Este post es un buen compendio de links para tener discusiones sobre Bitcoin. Pero lo mejor es este comentario sobre el Leninismo y el Libertarianismo, para memorizar y borrar:
BitCoin looks like it was designed as a weapon intended to damage central banking and money issuing banks, with a Libertarian political agenda in mind—to damage states ability to collect tax and monitor their citizens financial transactions. Which is fine if you’re a Libertarian, but I tend to take the stance that Libertarianism is like Leninism: a fascinating, internally consistent political theory with some good underlying points that, regrettably, makes prescriptions about how to run human society that can only work if we replace real messy human beings with frictionless spherical humanoids of uniform density (because it relies on simplifying assumptions about human behaviour which are unfortunately wrong).
Luke O’Neil hace un recuento de todas las historias falsas que compartimos en la internet en 2013.
(…) the New Jersey waitress who received a homophobic comment on the receipt from a party she had served; comedian Kyle Kinane’s Twitter beef with Pace Salsa; the Chinese husband who sued his wife for birthing ugly children after he learned she’d had plastic surgery; Samsung paying Apple $1 billion in nickels; former NSA chief Michael Hayden’s assassination; #CutForBieber; the exquisite, otherwordly weirdness of the @Horse_ebooks Twitter account; Nelson Mandela’s death pic; that eagle snatching a child off the ground on YouTube; Jimmy Kimmel’s “twerk fail” video; Sarah Palin taking a job with Al-Jazeera America (an obviously satirical story that even suckered in The Washington Post)
Aunque los periódicos siempre han usado el contenido barato y las noticias falsas para rellenar espacio, nunca ha sido como en 2013. La cultura de lo gratis ha llevado al periodismo a niveles paupérrimos :
Media malpractice like this didn’t trigger the collapse of traditional revenue models, but it’s hastening the job. Everyone wants everything for free now—news, music, movies, etc.—which means the companies don’t have any money to pay people to produce original work. None of this is anything you haven’t heard before, but it bears repeating. In order to make a living, those of us who had the bad sense to shackle ourselves to a career in media before that world ended have to churn out more content faster than ever to make up for the drastically reduced pay scale. We’re left with the choice of spending a week reporting a story we’re actually proud of (as I do just frequently enough to ensure a somewhat restful sleep every other night), reaping a grand sum of somewhere in the ballpark of two hundred to five hundred dollars if we’re lucky, or we can grind out ten blog posts at twenty-five to fifty bucks a pop that take fifteen minutes each. That means the work across the board ends up being significantly more disposable, which in turn makes the readers value it less, which means they want to pay less for it, and so on. It’s an ouroboros of shit.
The faster metabolism puts people who fact-check at a disadvantage,” said Ryan Grim, the Washington bureau chief for The Huffington Post, which reposted the fictional airplane tweets, the letter to Santa and the poverty essay. “If you throw something up without fact-checking it, and you’re the first one to put it up, and you get millions and millions of views, and later it’s proved false, you still got those views. That’s a problem. The incentives are all wrong.
Quizás porque tengo casi 20 años leyendo basura en internet, o porque tengo 15 de editor, verifico las fuentes antes de compartir alguna de estas noticias demasiado buenas para ser verdad. También hago un esfuerzo consciente por no hacer click en las «10 maneras en las que puedes conseguir un mejor empleo» y «No podrás creer lo que hizo este niño para librarse de su bully». Sin embargo, no dudo que dentro de unos meses, el poder del contenido viral nos llevará a un punto en el que las historias serán imposibles de verificar. En un océano de Buzzfeed, Huffpo, Upworthy y sus imitadores, la palabra escrita sólo sirve para acaparar clicks, no transmitir medias verdades.
Craig Mod escribe un nostálgico recuento de todas sus cámaras digitales y escribe esta hermosa reflexión esqueumórfica:
As I’ve become a more network-focussed photographer, I’ve come to love using the smartphone as an editing surface; touch is perfect for photo manipulation. There’s a tactility that is lost when you edit with a mouse on a desktop computer. Perhaps touch feels natural because it’s a return to the chemical-filled days of manually poking and massaging liquid and paper to form an image I had seen in my head.
Software ate the camera, but freed the photograph. It makes me uncomfortable, and if you care about cameras, it should make you uncomfortable, too. But — and here’s the trick — try to see if there isn’t something valuable in that discomfort, if it doesn’t bring with it a way to look at photography with fresh eyes, with new excitement.
También: cuando salió el iPhone 5s, mucha gente se quejó de que no traía nada nuevo. La verdad es otra. Ese procesador de 64 bits, dirigido principalmente a la Generación Instagram, cambió para siempre la historia de la fotografía. Si te parece una exageración, espera unos meses.
Utilizamos cookies para asegurar que damos la mejor experiencia al usuario en nuestro sitio web. Si continúa utilizando este sitio asumiremos que está de acuerdo.
