Despite these appearance, libraries — real ones concerned with guarding and curating knowledge — remain crucial to free and open societies, and not simply because their traditional services within academia, from curation to preservation to research, remain in high demand by scholars. More broadly, they crucially complement the Web in its highest aspirations: to provide unfettered access to knowledge, and to link authors and readers in new ways. Here’s why.
First, information may be easy to copy, but it’s also easy to poison and destroy. The Web is a distributed marvel: click on any link on a page and you’ll instantly be able to see to what it refers, whether it’s offered by the author of the page you’re already reading, or somewhere on the other side of the world, by a different person writing at a different time for a different purpose. That the act of citation and linkage could be made so easy to forge and to follow, and accessible to anyone with a Web browser rather than special patron privileges, is revolutionary.
But the very characteristics that make the distributed Net so powerful overall also make it dicey in any given use. Links rot; sources evaporate. The anarchic Web loses some luster every time that something an author meant to share turns out to be a 404-not-found error.
— On Facebook's empire
Here’s a simple truth: the internet has radically changed the world. Over the course of the past 20 years, the idea of networking all the world’s computers has gone from a research science pipe dream to a necessary condition of economic and social development, from government and university labs to kitchen tables and city streets. We are all travelers now, desperate souls searching for a signal to connect us all. It is awesome.
And we’re fucking everything up.
To save the internet we know and love, we’ve got to make it a public utility.
It looks like the overlapping of time became quite evident in the Navy Yard shooting. It’s almost like each step of the grieving process overlapped and became one. In this case, it looks like the event, the ongoing media coverage with developments, the time to grieve and the political backlash all overlapped and became one - one Monday morning. The rest of the day went on.
Iran opens up access to Twitter and Facebook for the first time since 2009.
Cyber attacks and cyber espionage have supplanted terrorism as the top threats to the United States in an annual “worldwide threat” assessment released on Tuesday by the U.S. intelligence community.
However, in testimony prepared for a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing, James Clapper, the director of National Intelligence, played down the likelihood of catastrophic attacks on the United States by either cyber attackers or foreign or domestic militants in the immediate future.
In what has become an annual ritual, Clapper presented to the Senate panel a 34-page paper that ran through a wide variety of threats covered by U.S. intelligence agencies.
People deal with shock in different ways. While most of us sit at our desks waiting for the Internet to insufficiently answer our questions as to why the Sandy Hook shootings happened, many of us are also dealing with the banalities of day-to-day work on a pre-holiday Friday; “It is terrible what happened in Connecticut. Did you get my email about Monday’s meeting?”
These types of conversations around tragic events, both online and offline, cause existential discord: There are very few people who wouldn’t agree that the shooting of children (children!) is an extremely horrific event. We are definitely in the majority.
But it is okay to talk about work right now just like it’s okay to be extremely distraught over this news. Humans have very strange and different ways of processing sadness.
When I found out what is possibly some of the saddest news I’ve ever received, I drove from Huntington Beach to LA and sat silently in my car in the parking lot of a public library for 3 hours. And then drove back. Inexplicably.
And no, I did not tweet about it and won’t post what it is here — Because I prefer to deal with some things privately.
But it’s fine if you want to tweet about your feelings regarding the Connecticut shooting, or anything really. Or not. And if some of you don’t feel like writing or sharing a story about a photosharing app (or do) for the next couple of hours, that’s okay too.
From my personal perspective, I do everything through social media. With that being said, I may be biased as a twenty one year old having grown up in the world of social networking, consuming media, watching television, texting friends constantly, blogging thoughts and being an active member of the internet.
Yes, I do instead ignore the online world and my internet enablers and cope with situations on my own. I do choose to go for a walk and not look at my phone sometimes. We all do need to de-charge, unplug and there are indeed times where I choose to cope with situations without access to the internet.
It is so easy to do otherwise. I now live in a society where our thoughts flow into our fingers which then type out our feelings, our opinions, our thoughts onto keyboards. They’re either publicized or put into a private blog, an email, a message. Or they are tweeted out, put into a Facebook post for our family and friends to see.
The feeling of our feelings and thoughts posted or published is something different than putting them down on pen and paper. It’s possible that we may feel relieved as we got something off our chests. Or it is also possible that it helps us grieve, helps us cope with whatever tough situation we’re facing. Maybe having the audience of online family and friends, or even strangers, helps as well.
Either way, in today’s world, the action of pushing the publish button coincides with with a click. And a relieving breath.