This is pretty confusing, and yet, here I am?

I am having the hardest time understanding this.

I like this quote from

How long should we hold onto thoughts before we expose them to others? With who should we expose the incompleteness of our thinking? Do we have property rights over our thoughts that should be protected? Would we dare Mind-meld with someone as smart as Star Trek's Spock. What would he think of us later?

Sometimes I don't do this at all, but I wonder who does? I'm pretty sure most responses that I see on Twitter aren't thought out first. Or in the comment section in a news article. I liked this article.

February 20, 2018

I feel like I should be mocking reality tv shows with the way that I feel about this: "Day 21. Still alone. Food hasn't been hard to come by, but I am feeling increasingly uneasy with the terrain. I am slowly losing my mind as I dive deeper into this forest, losing contact with the outside world. My volleyball I have named "Nike". He now has a face. He has been a good companion." Haha, it's not quite that bad but one has to wonder if there would be any artistic merit, let alone interest, to a show like that.

Brian Lamb's "Wide Open Spaces: Wikis, Ready or Not" has a similar feel for me. I like it at first, and am approaching it with caution, yet the deeper I dive into it, the less I recognize my surroundings and can tell my way around. He writes part of it, Then adds a chunk of writing by another author? I'm not sure who to cite for credit here. Under the "Tim Berners-Lee, Weaving the Web" section was an interesting quote "Remember when the Internet was about opening up access to information and breaking down the barriers between content creators and content consumers?". Kind of? When I was playing the M.U.D. in high school, there seemed to be a hint of this. Yet it quickly got away from that once people started to realize the potential there. Sir Tim Berners-Lee had to have seen this coming, right? To create something like the World Wide Web and not see the potential for what it could become seems a little short-sighted.

Lamb quotes Lee here: "In 1999, the World Wide Web inventor Sir Tim Berners-Lee looked back on the previous decade and lamented: "I wanted the Web to be what I call an interactive space where everybody can edit. And I started saying interactive, and then I read in the media that the Web was great because it was interactive, meaning you could click. This was not what I meant by interactivity." " I was going to quote this article but it's behind a paywall. I'm not sure if that's ironic viewing it with this reading in mind or not. John Green doesn't think it matters He says "The book does not exist for the benefit of the author, the book exists for the benefit of you." I think that this can also apply to what Lee's intent on the purpose behind creating the World Wide Web. It doesn't matter why it exists, just that it's there, to benefit everyone for their purposes.
There are no comments on this page.
Valid XHTML :: Valid CSS: :: Powered by WikkaWiki