The Internet Realm

Philosophy Forums Society, Government, and Economics
1

I’ve lived on the cusp of the internet, from its inception to now.

But today the world has changed and accepted the internet. It is no longer dominated and run by geeky, nerdy white boys. Instead everybody else has joined in. And computers became “user friendly”. This has, slowly, led to more and more people coming online, to share their opinions, and engage in a globalized format. Everybody is gaining access.

But what does this mean when you include everybody, across the world, different cultures, different mentalities, different values? Eventually there will be conflicts of some kind. And now I see that the primary conflict, will be between the difference of children and adults. Because children, too, are gaining access to the internet at younger and younger ages.

Should children be exposed to the internet? How can you censor and monitor everything, as an adult or parent? You can’t.

So what does this then mean, for the internet, and for the global world?

A differentiation needs to be made. Is the internet private or public? You connect to it, by your own choice, but often people use their computers from within the safety of their homes, their bedrooms, and even where they sleep. The internet, and computers, literally are a doorway into another world, with 7 billion other people. And so this is who you open your window to, the entire world behind your computer. But as mentioned, the danger becomes increasingly clear when children gain more and more access to the internet. What should the protocol be, when this child opens the window, to everybody else?

Is the obligation of security in the hands of the private users of the internet, even though children can happen upon the internet, or should the security be contained within the internet itself?

2

We’re actually living in a world of partial anarchy because of so much privatization and also minimilization of government and religion. Nobody is primed for change, either. They are asleep behind the wheel.

3

I propose the following scenario : The acceleration of information is of such dramatic velocity that education having to play catch up, and children becoming aware at alarming rates- can result in the following scenario:

In the not too distant future a child old enough to acquire computer skills may already be wise to any and all information on the internet. There may not be left any secrets,left ,to shield children against. The right to knowledge
,may no longer be delineated according to traditional age related cutoff points.

4

Exposing children to “reality” on the internet, that they might never see in their own lives, is dangerous and traumatizing. For example, there are already many accounts of teenagers bullying others online, and victims committing suicide. But what happens when the bullies and victims are under the age of 10?

And this also occurs in a child’s bedroom, supposedly, the safest place he or she ought to be.

5

Does society want to be regulated? How much so? If we put up more safety, more government, then what? I want more good government, actually. Canada has a really weak government.

6

There may be a wait and see attitude going on in terms of societies’ balancing act of risks versus benefits of openness.

The argument for for includes the idea that in time the exposed children will outgrow the need to embarrass their friends in direct proportion to their frequent use of on line communication. The novelty will wear down unexpected lacks of discretion.

7

Basically the internet is going to begin its “second phase” once under 10 year old children start logging onto it, from the privacy of their bedrooms, and will not be regulated or censored, by their access to the sea of information, especially under the roof of irresponsible parents. However, this can be a good thing or a bad thing, depending on the intelligence of said children.