What If.. The Internet had an “Off” Switch

More and more people around the world are allowing the forever-developing World Wide Web to make their lives that little bit easier.

Photo from modernmilkblog.blogspot.com

Business, social networking and communication are being advanced in what can only be described as the technological age that we are currently living in.

What would you do, however, if the internet as we know it was completely switched off via a single switch without any warning?

Fortunately, Sir Tim Berners-Lee has stated that there is no such thing as a single “Off” Switch because the world is decentralised and split up into hundreds of countries, there is no central “Off Switch”.

The only way it could be switched off is if the governments of the world come together and agree to change it from a decentralised system to a centralised one.

But what if everything were to revert to the way it was prior to 1990?

Photo from viralblog.com

A number of businesses relying entirely or partially on the internet would be severely damaged.

Also all people who make a living through pod-casting, hyperlocal news and those selling products on the internet would all consequently lose their jobs.

Photo from turbo.fortytwotimes.com

With nearly one billion users connecting with friends and family nearby or abroad, the death of Facebook would probably result in the majority of people just not trying to stay in touch any more.

If the internet has made people lazy enough to stay at home to communicate with friends rather than meet in person; will people really put in the extra effort?

Photo from mamamia.com.au

Yep, you would probably regain a large portion of your brain capacity to resolve difficult problems; which would previously have been looked up on the internet.

People would have to rely on books again and reading more has frequently been linked with increased intelligence.

Photo from thedrum.com

The newspaper industry has been taking a nosedive in sales ever since the introduction of the internet. With no more “instant” news through websites and social media such as Twitter; the flow of information will travel much slower.

Does this mean more people would revert to reading newspapers for information? As well as more traditional methods of news gathering? More than likely.

Photo from net-security.org

Without the internet, corporations and government will find it much more difficult to publish information to the public – therefore encouraging the emergence of more Quangos.

Quangos are not affiliated to the government, yet rely on government funding and have been heavily criticised for a true lack or transparency.

Photo from richardtimothy.com

As opposed to working from home or teleworking. More and more companies have turned to outsourcing, resulting in a lot of money being saved – but without the internet this could prove difficult.

This will result in many people hopping into their cars and driving to work before…

Photo from greenasathistle.com

Although GPS systems would still operate, but this would prove difficult without a constant flow of internet-based updates.

The loss of Google Maps and other map based technology on the internet would result in people being unable to print off a direct list of instructions and ultimately getting lost. And finally…

Photo from topdrawersoccer.com

And you wouldn’t be reading this post. Nor would you be reading any of my other posts or the posts of thousands of other bloggers across the globe.

Just a concept I know, our lives in many respects would probably benefit socially and personally but at the same time be ridden with economic decline in a world without internet.

Would the world be better without internet?

Daniel Mayes is a recent Journalism graduate with an upper-second. He has experience working at BBC World Service, Sky News Online and has worked on projects in Europe and Africa.

Pay the school + Pay the child

Educating a child is more expensive than once thought.

Photo from photoXpress

You pay the tuition, you pay his clothes, and you pay for his food. To get more benefit out of school, you should also pay your child for going to school.

Ambitious study of Harvard economist Roland Fryer Jr. paid $6.3 million to 18,000 students to testify his lead towards the education policy, classified as “one of the more rigorous studies ever”.

Students who are paid to merely attend school, like a day job, significantly fared better in their academics as measured by standardized tests. Money as an incentive is a pliable motivator. For these children, money is sweets, is games, is shoes, is cool stuff.

I’d want that. I wish I was also paid to go to school. If all parents did, all students will be rich! Of course it will make students work for it, especially those that are in their teenage years as money is independence. This may also mean training them for the harsh real world, that you hardly see “free work”, that work is done in exchange of money.

Medley of questions in my head challenged the results, even if I accepted the verity of the study. Couldn’t we see any other motivator other than money? If this was implemented, would they really like to learn, which is a never-dying process; or will they stop trying to learn when there’s no one paying them anymore? And are standardized tests the only measure of intelligence, forcing them to like science and math and disregarding arts or athletics?

Would you pay your child to go to school?

Source:
Should Kids Be Bribed to Do Well in School?; Time

 

Yes to Euthanasia?

If we all strive for more freedom in our lives, if we have the right choose our own jobs, our own way of living, may we not decide whether we want to live or not?

Photo from dailyrecord.co.uk

Euthanasia has been the cause of many debates worldwide. When we kill animals we do it fast to stop them from experiencing unnecessary pain. Do those animals want to die? Maybe so, their living conditions aren’t very good when humans put them in small cages. Animals can’t communicate with us, they can’t tell us if they agree. Would we let them live if they’d disagree? Maybe, if they could communicate, we might consider them equal to us, and we wouldn’t kill them. How can we be sure animals experience any pain at all? It is impossible, but we expect them to, it would be rather strange if they didn’t.

Tony Nicklinson was no animal. He was paralysed in 2005, and could only communicate with his eyes. Did he suffer from pain? Yes, he said his life had become a ‘nightmare’. Did he want to die? Yes, he lost many cases fighting for his right-to-die. Could he communicate, could he tell us he didn’t want to live anymore? Yes, he could and he did. Did we kill him, did we let him die without experiencing unnecessary pain? No.

Why didn’t we? Becauce the law says so? Is that a valid reason when someone has to live 7 years, paralysed? A healthy person who wants to die has many ways to do this. Tony didn’t, you can hardly kill yourself with your eyes. Doctors couldn’t because they would be murderers. His living conditions were worse than the animals we kill for food, living in small cages. If his living conditions are inhumane, does the law still apply to him?

After Tony lost a case in the High Court, he stopped eating, which was his death’s cause. It was his only option left. How could he enjoy living a life he didn’t want? How can you enjoy living if you’re forced to?

What is your opinion on the subject?

R.I.P Fresh Home Cooking

Gone are the days of heading to the supermarket to buy a vast array of vegetables, meat and other ingredients for tonight’s dinner.

Photo from denniswyman.com

Gone are the days when the mother would spend the best part of the day cooking a delicious meal for the whole family.

Gone are the days of fresh and in season produce being put together to create something truly delicious.

Instead today we are posed with a cardboard box, or a plastic pot or air tight package ready to get thrown into a box and ready to eat in two minutes. The lazy microwave age is upon us.

Everyday dishes such as spaghetti bolognese, shepherd’s pie, chicken curry and a wide selection of pastas, burgers and even pancakes can all now be cooked in the microwave. Who could resist? When the recommended retail price for a Birdseye Spaghetti Bolognese microwave meal costs as little as £1 (source: mysupermarket.co.uk).

However, since being at university, I’ve learnt the importance of fresh cooking and that buying in mass and cooking for everyone can actually work out rather cheap. Granted, it may cost slightly more than the Birdseye tat above, but you’ll know exactly what is going into it and is guaranteed to taste much better.

God knows what goes into a microwave meal, but it’s more than likely to consist of a variety of preservatives, colourings, artificial flavourings and badly sourced produce.

In a Birdseye Spaghetti Bolognese meal, the sauce consists of the following: Water, Beef 12%, Tomatoes, Onion, Tomato Purée, Mushrooms, Red Wine, Carrots, Celery, Maize Starch, Sugar, Reduced Sodium Salt (Potassium Chloride, Sodium Chloride), Garlic, Yeast Extract, Oregano, Parsley, Basil, Pepper.

Although the majority of ingredients are fresh here – which is certainly an exception – there is only 12% beef and a vast amount of water. In comparison, a packet of fresh beef mince, an onion, a carrot, tomato purée, Worcester sauce, a tin of chopped tomatoes and a packet of spaghetti spaghetti – when split four ways – provides a nutritious meal for four at a fair price.

Jamie Oliver, who forever emphasises healthy eating, has recently released the book 30 Minute Meals – proving how easy it is to cook and prepare a fresh three course meal for a family in very little time.

Photo from Jamie Oliver

Microwave meals don’t have to be the only option on a busy day; nor do they have to act as a cheaper alternative – as many students would prove.

Do you think the the culture of microwaves and TV dinners has gone too far? Or are fast meals built into our busy lifestyles?

Daniel Mayes is a recent Journalism graduate with an upper-second. He has experience working at BBC World Service, Sky News Online and has worked on projects in Europe and Africa.

Behold: Hands of Men and Women

Men are likely to have the uppermost hand than women when holding hands; but who has the dirtier hand?

Photo from photoXpress

Researcher Mark S. Chapell and his pals took the burden to observe 15,008 couples with holding hand activities. It’s true, men has the uppermost hand. And it may be that men initiate the act of touch.

Touch has a power. In the study of Coan, Schaefer and Davidson,  a woman was given mild electric shocks to observe her experience of pain and fear through MRI. At first, pain and fear was prominent. When a laboratory team member held her hand, the pain is still evident but fear diminishes. When the woman’s partner held her hand, the MRI shows that her brain calmed down remarkably.

Holding a woman’s hand is simple, seemingly vain, but it’s an easy way to make her at ease amidst pain and stress. Plus, it’s a romantic gesture too.

A man to man holding hand would raise brows in many societies; but in Afghanistan, it is expected. It shows affection for the men without the sexual association. And in times that you didn’t do that, it shows aversion as if you’re spacing yourself away from the other man.

Holding hands is dirtier than you thought. Tennessee senators passed a new bill claiming that holding hands and kissing are gateways to intercourse. The bill, which blocks sex education, aims to reduce the tipping numbers of the young engaging the activity – 27% of middle school students in Memphis City have had sex.

People from University of Colorado studied hands of men and women, and women’s hands are dirtier! Women “have a much ‘greater diversity’ of bacteria on their hands than men, and a higher number of innate bacteria living under the skin that can’t be washed away” (Noble, 2008). Interesting.. How did that happen?

What do you feel when you hold hands?

Sources:
Lending a Hand; Psychological Science
Why Arab Men Hold Hands; The New York Times
Men and Women Holding Hands; Ammons Scientific
Holding Hands Is Dirtier Than You Thought; YourTango