Communication in the Internet Age

[Centurijohn]

Of course. And if such a time does come to fruition, that 5% might be the most valuable and important information. Part of me is scared that this will happen, only because it will become that much easier for the government to control if almost all information is stored on one medium.

Well, government cannot impose a limit on people's creativity (e.g. for creating new media and/or circumventing censorship), so I think that there will be ways to get that information, as long as anyone is interested in spreading it.

[Dominato]

Well, government cannot impose a limit on people's creativity (e.g. for creating new media and/or circumventing censorship), so I think that there will be ways to get that information, as long as anyone is interested in spreading it.

If there is a strong dissenting movement, then I agree that the government will be limited in exercising control over the population. "As long as anyone is interested in spreading it" is a strong caveat, and it is much easier for governments to supress dissent in citizens through indirect means such government propganda, semi-offical, pro-gvernment citizen groups which inform on neighbours and act as a proxy of the state, requirements of journalists and media outlets to be vetted by the state, or even outright state control of the media, cracking down on protests, public education of children, etc.

[Centurijohn]

If there is a strong dissenting movement, then I agree that the government will be limited in exercising control over the population. "As long as anyone is interested in spreading it" is a strong caveat, and it is much easier for governments to supress dissent in citizens through indirect means such government propganda, semi-offical, pro-gvernment citizen groups which inform on neighbours and act as a proxy of the state, requirements of journalists and media outlets to be vetted by the state, or even outright state control of the media, cracking down on protests, public education of children, etc.

That wouldn't be enough to prevent people from being interested in spreading it, quite on the contrary. The more you oppress people, the stronger you make the resistance.

[vertigo]

If there is a strong dissenting movement, then I agree that the government will be limited in exercising control over the population. "As long as anyone is interested in spreading it" is a strong caveat, and it is much easier for governments to supress dissent in citizens through indirect means such government propganda, semi-offical, pro-gvernment citizen groups which inform on neighbours and act as a proxy of the state, requirements of journalists and media outlets to be vetted by the state, or even outright state control of the media, cracking down on protests, public education of children, etc.

That wouldn't be enough to prevent people from being interested in spreading it, quite on the contrary. The more you oppress people, the stronger you make the resistance.

For ideas to spread, they need to be displayed somewhere for others to see or the evidence needs to be visible so that people can figure it out for themselves. If the media is controlled then people only see one side of any situation and they can't figure things out for themselves. And if dissent is quashed, people don't learn that there is an alternate view. People don't feel oppressed when the media is controlled so as long as dissent is quashed quietly, no problemo.

[Dominato]

That wouldn't be enough to prevent people from being interested in spreading it, quite on the contrary. The more you oppress people, the stronger you make the resistance.

Right... I forgot how badly China and Cuba are being rocked by protests from their own people...

[Centurijohn]

For ideas to spread, they need to be displayed somewhere for others to see or the evidence needs to be visible so that people can figure it out for themselves. If the media is controlled then people only see one side of any situation and they can't figure things out for themselves. And if dissent is quashed, people don't learn that there is an alternate view. People don't feel oppressed when the media is controlled so as long as dissent is quashed quietly, no problemo.

People can feel oppressed independently of whether someone is telling them that they are, and you need to feel coerced to be coerced. As far as media-control goes, my point was that the government can never control all possible ways of displaying that information, because people can always come up with new ways of doing that.

[Centurijohn]

That wouldn't be enough to prevent people from being interested in spreading it, quite on the contrary. The more you oppress people, the stronger you make the resistance.

Right... I forgot how badly China and Cuba are being rocked by protests from their own people...

I don't know about the development of the resistance in China and Cuba (though I'd expect both regimes to have become less oppressive than they were), but my point is that the more you oppress, the more incentives you give the people to fight you.

[Brad Reddekopp]

China appears to have become quite a bit less oppressive, at least regarding markets. The government has enshrined private property rights in their constitution (something Canada hasn't done, BTW) -- not that a constitution can really be relied on to protect individuals, of course.

Cuba? Well, about a year ago, the government of Cuba lifted the ban on citizens owning cell phones. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... -cell.html

[vertigo]

That wouldn't be enough to prevent people from being interested in spreading it, quite on the contrary. The more you oppress people, the stronger you make the resistance.

Right... I forgot how badly China and Cuba are being rocked by protests from their own people...

I don't know about the development of the resistance in China and Cuba (though I'd expect both regimes to have become less oppressive than they were), but my point is that the more you oppress, the more incentives you give the people to fight you.

... more incentives, fewer means.

[Centurijohn]

That wouldn't be enough to prevent people from being interested in spreading it, quite on the contrary. The more you oppress people, the stronger you make the resistance.

Right... I forgot how badly China and Cuba are being rocked by protests from their own people...

I don't know about the development of the resistance in China and Cuba (though I'd expect both regimes to have become less oppressive than they were), but my point is that the more you oppress, the more incentives you give the people to fight you.

... more incentives, fewer means.

More incentives also means more incentives for coming up with new means.