<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Edgy comments</title>
	<atom:link href="http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2008/07/15/edgy-comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2008/07/15/edgy-comments/</link>
	<description>a blog about information</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 01:37:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: crc</title>
		<link>http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2008/07/15/edgy-comments/comment-page-1/#comment-381138</link>
		<dc:creator>crc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jul 2008 11:54:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://confusedofcalcutta.com/?p=1228#comment-381138</guid>
		<description>&#039;Google don&#039;t make people stoopid, people make people stoopid&#039;?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8216;Google don&#8217;t make people stoopid, people make people stoopid&#8217;?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Zubin Wadia</title>
		<link>http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2008/07/15/edgy-comments/comment-page-1/#comment-380992</link>
		<dc:creator>Zubin Wadia</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jul 2008 04:45:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://confusedofcalcutta.com/?p=1228#comment-380992</guid>
		<description>There always has been a plethora of information on Earth since the 20th century began. What the internet changed is that it made information ubiquitous &amp; timely.

The result of all this &quot;access&quot; has, in my opinion, created a new quotient classification - Correlatory [sic]. 

Due to the internet&#039;s propensity to publish immense amounts of information in a variety of perspectives, human minds will have to evolve into a correlatory mindset. Those with a higher CQ will be able to determine trends and ascertain decisions more rapidly than the less inclined.

Cheers,

Zubin Wadia</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There always has been a plethora of information on Earth since the 20th century began. What the internet changed is that it made information ubiquitous &amp; timely.</p>
<p>The result of all this &#8220;access&#8221; has, in my opinion, created a new quotient classification &#8211; Correlatory [sic]. </p>
<p>Due to the internet&#8217;s propensity to publish immense amounts of information in a variety of perspectives, human minds will have to evolve into a correlatory mindset. Those with a higher CQ will be able to determine trends and ascertain decisions more rapidly than the less inclined.</p>
<p>Cheers,</p>
<p>Zubin Wadia</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Benoît Tuerlinckx</title>
		<link>http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2008/07/15/edgy-comments/comment-page-1/#comment-380801</link>
		<dc:creator>Benoît Tuerlinckx</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2008 20:45:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://confusedofcalcutta.com/?p=1228#comment-380801</guid>
		<description>Google is not making us half as stupid as what television did to the masses.
Give people a TV set, and they will zap sequentially among a few dozen programs all built for much the same target audience.
Give the same people Google, and they will LOOK FOR something they like, and yield (sometimes) some (moderately) unexpected result.
Now of course Google will not necessarily make people more curious, and even though it gives them access to the long tail, this tool like all mass media tools will potentially accelerate nationalisms, sectarism, and eventually lock up people into closed schemes. 
But at least it provides more POTENTIAL than the remote control of a good old cabled TV set.

Now if you agree to become more stupid, Google will facilitate the process.  And it&#039;s always been the same: the computer enables us to make the same mistakes as before. Just faster.

I like this blog because it helps open the mind, it stimulates curiosity. 

And I must admit it&#039;s not Google that led me to this blog. It&#039;s another blog (by French consultant Louis Naugès), which I discovered through a personal recommendation.
Word of mouth in reality then virtual word of mouth.

It all boils down to communities and trusting people we know to get us to discover new things.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Google is not making us half as stupid as what television did to the masses.<br />
Give people a TV set, and they will zap sequentially among a few dozen programs all built for much the same target audience.<br />
Give the same people Google, and they will LOOK FOR something they like, and yield (sometimes) some (moderately) unexpected result.<br />
Now of course Google will not necessarily make people more curious, and even though it gives them access to the long tail, this tool like all mass media tools will potentially accelerate nationalisms, sectarism, and eventually lock up people into closed schemes.<br />
But at least it provides more POTENTIAL than the remote control of a good old cabled TV set.</p>
<p>Now if you agree to become more stupid, Google will facilitate the process.  And it&#8217;s always been the same: the computer enables us to make the same mistakes as before. Just faster.</p>
<p>I like this blog because it helps open the mind, it stimulates curiosity. </p>
<p>And I must admit it&#8217;s not Google that led me to this blog. It&#8217;s another blog (by French consultant Louis Naugès), which I discovered through a personal recommendation.<br />
Word of mouth in reality then virtual word of mouth.</p>
<p>It all boils down to communities and trusting people we know to get us to discover new things.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark</title>
		<link>http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2008/07/15/edgy-comments/comment-page-1/#comment-380750</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2008 18:44:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://confusedofcalcutta.com/?p=1228#comment-380750</guid>
		<description>It reminds me of me of Jonathan Lethem&#039;s &quot;Gun, With Occasional Music&quot; where in the future people effectively choose to have &quot;Google&quot; connected directly to their brains and that is their memory.

In time choice vanishes and it becomes a crime to have your own memory rather than relying on the shared memory.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It reminds me of me of Jonathan Lethem&#8217;s &#8220;Gun, With Occasional Music&#8221; where in the future people effectively choose to have &#8220;Google&#8221; connected directly to their brains and that is their memory.</p>
<p>In time choice vanishes and it becomes a crime to have your own memory rather than relying on the shared memory.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Planet iPhone - Edgy comments</title>
		<link>http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2008/07/15/edgy-comments/comment-page-1/#comment-380127</link>
		<dc:creator>Planet iPhone - Edgy comments</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Jul 2008 22:58:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://confusedofcalcutta.com/?p=1228#comment-380127</guid>
		<description>[...] Some weeks ago, while in the US, I could not resist buying the latest Atlantic Monthly, seeing that Nicholas Carr had written a piece headlined “Is Google making us stupid?” Incidentally, for some strange reason, the magazine insisted on spelling “stupid” as “stoopid” on the cover, ostensibly to play off the word “google”, but then went back to the normal spelling for the headline of the article itself. Weird. I couldn’t see the point. But that’s not relevant. What is relevant is Carr’s art Read entire story [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Some weeks ago, while in the US, I could not resist buying the latest Atlantic Monthly, seeing that Nicholas Carr had written a piece headlined “Is Google making us stupid?” Incidentally, for some strange reason, the magazine insisted on spelling “stupid” as “stoopid” on the cover, ostensibly to play off the word “google”, but then went back to the normal spelling for the headline of the article itself. Weird. I couldn’t see the point. But that’s not relevant. What is relevant is Carr’s art Read entire story [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

