5 ms·

>I'd gladly donate some local lectures on the stuff I know if I had the time. It sounds like your time is a limited resource and you choose to allocate it to o

>I'd gladly donate some local lectures on the stuff I know if I had the time. It sounds like your time is a limited resource and you choose to allocate it to other areas of your life instead of for the good of spreading knowledge. Why then, do you think others should give their time away for free? Not trying to be hostile, just a thought for you.

pdimitar 7y ago
No offense taken, yours is a valid criticism -- until you meet 20+ internet marketers in real life. There are a lot of very greedy people with a lot of time on their hands but they choose to try and strangle the internet instead of bettering it. And I am left saddened that I have a family to support, health to improve, and work on having my own retirement fund. Maybe start a business or two as well. Trust me I get it. But currently I have to think of the future and there are only 14-15 active hours a day. Yours remains a valid remark. If we want to have useful internet then maybe a lot of personal lives have to be sacrificed.
- siphon22 7y ago
  I get where you're coming from. But I'm going to offer another perspective. There is a shitload of content being made on the internet, and I believe you too would agree the vast majority of content on the web could be hardly called "knowledge" and are more likely to have a negative effect than good on society. And it's literally all free, they don't get paid for that, it's just what people naturally do, and technological advancements have made it really easy to do. In such a landscape, how do we incentivize the proliferation of actually useful content and knowledge? It's not so easy as to just putting words out there most of the time is it? The content we consider valuable have significant amounts of time, research, and thought behind them I would assume. Time is a limited resource, and it is often that the people who have the most valuable knowledge to offer have less of it while those who post meaningless crap have the most.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]

pdimitar 7y ago

No offense taken, yours is a valid criticism -- until you meet 20+ internet marketers in real life. There are a lot of very greedy people with a lot of time on their hands but they choose to try and strangle the internet instead of bettering it. And I am left saddened that I have a family to support, health to improve, and work on having my own retirement fund. Maybe start a business or two as well. Trust me I get it. But currently I have to think of the future and there are only 14-15 active hours a day. Yours remains a valid remark. If we want to have useful internet then maybe a lot of personal lives have to be sacrificed.

siphon22 7y ago
I get where you're coming from. But I'm going to offer another perspective. There is a shitload of content being made on the internet, and I believe you too would agree the vast majority of content on the web could be hardly called "knowledge" and are more likely to have a negative effect than good on society. And it's literally all free, they don't get paid for that, it's just what people naturally do, and technological advancements have made it really easy to do. In such a landscape, how do we incentivize the proliferation of actually useful content and knowledge? It's not so easy as to just putting words out there most of the time is it? The content we consider valuable have significant amounts of time, research, and thought behind them I would assume. Time is a limited resource, and it is often that the people who have the most valuable knowledge to offer have less of it while those who post meaningless crap have the most.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]