TechSpot

Survey: The Internet has had a negative impact on morality, good for education and relationships

By Shawn Knight
Mar 19, 2015
Post New Reply
  1. emerging markets internet blamed negative impact morality internet web project loon internet.org morals

    The Internet is a lot of things to a lot of people and is generally considered by those in developed nations that actively use it to be an integral and positive aspect of life. But what about those who are just now coming online? The landscape of the Internet looks vastly different today than it did many years ago when most of us first hit the web. Do today’s newcomers see it in a positive light? 

    A new study from Pew Research polled residents in 32 emerging and developing nations about the influence that the Internet is having on their society. Of those questioned, 42 percent said the net has had a bad influence on morality while 30 percent provided the same answer as it relates to politics.

    emerging markets internet blamed negative impact morality internet web project loon internet.org morals

    Of all the individual countries polled, none said the Internet has had a positive influence on morality.

    The Internet isn’t totally evil, however, as an overwhelming 64 percent of respondents believe it has had a good influence on education. Similarly, 53 percent said it has influenced personal relationships in a positive matter while 52 percent said the same about the impact on the economy.

    emerging markets internet blamed negative impact morality internet web project loon internet.org morals

    Unsurprisingly, survey takers’ answers were heavily influenced on whether or not they actually use the Internet. For example, 65 percent of Internet users in a survey of 31 emerging and developing nations (Pakistan was not included due to insufficient sample size) believe the Internet has had a positive influence on personal relationships. Among non-Internet users, that figure is 21 percent lower at just 44 percent.

    Whether they like it or not, the Internet will be arriving in many unconnected regions in the years to come thanks to efforts like Google’s Project Loon and Facebook’s Internet.org initiative.

    Permalink to story.

     
  2. Uncle Al

    Uncle Al TS Evangelist Posts: 1,663   +774

    Certainly no surprises in those results. The anonymity the web presents allows people do be their worst without a lot of fear of being caught, but if somebody ever creates the kinds of tools that are easily used and accessible to everyone, we might see people behave better, especially if they can track down the offenders and confront them. Many safety factors would be needed, but it might slow down so much of the internet stalking and make the "haters" a lot more publicly known to everyone.
     
    cliffordcooley likes this.
  3. If law enforcement suddenly came up with some easy way to break anonymity in the tor network, I would be happy. With all the messed up **** in the dark web, a place where the sickest people of in humanity FESTER, breaking it could do so much for the victims. Especially the children forced into child porn.

    The sad part is that everybody who downvoted morality in these surveys probably did it before they even knew what was really out there.
     
  4. lipe123

    lipe123 TS Evangelist Posts: 658   +174

    Anything that relies on "hey how do you feel about X" is total BS data.

    You want to talk morality, how about we go back 2000 years?
    Kama sutra anyone?
    Giant Indian Sex temples with intricate carvings of some of the most explicit stuff you've ever seen?
    It was perfectly normal for richer romans to have a boy slave to have sex with.
    Rape wasn't even a word it was just a normal thing.

    Cheating, blackmailing, lying, etc etc has been human nature since the beginning of time. How dare anyone say that the Internet is making that worse or better. Sure the itnernet could use some safeguards and better tracking to convict wrong doing but its just an outlet for the nasty thats already there, its not creating anything new.
     
    Seraphim401 likes this.
  5. davislane1

    davislane1 TS Evangelist Posts: 3,543   +2,339

    Exactly.

    This is why I believe security cameras should be installed in homes with required access to law enforcement. Once the Internet loses anonymity, these creeps will go right back to doing these things completely under the radar. The naysayers will doubtless complain about the need for privacy, but if you aren't doing anything illegal you don't need that anyways. The fewer places pervs can hide, the better.

    /s
     
    Seraphim401 likes this.
  6. Seraphim401

    Seraphim401 TS Enthusiast Posts: 58   +12

    We must remember that the internet is our collective consciousness projected.
    When we change so will the net.
     
  7. davislane1

    davislane1 TS Evangelist Posts: 3,543   +2,339

    As for the poll...

    The Internet has not caused a decline in morality. It has merely demonstrated the moral deprevaty of the cultures that utilize it. Suggesting otherwise would be like blaming the invention of language for verbal abuse.

    I would also content that the Internet hasn't done a damn thing where politics are concerned, other than eat into the revenue streams of traditional outlets. 50 years ago the vast majority of people towed the party line. Today, the vast majority of people on the Internet tow the party line. (Unless you're a libertarian, in which case, you're still "that guy".)

    The impact on education, on the other hand, seems to be accurate. There has never been a time with greater access to knowledge and skills than the Internet Age.
     
  8. cliffordcooley

    cliffordcooley TS Guardian Fighter Posts: 8,551   +2,894

    Outside yes inside no, I must disagree. There are locks on the doors for a reason. Locks keep people that are not invited out (that is until the locks are broken). Locks are a physical layer to keep even law enforcement out, if they do not have a search order. With camera's mounted in the home there is no physical layer of separation. As long as I have the right to keep anyone out that does not have a search order, I cannot agree to allowing camera access at all.
     
  9. They left out one thing: the Internet spreads (the likes of) Kim Kardashian's cr4p every single day on 'so called' news sites. What a complete failure of technology (use). Only yesterday I saw that 'doctors are advising Kim to stop having sex 14 times a day' and I had to go and vomit. I only wish I could have landed it on her face.
     
  10. davislane1

    davislane1 TS Evangelist Posts: 3,543   +2,339

    Actually, I was attempting to stir the ire of the Guests with that comment. I didn't find the Guest's initial comment to be particularly well thought out, and so sarcastically drew the same conclusion albeit in a different area of privacy.
     
    cliffordcooley likes this.
  11. Uncle Al

    Uncle Al TS Evangelist Posts: 1,663   +774

    Sadly, security camera's, no matter where they are posted, have never "stopped" a crime, they have only made it easier to catch and prosecute those that commit the crime. There is a certain advantage of having grown up prior to the technology revolution in that we have a perspective from both sides. For all the advantages we had before the internet, there are an equal number due to the internet.

    Technology certainly makes things easier, faster, more available but to make a claim of "better" very much depends upon the individual perspective. Credit cards make things easier up until you suffer a major financial loss due to one, then "better" takes on a whole new perspective.

    While the study is valid, it would have been far better had they broken it down into age groups, ethnic groups and perhaps by profession. I am certain there are other better divisions but to lump them into one large group can certainly be misleading.
     
  12. cliffordcooley

    cliffordcooley TS Guardian Fighter Posts: 8,551   +2,894

    Yeah and to a degree, camera's have only added a layer to the sport (I'll call it sport for lack of a better term) of committing a crime without getting caught.
     
  13. davislane1

    davislane1 TS Evangelist Posts: 3,543   +2,339

    Crime is a skill. This is why most crooks are degreed professionals.
     
  14. "Exactly.

    This is why I believe security cameras should be installed in homes with required access to law enforcement. Once the Internet loses anonymity, these creeps will go right back to doing these things completely under the radar. The naysayers will doubtless complain about the need for privacy, but if you aren't doing anything illegal you don't need that anyways. The fewer places pervs can hide, the better."

    Lol at the sarcastic comment, but if you really thought it my comment wasn't well thought out you would have addressed how exponentially easier it is to partake in illegal activities, specifically child porn, on the internet (largely thanks to the Tor network!).

    To be make my point more simple and direct, the internet makes it far easier to DISTRIBUTE and FIND the child porn than trying to ask a neighbor.
     
  15. Typo: the tor network* makes it far easier
     
  16. amstech

    amstech TechSpot Enthusiast Posts: 1,455   +606

    This is 3rd grade logic that is nothing short of being completely asinine. It's so invasive, rude and without premise it displays your true lack of grip on reality.
     
  17. davislane1

    davislane1 TS Evangelist Posts: 3,543   +2,339

    So, basically, I achieved what I set out to do in spades. What's your point?

    I've committed no such superficial examination. In fact, that is exactly the claim I indirectly made against you with my ridiculous response. I'm well aware that the existence of anonymity services like Tor makes distribution and discovery easier. This is what also makes that software highly valuable when it comes to shutting down the CP rings that operate across the globe.

    Anonymity providers do not provide absolute security. But perverted criminals tend to think otherwise, hence their presence on Tor, Freenet, and I2P. They act brazenly and in large number on these networks because they feel safe. This removes them from the deep underground and puts them on the surface of the deep web, en mass (relatively speaking), attracting the attention of the relevant law enforcement agencies. Those agencies are then afforded the opportunity to map the distribution networks and, once someone slips up, take both the producers and consumers down. It is no coincidence that the growth in Tor's publicity has coincided with some of the biggest CP busts of recent memory.

    It is also no coincidence that Tor has become less popular as criminal operators like Silkroad and the now-outted CP outlets have been exposed via security holes in Tor (I can't speak to Freenet as no media has covered it to my knowledge). Instead, criminal actors have been moving to the far more secure and far more off-the-radar I2P network, where you need to be given a destination key by an existing user/database to access anything. The worst offenders have thus gone from being conspicuous to near invisible, drastically decreasing their footprint and thus law enforcement's ability to find and terminate their operations.

    Decisively cracking the Tor network is thus a pyrrhic victory. You stop the immediate and most sloppy actors in one massive swoop while driving the savviest producers and their networks into even more secure networks. Effectively, you wind up locking up all the dumb freaks (consumers) while making the actual abusers (producers) and their victims harder to unearth. What's more, the conspicuous consumers that don't get stuffed into the back of LEO vans start dumping Tor in favor of more secure networks, making it harder to bust them in the long-run as well.

    Furthermore, there is a boatload of collateral that goes along with this false achievement. First, you remove anonymity from the web by definition. I suppose this is fine if you don't believe Internet users have a right to anonymity. Second, and more importantly, you establish a precedent of the ends justifying the means, which inevitably bleeds into other aspects of law enforcement where privacy is concerned (anyone who would dispute this should review the case for domestic surveillance of suspected terrorists and where that has subsequently led).

    To simplify everything with an analogy, you're laser focused on capturing rooks when the point of the game is to grab the king. Cracking Tor is a nice tactical move that is strategically shortsighted.

    On a side note, this is why I lament the FBI et. al. bragging to the media about busting these people. You want criminals to feel safe when they are in immanent danger, not vigilant.
     
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2015
  18. "you stop the immediate and most sloppy actors in one massive swoop while driving the savviest producers and their networks into even more secure networks. Effectively, you wind up locking up all the dumb freaks (consumers) while making the actual abusers (producers) and their victims harder to unearth."

    I think a well-timed swoop could do a little more than that. But if Tor were really a place to trap these sickos MORE than perpetuate them, those savvy producers would not be there in the first place.

    But the great thing about locking out the dummies is that not-so-bright people make up most of our species' population (whether they be sick or not).

    If the savviest of producers do hide in more secure networks, it's already bad for business.

    Literally just because they would be jumping ship and going off the EASY TO FIND AND USE, ALL IN ONE PLACE, tor network, that alone would make them harder to find ESPECIALLY FOR THE CP DUMMIES right off the bat. Seeing as they do make up most of those cp users, cp business overall falls drastically, and you kill MOST of the business from its roots. Money and traffic (pretty much through tor....) Sure cp would still exist, but the main hub, the "mainstream" known way to get to the cp, would be divided and shattered.

    They would go to other networks, but it's unlikely tor would be replaced as effectively as it is now for all cp users alike... particularly for the majority, that is the dummies...

    Cp is as successful as it is because it is easy to find mostly..... no nearly entirely thanks to Tor. New CP simply will not be nearly as successful and common on the internet if Tor could no longer be relatively trusted by cp consumers. Tor carries cp on its back on such a scale no one network will probably ever do again.
     
  19. @davislane1
    Lol to all the people arguing with your original post.
    It was clearly sarcasm and even if they didn't initially see the sarcasm in the post you even included an "/s" to signify you were being entirely sarcastic.
     
  20. cliffordcooley

    cliffordcooley TS Guardian Fighter Posts: 8,551   +2,894

    That's the problem with shorthand. Not everyone know what it represents and there could be many different meanings. I'm happy for you! You make me so proud that you knew what "/s" stood for.
     

Similar Topics

Add New Comment

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...