Something that worries me is how vocal some people are now about silencing people they disagree with on the internet. De-platforming and such. This seems very regressive to me. I think this is not the right way, if you can't have a civilized debate with someone maybe more research is needed for a fully formed opinion.
Well, I may be misquoting him, but I remember getting the idea from the book, and I now find it hugely helpful to challenge myself like this when I find my opinion is in conflict with another person's. Working from "Am I wrong?" breaks down a of the ego barriers that are erected when you instead begin by defending a position you already hold.
I remember growing up on the internet ~1995-2010 and feeling truly free the whole time I was connected. Now I just feel trapped and monitored in a way that I don't know how to handle anymore.
Without sounding to crazy, basically anything internet connected I use these days appears to be designed to circumvent my privacy (to sell me shit) or to curtail my freedoms (government surveillance) and getting around those things is a game of cat-and-mouse and constantly requires my attention.
I very much look forward to future developments, which I think will come from VR & AR. Those will enable true face-to-face communication without the awkwardness of videochat, and allow people to collaborate in the same virtual environment as if they were in the same room, and that will be closer to the hyper-connectivity of cyberutopianism.
However I don't believe in the idea that a medium can dramatically change human nature for better or for worse.
That said, it all comes down to discipline. There are people who don't need the nudging, who can follow protocols by their own choice. The internet allows them to find each other. That won't transform the world, but the internet will allow them to live their own utopia without bothering everybody else.
Hyper-connectivity between each and everyone to me never made sense, because it's a fundamental recipe for conflict. The notion that everyone gets along and is equal and that we just need to let everyone talk to each other because rational people always change their mind and come to conensus is a pie in the sky fantasy. People don't work like this. Some people should just not be in the same room because they'll hit each other on the head after five minutes of interaction.
That the constantly over-stimulated internet where people who fundamentally don't get along get to talk to each other leads to false realities, noise, and argument for argument sake always seemed extremely obvious to me.
Now, everyday people might not be interested or up to it but they weren't twenty years ago either.
