A discussion on Artificial Intelligence and how it's going to affect our industry. 3 3

[VintageComics]

On 10/6/2023 at 3:22 PM, Dr. Balls said:

On 10/6/2023 at 2:56 PM, Lazyboy said:

So go look at it. Comichron has all the information you want.

It doesn’t have hardly any information I would want regarding this (at least from what I can see for full year 2022) There’s no data on digital subscriptions, it excludes certain distributors like Penguin, and provides no revenue information at all. It provides how many print comics and TPBs were sold through Diamond and speculations to how much something increased or decreased. Useful information, but not a lot.

I’m not the one to pass this along to - I’m not claiming the industry is up or down, I’m saying that citing a number or website isn’t enough to constitute an accurate depiction of what is happening. You’re quoting the wrong person here.

Yup. Agree again.

But this discussion would actually be a GREAT thread topic. It should be someone's Master's thesis. 

[VintageComics]

On 10/6/2023 at 11:18 AM, Dr. Balls said:

Sure, it might get heated and lines drawn, but in the end - this is a great place to delve into topics in and out of comics.

There's a distinct, small group of boardies here who have spent the last 3 years weaponizing the "notify moderator" button and sicking moderation against me in an effort to get me to stop talking because they don't like what I have to say. Even though I don't break ANY forum rules I still keep getting hit with strikes and opposition. You just saw it happen in this thread. 

But I never had a problem with moderation before this group all started turning against me.

Weird, right? 

[VintageComics]

Last night I sat and chatted all night with some highly successful people who work for Warner and Paramount. They create movie scores for big films and one guy used to work with Hans Zimmer.

We're talking about people who are near the top of the feeding chain in entertainment. It doesn't get bigger than Hans Zimmer. 

We talked long and hard about their industry, and let me tell you they have NO idea what's actually happening. Much of the conversation went along similar lines of the conversation here with me having a head start because of my research, and we sort of concluded that the mediocrity will be pushed to the forefront, the people at the top will be protected (because they are the true talent - AND THE MONEY) and the people at the bottom will suffer the greatest. 

And this seems to be the formula emerging tech implements from all of these discussion we've had.

That tech upending industries causes the poor to suffer the most, the middle class which is somewhat more stable than the lower class experiences the turmoil but somehow manages to navigate it and the wealthy continue to benefit the greatest. 

Basically the normal cycle of life, only amplified and sped up from analog to digital.

[CGC Mike]

On 10/6/2023 at 8:27 PM, VintageComics said:

There's a distinct, small group of boardies here who have spent the last 3 years weaponizing the "notify moderator" button and sicking moderation against me in an effort to get me to stop talking because they don't like what I have to say. Even though I don't break ANY forum rules I still keep getting hit with strikes and opposition. You just saw it happen in this thread. 

You make it sound like I am a dog.  When did you get all of these strikes?  

[VintageComics]

On 10/6/2023 at 8:40 PM, CGC Mike said:

You make it sound like I am a dog.  When did you get all of these strikes?  

It wasn't my intent to make you sound like a dog but it was my intent to make it sound like they have a dog whistle. 

Well, at least thank you for saying they aren't notifying on me. 

To your question, pretty sure everyone knows when I get all my strikes. My life has been the most exciting board game in years.

[valiantman]

On 10/6/2023 at 7:34 PM, VintageComics said:

Last night I sat and chatted all night with some highly successful people who work for Warner and Paramount. They create movie scores for big films and one guy used to work with Hans Zimmer.

We're talking about people who are near the top of the feeding chain in entertainment. It doesn't get bigger than Hans Zimmer. 

We talked long and hard about their industry, and let me tell you they have NO idea what's actually happening. Much of the conversation went along similar lines of the conversation here with me having a head start because of my research, and we sort of concluded that the mediocrity will be pushed to the forefront, the people at the top will be protected (because they are the true talent - AND THE MONEY) and the people at the bottom will suffer the greatest. 

And this seems to be the formula emerging tech implements from all of these discussion we've had.

That tech upending industries causes the poor to suffer the most, the middle class which is somewhat more stable than the lower class experiences the turmoil but somehow manages to navigate it and the wealthy continue to benefit the greatest. 

Basically the normal cycle of life, only amplified and sped up from analog to digital.

I guess I'm confused why this is a problem. It's not about the poor suffering, it's about people who are easily replaced by others with the same skill, more skill, or technology, needing to find a different line of work or to obtain skills/education that allow for something other than "easily replaced". That situation happens nonstop without A.I., throughout history. What's different this time? It will happen quicker? That might be a good thing. Things that go wrong slowly for just a few people at a time take years to get solved. Things that go wrong quickly and impact a lot of people will get solved more quickly because it impacts a lot of people.

[Beastfeast]

On 10/6/2023 at 5:43 PM, VintageComics said:

It wasn't my intent to make you sound like a dog but it was my intent to make it sound like they have a dog whistle. 

Well, at least thank you for saying they aren't notifying on me. 

To your question, pretty sure everyone knows when I get all my strikes. My life has been the most exciting board game in years.

Dude.  The way you write about yourself on these boards, you are constantly (at the same time) the greatest victim and the greatest champion.  Your persecution complex is only matched by your weirdly high self-image.  Add some religiosity and conspiratorial thinking (which you do - often) and you would be one hell of a cult leader.  

 

[VintageComics]

On 10/6/2023 at 9:54 PM, valiantman said:

I guess I'm confused why this is a problem. It's not about the poor suffering, it's about people who are easily replaced by others with the same skill, more skill, or technology, needing to find a different line of work or to obtain skills/education that allow for something other than "easily replaced". That situation happens nonstop without A.I., throughout history. What's different this time? It will happen quicker? That might be a good thing. Things that go wrong slowly for just a few people at a time take years to get solved. Things that go wrong quickly and impact a lot of people will get solved more quickly because it impacts a lot of people.

That's a very interesting take on it but it's only half the picture. 

There are POSITIVE side effects and NEGATIVE side effects to EVERY situation, decision, advancement and innovation. . 

People tend to want to ignore the negatives and focus on the positives but a PROPER discussion would include BOTH. In fact, a proper discussion would extensively discuss the negatives over the positives as nobody wants unpredictable negatives. Unpredictable positives we can live with. 

Instead, people tend to prefer to do is sensationalize the positives and bury the negatives. Why is that?

----------------------------------------------------

Yep, it will definitely speed things up.

As we can have all pretty much agreed at this point, this has been the overall effect of technology on society. It speeds up everything but in doing so it not only increases speed alone. There are more dimensions to the discussion.

Increasing in speed in ANY situation increases volatility - just like a car accident. Or a stock market.

So what happens is what we've seen happening in the stock market over the last 15 years as machines have taken over trading - an increase in speed and volatility of the markets.

( @namisgr and to those concerned about this thread being off topic you'll note that I am talking about stock markets and cars to show parallel behaviors between large systems - not to take this thread off topic)

Has this extra volatility overall been good for the markets?

I guess that depends on where you were caught.

When the stock markets crashed I would say the millions of people who lost homes, savings, livelihoods, jumped out of buildings etc didn't think it was insignificant.

Do people crashing a Ford Model T whose top speed was 42 MPH have as much to worry about as someone crashing a Lamborghini at 200 MPH?

 

Now there's one more facet to add to the discussion.

As technology has sped up and increased volatility it has also increased the strength and size of it's impact, quickly increasing the number of people affected with every incident. 

So while the stock market crashing in 1929 was bad, there were only 2 Billion possible people to get affected. 

The stock market crash in 2000 was bad but now there are 6 Billion possible people to get affected. 

 

Likewise, a Lambo wiping out at 200 MPH is potentially going to take out a LOT more innocent people than a Ford Model T wiping out at 42 MPH.

------------------------------------------------------

So, following that line of thinking, AI is unleashed on the world and within a few short months one of the largest industries on the planet - Hollywood -  gets upended (let's include comics into Hollywood now since Hollywood is one of comics' primary revenue vehicles now).

What happened? Months long strikes, millions of jobs affected, people moving out of state, selling homes. 

And that's just ONE industry. 

I just don't understand how people can be so cavalier about something that can change things so quickly. It's not going to be negligible for a lot of people. 

We're not going to stop it but we certainly don't understand it well enough to keep it from harming anyone. 

[VintageComics]

On 10/7/2023 at 4:31 PM, Beastfeast said:

Dude.  The way you write about yourself on these boards, you are constantly (at the same time) the greatest victim and the greatest champion.  Your persecution complex is only matched by your weirdly high self-image.  Add some religiosity and conspiratorial thinking (which you do - often) and you would be one hell of a cult leader.  

 

Wait, who are you again?

Have we even had a meaningful conversation? Have you ever met me?

Do you actually know anything about me or do just think it's a good idea to attack total strangers on the internet? 

The only 'image' I have is the one you've formed in your own mind from a few tidbits of information. 

If you can't discuss the topic and your only purpose is to attack the messenger then you should learn to use the ignore feature. 

M'key? Thanks. 

Edited October 7, 2023 by VintageComics

[Eclipse]

On 10/6/2023 at 8:34 PM, VintageComics said:

Last night I sat and chatted all night with some highly successful people who work for Warner and Paramount. They create movie scores for big films and one guy used to work with Hans Zimmer.

We're talking about people who are near the top of the feeding chain in entertainment. It doesn't get bigger than Hans Zimmer. 

We talked long and hard about their industry, and let me tell you they have NO idea what's actually happening. Much of the conversation went along similar lines of the conversation here with me having a head start because of my research, and we sort of concluded that the mediocrity will be pushed to the forefront, the people at the top will be protected (because they are the true talent - AND THE MONEY) and the people at the bottom will suffer the greatest. 

And this seems to be the formula emerging tech implements from all of these discussion we've had.

That tech upending industries causes the poor to suffer the most, the middle class which is somewhat more stable than the lower class experiences the turmoil but somehow manages to navigate it and the wealthy continue to benefit the greatest. 

Basically the normal cycle of life, only amplified and sped up from analog to digital.

 

Yeah but those guys have probably never spent 1 day on set in their life, and have no idea what it really takes to get a movie made. In my almost 30 years in the film industry i have not once heard or seen the guys making film scores on set

[VintageComics]

On 10/7/2023 at 7:41 PM, Eclipse said:

 

Yeah but those guys have probably never spent 1 day on set in their life, and have no idea what it really takes to get a movie made. In my almost 30 years in the film industry i have not once heard or seen the guys making film scores on set

Their jobs are still affected by Artificial Intelligence though, aren't they? That's why they were discussing it. 

Whether someone appears on set or not doesn't disqualify them from the conversation. MANY people are affected that don't appear on set. 

 

[CAHokie]

As I said in the writer’s strike thread, just because something can be done cheaper and easier doesn’t mean it should.
 

Extras in movies/tv are some of the most “interesting” people I have ever met. Take that how you will. They do serve a function though. They create realism and an atmosphere. If you replace them with AI figures then the talent is essentially doing an entire movie in green screen. Sure, that’s fine for certain types of movies but I think it would really change the performance in others. Some will balk at doing it.

[fantastic_four]

On 10/6/2023 at 9:54 PM, valiantman said:

On 10/6/2023 at 8:34 PM, VintageComics said:

That tech upending industries causes the poor to suffer the most, the middle class which is somewhat more stable than the lower class experiences the turmoil but somehow manages to navigate it and the wealthy continue to benefit the greatest. 

Basically the normal cycle of life, only amplified and sped up from analog to digital.

I guess I'm confused why this is a problem. It's not about the poor suffering, it's about people who are easily replaced by others with the same skill, more skill, or technology, needing to find a different line of work or to obtain skills/education that allow for something other than "easily replaced". That situation happens nonstop without A.I., throughout history. What's different this time? It will happen quicker? That might be a good thing. Things that go wrong slowly for just a few people at a time take years to get solved. Things that go wrong quickly and impact a lot of people will get solved more quickly because it impacts a lot of people.

This might be the first point Roy has made about automation replacing labor over our decade-plus discussion about the topic that I mostly agree with him on--certainly the poorer and less educated you are the more you suffer from automation's effect of replacing jobs, and the richer you are the more you benefit.  And your point is valid as well, so I'll address it.  The primary difference this time as compared to history for job obsolescence is that before now the vast majority of people who lost jobs to automation were those who were least educated, but with AI that pool may easily expand to HIGHLY educated people suddenly getting replaced by automation.  Accountants, lawyers, and many other white collar workers are at clear risk of getting replaced within the next half-century, and it may happen even MUCH more quickly than that.  One of the more dire pronouncements I've heard is that if you're now one of the many new remote workers then your job will be one of the first white-collar jobs to get replaced by AI.  As a newly-remote computer programmer who sees AI significantly encroaching upon my work I take that possibility very seriously, albeit not as blindly pessimistically as Ned Ludd did a bit over two centuries ago.  I'm not ready to go around smashing code-writing bots just yet.    This time it's not mostly just the poor and uneducated at risk, it's large swaths of EVERYONE who isn't rich.

So what do you do if you're a parent with a kid or a concerned teenager about to enter a university?  Skip the majors at risk of getting replaced by AI lest your $200K to $500K education become largely devalued before your working years are up--if not far sooner than that and your degree becomes obsolete shortly after you graduate?    It's a tough thing, and I really haven't heard great ways to navigate this terrain.  It may end up disenfranchising MILLIONS of people over a very short period of time, i.e. 5 to 10 years, and while futurist enthusiasts such as myself have mapped out many of the milestones for how society has to change on the way to complete automation the one with the biggest risk is exactly what we will do as the value of human labor starts to significantly decrease.  And even futurists don't make foolproof roadmaps, so we may be entering a half-century to century period of significant pain for larger groups of people than history has ever seen as we struggle with how to deal with the possibility of exponentially-increasing automation.  I'm not sure the value of human labor has decreased significantly at all since the start of the Industrial Revolution despite the fears most popularly started by Marx made us all aware of, but once it does start I don't really trust even the most educated among us to clearly see capitalism's decline before large portions of several GENERATIONS of people are significantly struggling.

But that's the pessimistic view.  There are some pretty easy fixes to patch capitalism as automation increases, and I'm sure many of them will get enacted.  They may be enough.  Can't get too much more into detail with those lest the argumentative among us tank the thread.  

Edited October 10, 2023 by fantastic_four

[darkstar]

On 9/2/2023 at 7:30 PM, VintageComics said:

Just look at what the writer did above for that Graphic novel. He is self admitting that he can not draw and yet that work is incredible. 

It's actually atrocious and off-putting. 

[VintageComics]

On 10/10/2023 at 8:30 AM, CAHokie said:

As I said in the writer’s strike thread, just because something can be done cheaper and easier doesn’t mean it should.

Correct. What is amazing is that most discussions these days follow the same parallels in every area of society whether it's automotive or entertainment or anything. 

I've been saying for DECADES on here that cheaper is NOT better. Until people can understand the long term consequences of constantly trying to get "cheaper" products they are going to continually shoot themselves in the foot. It's a self perpetuating prophesy and the consumer needs to break the cycle because the supplier will always supply whatever the consumer will gobble up so products continue to get cheaper and worse perpetually.

The reason people don't adjust is for the same reason an addict doesn't want to stop using. There is a necessary adjustment period of change that might be difficult to endure (the hang over from a lifetime of bad decision making) and it's precisely because people avoid a little short term suffering to avoid a longer term, larger problem that the problem continues to grow. 

No, this isn't a talk about addiction. This thread is not off topic. It's a parallel to emphasize the point. 

To solve the world's ills the solution is the same. We need to value things that have value.

Things that are built with integrity and quality in mind over profit. 

And the way to do that is to raise better families because those families will make better decisions FOR THE COMMUNITY THEY'RE RAISED IN.

In case nobody heard me before. 

On 10/10/2023 at 8:30 AM, CAHokie said:

Extras in movies/tv are some of the most “interesting” people I have ever met. Take that how you will. They do serve a function though. They create realism and an atmosphere. If you replace them with AI figures then the talent is essentially doing an entire movie in green screen. Sure, that’s fine for certain types of movies but I think it would really change the performance in others. Some will balk at doing it.

One of the parallels I was talking about was how people don't care (or just can't tell) if something is fake. That's a common theme through this thread and many if not most industries that have undergone massive upheaval due to technical advances. 

"Fake beef? Does it taste like beef? It does? Oh then it doesn't matter if it's fake or not."

Well, actually it DOES matter because your body evolved from millions of years of eating REAL food. Your body is not a processing factory that doesn't care what goes into it. Your body is formed out of the soil, out of all the things that your food grows out of and your body is connected to where REAL food comes from. 

So you can't make a new reality, a new "food" from scratch and expect your body which evolved eating real food to treat fake food the same way. 

You may not catch what it's doing to your body right away but it IS doing something and logic would dictate it's not as good for you as real food. 

 

Same with art. 

Art has a measurable effect on society. It moves, changes and inspires people. It heals. It educates. It moves information. 

HEALTHY humans cleave toward other healthy humans. We cleave toward other humans because inspiration from other humans is inspiring, empowering, healing and necessary. 

What happens when your inspiration is no longer real? When it's manufactured artificially?

When the origins are NOT HUMAN? 

Well, the same thing happens in EVERY instance. 

The human starts to long for what's missing and a new problem is created. 

The mental health problems we are facing are mostly, directly related to the digital world being imposed on us. 

Why? Because I believe it's warping reality and we can't handle it in a healthy manner. 

-------------------------------------------

I think maybe not everyone can even intuitively see or understand what I'm talking about.

I remember having the discussion about Henry Cavill's moustache being Photoshopped out for Justice League. I remember noticing it in the movie theater and even talked about it here on this forum on several occasions. It really bothered me the way it looked, meaning it bothered me that it didn't look right in the movie - I could clearly tell something was not right but most seemed to not even notice it.

So maybe I just keep noticing things that most don't?

If so, the thought of the majority of people being completely oblivious to something so obvious to me is frankly quite scary now when I think about it. 

Edited October 11, 2023 by VintageComics

[VintageComics]

On 10/10/2023 at 6:06 PM, darkstar said:

It's actually atrocious and off-putting. 

Do you mean Frank Robbins atrocious and off-putting or Herb Trimpe / Bill Mantlo atrocious and off-putting?

It's a story book with pictures. If you don't like the story book, don't buy the pictures. 

I'll tell you something, my friend Brian is a very smart man and he is just one of MANY burning the midnight oil as they learn to use this new medium. The only difference is btat he's totally upfront about it while the art houses seem to be playing cloak and dagger with their lies and manipulation. 

But I'd exect no less from big corporate money. 

[CAHokie]

On 10/10/2023 at 7:06 PM, VintageComics said:

Correct. What is amazing is that most discussions these days follow the same parallels in every area of society whether it's automotive or entertainment or anything. 

I've been saying for DECADES on here that cheaper is NOT better. Until people can understand the long term consequences of constantly trying to get "cheaper" products they are going to continually shoot themselves in the foot. It's a self perpetuating prophesy and the consumer needs to break the cycle because the supplier will always supply whatever the consumer will gobble up so products continue to get cheaper and worse perpetually.

The reason people don't adjust is for the same reason an addict doesn't want to stop using. There is a necessary adjustment period of change that might be difficult to endure (the hang over from a lifetime of bad decision making) and it's precisely because people avoid a little short term suffering to avoid a longer term, larger problem that the problem continues to grow. 

No, this isn't a talk about addiction. This thread is not off topic. It's a parallel to emphasize the point. 

To solve the world's ills the solution is the same. We need to value things that have value.

Things that are built with integrity and quality in mind over profit. 

And the way to do that is to raise better families because those families will make better decisions FOR THE COMMUNITY THEY'RE RAISED IN.

In case nobody heard me before. 

One of the parallels I was talking about was how people don't care (or just can't tell) if something is fake. That's a common theme through this thread and many if not most industries that have undergone massive upheaval due to technical advances. 

"Fake beef? Does it taste like beef? It does? Oh then it doesn't matter if it's fake or not."

Well, actually it DOES matter because your body evolved from millions of years of eating REAL food. Your body is not a processing factory that doesn't care what goes into it. Your body is formed out of the soil, out of all the things that your food grows out of and your body is connected to where REAL food comes from. 

So you can't make a new reality, a new "food" from scratch and expect your body which evolved eating real food to treat fake food the same way. 

You may not catch what it's doing to your body right away but it IS doing something and logic would dictate it's not as good for you as real food. 

 

Same with art. 

Art has a measurable effect on society. It moves, changes and inspires people. It heals. It educates. It moves information. 

HEALTHY humans cleave toward other healthy humans. We cleave toward other humans because inspiration from other humans is inspiring, empowering, healing and necessary. 

What happens when your inspiration is no longer real? When it's manufactured artificially?

When the origins are NOT HUMAN? 

Well, the same thing happens in EVERY instance. 

The human starts to long for what's missing and a new problem is created. 

The mental health problems we are facing are mostly, directly related to the digital world being imposed on us. 

Why? Because I believe it's warping reality and we can't handle it in a healthy manner. 

-------------------------------------------

I think it's worth mentioning that maybe not everyone can even intuitively see or understand what I'm talking about.

I remember having the discussion about Henry Cavill's moustache being Photoshopped out for B v S (I remember noticing it in the movie theater and even talked about it here on this forum on several occasions. It really me the way it looked, meaning it bothered me that it didn't look right in the movie - I could clearly tell something was not right but most seemed to not even notice it.

So maybe I just keep noticing things that most don't?

And the thought of the majority of people being completely oblivious to something so obvious to me is frankly quite scary now when I think about it. 

My personal fact checker should be along soon. Since I know what I am talking about, maybe he will mansplain things to you instead.   
 

(That was an impressive wall of text by the way but a lot of truth to it) 

[VintageComics]

On 10/10/2023 at 10:43 AM, fantastic_four said:

On 10/6/2023 at 9:54 PM, valiantman said:

On 10/6/2023 at 8:34 PM, VintageComics said:

That tech upending industries causes the poor to suffer the most, the middle class which is somewhat more stable than the lower class experiences the turmoil but somehow manages to navigate it and the wealthy continue to benefit the greatest. 

Basically the normal cycle of life, only amplified and sped up from analog to digital.

I guess I'm confused why this is a problem. It's not about the poor suffering, it's about people who are easily replaced by others with the same skill, more skill, or technology, needing to find a different line of work or to obtain skills/education that allow for something other than "easily replaced". That situation happens nonstop without A.I., throughout history. What's different this time? It will happen quicker? That might be a good thing. Things that go wrong slowly for just a few people at a time take years to get solved. Things that go wrong quickly and impact a lot of people will get solved more quickly because it impacts a lot of people.

Expand  

This might be the first point Roy has made about automation replacing labor over our decade-plus discussion about the topic that I mostly agree with him on--certainly the poorer and less educated you are the more you suffer from automation's effect of replacing jobs, and the richer you are the more you benefit.  And your point is valid as well, so I'll address it.  The primary difference this time as compared to history for job obsolescence is that before now the vast majority of people who lost jobs to automation were those who were least educated, but with AI that pool may easily expand to HIGHLY educated people suddenly getting replaced by automation.  Accountants, lawyers, and many other white collar workers are at clear risk of getting replaced within the next half-century, and it may happen even MUCH more quickly than that.  One of the more dire pronouncements I've heard is that if you're now one of the many new remote workers then your job will be one of the first white-collar jobs to get replaced by AI.  As a newly-remote computer programmer who sees AI significantly encroaching upon my work I take that possibility very seriously, albeit not as blindly pessimistically as Ned Ludd did a bit over two centuries ago.  I'm not ready to go around smashing code-writing bots just yet.    This time it's not mostly just the poor and uneducated at risk, it's large swaths of EVERYONE who isn't rich.

Ah, so I only make valid points when they affect you personally and directly. 

The rest of the time you have this Pollinic attitude that nothing is a problem.

Again, I am NOT AGAINST TECH. I AM FOR UNDERSTANDING TECH'S POSSIBLE EFFECTS ON SOCIETY BETTER BEFORE IMPLEMENTING IT.

That is the ONLY point I'm trying to make. 

Why ANYONE would be against that boggles my mind. 

[VintageComics]

On 10/10/2023 at 7:16 PM, CAHokie said:

That was an impressive wall of text by the way but a lot of truth to it) 

I added a few more words, just for you. 

[Dr. Balls]

On 10/7/2023 at 5:19 PM, VintageComics said:

As technology has sped up and increased volatility it has also increased the strength and size of it's impact, quickly increasing the number of people affected with every incident. 

So while the stock market crashing in 1929 was bad, there were only 2 Billion possible people to get affected. 

The stock market crash in 2000 was bad but now there are 6 Billion possible people to get affected. 

 

Likewise, a Lambo wiping out at 200 MPH is potentially going to take out a LOT more innocent people than a Ford Model T wiping out at 42 MPH.

That's an interesting way to frame the way society has scaled. I agree, and I also think that social media has scaled in a similar fashion. Take 90's Chat Rooms - which we're also filled with a mix of people from jokesters to trolls - but there wasn't as many people accessing it as today. The effect of social media on society as a whole back then is not what it is now. In 1995, disinformation or skewed narratives we're relegated to a corner of this newfangled thing called "The Internet" - but in 2023, it's sold as fact, gospel and (as much as I hate to use this word) the zeitgeist of the here and now.

The internet, traveling at 42 MPH in 1995 did not wreck as many people as it does now traveling at 200 MPH.