"Light speed" seems to be used idiomatically in Star Wars. Rather, the characters appear to be travelling through a different dimension (i.e., hyperspace) and use that as a sort of shortcut to whatever their destination might be. Even "hyperspace" might be an idiom tho.
I actually forgot about that. I don't know about Star Trek cause I never followed the franchise that closely, but I know in Stargate their hyperspace drives opens a window in subspace that the ship enters. So I think technically the ship is traveling at normal sublight speeds while in a separate layer of space (or as you put it, another dimension) thus achieving superluminal travel.
But they also have inertial dampeners like I mentioned before which offset the effects felt with acceleration like that.
Probably the defining characteristic of Web 1.0 was a complete Wild West type of attitude. You could say anything, do anything, whatever. You might encounter opposition or disagreement, of course. But that's part of the fun.
Oh man that's so true, Web 1.0 was kind of libertarianism personified. I miss those days so much, the internet just felt like raw information. Not skewed or slanted or biased, I didn't feel like I was being herded in a direction with every link I clicked.
Remember the plethora of search engines there were back then? Before "googling" became a synonym for web searches. There was Bing, Lycos, Ask Jeeves...man the goodness of the internet, if it ever had any, died with Netscape.
Web 2.0 is defined by social media. And social media are defined by the presence of women. In the Web 1.0 days, women used the Internet to check email or shop or something. The joke went "There are no women on the Internet". They were there. They just weren't on message boards and whatnot, mostly.
Interesting connection there, I hadn't looked at it in those terms but that's absolutely right.
But Web 2.0 changed that. Women are visibly online now (i.e., they're on social media). And at this point, I think it's safe to say that Web 2.0's defining characteristic is censorship, heavy moderation, etc.
Without question, Web 2.0 is defined by control entirely contrarian to the libertarian values of 1.0.
I find this rather interesting. That's the polite way to phrase it anyway. Men seem to get something out of disagreement. There is dialogue and ideas/opinions are shared, they're discussed and whatever, it all comes out in the wash. Disagreement isn't rly a big problem. For men.
Of course, that's how we're wired. For mental battle just as much as a physical one, our minds need that kind of strength conditioning and the web is/was a good resource for that because we can learn new things and then challenge those things.
But for women, it seems to be. Women seem to interpret disagreement as conflict and women are generally conflict-averse. I've even heard women say that comment sections getting shut down on news sites is a good thing because it lessens the chance of disagreement. And that's simply not a male attitude at all.
That's probably why cancel culture seems to be women-lead, starting with unworthily prominent voices like AOC, Omar and Tlaib, and then it took off from there.
For a lot of stuff I do online, I'm socked up so that if I say anything that I know is truly edgy, there's no way in hades anybody can ever dox me. Which is a pretty big change. It shouldn't be this way. People should be able to speak their minds freely.
But we can't. Because women are on the Internet now.
tl;dr- My unpopular opinion is that Web 2.0 sucks.
Smart man, it's just a shame that has to happen though but there are basement dwellers lurking in every forum and every comm box on the internet just looking for a chance to get their rocks off by doxxing a good citizen.
I agree with that unpopular opinion though, Web 2.0 does suck.
I love baseball. Its the strategy.
Ahhh baseball. My first love. It's also liturgy. It mirrors the Mass I've discovered.