4 ms·

Douglas Adams on the Internet in 1999: "Newsreaders still feel it is worth a special and rather worrying mention if, for instance, a crime was planned by peopl

Douglas Adams on the Internet in 1999: "Newsreaders still feel it is worth a special and rather worrying mention if, for instance, a crime was planned by people ‘over the Internet.’ They don’t bother to mention when criminals use the telephone or the M4, or discuss their dastardly plans ‘over a cup of tea,’ though each of these was new and controversial in their day."

mola 6y ago
Massive changes in quantity sometimes induce changes in quality. You can't create a world movement if all your means of communication are non viral
- onion2k 6y ago
  You can't create a world movement if all your means of communication are non viral. That must be why there were no religions before the internet..
  - LadyCailin 6y ago
    Fun fact: The medieval crusades were coordinated via TikTok.
  - watwut 6y ago
    It took a lot of time and several military conquests. Once it was done, it was cemented for hundrends of years.
    - dalbasal 6y ago
      This just isn't true. History is full of explosive growth in religious movements, cults and sects, many very short lived and some long. The ones that lasted are the ones we still have. It sometimes happened through conquest, and often in non military ways. Also political movements. The French and American revolution didn't have much of a preamble.
      - watwut 6y ago
        > religious movements, cults and sects, many very short lived and some long Those however are not characterized as "world movement". > Also political movements. The French and American revolution didn't have much of a preamble. The French revolution was not one movement tho. It was general breakdown with many movements violently competing for power.
        onion2k 6y ago
        This is just the 'No true Scotsman" fallacy.
        watwut 6y ago
        This is original comment: "You can't create a world movement if all your means of communication are non viral." This is original contra-argument: "there were no religions before the internet" followed by example of "French revolution" and various "religious movements, cults and sects, many very short lived and some long". It is not fallacy to point out that none of these things was the kind of "viral world movement" original comment was clearly talking about. For that, non viral communications are not enough.
        dalbasal 6y ago
        By the standard you set, nothing is a "viral world movement." Any example you give (including ISIS, which is the context) can be dismissed as not global enough to be a "viral world movement" or too factitious to be considered a movement at all, like the French revolution. That's what the "no true scotsman" rhetorical fallacy is. Since "viral world movement" is somewhat broad and imprecisely defined, you can always say that any example is not a true scotsman no matter how scottish she is. The idea that French republicanism (or republicanism generally) was not political movement silly.
        watwut 6y ago
        The history is simply not full of "viral world movements" and my argument is that internet is necessary if that is your goal. When world viral ends up being local local cult that grows slowly locally and at some point reaches strength locally just to die quickly, then it is neither viral nor global. > Any example you give (including ISIS, which is the context) can be dismissed as not global enough to be a "viral world movement" or too factitious to be considered a movement at all, like the French revolution. But French revolution was significantly more factitious then pretty much anything else. It was absurdly complicated set of widely different groups fighting for very much different goals. Literally ranging from right to radical left, from those for monarchy through those for democracy through whatever dictatorship. It was not one movement at all, it is more of what happens when state fails and everyone rushes for a gun. ISIS is one movement, its fractions are centered around common ideology with smaller differences. ISIS is not leading war against other branch with different name that is still ISIS. And while ISIS is not super global, it did managed to recruit from western countries. ISIS would not been as successful without internet and used internet extensively.
azinman2 6y ago
Probably because the decentralization, reach, and scale make it materially different where the potential harms can be so much greater. That IS was able to recruit and inspire people across the world through their distribution of propaganda is a prime example of this.
- sushshshsh 6y ago
  I mean, the IRA was able to do the same with the telephone and the M4 and lasted much longer than ISIS
  - dalbasal 6y ago
    I agree, but I don't think this is an example. For one thing, the IRA used the M1. The M4 runs east-west. (joke). More to the point, revolutionary republicanism and the IRA existed for a pretty long time. A lot of those who joined the (P)IRA in the 70s were grandchildren of "old IRA" members. True also for many of the international (mostly US) supporters. They communicated in person.
    - azinman2 6y ago
      And notice how regional that is, stemming from a history/land divisions that again were regional. Imagine if people were bombing for the IRA world-wide... that is materially different.
      - sushshshsh 6y ago
        Ironically the weapons and funding for the IRA came from international sources, much like how ISIS obtains funding and fighters from international sources. And the IRA did this without the use of the internet in 1970. Two principle sources were the USA and Basque country. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provisional_Irish_Republican_Army_arms_importation#:~:text=In%201969%20the%20IRA%20received,receives%20weapons%20from%20Basque%20ETA https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provisional_Irish_Republican.... The IRA didn't target global targets, it's true. The IRA didn't blow up mosques in Syria. But the reason for this is that terrorists attack those who are in power, and the large majority of that flows back to Western Europe and USA. There are no muslim terrorists trying to get popular from murdering school children in Belarus, for example.

mola 6y ago

Massive changes in quantity sometimes induce changes in quality. You can't create a world movement if all your means of communication are non viral

onion2k 6y ago
You can't create a world movement if all your means of communication are non viral. That must be why there were no religions before the internet..
- LadyCailin 6y ago
  Fun fact: The medieval crusades were coordinated via TikTok.
- watwut 6y ago
  It took a lot of time and several military conquests. Once it was done, it was cemented for hundrends of years.
  - dalbasal 6y ago
    This just isn't true. History is full of explosive growth in religious movements, cults and sects, many very short lived and some long. The ones that lasted are the ones we still have. It sometimes happened through conquest, and often in non military ways. Also political movements. The French and American revolution didn't have much of a preamble.
    - watwut 6y ago
      > religious movements, cults and sects, many very short lived and some long Those however are not characterized as "world movement". > Also political movements. The French and American revolution didn't have much of a preamble. The French revolution was not one movement tho. It was general breakdown with many movements violently competing for power.
      - onion2k 6y ago
        This is just the 'No true Scotsman" fallacy.
        watwut 6y ago
        This is original comment: "You can't create a world movement if all your means of communication are non viral." This is original contra-argument: "there were no religions before the internet" followed by example of "French revolution" and various "religious movements, cults and sects, many very short lived and some long". It is not fallacy to point out that none of these things was the kind of "viral world movement" original comment was clearly talking about. For that, non viral communications are not enough.
        dalbasal 6y ago
        By the standard you set, nothing is a "viral world movement." Any example you give (including ISIS, which is the context) can be dismissed as not global enough to be a "viral world movement" or too factitious to be considered a movement at all, like the French revolution. That's what the "no true scotsman" rhetorical fallacy is. Since "viral world movement" is somewhat broad and imprecisely defined, you can always say that any example is not a true scotsman no matter how scottish she is. The idea that French republicanism (or republicanism generally) was not political movement silly.
        watwut 6y ago
        The history is simply not full of "viral world movements" and my argument is that internet is necessary if that is your goal. When world viral ends up being local local cult that grows slowly locally and at some point reaches strength locally just to die quickly, then it is neither viral nor global. > Any example you give (including ISIS, which is the context) can be dismissed as not global enough to be a "viral world movement" or too factitious to be considered a movement at all, like the French revolution. But French revolution was significantly more factitious then pretty much anything else. It was absurdly complicated set of widely different groups fighting for very much different goals. Literally ranging from right to radical left, from those for monarchy through those for democracy through whatever dictatorship. It was not one movement at all, it is more of what happens when state fails and everyone rushes for a gun. ISIS is one movement, its fractions are centered around common ideology with smaller differences. ISIS is not leading war against other branch with different name that is still ISIS. And while ISIS is not super global, it did managed to recruit from western countries. ISIS would not been as successful without internet and used internet extensively.

azinman2 6y ago

Probably because the decentralization, reach, and scale make it materially different where the potential harms can be so much greater. That IS was able to recruit and inspire people across the world through their distribution of propaganda is a prime example of this.

sushshshsh 6y ago
I mean, the IRA was able to do the same with the telephone and the M4 and lasted much longer than ISIS
- dalbasal 6y ago
  I agree, but I don't think this is an example. For one thing, the IRA used the M1. The M4 runs east-west. (joke). More to the point, revolutionary republicanism and the IRA existed for a pretty long time. A lot of those who joined the (P)IRA in the 70s were grandchildren of "old IRA" members. True also for many of the international (mostly US) supporters. They communicated in person.
  - azinman2 6y ago
    And notice how regional that is, stemming from a history/land divisions that again were regional. Imagine if people were bombing for the IRA world-wide... that is materially different.
    - sushshshsh 6y ago
      Ironically the weapons and funding for the IRA came from international sources, much like how ISIS obtains funding and fighters from international sources. And the IRA did this without the use of the internet in 1970. Two principle sources were the USA and Basque country. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provisional_Irish_Republican_Army_arms_importation#:~:text=In%201969%20the%20IRA%20received,receives%20weapons%20from%20Basque%20ETA https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provisional_Irish_Republican.... The IRA didn't target global targets, it's true. The IRA didn't blow up mosques in Syria. But the reason for this is that terrorists attack those who are in power, and the large majority of that flows back to Western Europe and USA. There are no muslim terrorists trying to get popular from murdering school children in Belarus, for example.