de calitatea morală a unei astfel de încercări de cenzură, atunci când vor da altădată peste replică.
c. că le place muuult de tot să se citească pe ei înșiși exclusiv și cel mult să mai treacă vreunu' doi să le sufle'n pânzele dragostei de sine.
d. că nu știu ce'i trackbacku' și nici n'au avut măcar curiozitatea să vadă ce'i cu mecanismu' ăsta, atitudine improprie pt. un intelectual.
În general, cei ce se ofensează ușor de trackbackuri care nu's spam, dau dovadă d'un infantilism hilar. De ce dracu' mai scrii o idee dacă ți'e frică s'o expui unei replici? Și ce sens are frica'n contextu' ăsta?
2. despre bloguri: că sunt luate, în sfârșit, în serios ca mijloace de comunicare/informare; dacă ai ajuns să te temi că cititoru'ți ar putea da' de critica la textu' tău, înseamnă că blogu' chiar contează.
Nu mai vorbesc de situația blogurilor mizerabiliste: alea făcute ca să'mpingă reclame, o variantă bășită, cu aceeași soartă ca ziarele și TVu', a celor ce'ncearcă să trăiască din vânzarea de cuvinte. Numai autenticu' nu plictisește, făcătura expiră rapid.
If you're still using Windows in 2009, at home or at work, while there is FreeBSD, and this variety of GNU/Linuxdistributions, like Debian, Ubuntu, Gentoo, Knoppix ..., please don't speak to anyone anymore about freedom of choice, that's a freedom you're not using, so chances are you're not really grasping the concept.
Note: I don't work in anything related to GNU, Linux or FreeBSD and I'm not part of any promotion campaign, I'm just using them (Debian, the universal operating system, on my desktop and laptop, and FreeBSD on my home-server machine) and this is an authentic message from a picky previous user of Windows confirming the quality and the maturity of the software which finally allows you to use your freedom of choice with no strings, or pains, attached.
Here's a rather different, if not opposite, perspective: there seem to be 3 levels of reality in the modern world, from the virtual to the real, and the most effective way of changing/living in the reality is to study it virtually. Any physical model is a virtual world, and it's painstaking to make it a reality, but when that's done, the reality changes lastingly, and yes, alas, some can afford to stay stupid (imagine the military and the buttons they can press, imagine the managers and the click-OK software they use) with dire consequences.
The basic level is what I would call the environment level, gathering/producing food, building shelters, extracting/using resources etc. That is the basic reality, it's the nature, you can't talk it into white is black whenever that suits me, unless you're a well-trained buddhist.
The intermediate level is what I would call the city reality, where plenty of people are delegated to administer resources and conflicts, to study easier ways of handling the basic, the most inert to humans, level. Here the natural reality becomes twisted, if not a pseudo-reality altogether, due to two reasons: 1. you have to twist it to research it; 2. you have to twist it to talk/beat others into working for you.
Part of the research is benign, with the aim of understanding the environment and to find ways to accommodate it while living a life in dignity.
The rest of it, along with the reality twisting exploiters, is based on the assumption that it's easier to exploit others' work than doing it yourself, while, in fact, this assumption is only time consuming for the one who carries it: it has the result of decreasing the quality of life for those who are exploited and therefore for those who live by this assumption among the exploited, because, ultimately, we inhabit together the earth.
This misguided bunch of fools, the exploiters, tries continuously to refine the ways of exploiting others, and one of their big hits in the modern world is the media; for example, while in the '60 the TV was seen as a chance for education at a distance, a world saver, today it has become a powerful tool for making the folk stupid and submissive, because it's read-only/listen-only, you can't reply without competing with those which are hypnotized already.
The last time I've seen the TV as a systematic educational tool was in my communist country around the age of 14 but I've seen it, since, increasingly being used to brainwash and manipulate the watcher, into believing something or into buying something (it culminates with the TV in the capitalist systems today). This became the virtual-reality level.
Now I no longer own a TV, nor a TV cable, I no longer pay these reality twisters, I no longer pay their salaries. The lack of authenticity or honesty in most of these presentations became unbearable to me.
This is the virtual world a modern human has to break out of. It's so fake and obsolete that it hurts on the basic level.
However, I also understood that the government, that bunch of people you delegate to run a city/a country, should be mandated to inform the population which delegated them, to show the nude statistics of the activities/results in all the areas they are supposed to be involved, to explain the reasons why that or that choice has been made, which uses taxpayers' efforts. A tax-payed public-available government TV channel where administrators are invited to explain why the price of oil is up, why the tap water is bad, or why it has improved etc. A well-stuffed government blog would be also sufficient, if not better: it allows for feedback serendipity.
And here is the third level of virtuality: the Net, i.e. the linked, partly computable world of expression. This kind of virtuality is of the same nature as Marx's writings or (Aldous) Huxley's writings, or Einstein's writings and plenty of others' studies. All these writings were purely virtual signs, expressions of a human mind, but they affected the basic level in various, unforgettable, ways, like the socialism, the usable electricity, the trains etc. The Net is some orders of magnitude more effective than the best intellectual works of the past in acting on the basic level: not only it can make these works accessible for all, but it makes them available for criticism, it helps creating new ones too; finally, it makes it difficult to impossible for the reality twisters to mass-hypnotize the folk, one has to pay a lot of slaves to twist the reality in their short-time favor. The folk uses it increasingly to communicate and to change/settle their ideas/actions about the world through this process. The Net is an anonymous revolution which already started and will continue as long as the humans exist. Even if some stupid rich guy would like to find a way to make a population work for him, he can simulate that on a virtual world: the more refined the simulation the sooner he'll understand that exploiting other humans or the environment is a loser's type of activity, it only destroys the meaning of the aggressor's life and of those who support the aggression along the way, beyond making life miserable for the exploited.
The Net makes obsolete any institutionalization of human communication. It is the virtual core of the human reality. No group of self-appointed intellectuals will have the final sentencing authority anymore unless they authentically connect with the society, to the Net, but then that group dissolves naturally, becomes a mere convention of speech, what remains is the mindset, the attitude.
No dictatorship can be overthrown, no social action can be put on its feet without a mindset. And this is born from the communication, today it means the Net. Not even telepathy can ever beat it.
The Net doesn't create masses, mimetic hordes: if the success of a central Net service seems to create them, be prepared to see them lost, only individuals will remain and the communication between them, the real society, made of people from anywhere.
The Net creates humans by recovering in them the culture lost with each death: the Net is relevant, with maximum effectiveness, to those who seek, it's the school tailored for each one of us, it's the library many of us dreamed of.
The Net is the social conscience. A revolution doesn't need hordes of people on the streets, doesn't need the TV, it only needs critical minds, then the rest follows. A revolution doesn't need to be named a revolution, after all: the expectations of each one of us and our daily actions, determined through communication, through the Net, have an impact, the natural impact, upon the current society's institutions and organization. There won't be counter-revolutions and stolen revolutions, the Net (the people communicating through it) makes that impossible, meaningless.
The Net brought the organic milk and the bicycles back in Pittsburgh.
Mr. Dvorak complains about the dying of newspapers, which supposedly should give you a skillfully baked world view. In this article, although he's right in a few details on the education, he's utterly wrong with the main theme, that a world view should be served at breakfast. There is no world view one can grasp from a classical newspaper, that's the world view of those paid by the newspaper, it always was. Want an authentic world view? Check those personal blogs which have no ads, no "free registration" and no access fee. That's a service somebody offers to you by telling you about the part of the world he's living in; it's the true social part of what a human is supposed to be. He's getting explicit feedback in the best cases. You don't have to give that explicit feedback, I understand, you're in a hurry to make money to build your identical dream house, but have the minimal decency to not complain the blog is happening. In fact, I read the article linked-to above as a kind of blog entry; that's feedback enough for me; ignored all the ads around there.
This way, by reading on the Net, you check those parts of the worlds you're interested in, and you don't have to drive 1 hour and pay for a beer in a non-smoking place to hear somebody's opinion or conclusion, you just click and read. You need the news you did not know you're interested in? Check the web again, and if this is too time consuming for you then pay a tax for the city council to keep a blog of what's happening in your city, to the senate to keep a blog on what's happening there, and so on; or just ask them to do that for the tax you pay already. While you are at it, ask the universities to make publicly accessible the research you paid for.
Mr. Dvorak believes the Net is transforming the North-Americans into "a nation of narrow thinkers", that's old news: a nation of people who have to drive a car to buy food is already a nation of narrow thinkers, a nation who believed that Iraq, or Afganisthan, has been invaded for ethical reasons is already a nation of narrow thinkers, a nation which believes that Iran or any other country for that matter doesn't have the right to nuclear power while that nation itself does, is already a nation of narrow thinkers. That narrowness of thinking came from the pre-cooked world view served by a few well-paid narrow thinkers. Hopefully, through the Net, various questions and choices will be accessible and informative to you, things you haven't thought of because somebody else was designated to do that for you while you were driving.
Debt-based thinking (mortgage thinking) and acting should have been dead for a long time, but now thanks to the Net, a new culture is rising, although in an implicit or underground way, at some point it will become a critical mass. Just sit and watch, Mr. Dvorak (ok, maybe those days will not find us alive), this is not just another wave of marijuana smokers daydreaming about sharing something they never had with everybody else. These Net people don't have to be on some special social networking site, the Net is the social network, anything less is just a temporary enterprise for the quick-money.
Due to the Net I don't have to do anything special to keep up with the world, neither the world :), but we just started growing together.