'Father of the Internet' Vint Cerf warns we could be heading towards a digital Dark Age

[war59312]

By whom? Jesus? Only a global cataclysm is capable of this, one where no humans are likely to survive either

And even if you did, you will always have more important things to worry about like cats.

Edit: Wow I must have been wasted when I posted that. lol

 

[captaincranky]

Considering that the Islamic State is burning people alive and cutting off their heads, I would say this person's use of the term "Dark Age" to describe having to do things without the Internet is a bit misguided.

Indeed, sitting at one's computer, surfing the internet, watching TV, playing music, and playing video games, would have earned one the title of, 'the mystical sorcerer of the ivory tower", if one was doing it during the true, 'dark ages'.

By whom? Jesus? Only a global cataclysm is capable of this, one where no humans are likely to survive either

And even if you did, you will way more important things to worry about then cats. [/QUOTE]

Who in God's name are you quoting?

Should we no longer have cats in some bleak and distant future, then most likely by then , c0ckroaches will be keeping us for pets...

 

[Sancticide]

Name something that doesn't rely on electricity.
I love the scene in the new Apes movie when they finally restore power from this old waterplant; for a moment the guys tablet has charge, and its the first time he's seen pictures of his family in years then he bursts in to tears.

Uhh, in that movie, most of the human population have been killed by a virus and sentient apes are taking over the planet. If something on that scale has occurred, making it that difficult to generate electricity, we're already pretty hosed. I kinda doubt paper books and photos would survive much better once scavengers and war are through with them. And if humanity rebounded in a decade or so, it may STILL be possible to retrieve some of our lost history (which is Cerf's entire point) once we turn the power back on.

 

[Sancticide]

Correction: "sentient" should be "super-intelligent"

 

[amstech]

Uh I kinda doubt paper books and photos would survive much better once scavengers and war are through with them. .

This makes sense if you were born yesterday.

 

[captaincranky]

Uhh, in that movie, most of the human population have been killed by a virus and sentient apes are taking over the planet. If something on that scale has occurred, making it that difficult to generate electricity, we're already pretty hosed. I kinda doubt paper books and photos would survive much better once scavengers and war are through with them. And if humanity rebounded in a decade or so, it may STILL be possible to retrieve some of our lost history (which is Cerf's entire point) once we turn the power back on.

Actually, papyrus documents have survived since ancient Egypt.

BTW, I've seen "Fahrenheit 451", and, "Mad Max" along with, "The Andromeda Strain", and many others. I just don't let that color everything I write or believe.

If you want to experience a more plausible future, much of which has already been realized, I suggest taking on Aldous Huxley's, "Brave New World". It's in the public domain now, and can be downloaded for free. Or, you could actually go out and by the book.

 

[Sancticide]

Actually, papyrus documents have survived since ancient Egypt.

BTW, I've seen "Fahrenheit 451", and, "Mad Max" along with, "The Andromeda Strain", and many others. I just don't let that color everything I write or believe.

I was only responding to that specific example of a future where we can't access digital media because for some reason all civilizations have been reduced to a state where we have no electricity. My point was that in that case, paper and digital are probably equal in terms of survivability, at least in the long term.

 

[captaincranky]

I was only responding to that specific example of a future where we can't access digital media because for some reason all civilizations have been reduced to a state where we have no electricity. My point was that in that case, paper and digital are probably equal in terms of survivability, at least in the long term.

You should still read, (or reread), "Brave New World". You might get a laugh out of it. Plus, you might even decide, "doomsday isn't so bad after all.".

 

[war59312]

Indeed, sitting at one's computer, surfing the internet, watching TV, playing music, and playing video games, would have earned one the title of, 'the mystical sorcerer of the ivory tower", if one was doing it during the true, 'dark ages'.

And even if you did, you will way more important things to worry about then cats.

Who in God's name are you quoting?

EDIT: THERE SHOULD BE A QUOTE BLOCK STARTING HERE

Should we no longer have cats in some bleak and distant future, then most likely by then , c0ckroaches will be keeping us for pets...[/QUOTE]
Yea wow. I must have been totally wasted.. I forgot all about this post even. There, edited. haha As if its any better.

Edit: ok quoting is broken big time. It's not adding the second quote info...

 

[captaincranky]

Who in God's name are you quoting?

I still can't figure that out.

EDIT: THERE SHOULD BE A QUOTE BLOCK STARTING HERE

You have to copy and paste the entire attribution box.

Should we no longer have cats in some bleak and distant future, then most likely by then , c0ckroaches will be keeping us for pets...

I have two cats, now

Yea wow. I must have been totally wasted.. I forgot all about this post even. There, edited. haha As if its any better.

It wasn't even close to better . You have to type in "[/quote]" to close it. (But without the quotation marks).

Edit: ok quoting is broken big time. It's not adding the second quote info...

No quoting is not broken, it's you. Sorry.

So, to split a quote, you copy and paste the original attribution box ahead of the segment you've detached. (Make sure you get ALL of it) then type the quote box as I showed above, after the quoted passage.. You will probably be able to examine this post to see how it works.

If not, here's what each section should look like: [QUOTE="war59312, post: 1458854, member: 280214" Blah, blah, et al. THEN: [/quote

Please note: I deleted the trailing brackets ( ] ] ) to show you the form without actually quoting

 

[war59312]

I still can't figure that out.

You have to copy and paste the entire attribution box.

I have two cats, now
It wasn't even close to better . You have to type in "

" to close it. (But without the quotation marks).



No quoting is not broken, it's you. Sorry.

So, to split a quote, you copy and paste the original attribution box ahead of the segment you've detached. (Make sure you get ALL of it) then type the quote box as I showed above, after the quoted passage.. You will probably be able to examine this post to see how it works.

If not, here's what each section should look like: [QUOTE="war59312, post: 1458854, member: 280214" Blah, blah, et al. THEN: [/quote

Please note: I deleted the trailing brackets ( ] ] ) to show you the form without actually quoting[/QUOTE]

My reply starts here:

All I did was click the reply button. It should quote correctly. I should not have to edit anything.

Thanks, I do understand oh how to quote correctly. It's simply not working correctly.

I expect that when I click on the reply button that all the quoting is done correctly and automatically.

Edit: See how your not even quoted correctly. First part is but not the rest. It's getting very confused.

oh well im over it

 

[mailpup]

Edit: See how your not even quoted correctly. First part is but not the rest. It's getting very confused.

I don't think you understand how the quote codes work. The quoted reply was messed up because it contained a quote code within the text. The code was placed there by captaincranky when he was trying to explain how quotes work. When you quoted him, the forum software was only rendering the reply according to the codes it had to follow.

BTW, it isn't necessary to quote the post if your reply follows directly after it unless you are replying to a specific portion of it. In that case you may quote that portion.

 

[captaincranky]

I expect that when I click on the reply button that all the quoting is done correctly and automatically.

Edit: See how your not even quoted correctly. First part is but not the rest. It's getting very confused.

oh well im over it

You need to work past the idea that the world is wrong, and you're right.

The process you're outlining, the one where you 'demand' that it should know what you want and do it, won't work on this software, or any other forum software I've been exposed to.

You'll need to get over yourself. It would seem that the software isn't about to get over you.

 

[war59312]

I don't think you understand how the quote codes work. The quoted reply was messed up because it contained a quote code within the text. The code was placed there by captaincranky when he was trying to explain how quotes work. When you quoted him, the forum software was only rendering the reply according to the codes it had to follow.

BTW, it isn't necessary to quote the post if your reply follows directly after it unless you are replying to a specific portion of it. In that case you may quote that portion.

Right, sorry I meant to say my original post. The one I had originally quoted back on Feb 17, 2015. I fixed it manually.

All I had done was clicked the reply button. That's it. It showed it in preview window the correct quotes and all. But when I then clicked the blue "post reply" button it screwed the quoting all up.

Lets see if this quote gets mixed up. And yes the only reason I was quoting was to see if quoting was working or not. Otherwise, indeed, that drives me crazy when people just keep quoting the post right before it. I only quote when the reply gets to the next page or quoting some of pages back.

Edit: OK so quoting appears to work when quoting one "quote". That is, quoting of just one user. I expected this to work.

 

[war59312]

You need to work past the idea that the world is wrong, and you're right. ... You'll need to get over yourself. It would seem that the software isn't about to get over you.

OK, sounds like you need to let off some steam. It's really not that big of a deal.

...The process you're outlining, the one where you 'demand' that it should know what you want and do it, won't work on this software, or any other forum software I've been exposed to....

I never demanded anything. "Expected" does not mean "demand". "Expected" simply means "likely to happen". That's it.

Anyways, seems quoting does work some of the time. I really don't care now. Your poor attitude has worn thin on me. This will be my last post on this subject. I'm moving on. Back to work I go in a moment.

When I use the word "expect", it's standard lingo for when reporting an issue or bug. As in "seen behavior", "standard behavior", "expected behavior", "reported behavior", etc.

I understand how the software works. I simply "expected", rather I thought "likely to happen" that the quoting was going to quote that previous post correctly. It had not.

Not a big deal. I simply edited the post and corrected it manually.

 

[cliffordcooley]

Edit: OK so quoting appears to work when quoting one "quote". That is, quoting of just one user. I expected this to work.

There is nothing wrong with quoting multiple times, as long as you pay attention as to where your cursor is located. Because your cursor location is the location where the quote will be placed. You can place quotes before quotes, quotes after quotes, and even embed quotes inside of quotes.

 

[war59312]

I understand. Looks like it was something else that had broken it.

Not sure, since I cant view my original post where the quoting all screwed up. That is, I can't view the original version, only the latest edited.

Edit: Thus I cant give a "steps to reproduce". oh well, if I happens again I'll just leave the original post and do a full bug report.

 

[captaincranky]

I understand. Looks like it was something else that had broken it.

Not sure, since I cant view my original post where the quoting all screwed up. That is, I can't view the original version, only the latest edited.

Edit: Thus I cant give a "steps to reproduce". oh well, if I happens again I'll just leave the original post and do a full bug report.

We don't need a bug report. Unless you'd like me to report you..;