3 ms·
If you don't mind my saying so, I think it's your point of view that's naive. OP is talking about a large cultural shift, the type that skeptics said was impos
by Eric_WVGG 4y ago
If you don't mind my saying so, I think it's your point of view that's naive.
OP is talking about a large cultural shift, the type that skeptics said was impossible back at the advent of the web. The orthodox opinion was that the web was a fad and we'd all be reading newspapers and using coin-operated phones forever.
The scale of change that he’s describing — where the internet ceases to become a source-of-truth — would be a complete paradigm shift. Whether it's a "core part of today's society" is entirely irrelevant… newspapers were once core too.
- gavinhoward 4y agoThe reason newspapers shifted away from being core is because there were other communication media to replace them. There aren't such replacements for the Internet.
- nickthegreek 4y agoI dont think we are talking about replacing "the internet", but replacing fb/twitter/insta with many many more micro communities that might be a bit more gated for entry due the cheapness of spam. These types of communities flourished in the 80s-2000.
- hgsgm 4y agoUrban Buildings were important before WWII firebombing. I don't think it would be progress to abandon cities because someone figured out how to destroy them.