[SeekAndFind]

Folks, READ THE REST OF THE ARTICLE WITHOUT SKIMMING. It's something worth pondering and thinking about.

[SeekAndFind]

bump

[counterpunch]

Obama

Osama

---

Edit...
Ignore all
Add to dictionary

 

[devane617]

The people deserve the answer they get with Google. The sad part is ‘their’ laziness cost the remainder of us the truth.

[shove_it]

Yup...it all started with the wheel. We got lazier and lazier.

[SamAdams76]

I don’t have time to plod through this entire article. Can somebody just distill this to a paragraph or less for the rest of us?

[KarlInOhio]

Most of the time when I’m googling something I’m not looking for just the overview rather than a deeply researched knowledge of the topic. Before the internet I would have either checked an encyclopedia article (about which I heard the same complaints) or just not bothered. Maybe I would have grabbed a topic specific book if I were doing something like trying to find the energy density of gasoline vs ethanol (probably my CRC Chemistry & Physics Handbook in that case), but I wouldn’t have read a full book on oxidation of alkanes and alcohols just to get a couple of numbers.

[Enchante]

It’s more info than I can absorb..... is there a Wikipedia summary available? /s

:^)

[ThomasThomas]

Sometimes it seems that too many writers really want to be novelist or are paid by the word. This most often true of the internet where space is not a solid limit.

The ease of writing and editing documents has made it easier for authors to produce a large amount of words instead of focused though. Being a math type I think of it as a word to thought ratio. This article did not have the problem of to many words and not enough thought.

I had a manager send out a memo once that after five paragraphs I knew that it was important and I needed to respond by doing something. What I had to do was clear to me then as it is to you now.

Many people skim now to find out what they need to know with out all the extra words that don't add to understanding of the content. And them some are just lazy.

[Donald Rumsfeld Fan]

People think that dictionaries and Wikipedia settle the argument. They think they can just deliver one-liners that refute detailed articles or arguments. They select just one paragraph to address from large articles and ignore the rest. They resort to canned canards such as "that source is biased" or "it is intolerant to say I am wrong" because real legwork is beyond them. Google has truly "made them stupid."

The dilemma lies in the fact that in our desire to get to the truth we must expend increasing amounts of time and energy. Since time and energy is a finite quantity it must be rationed accordingly.

We then have a choice.

We can either know more and more about less and less until we know absolutely everything about nothing.

Or we can know less and less about more and more until we know absolutely nothing about everything.