Page 1 of 3
#1
We are rapidly approaching a point where all data will be accessed via the Internet, or other more selective networks.
At some point, recent history will be easily edited to fit the narrative.
Example of some common tech widely available:
#5
That's all of the lyrics I know, and those may be the entire song.
#6
Quote by 33db
That's all of the lyrics I know, and those may be the entire song.

There's no more.
Quote by Diemon Dave
Don't go ninjerin nobody don't need ninjerin'
#7
Lulz.. fuck you guys... for that you get a haddaway...
#8
Futureal
WHAT A
HORRIBLE
NIGHT TO
HAVE A
CURSE.
#9
history has always been biased to those who have the power to write it

or something like that

don't worry about it
(\__/)
(='.'=) This is Bunny. Copy and paste Bunny into your
( )_( ) signature to help him gain World Domination



Do you remember chalk hearts melting on a playground wall
Do you remember dawn escapes from moon washed college halls
Do you remember the cherry blossom in the market square
Do you remember I thought it was confetti in our hair
#10
This happened with out internet. Place use what ever version of history fits them best. Weather its to make themselves look like the good guys or make what they've done bad seem not as bad. The only way to truly know history is to have been there other than that it's what story to believe more. The winners of wars and the powerful control what the history books will say.
They can't stop us Let 'em try For heavy metal We will die!
#12
'How Can Mirrors Be Real If Our Eyes Aren't Real" - Jaden Smith
Quote by jrcsgtpeppers
There shall be a stop to this madness. The battle is not over. My tasty licks aren't going anywhere.

Quote by The_Blode
^ I've just realised if you say Simple Plan's 2011 effort "Get Your Heart On!" really fast in a Southern American accent, it sounds gross. . .like sexual gross!

Quote by Necroheadbanger
Hello.
I'm looking for professional bongo-ists and triangle-ists to make a Progressive Technical Brutal Death Metal band
(will be called AxOxJxLxAxIxVxXxUxWxZxQxUxRxWxGxJxSxAxLxKxMxNxHxUxGxAxAxWxVxCxBxZxVx)
(Don't even ask what it means)


https://soundcloud.com/95dank



#14
MurrcuryFoxx
Quote by MurrcuryFoxx
This happened with out internet.

True, the Internet upped the ante when history can be changed with the click of the button, your "books" deleted from your reader, etc.
At least with a printed book you could keep a copy, so that down the road when they rewrote history you still had something to show, the Internet for the most part gets rid of that.
#15
Quote by 33db
MurrcuryFoxx
True, the Internet upped the ante when history can be changed with the click of the button, your "books" deleted from your reader, etc.
At least with a printed book you could keep a copy, so that down the road when they rewrote history you still had something to show, the Internet for the most part gets rid of that.

Not really. There are quite a few projects going that cache data, meaning very often previous(or even original) versions of published files can be found.
Quote by Diemon Dave
Don't go ninjerin nobody don't need ninjerin'
#16
Quote by slapsymcdougal
Not really. There are quite a few projects going that cache data, meaning very often previous(or even original) versions of published files can be found.

You don't control that, a printed book you can hold in your hand.
#17
Quote by Aeolian Harmony
Bonjour, Monsieur Baudrillard

Fucking brilliant.
Baudrillard's provocative 1991 book The Gulf War Did Not Take Place raised his public profile as an academic and political commentator. He argued that the first Gulf War was the inverse of the Clausewitzian formula: not "the continuation of politics by other means", but "the continuation of the absence of politics by other means". Accordingly, Saddam Hussein was not fighting the Coalition, but using the lives of his soldiers as a form of sacrifice to preserve his power (p. 72, 2004 edition). The Coalition fighting the Iraqi military was merely dropping 10,000 tonnes of bombs daily, as if proving to themselves that there was an enemy to fight (p. 61). So, too, were the Western media complicit, presenting the war in real time, by recycling images of war to propagate the notion that the U.S.-led coalition and the Iraqi government were actually fighting, but, such was not the case. Saddam Hussein did not use his military capacity (the Iraqi Air Force). His power was not weakened, evinced by his easy suppression of the 1991 internal uprisings that followed afterwards. Overall, little had changed. Saddam remained undefeated, the "victors" were not victorious, and thus there was no war—i.e., the Gulf War did not occur.


We've always been at war with Eastasia
#19
Quote by 33db
You don't control that, a printed book you can hold in your hand.

But you can't hold it in your hand 24/7, can you?

Someone can swap it with a replica if you go to sleep.


DO YOU DARE EVEN CLOSE YOUR EYES?
Quote by Diemon Dave
Don't go ninjerin nobody don't need ninjerin'
#20
Quote by slapsymcdougal
Not really. There are quite a few projects going that cache data, meaning very often previous(or even original) versions of published files can be found.


This is obviously a hypothetical extreme but say Googles mainframe where to be wiped out countless amounts of data and history would be lost forever that no amount of Data caching would save. If some country or group wanted to remove huge parts of recorded history in a way they could.

It would be a lot like the dark ages untold amounts of history and science were lost forever then there isn't anything stoping something similar from happing now.
They can't stop us Let 'em try For heavy metal We will die!
#21
Quote by MurrcuryFoxx
This is obviously a hypothetical extreme but say Googles mainframe where to be wiped out countless amounts of data and history would be lost forever  that no amount of Data caching would save. If some country or group wanted to remove huge parts of recorded history in a way they could.

It would be a lot like the dark ages untold amounts of history and science were lost forever then there isn't anything stoping something similar from happing now.

Mainframes haven't really been a thing in computing for a couple of decades.

Google operates using like 9 massive datacenters in the US alone, and there's a considerable degree of redundancy between them. 
Quote by Diemon Dave
Don't go ninjerin nobody don't need ninjerin'
#22
Quote by slapsymcdougal
But you can't hold it in your hand 24/7, can you?

Someone can swap it with a replica if you go to sleep.


DO YOU DARE EVEN CLOSE YOUR EYES?

Glue.
#23
Quote by slapsymcdougal
Mainframes haven't really been a thing in computing for a couple of decades.

Google operates using like 9 massive datacenters in the US alone, and there's a considerable degree of redundancy between them. 



That's why I said it was a hypothetical extreme. I used google just because that's something we all know. One mainframe or many datacentere the idea is the same. I'm not trying to say it will happen but it could happen.
They can't stop us Let 'em try For heavy metal We will die!
#24
Quote by slapsymcdougal
Mainframes haven't really been a thing in computing for a couple of decades.

Google operates using like 9 massive datacenters in the US alone, and there's a considerable degree of redundancy between them. 

Mainframes are still "a thing" but I believe Google went for a more cost effective approach of single slot rack mounts, simple, fast, inexpensive and easily replaceable/scalable.
#25
Quote by MurrcuryFoxx
That's why I said it was a hypothetical extreme. I used google just because that's something we all know. One mainframe or many datacentere the idea is the same. I'm not trying to say it will happen but it could happen.


Just being delisted by Google is enough to kill some web sites.
#26
before we get onto baudrillard let's go back to
Quote by MurrcuryFoxx
This happened with out internet.


they're coming to take me away
ha-haaa
#27
Quote by 33db
Mainframes are still "a thing" but I believe Google went for a more cost effective approach of single slot rack mounts, simple, fast, inexpensive and easily replaceable/scalable.

They're really not. The only ones that still operate were built for a specific function, and it's not yet economically viable for the company operating them to upgrade to a supercomputer.
Quote by Diemon Dave
Don't go ninjerin nobody don't need ninjerin'
#28
Quote by Banjocal
before we get onto baudrillard let's go back to


“All that was once directly lived has become mere representation,”

Pretty much sums up modern social media and the Internet.
#29
Quote by Banjocal
before we get onto baudrillard let's go back to


Is this Bucket chap the author or the publisher?
Quote by Diemon Dave
Don't go ninjerin nobody don't need ninjerin'
#30
Quote by 33db
“All that was once directly lived has become mere representation,”

Pretty much sums up modern social media and the Internet.
I tend to think of it as a precursor to Baudrillard. Except Baudrillard often fails to account for areas of the world further away from the hyperreality he describes, whereas debord doesn't quite so much. Also Debord isn't passively nihilistic

Quote by slapsymcdougal
Is this Bucket chap the author or the publisher?
only a true philosopher would ever know
they're coming to take me away
ha-haaa
#31
Banjocal
This is the first I've heard of either of them, but what Debord (and others) theorize goes a long to explaining why some people are currently trying to get Howard Zinn's "A People's History of the United States' banned from public schools.
http://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlog/archives/2017/03/02/bill-introduced-to-ban-howard-zinn-books-from-arkansas-public-schools
Zinn was hijacking/subverting the spectacle.

My to read list just got several books longer.
Last edited by 33db at Mar 5, 2017,
#33
baudrillard's work has supplanted the man and become more real than he could ever hope to be


baudrillard: 1
baudrillard: 0
Quote by Fat Lard
Why would you spend tens of thousands of dollars to learn about a language you already speak? It was over before it even started dude

Quote by captainsnazz
brot pls
#34
  • It depends on how we advance culturally whether this is a problem or not. If you use that software to modify a recording, then unless you are the sole owner of it then it'll also be somewhere else. If our culture seeks to protect and make those original recordings available, then no matter how many fakes you create people will always just refer to the original and ignore yours. However, if our culture doesn't give a fuck and believes everything that sees, then yeah it'll be a problem. If there is no public source for the original recording and only the fake one is released it's a problem too. It's not really reasonable to say it'll doom us all, but we need to be careful.
  • More and more historical data is archived digitally, this is true. This is worrying for the future, because that data will disappear. Unless we have a plan for Google, Microsoft and >90% of web sites to be functioning and around for thousands of years, that data will either be wiped out, or become corrupted, or the technology to access it will be lost. I mean, the actual data stored are 0s and 1s on disks or tapes, but it's codified and you can't get the data out unless you know the exact standard, some of which are known only to the company. Some (or most, hopefully) data is encrypted so unless you get the keys you won't get it out. This will be a huge problem for future archeologists in >100 years (or more). This problem doesn't happen with stone tablets, or even paper.
#35
Maybe what's needed is the data equivalent of the Svalbard Global Seed Vault.
#37
Quote by Aeolian Harmony
Debord got gud. Baudrillard is often despairing, if insightful.

Baudrillard is contemporary, despair and cynicism are understandable.
#38
the issue here is kind of flawed anyway because it's assumed that books, in their physically and more secure method of storage, are accurate in the first place. While digital information can be altered, we have the ability to rapidly compared and cross-reference data across a large number of examples to discern where manipulation is happening. In many scenarios, we only have one version of a book or one translation that survived centuries of previous translations. Who gives a shit if you still have the information if it's essentially a completely new piece. It reminds of that Borges story where an entire history is made for a fictional city, and that history is treated as completely real.

Treating digital storage as somehow more fallible than a written tradition is rooted in ignoring how very fallible books are. We're just so used to them being the primary method that it seems unreasonable to question just how reliable they are.
Quote by Fat Lard
Why would you spend tens of thousands of dollars to learn about a language you already speak? It was over before it even started dude

Quote by captainsnazz
brot pls
#39
Quote by BladeSlinger
the issue here is kind of flawed anyway because it's assumed that books, in their physically and more secure method of storage, are accurate in the first place. While digital information can be altered, we have the ability to rapidly compared and cross-reference data across a large number of examples to discern where manipulation is happening. In many scenarios, we only have one version of a book or one translation that survived centuries of previous translations. Who gives a shit if you still have the information if it's essentially a completely new piece. It reminds of that Borges story where an entire history is made for a fictional city, and that history is treated as completely real.

Treating digital storage as somehow more fallible than a written tradition is rooted in ignoring how very fallible books are. We're just so used to them being the primary method that it seems unreasonable to question just how reliable they are.


The way I was looking at it a book could be preserved and later used as evidence for the change that occurred after, yes the book could've have been wrong in the first place, but it's something that could be kept intact and verified at a later date.

Digital data not so much, think of saving a jpg or HTMl, both can be easily faked as can video shown in my original post.
I saw the book as a referential item more than an infallible item.

You're also assuming you will have access to cross reference in the future, and that what you're getting as results is any more "real" than what you're researching.
That is the insidious nature of digital data, it can all be changed by those that control it across the entire network.
This article discusses an app attempting to validate data by tagging it.
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2017/03/proof_mode_for_.html
Who gives a shit if you still have the information if it's essentially a completely new piece.

^ I don't follow what you are saying there.
Last edited by 33db at Mar 5, 2017,
Page 1 of 3