Ignorance is bliss

After reading about all the scary issues about the internet (thanks Jonathan!) I've come the the conclusion that ignorance may indeed be bliss. The amount of bad things journalists, academics, and other experts pick up on in the digital age have lead me to the conclusion that there are three mind-sets one can adopt in regards to the internet: Ignore the warnings, adopt a cynical approach, or believe the warnings. One of the biggest issues constantly in the media is privacy, social network sites have become the "crowning jewel" for web 2.0 and as such much attention is given to them, that's why whenever facebook introduces new features the world pays attention. But lets talk about the good and bad things about different attitudes towards the internet:

1: Ignore it!: As I said before being ignorant of the constantly shifting face of the internet may seem like the best way to approach the internet. Whether trawling through the literature by people like Clay Shirky and Cass Sunstein or scrolling through journals or blogs it seems there are warnings about every which way the internet operates. For instance companies using peoples cookies to create a profile of online habits has some people worried  the information they have may be used for more sinister purposes. So far as we know the use of such private data is used merely for marketing purposes, to help companies advertise to the right crowd. Facebook, twitter, Youtube, all the pages with heavy traffic do conduct market research this way, it really makes you wonder whether worrying about covering your tracks (which in many cases is useless if the company really wants your info) is really worth all the hassle. If you're going to do something, why should you have to worry about the repercussions of innocent habits, hell maybe its better that companies DO have your information you might think then at least someone is monitoring what people are using the internet for. 

2: LOL in their faces: There seems to be a few points of merit in adopting a cynical view of internet warnings. For one these warnings are akin to the kind of warnings parents give their kids; "dont talk to strangers" it would seem there is a lot of over hype about what kinds of bad situations you can find yourself in on the net. This is a result of people (mostly youths) behaving in ways they usually wouldn't in real life. While kids have adopted the internet wholeheartedly parents have not become as attached, as such there is a misunderstanding between parents and kids that the same social behaviour in the real world should be applicable in the cyberworld. If this misunderstanding could be realized then a lot of the "internet specific" warnings you read about can definitely be avoided. 

3: BE AFRAID, BE VERY ARAID: If you believe all the bad things people say about the internet chances are you would use the internet very little. Seeing as most people have an intimate relationship with the internet its safe to say, while we are aware of the dangers, we are willing to tempt fate. It's human nature i suppose? People walk across busy roads, speed while they are driving and pump themselves so full of drugs with increasing regularity its a wonder we even have laws for for these behaviours, people just don't think bad things will happen to them.

As students we are more likely to be aware of the kinds of subtle issues many people would overlook, things like who owns what and for what reason (POP QUIZ: Who created twitter?) but does that make us more likely to take heed of the warnings or have we become so overloaded with things to be wary of that we just don't give a damn anymore? In the writing of this I've convinced myself that while ignorance might be a nice idea in the short term, eventually you're going to need to know why a guy called Herbert the Pervert is commenting on your statuses. I certainly think there is an advantage in being aware of the issues but until Mark Zuckerburg or Google uses my information to destroy my life I couldn't give a damn what they do with it.