That last post had a comment that made me do research. Is Ron Paul a third-party candidate? As of right now, no, he's a Republican candidate, but it made me think about some stuff:
1. If he was a third-party candidate, how come I didn't know? The answer being that I'm not paying attention to what's going on with politics in this country.
2. If I made some misstatement, should I pull my post until I fix it, or not care? I was ready to pull the post, since it seemed like I was making some argument about candidates. But then I looked at the post and it looked okay.
3. If you post something stupid on the Internet, it's stupid for a long, long time. If you have an argument with some friends and you say something dumb, and your friends say you're an idiot, you can take it back, say "sorry" and say you heard someone else say that, and you didn't mean it, and you're really not stupid, or maybe you are stupid, but you didn't mean it, and everyone would be cool with that. As long as you didn't become an ass about it. But posting stupid stuff on the Internet, for as free and open as we think it is, can get you in lots of trouble.
And then I realized why I didn't know about Ron Paul: I don't think I look for new ideas on the Internet; I go to support what I already know. Yes, I find answers, but only to questions I already have. I (and I'm thinking "we") don't find new questions.
Unlike when we read a book. When you immerse yourself into someone else's life for 300 pages, that's when you can develop new ideas.
I wonder if ebook readers feel the same way. When you read a book, your hands are occupied; your eyes are occupied; your brain is occupied. Does it feel the same with an ebook? Are you more concerned with battery life or pressing the wrong button?
But I can say that the Internet has not improved me. I don't think I've learned anything new about the world or myself because of it. And if this was a stupid thing to post, I'm not sorry because I mean it.
