#cyber literacy

[wrathsofgrapes]

Social Media, Sousveillance, and the Self (The Three S’s!) REVISED AND BASS BOOSTED

Preface: I posted this as a gaggle of thoughts some months ago, which you can see if you scroll down just a little bit on my blog. These thoughts were decently unorganized and months later, after slow broiling and marinating these thoughts some more, I decided to turn it into a real conjecture of sorts.

Very special thanks + shoutout to my philosophy professor Daniel Rodriguez-Navas for his careful, thoughtful, constructive, and encouraging guidance throughout the development this paper.

Most young people are socially expected to have a form of social media now, and especially expected to have some form of personal information be public. Many find it strange if one does not post photos of themselves online. Most of us, generation Z, are expected and encouraged to contribute to this massive user-curated database, and in exchange, we are able to receive more attention than what was previously fathomable in the form of likes, shares, and comments. This attention is addictive, debilitating, heart-wrenching and hyper-fixated. It has never been possible in human history to access this many people at once, to be heard by this many people and hear this many people. The digital space has never been “natural” - though depending on particular definitions of “natural”, the transhumanist may argue that the digital space is the next step in evolution; an extension of the human realm. But we were not eased into this digital realm, we were thrown, many of us at a very young age, into this realm with a violent and perverted amount of freedom, enticed by information overload and the addiction of attention. The societal over-exposure to the current climate and habits of social media platforms has had not only a detrimental effect on users’ physical health and self esteem, but has also created an uncanny simulacrum of the ways in which we interact and present ourselves with/to others in real life. The incorporation of social media in our everyday lives has solely transformed the ways in which we love, hate, cry and laugh, prioritize - at others and especially ourselves. 

The new product of attention has become a pinnacle of desire; and we pay with sensation, with shock, with beauty and individuality. When these technological experiments first came out, our young, malleable, dissatisfied minds were the first to latch on. Our parents critiqued this, which made the project even more successful. But it is not a phase like our parents said it would be. They caved. All it took was a few years of normalization - advertising, attention, and they too, became hooked. A 2021 Pew research center study found that 91% of US adults aged 30-49 use online platforms, slightly decreasing in ages 50-64 with 83%, and 49% in adults aged 65 and up. We no longer even have an ancient antagonist to complain about “kids these days”. It has become all free and liberated, no shame in this addiction because the algorithms have improved, proved to be impenetrable in its strategy. 

What we now value is increasingly impacted by the digital sphere, riddled with advertisements for particularly desirable lifestyles. With a life revolving so much around the aspect of the digital realm, and with the digital realm being created on the foundation of capital pursuit, value is no longer personal. Life and culture are no longer personal. The personal is no longer personal. Lee Artz, author of “Global Entertainment Media: A Critical Introduction” describes how world culture no longer stems from local cultures, created by people. Instead, TNMCs (TransNational Media Corporations) create a culture based off of the pursuit of production and wealth, skillfully peppered with some features of local culture for the sake of relatability and familiarity, sold under the guise of “cultural diversity”. 

The transaction is subtle - we buy a fix of attention, a sense of connection in exchange for personal information, the more intimate the better. Post a photo of yourself - better if you are wearing less, better if you are doing something vulnerable, intimate, better with more controversy. A 2018 study by Bell, Cassarly and Dunbar examines the extent to which young women aged 18-24 posted self-images that were sexually suggestive and its correlation with the amount of “likes” and online engagement one would receive. The results concluded that this type of positive engagement on sexually suggestive photos encouraged young women to post more of them. As young people have been subject to this reward system for longer and whilst our young minds are still developing, we have a heightened sensitivity to this type of social reward. The oversharing of one’s sexuality and body essentially transfers ownership, or feeling of entitlement to the consumer, who possesses the power of encouraging it, or negatively engaging.

It’s not only sexualization that receives this engagement - the new phenomenon of oversharing personal information on the internet, especially now that less people are choosing to stay anonymous on the internet than ever before, has become essentially a new norm. Simply opening the Tik Tok app will present you with people in their homes, talking to the camera about intimate, vulnerable, and often embarrassing stories in full detail. The fascination with this seemingly raw and unfiltered form of content, or sexualized content, taps into a different type of perversion in the human psyche; this type of content, because it is in a way so humiliatingly honest, welcomes the most brutal responses. Though many love informational oversharing, with netizens commonly expressing that it makes them feel better about themselves, or relieved in its relatability, a 2022 study concluded that informational oversharing stems from anxiety and alienation from society, where people desperately try to find intimacy, attention, and relatability in their vulnerability.  “Better to shock than to bore” - or relevance over irrelevance, has become the subconscious logic. Relevance is emphasized more than ever now, where even “normal” people have a fixation on “staying relevant”, much like a celebrity would traditionally have. The “digital footprint” is no longer about reservation or preservation, it is about sensation and impact. That’s the new age of fame, and it is stupidly easy, stupidly addictive. 

I feel like this newfound addiction to attention and instant gratification has shifted our collective values. We value privacy much less, in favor of attention. Social media platforms have taught us that we can receive a great amount of attention, validation, and discourse just by trading one’s privacy, the value of which has been artificially decreased by TNMCs just as the value of fame/exposure has been artificially increased. 

The strategy of self advertisement is now learned by young adolescents before, or even instead, of the strategies of self preservation and self protection. No real cyber literacy is taught - it is simply learned through experience. Older generations and very young children do not have the years of developmental experience infiltrated by the digital space to garner an awareness of the real-life-to-digital dissonance. The two are not as easily separable to someone naive to the difference of impact they have. The digital space gives one, in a way, the illusion of ultimate privacy, almost like it encourages the exploitation of your deepest vulnerabilities. You can tell your innermost secrets out loud, alone, in the comfort of your own room, and be heard and seen by millions. Accounts of very young children or older people often go viral because their personas online are often either the most vulnerable pure reflection of their reality, or they are presenting themselves in a very obviously curated way, where they naively act like how they think people on the internet should act. These types of accounts are almost always loved by the public in an exploitative or patronizing way, where the humor lies in the fact that they do not act on social media in the way that shows a sense of “getting it”, part of this dreadful post-ironic, terminally blasé attitude that has plagued those with experience-based, shame-based digital literacy. I propose that this attitude is formed out of self protection, or a need to present oneself as somebody who is impenetrable in vulnerability.

The internet is where anything is said mostly without real life consequences - and this is another large aspect of why the digital space is addictive. One gets addicted to the honesty, which coaxes you into delving into and producing opinions that one would not think of producing in real life. Because of this honesty, people often purposefully think of things to critique and reasons to attack. But this is also a product of the oppressive real-life social norms of courtesy and the overbearing expectation of niceness. The digital realm is, in a way, a solace where we can reject that. But that freedom of communication is simply on the other extreme end of the spectrum of healthy communication. The pendulum never stops in the healthy middle. I often like to think of all my social media comments as if they were being said to me, in person, by the people behind these profiles. They usually have photos of themselves publicly posted. They say vile things because I am not real. To them, and funny enough, oftentimes to myself as well, I am just a monkey that is dancing on the circuit board inside their phones, in their pocket, accessible at any time and able to be deleted at any time. I am so beautifully insignificant, so temporary, and yet it inexplicably gives me a sense of a permanent presence - a stable one, that will not fade. I am not immune to the fetishization of fame.

Schlosser identifies self presentation versus self disclosure; self presentation being a goal-oriented, strategic, and curated presentation of the self, with self disclosure being sharing factual information to another about oneself, regardless of its impact on one’s social reputation. She finds that the internet gives affordance for self disclosure due to the option of anonymity, but also discourages disclosure through unfiltered and open audience feedback. Through personal observation, I believe that the issue is more complex, and calls for a more nuanced discussion than whether social platforms promote or discourage presentation or disclosure - because this discussion suggests that there is no blurred line between the curated self and the objective self. Even in a non-social media context, it is hard to differentiate between genuine and performative behavior, since it is so hard for a subject to differentiate and admit to it. With how engrossed most people are within their digital selves, I will argue that it is all presentative - and that even content that feels like disclosure is self presentation. Is there really no motive in disclosure, as Schlosser puts it? 

Maybe disclosure is innocence - a naieveté that is ironically revered and unironically feared. With the internet being an automatic concrete archive of one’s opinions and expression and a machine that almost always guarantees a consequence, there is a saying that has emerged in recent years: “be careful of what you say on the internet”. This is referring to the fear of getting “canceled” for saying something problematic, or to the possibility of publicly embarrassing oneself whether in action, speech or aesthetics. When people have an understanding of this ruthless internet system, everything one says and does on the internet is purposefully curated, with extra care in the desired effect of the content. Even when content is created for the purpose of self-degradation or self embarrassment for humor, it is still careful to not be too vulnerable, or too weird. 

Referring back to my earlier observation of how content from young children or older people who do not necessarily “get” the internet often go viral, I think that maybe this form of simple, naive, innocent and vulnerable content is the only true disclosure that exists on the internet - unintentional disclosure. Unintentional disclosure also can come forth in times where one may try to present a lie to consumers, and are proven false. I believe that this is why these videos and posts go viral - we all truly do love disclosure. We love honesty and vulnerability, proof of humanness and unintentional subjects of endearment. I do believe that my current generation is striving for real human connection, closeness, and earnest communication in this epidemic of loneliness, spearheaded by the cave-like illusion of comfort that technology brings. We’re just scared - I know I am - because who wouldn’t be, as involuntary test subjects for mystifying technologies? 

Altman and Taylor proposed the social penetration theory (SPT), where surface-level relationships can develop into much deeper ones, where the seal of intimacy gets penetrated, in a sense, through the sharing of personal information - self disclosure. The goal within self disclosure is social penetration, which is more present than ever in the context of social media, except social media does not give the affordance of other strategies to gain social penetration - such as a slow, gradual relationship, face-to-face contact, and mutual acknowledgement. Since content creators do not have these other affordances, I will argue that they feel the urge to go to extremes with a performance of self-disclosure, for the main goal of social penetration, creating parasocial relationships. 

The parasocial relationship is the driving force of the use of influencers in modern day advertisement. Simulating intimate, honest relationships is what the content creator strives for, because that is what creates the most engagement and makes for the best product endorsements, encouraged and funded by TNMCs. It is what the consumer also loves to consume, because without the added aspects of social penetration such as a slow, gradual relationship, face-to-face contact, and mutual acknowledgement, the consumer is able to have a fundamentally not whole but idealized version of the curator, where the curator’s personality can seem much more wholesome, specified, honest and relatable than the personality of anyone that the consumer could know in real life. 

The influencer blurs the line between “normal” person and celebrity. Celebrities used to be elusive creatures, where a sighting of them outside of a movie or magazine was considered fascinating - because celebrities used to be untouchable. They were Gods rarely among men and worshiped for their unapproachability. The influencer in the digital age has fundamentally transformed the concept of fame into one based not necessarily on traditional talent, but on social penetration, controversy, and very importantly, attractiveness. Even traditional celebrities are now, in recent years, joining social media platforms to engage with fans in a parasocial way - to show that celebrities are just like us! They eat food, shit it out, and have bad hair in the morning! We have all found out how profitable it is to be human - but not too human - that now, even the Gods have come down to earth to cash in. 

Even if consumers are aware of these dynamics in their media consumption, they will still often choose to engage positively in this system. 54% of young Americans would even become an influencer themselves if given the chance, because of how it is advertised and idealized. The parasocial relationship has created a simulation of what a person should be, due to the lack of affordances for actual human connection whilst simulating a version of human connection that is advertised as better than a real human connection - but I will argue that in reality, digital social penetration, or maybe even the illusion of it, fails to satisfy real social needs, but instead of this dilemma spurring people to seek out in-person connections, the instant and effortless gratification of a digital parasocial relationship makes users simply seek out a surplus of it.

My image, or at least the image I carefully project, has been seen by millions. Millions now have a specific perception of me - two-dimensional and dictated by an altered fraction of my legitimate self, locked in time. But what is the legitimate self? The digital age has created a larger gray area in the concept of “self” and “individual”, widening the hole that capitalism has created, where one is not only a product, but a walking advertisement. We now express and define the self through sousveillance, and often do not know ourselves without it. The self has come to be defined as the density and reaction of digital perception. Sometimes people no longer know who they are after their popularity leaves them. Late stage capitalism, bass-boosted by new technologies, has made individuals to be solely defined by reaction - because reaction is what creates transaction, what creates currency, whether it be a fix of mental gratification or actual money. I cannot think of anyone who would possibly like to admit it, but there is certainly a present attitude of “if you don’t exist online, do you even exist? Why wouldn’t you want to be online?” Why wouldn’t you want to partake in this addictive algorithm, endless scrolling, information overload, stimulation overload, and the promise of attention? You are weird if you don’t.

 With the value of personal information going up, and the value of privacy going down, with people believing that they are so insignificant that their information does not matter - I will refrain from using that as a main talking point. The promotion and investment into the advancement of social technologies almost feels like state-funded propaganda, but I also will not get into that talking point in fears of sounding like a crazed conspiracy theorist. The main issue is how it has shifted our entire social attitude, and has deeply affected the social dynamics of communities and circles in real life. Human connection is strained by image and obsession. It is strained from a disembodiment of the self and the environment. We now have to control our social lives online (transcending location and social boundary) as well as our social lives in real life. Because of how personal one’s social page seems, and how unintimidating and easy it is to contact anyone, there is no secrecy left. And some of the world’s greatest stories revolve around the beauty of secrecy.

This conjecture is not just to say that everybody should return to analog, and that the digital age has not had its glorious moments - but social media tries to convince you that the main purpose of your patronage to their platform is connection, fun, and inspiration, while the purpose is really all capital. And because we, the 21st century, have become test subjects for these new, cruel, untested technologies, there was truly no restriction or boundary on who was deemed able to access essentially this panopticon of positive/negative reinforcement, and content from every dark crevice of the world. This promotion of self exploitation has wedged its way into being a priority for many. Friends become friends and lovers become lovers based on aesthetics, image, and attraction. The curation of a profile is just as important as the curation of the real self. The curation of a profile becomes the self. The line between who one is online and in real life is becoming more and more blurred; people try to mold themselves to act in the way they are able to online. Online, one is free to lust and lie and hate and obsess and love. Online, one can be confident, sexy, loud, carefully vulnerable, relentlessly controversial, smart, beautiful, mysterious, careless, carefree, detached, ethereal and unreal. But maybe humans were not meant to be all of those things, all at once.

Author’s note: If you read to the end of this, thank you, and if you’d like access to the bibliography please PM me! I would have liked to make this longer - there’s so many things I could have gone on and on about. I’d also love to hear any comments or questions or general feedback.

[anthropologistfromentropy]

Just reported an ad on Tumblr that was pretending to be a Finnish news website (Aamulehti). I know most of us don't click ads here anyway, but some may not notice something is an ad.

And be wary of believing all headlines you see, could be fake news. At least this one was pretty harmless, just stupid drama of a Finnish celebrity. But I'm worried people from other countries, especially USA, could be getting actual political propaganda. With the election year, and Ukraine and Palestine crises and everything.

[cyberniix]

I do not trust anyone who hates any of the "main" (Dipper, Mabel, Stan, Ford) (Honorary mention: Fiddleford) GF character's i'm ngl

The GF fandom's constant demonization of complicated characters for daring to make (very human) mistakes is insane. They would much rather defend the morally worst character in the show (Bill) than accept that sometimes teenagers make mistakes. (A good example is everyone shifting the blame for weirdmageddon onto Mabel, or Dipper wanting to stay in Gravity Falls)

I could go on and on about this for HOURS about specific characters, especially Ford & Fiddleford, but I'll save that rant for another day when it isn't 7am 😒

[universitypenguin]

I just read a fantastic article about how Tiffany Haddish handled cyber bullying. This is the line that really jumped out at me in the piece:

[Haddish] hired a digital forensics analyst when death threats started coming her way. The analyst’s research showed that 75% of these threats were “created by robots in Malaysia and Iran.”

This is something that I need to keep in mind more when I’m on social media. Because how much of what we’re seeing is really people’s opinions? How much is rage bait for profit? What amount stems from political manipulation and foreign influence?

[childrenofthedigitalage]

Protecting Children Online: Lessons from the Tragic Alexander McCartney Case

One of the more distressing incidents making headlines in Ireland and Northern Ireland yesterday, was that of the convicted paedophile Alexander McCartney.  A Newry resident, he is now facing what could be considered a lenient sentencing for his involvement in the tragic death of a 12-year-old girl. Also the subsequent death of her father who took his own life following the online sexual…

[cyber-soul-smartz]

Mastering Technological Overload Wilderness: Skills & Strategies

Navigating the wilderness of technological overload often leaves me feeling overwhelmed and disconnected - a constant struggle to find balance & peace amidst the digital chaos. Let's journey together towards digital well-being. #DigitalDetox #Mindfulness

[cybersixed]

Me: yeah I think it’s ok and perhaps even good to have media that challenges our morals to some degree, exploration of dark themes in media is not inherently bad

Me the moment a piece of media is challenging my personal morals and sense of righteousness:

[kids-worldfun]

How to Teach Kids the Dos and Don'ts of Social Media Posting

Teaching children the appropriate and inappropriate ways to post on social media cannot be overstated. Instilling healthy internet behaviors in children at a young age enables them to navigate the digital environment responsibly. The empowerment of children with these abilities is vital for their online well-being. In this parenting blog, we will discuss practical methods that may be used to…

[townpostin]

Singhbhum Chamber to Host Seminar on Cyber Fraud and Banking Services

ICICI Bank experts to address cybercrime concerns and highlight financial products for businesses Event aims to educate local entrepreneurs on fraud prevention and available credit facilities. JAMSHEDPUR – The Singhbhum Chamber of Commerce and Industry is organizing a seminar on cyber fraud prevention and banking services for businesses on June 25 at 7:00 PM. ICICI Bank experts will provide…

[jcmarchi]

Nicholas Brackney, Dell: How we leverage a four-pillar AI strategy

New Post has been published on https://thedigitalinsider.com/nicholas-brackney-dell-how-we-leverage-a-four-pillar-ai-strategy/

Nicholas Brackney, Dell: How we leverage a four-pillar AI strategy

.pp-multiple-authors-boxes-wrapper display:none; img width:100%;

Dell is deeply embedded in the AI landscape, leveraging a comprehensive four-pillar strategy to integrate the technology across its products and services.

Nicholas Brackney, Senior Consultant in Product Marketing at Dell, discussed the company’s AI initiatives ahead of AI & Big Data Expo North America.

Dell’s AI strategy is structured around four core principles: AI-In, AI-On, AI-For, and AI-With:

“Embedding AI capabilities in our offerings and services drives speed, intelligence, and automation,” Brackney explained. This ensures that AI is a fundamental component of Dell’s offerings.

The company also enables customers to run powerful AI workloads on its comprehensive portfolio of solutions, from desktops to data centres, across clouds, and at the edge.

AI innovation and tooling are applied for Dell’s business to enhance operations and share best practices with customers.

Finally, Dell collaborates with strategic partners within an open AI ecosystem to simplify and enhance the AI experience.

Dell is well-positioned to help customers navigate AI workloads, emphasising choice and adaptability through the various evolutions of emerging technology. Brackney highlighted Dell’s commitment to serving customers from the early stages of AI adoption to achieving AI at scale.

“We’ve always believed in providing choice and have been doing it through the various evolutions of emerging technology, including AI, and understanding the challenges that come with them,” explained Brackney. “We fully leverage our unique operating model to serve customers in the early innings of AI to a future of AI at scale.”

Looking to the future, Dell is particularly excited about the potential of AI PCs.

“We know organisations and their knowledge workers are excited about AI, and they want to fit it into all their workflows,” Brackney said. Dell is focused on integrating AI into software and ensuring it runs efficiently on the right systems, enhancing end-to-end customer journeys in AI.

Ethical concerns in AI deployment are also a priority for Dell. Addressing issues such as deepfakes, transparency, and bias, Brackney emphasised the importance of a shared, secure, and sustainable approach to AI development.

“We believe in a shared, secure, and sustainable approach. By getting the foundations right at their core, we can eliminate some of the greatest risks associated with AI and work to ensure it acts as a force for good,” explains Brackney.

User data privacy in AI-driven products is another critical focus area. Brackney outlined Dell’s strategy of integrating AI with existing security investments without introducing new risks. Dell offers a suite of secure products, comprehensive data protection, advanced cybersecurity features, and global support services to safeguard user data.

On the topic of job displacement due to AI, Brackney underscored that Dell views AI as augmenting human potential rather than replacing it.

“The roles may change but the human element will always be key,” Brackney stated. “At Dell, we encourage our team members to understand, explore, and, where appropriate, use tools based on AI to learn, evolve, and enhance the overall work experience.”

Looking ahead, Brackney envisions a transformative role for AI within Dell and the tech industry. “We see customers in every industry wanting to become leaders in AI because it is critical to their organisation’s innovation, growth, and productivity,” he noted.

Dell aims to support this evolution by providing the necessary architectures, frameworks, and services to assist its customers on this transformative journey.

Dell is a key sponsor of this year’s AI & Big Data Expo. Check out Dell’s keynote presentation ‘From Data Novice to Data Champion – Cultivating Data Literacy Across the Organization’ and swing by Dell’s booth at stand #66 to hear about AI from the company’s experts.

The comprehensive event is co-located with other leading events including Intelligent Automation Conference, BlockX, Digital Transformation Week, and Cyber Security & Cloud Expo. Explore other upcoming enterprise technology events and webinars powered by TechForge here.

Tags: ai, ai & big data expo, ai and big data expo, artificial intelligence, dell, enterprise, ethics

[gemsartsjewellery]

Safer Internet Day is an annual event celebrated globally to promote the safe and responsible use of the internet and digital technologies against cyberbullying, online fraud, and privacy issues, while promoting digital literacy and responsible behavior online.

[parkersgnome]

⭐️Mima Rants⭐️

I remember coming across slideshow on tik tok this about a year ago, and even *I* (as someone who used to be grossed out by proshipping) thought was ridiculous…

This is the title of the slideshow.

Just a heads up guys, just like our favorite ships, None of these stories are real.

And if they were based on actual events, wouldn’t it make more sense to make a video about that instead of making up shit that never happened?

But, Let’s go through each of these as if they were real stories, shall we?

First one

“Caleb uses the internet to deal with his trauma”, Alright, I’m gonna stop you right there.

Isn’t “Staying off the internet is beneficial for your mental health” something we learned in, idk, fucking grade school? Cyber safety PSAs in middle school? Something that dozens of people have screeched from the top of their lungs since social media was invented?

Who the heck told him that being on the internet was going to help with his trauma and improve his mental health???

His feelings are valid, I get that. He has every right to be disturbed by Sage’s writings and fantasies. However, it seems that Sage isn't encouraging these actions in real life and keeps them strictly within fiction. As long as it’s in text or art, Sage has every right to express his fantasies.

Anyways, Caleb should seek a better therapist who can teach him better coping mechanisms like going out for walks, yoga, baking, or some other fourth thing instead of browsing social media where there’s a good chance he can run into something that makes him uncomfortable.

Next one…

“Jackie is 10-”

Yeah no no no no no no.. no… NO.

10-years-old. That’s, like, what? 4th grade? Shouldn’t Jackie be watching cartoons, playing with toys, or better yet, playing outside? Why did her parents give her internet access? Why aren’t they monitoring what their elementary schooled daughter is watching online?

If Charlie was going out of her way to promote this to minors then I would say she’s in the wrong, but this story never implies whether her content was specifically targeted to and/or letting minors come on to her account.

I've never seen proshippers create accounts specifically targeting children. If Charlie makes it clear her content isn't for kids, then it's not her fault if some random little girl she doesn’t know ends up consuming it.

If Jackie started to think this was normal, then it is her parent’s fault for neglecting her online safety and allowing her to access adult-targeted content at an age when media literacy is at an all time low.

The last one

“dEGenErates LiKE hiM 🤓” 💀💀

Once again, unless you can present to me a REAL LIFE incest/pedophilia case where proshipping was involved, this is not a valid argument that fiction affects reality.

Alas, we're treating these stories as if they were real. If Trey feels compelled to SA his sister after seeing writings or drawings of problematic ships, this suggests he’s likely an untreated mentally ill individual, especially since he can't differentiate fiction from reality.

What? If Trey played GTA V and started shooting and robbing a bank because he wanted to be like Trevor Phillips, should we consider banning violent video games?

As proshippers, we do not endorse real-life criminals and genuinely terrible people. The essence of proshipping is that all negative or degenerate actions should be confined to fiction. Understand?

End of discussion.

Anyway, as ridiculous as that slideshow was, please refrain from harassing or bothering the artist who made it. They have the same freedom of speech we do, and stooping to harassment and bullying wouldn't make us any better than antis who promote such behavior.

[mandatory-blog-stop-asking]

It's funny how most every cyberpunk story or setting thought that due to technology taking over people's lives and humanity, computer literacy would become commonplace enough that the very term would disappear. Everyone in Night City or whatever is super into hacking or can at least give you the difference between hardware, software, antivirus, spam, etc. To not know the basic gists or cybernetics and cyber security is paramount to not knowing how to count or how to read.

In reality we're about to enter an age where knowing how to create a folder or a zip file is back to being ancient lore inscribed in tablets that only the 30 year old who works at your IT office knows how to do. Phones and the growing marketability of easy-access no-customization technology means kids just don't use computers anymore. And it's crazy how fast it happened.

When I was in kindergarten we still had "computer class" once a week, and it was objectively useless for everyone in my class. Regardless of our age or interests, all of us had casual PC time either at home or in cyber cafes, all of us knew how to do things the teachers many times struggled with. The moment typing machine class became keyboard typing class, computers were already dominating most of our time. I learned how to navigate a computer the same way I learned English; by myself, because it was vital for my own interests.

And between highly streamlined video games, single umbrella closed OSs and everything being a fucking app, a 14 year old nowadays is lucky if they know what quotation marks do to your Google results. It's genuinely harrowing how the future is tech-dependent, yet we're becoming completely tech-illiterate.

The worst part is that it's completely on purpose by the tech industry. Much like not being able to fix your own products when they break, if you simply don't know what your phone or your computer can *do*, it's much easier to sell you a borderline identical one a little earlier than you'd actually need it. Phone updates are already pretty much semantic; you can't even see the difference between new models and old ones anymore, unless the visual difference is the point. And it all just gets more and more expensive for less and less bang for your buck.

We never expected the cyberpunk dystopia to be dull, and to rely on making us dumb. Crazy how well it worked.

[study-diaries]

Heyy so I need to give a speech for my English class but I can’t come up with any topics do you have any suggestions? (The topic has to be about a problem and interesting to my classmates) 🩷

Hello! :)

I hope this helps! <3

Education:

How education can solve generational poverty?

How the current education system is not flexible enough for people with disability (physical and mental) including LDs and mental illnesses?

Why the current education system is not suitable for the modern day youth?

Even though the literacy rate has gone up in the last 30 years, lack of jobs and unemployment are still high and situations like under employment is on the rise.

Health:

The rise in obesity and it's connection with lifestyle diseases.

The interrelationship better physical and mental health and how it is affecting work/study areas in our lives.

Sleep deprivation among students/employees gone up affecting their health and overall development.

Environment:

Overfishing

Ozone layer depletion

Deforestation

Technology:

How modern technology is affecting unemployment negatively.

A pandemic of adversity due to social media

Cyberbullying/cyber stalking/harassment

Social:

Migration (rural to urban -> urban congestion)

Gender inequality

Feminism

Overpopulation

Miscellaneous:

Beauty pageants objectifying women

Addictions (video game/ social media/ alcohol etc)

Traffic jams

Choosing the right career path for the modern job market

These are all i could think of. Hope you do well on your speech! :)

[science-fiction-is-real]

A lot of Tumblr brain rot and insanity that we see, the poor media literacy, over zealous morality policing, the madness where we label someone a genocide apologist because they watch Steven Universe, all of this would go away if you all learned how to think DIALECTICALLY.

Dialectics is a philosophical framework that is a keystone to socialist political analysis but also necessary for, like, daily life. It is based on the facts that the world is:

1) in a constant state of change and evolution.

2) is made up of multiple moving parts that are in conflict and contradiction with one another.

This means that multiple things can be true at the same time. Things can be both good and bad at the same time. Things that are progressive in one time period can be regressive or reactionary later on.

In other words, dialectics acknowledges that the world is COMPLICATED which you think would be common sense but apparently is not.

So how would this solve Tumblr brain rot.

Take a movie that is frequently labeled as problematic. We'll use James Cameron's Avatar for our example. Tumblr brain rot tends to jump to extremes and you may see Tumblr users say things like: "every person who enjoyed that movie or rights fan fic about it must hate indigenous people, due to the fact that the movie has anti-indigenous stereotypes and tropes contained within it."

Let it be known that I am NOT defending James Cameron's Avatar, saying that it's a good movie, or that James Cameron deserves your money. However it is a big jump to go from "this movie has problematic elements" to "everyone who enjoyed the movie is an irredeemable racist who deserves to be cyber bullied."

Because multiple things can be true at the same time.

Avatar (blue ppl version) relies on anti-indigenous racist tropes and a white-savior story line. But also

1) the movie unapologetically celebrates anti-colonial resistance and the struggle for indigenous self determination. And people may like the movie for that reason.

2) people may like the movie for it's positive aspects that are not racist such as detailed world building or good visuals.

3) due to being exposed to a racist public school system and very large amounts of racist propaganda from the ruling class, the majority of working class Americans, through no fault of their own, fail to recognize racism in the media when they see it. It's our job on the left to educate them and we haven't always been good at that.

4) it's a dumb fucking movie and the fact that you care what type of movies people like shows that you are spending too much time consuming media instead of going outside and engaging in real activism. Hating on Avatar isn't going to do a damn thing to win the right of democratic national self determination for indigenous people.

To think dialectically is to recognize all of these things at the same time.

While I don't recall any actual examples of cyber bullying over Avatar (blue ppl), I'm using it as an example.

But I hope how you can see how dialectical thinking can lead you away from unproductive behavior (cyber bullying people who like bad movies) to useful behavior (educating people on indigenous issues, participation in real life indigenous - rights activism). And that is how you escape Tumblr brain rot.