-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Information should NOT be free, and other crucial ideas
- Thread starter icehorse
- Start date
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Yeah, that definitely isn't the case with Sam Harris. You don't have agree with him, but gross mischaracterizations are unfair regardless.
Umm no. Information is power and it’s elitist to only give that power to those with money. I realise there are already media empires manipulating things. Murdoch, Zuckerberg etc. But I mean I don’t see that being solved with even more capitalism
Besides how are kids supposed to do their schoolwork/homework if they have to pay Google?
Besides how are kids supposed to do their schoolwork/homework if they have to pay Google?
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
That would disappoint the televangelist.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Maybe Google ought to pay people for using it. Turn the tables around!
How?
Say you go back to school to try for a better job since you’re barely making ends meat. Should that person have to burden themselves with yet another expense?
Now this idea I like
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Yeah....that definitely is failing for healthcare, it did not work for fire stations, and I just don't see it working for this.
Let's see if we can walk through this...
1 - Is Zuckerberg astoundingly wealthy?
2 - How much do people currently pay for FB?
3 - How is he getting wealthy, if no one is paying?
4 - Advertising you say? Aha!
5 - Would advertisers continue to pay big bucks for advertising if it didn't work?
When you expose yourself to advertising you ARE paying - whether you realize it or not - AND you're being manipulated - whether you realize it or not.
It is a MYTH that things like FB are free!
I often forget that I’m interacting with people who literally have to pay for their healthcare.
My father was on pension when he was diagnosed with cancer. He would have been dead 10 times over if not for our Medicare system.
The time I got to spend with him is worth more than all the money in the world. To have one’s healthcare ties to their income seems ungodly cruel to my eyes
Yes, ads are annoying, manipulative and destructive. They can influence information sharing if it hurts their bottom line. Like say when the insurrection happened in the US social media began clamping down on election fraud posts even more because it made them look bad.
But again, if you’re going to make the average citizen shoulder all the burden, all you’re really doing is ensuring those below the poverty line have no real access to information anymore. How is that helpful?
Ad revenue is a necessary evil of capitalism
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
It is. And it's not just income, here the tradition is it is tied to your job and your get the insurance your employer provides. And before the ACA I went without because if my employer offered it it wasn't worth the cost (and I didn't make enough to afford it anyways).
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
That's why I use ad blockers, and I'm in no way ashamed to say I block them all. I don't care, cry me a river, bugger off. I didn't invite them so as far as I'm concerned ads and trackers are foreign objects in my computer that I am entitled to block, erase, deny, or otherwise impede their intended purpose.
I see that as bit like “the master holding hostage a special treat.”
If you’ll excuse the clumsy somewhat hyperbolic phrasing.
I’m rather cynical of employers over here. I’d imagine my cynicism would just worsen if they had the power of deciding what kind of medical assistance I was allowed to have
Lol same
osgart
Nothing my eye, Something for sure
There's a big difference between public information and private information. Why should it cost anything to enable people with knowledge? It shouldn't other than it takes work to convey information and nobody does anything for free.
Problem is everything is so money driven that people have to compete to have a livelihood. So manipulation and greed seem to prevail. The wealthy people are not going to share with everybody. They are only going to do what benefits themselves.
I can imagine a utopia where knowledge and information was free. Money systems will always prevent that. No self serving animal is going to give up their power to those who would take it away, or cause more competition. And information is power. It's the most expensive currency.
Sure it would be nice if we had systems that valued life above profit. At the same time providers of life need compensation for their services. How would you meet these two needs in a system of government? Perhaps a balance can be struck.
If everyone thrived then the population would explode too.
Problem is everything is so money driven that people have to compete to have a livelihood. So manipulation and greed seem to prevail. The wealthy people are not going to share with everybody. They are only going to do what benefits themselves.
I can imagine a utopia where knowledge and information was free. Money systems will always prevent that. No self serving animal is going to give up their power to those who would take it away, or cause more competition. And information is power. It's the most expensive currency.
Sure it would be nice if we had systems that valued life above profit. At the same time providers of life need compensation for their services. How would you meet these two needs in a system of government? Perhaps a balance can be struck.
If everyone thrived then the population would explode too.
Who do you think is currently shouldering all the burden?
And, BTW, we're not saying info should cost a LOT, but it should cost a little. And of course, we could provide the poor with info credits or some such.
I would say that we've acquiesced to the idea that ad's are "necessary", but Lanier (and I) are saying that we do NOT have to acquiesce.
Society. I dislike advertising in general. I understand what you’re saying, but I do not live in some communist utopia. I work with what I got.
Why should it cost anything at all?
You kind of do, unless you can propose a better system. And charging people to use Google I don’t see as a workable system.
Hey @SomeRandom
Well, I think we all dislike advertising, so there's a start
When I asked "who is shouldering the burden" your answer was "society", which I think is non-responsive in this conversation. Whether we like to admit it or not, WE already ARE paying to use FB and Google and the like. Who else would be paying??? The harsh reality is that advertising works on most of us.
As for why it should cost anything at all? Ummm.. because it costs money to provide it? You seem to be imagining that there is such a thing as a free lunch?? There isn't. full stop.
Well, I think we all dislike advertising, so there's a start
When I asked "who is shouldering the burden" your answer was "society", which I think is non-responsive in this conversation. Whether we like to admit it or not, WE already ARE paying to use FB and Google and the like. Who else would be paying??? The harsh reality is that advertising works on most of us.As for why it should cost anything at all? Ummm.. because it costs money to provide it? You seem to be imagining that there is such a thing as a free lunch?? There isn't. full stop.