I recall someone saying 'The internet is for lonely people'. If that is true, then about half the world is 'lonely'. I can vouch with utmost honesty that, more often than not, I come online to write in my blog or to talk to my friends or to read others' blogs. My mother says that 'bloggers are people who are either unemployed or have enough free time to seek attention on the internet'. I didn't agree with her, maybe it's simply the generation gap. (It is no secret that she is computer illiterate.) Everyone seems to have a blog, including Dmitry Tursunov! When I confronted my mother with the fact that everyone has the right to express themselves (assuming that they think democratically) she curtly said, "I have no intention of leaving anything behind, it's why I don't even write a diary". My mother doesn't realize that I have just immortalized her in my blog! (At least till blogger ceases to exist!) So is being on the internet a pathetic attempt by human beings at immortality? Are we not able to accept our insignificance? Do we really think that a sequence of bits can actually make us immortal (At least they remain cached in servers for ages. Besides, if one is suspected by the CIA, then they remain immortalized in print on record.)
Alright, maybe I got a little carried away. Maybe it's just the right of every human being to have his or her 15 minutes of fame. Hence I ask the parental and grandparental generation; is that such a bad thing? It's easy for the older generation to scoff at new-age methods to do the same old thing. (They're the proponents of heirlooms, inheritances and legacies to start with.) The entry might not make sense now, but I think it will make sense sometime in the future when prose-style blogs will be an obscurity. As for loneliness, the lack of internet access is not a measure of the degree of lonliness.