Is the Power of the Internet Being Purposely Withheld? Part 2

In the first part of this 2 part article I discussed several science fiction style conspiracy theories surrounding the internet, and mega corporations using it's power for nefarious agendas. While I mentioned the "Matrix" and "The Truman Show" admittedly the majority of the article was focused around my own personal project that if I ever were to write a science fiction novel it would look similar to that. The idea that through the use of the internet "reality" is slowly being infiltrated, and altered. Quietly, little by little, day by day, the reality of the world around us, what we come to believe is reality, is becoming more fabricated, and more false.

While I believe this would make for a great book unfortunately I think what is really happening is less thrilling, and more insulting towards the human race.

I truly think all the world is a stage, and there are various plays of different sizes going on, many simultaneously, involving actors of different caliber. I believe that there are often unseen forces manipulating the way the world works, to discuss their reasons is to lessen the discussion on their existence.

I believe that those who pull the strings knew of "the internet" at least how we currently know it today. Surely they knew the some of the consequences, and ultimately after it's inception those with less foresight, but great intellect devised ideas such as an "internet of things" in which our everyday household items are spying on us. Where the next war might not be fought on a battle field with guns, but rather a cyber war with hackers going back and forth, using slow methodical logic, and a propaganda war likely waged on a countries own citizens. However, I believe the internet, and it's powers came about much faster than anticipated.


For example, back in the 60's with the launch of the Apollo moon mission there was little criticism, however if today's technology were available there would be much more criticism as evidenced by the number of videos, and websites devoting a great deal of time, effort, and energy into seriously discussing the idea that the moon landing was a hoax, and the debate between the varying sides, as well as the involvement in the infamous trolls, and conintelpro agents.

A good example to illustrate the use of the internet in a way that wasn't expected was in the case of the Sandy Hook shooting. Regardless of ones believe on the Sandy Hook shooting, it can't be denied that there were several oddities surrounding the entire event. Many questions that have not been addressed, and can't seem to be answered. Within a short while of the incident "going live" masses of people were combing their various expertise and analyzing various aspects of the shooting. This is where the internet thrives, in the ability to bring together people of different backgrounds, with varying skill sets, and allows them to put forth their knowledge into the collective database, and contribute to something much larger than themselves. I believe it was a miscalculation how people would react. I believe it was assumed that people would simply not question what they were being told, and only a few people who did would be called "conspiracy theorists" and demonized, sure the powers that be were not expecting the vast number of people to come together, and put their various skills together for no reason other than disproving a lie, there was no financial motive.

While the Sandy Hook shooting, and the resulting discussions that took place is a great example of how the internet can be a valuable tool it also highlighted a major flaw, that unfortunately if isn't addressed will prevent the internet from ever reaching it's full potential. There are perhaps some who are deliberately withholding the software advances intentionally, so that their software flourishes, that they maintain a monopoly, but also to hinder people from using the internet's true potential.

The problem becomes very clear to me when writing articles. I have a great deal of knowledge in my head, and I attempt to convey it to others, or rather I attempt to convey, and discuss my opinions which I've formed from the knowledge I've obtained over time. This is where the laziness factor comes into the picture. Although its very simple to Google search a link, people don't want to do that. There are a large number of people who will read an article, and if you can keep their attention throughout the whole article, and provide all the sourced information to them, then you have a possibility of converting them to accepting your point of view. However, there are very few people who can be held captive long enough to read through long sections of dry text, especially if it's not on a subject that are specifically interested.

It becomes frustrating when I want to write an article, however, I'm discouraged from doing so because I know the inherent difficulty in doing so. Instead of writing the facts down, and drawing the conclusions I've made from them, which takes it's own amount of time, I'm forced to source out information I already know. This is because there's a large amount of people who even though they can easily search out the information to verify it if the believe it to faulty, expect the author to do that for them. This makes writing articles less enjoyable, and very tedious. Because of that less articles are written, and less critical hard hitting articles are written because the really mind blowing conclusions usually have a lot of background to them, and go into deep subject matter, and it's too much of a task to source out that information for the readers.

The way the internet is currently structured is in a liner hyperlink fashion, with forward, and back. When reading an article you can click on a link to go to that source, and then read through that source, go back to the original article, and so on. However, there's a much better format which has been proposed several times, however, for whatever the reason it was shot down by the companies of Adobe and Microsoft. This uses deep linkage. For example if in an article a quote from the Bible is used, and someone clicked on the quote they would be brought to a page showing the Bible, side by side with the original article, and on the Bible page they would be at the location of the quote. This because extremely useful because researching is no longer linear in fashion. A person can start off reading an article, and be taken down a path of following the authors citations, that leads them to their own information on the subject, and can then always go back to the original article. Text, video, and audio can all be linked this way. For example if a quote from a song is used in an article, clicking on that quote can bring up a video of that song. This is all done in a multidimensional layout, instead of a flat paper like layout. Additionally it can be designed so that the software auto sources articles. For example if an author writes and article they have the ability to add links to places they think people should go to, and those links will all open side by side not on top which is a big difference, however, the program might search out and find things it thinks should also be linked, and someone can click on those and that will allow those pages to appear next to the main article.

This ultimately makes the process of sourcing out articles much easier, especially articles that have a lot of information, that the author has acquired over a great deal of time. This makes navigating the internet much more fluid, and less linear, and would allow research to flourish, and make the internet reach it's full potential, or access more of its potential.

A good explanation of this is by the creator of the project, code named Xanadu. It's summed up best by his quotation about "What is History" -