Wednesday, December 20, 2006

Internet communication, safe or not?

The internet. A better way to reach out or another haven in a materialist's world?



My Attempt At a Scholastic Social Report

While by "safe or not" I do not insinuate that internet communication is violently dangerous, is it really the healthiest form of communication? While the invention of phones provided people the opportunity to communicate between continents, internet communication has broadened that perspective. Very similar to phones, internet communication can reach just about anyone, but it is a more advanced form of communication that are often between strangers, in large chatrooms with any possible person at any time, and with people whom you cannot be confident as to their age, gender, or personal characteristics. The first point I would like to make is this, the fact that you can never be aware of who that person is. Although living behind the facade that that person is who he says he is has no real detrimental effects, once a person starts growing a serious attachment to this illusionary figure, it would seriously disappoint him/her if that person is not who he says he is. In either case, it is not really the best idea to chat and talk with someone whom you do not know. It often provokes paranoia and a huge desire for that person to be a perfection figure in your eyes. Once you realize that that person is not perfect, you end up disappointed once again. That brings me to my second point, it is just too easy to grow addicted to internet chatting. Although there is nothing wrong with an addiction to anything, internet chatting, once expanded to long hours, is extraordinarily comfortable and mind-numbing. It can throw off concentration of other things. Another way in which this addiction can have negative side effects is that it is just too easy to grow an affinity or infatuation with someone from the internet. After all, the person behind the screen is a person, and who is capable of humor, compliments, and warmth. People respond to these characteristics just like they do in real life. Once you seriously grow attached to that person's "warmth," you become addicted to a person who is nothing more than an illusionary image. While in life real, love disappointments can occur pervasively as well, there is at least a possible chance at correcting such disappointments since you know this person by heart, and can talk to that person face to face. If disappointed on the internet, all that friend has to do is refuse to speak to you and you end up disappointed with no real chance of ever doing anything about it.

26 comments:

golden_hawk said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

i dunno, the whole notion that people operate from behind a façade when speaking online has been blown way out of proportion. And most people I've grown feelings of some sort for are people I've grown to trust over the years, so I guess I'm safe.

"it is just too easy to grow an affinity or infatuation with someone from the internet" - ohh, who is she? you never told me about her.

FREAK said...

I saw your post earlier.

Anonymous said...

ok

Anonymous said...

My blogger account never works. I hate the java script/beta/[insert internet-savvy term] here.
:(

- Sense

FREAK said...

Man, that sucks. I have no idea why considering we're on the same website.

golden_hawk said...

I'm having the same problem as the sensei there, except my blogger account used to work. and it still does. everywhere. just not on your gay blog, for some reason.

FREAK said...

Yet you're posting here?

I think he meant that his blog doesn't work period.

golden_hawk said...

Ah. Bo. Well, I'm posting under my gmail account.

FREAK said...

Find me someone else who has the same problem.

I can't have this site not working.

Anonymous said...

I do.

golden_hawk said...

"Either this or Rocky Balboa."

Dude. Seriously.

Anonymous said...

And your imitations are getting lame, btw.

golden_hawk said...

anonymous124 is pretentious.

Anonymous said...

He never sounds pretentious.

Rocky Balboa sucks.

Anonymous said...

Well, he likes pretentious films.

golden_hawk said...

And you're dumb for not understanding what my imitations are all about. I'm "operating from behind a façade" - which just happens to be what this article is about. Form follows function. Smart, eh?

golden_hawk said...

You're boring, y'know that?

golden_hawk said...

Shep and his "choppy editing." Omg, "choppy," that's terrible. Let's not even consider that there's nothing inherently wrong with "choppy" and that it could have been done that way for an artistic worthy purpose. I mean, clearly, they just couldn't cut the film "the right way" and proceeded to chop it down randomly. Probably didn't even realise the mess they made until Shep came along and saw their terrible mistake. The editing was choppy! Choppy! Can you believe that? I'm so glad he noticed it.

golden_hawk said...

And now lemme highlight a completely random piece of dialogue and take it completely out of context just so we can all laugh at how terrible it is.

golden_hawk said...

And shame on Mann for shooting it with a mobile.

massromanticrights said...

"artistic worthy purpose."

Maybe that purpose is bad?

golden_hawk said...

Yer from that maple leaf country?

golden_hawk said...

"artistic worthy purpose

Maybe that purpose is bad?"

If it's artistically worthy it's not bad, and if it's bad it's not artistically worthy, so no. And at least show you understand there was a purpose to it (and explain why it was bad), don't shep your way out and say it meant nothing!

golden_hawk said...

All right, just being friendly
by MovieFreak_One 12 hours ago (Fri Dec 22 2006 01:10:19 ) Ignore this User | Report Abuse

-----------------------------------
So ya working today?

LOL. Give it up, Fwee. You're just not a friendly guy. It's ok, really. We lika ya that way.

golden_hawk said...

Rocky Balboa
8.0/10 (3,061 votes)

Curse of the Golden Flower
6.9/10 (261 votes)