We all know that quote "Knowledge is power" and when it comes to the internet, knowledge is something that is in abundance, do you think that power is being inflated? or does it mean that power is being democratised on a global scale?

Taking the internet, quote "Ignorance is power" looks more valid. And not only in internet.

Internet neutralizes knowledge. It drowns and dissolves it in more easy to access, more digestible, more gratifying, and more abundant bullshit.

The best weapon against knowledge is not silence, but noise.

I don't think so. See: every internet trend.

If this were a problem thread, I'd recommend your post as the solution.

From the internet i have learned much. Some of what i've learned relates to self-reliance (growing food and medicine, producing energy, tool making, etc). So the internet empowers me in a way which lessens the power that others have over me.

The internet erodes boundaries and threatens institutions which rely on ignorance. The internet allows collaboration on a level our race has never known. Yet the internet promotes ignorance, isolation, and group think. etc etc. The internet is what people make it, and what the minders limit it to.

If states stay out of it, i think the internet can be boon to humanity. But if man mostly uses it as toy, then it'll be worse for us than television and microwaves. If states evolve their manipulation of us through it, then it is curse. Time will tell.

I believe the internet does help make it so that people(those who can separate the information and disinformation) all over the world are more well-informed but more powerful? No. Money = Power. You can have all the knowledge this world can offer inside your head but without any money...you are just a poor person with no power. If the internet could truly make people all over the world more powerful(with knowledge), powerful people would of already destroyed the internet. Power shared is power lost...

Power is inflating. Unfortunately, the power is Foucauldian.

They also say that, "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing." And that's precisely what the internet provides, in our ten-second sound bite culture: why bother to learn, when you can just skim — and then cherry-pick out only the "facts" you need to support your position.

this.

We have all the information to do all the "right decisions" - yet information is rarely properly researched, understood and converted into actual knowledge.

Inflated.

(sarcasm) ARE YOU SAYING THIS SHIT HAS GONE INTERNATIONAL!

I disaggree. what mainstream media is showing you is way more made digestible, gratifying and influencial and I say that knowing journalists who are not happy with being controlled by political parties and companies, even if only on a small scale. At least you get the information in the noise and can apply some filters to ignore the abundant stuff this way, this is not possible if information is completely hidden from you.

I think there's an important distinction between information availability and knowledge absorption. The Internet definitely has a tremendous abundance of information, some of it good quality information and some of it not so good or even terrible. I think it is safe to say that the amount of information online universally increases over time and will continue to do so forever under the assumption the Internet and mankind continue to exist and don't face any major technical roadblocks or destruction or major damage to the system as a whole.

The potential that exists for knowledge to increase because of the availability of this information is definitely there, and some people take advantage of that to a greater purpose, but I don't think it is universally applied to everyone. There are many people out there who don't tap into the power of the information availability on the Internet to increase their knowledge in any substantial way. So I wouldn't say the availability of the information translates into universal increase in knowledge or power.

The potential is there, but it depends on whether one chooses to use it for that purpose or not. I do also think that there are many people out there who use it in a way like you've characterized it above though too, and that it has a net positive impact in many ways on the democratization of power to some extent or another. It enables people to organize together to fight for a common cause, to promote positive change and fight against tyranny, but it also enables people to use it for the opposite. It's a bit of a mixed bag, but I think overall we're all better for it in the long run.