Digital world

In the combined influence of just having watched Die Hard 4 and an interesting conversation I had with a classmate yesterday, concerning what is real and what is surreal, I started musing about our digital world. I realise that it is ironic, or maybe paradoxical, to be telling you this via that same digital world, but that's the way it works. Or at least, that is one of the conclusions I could draw from both influences; everything is connected, and if you want to be "in" on that connection, the internet is the way to go.
Now said classmate is veeery much into the theories of Jean Baudrillard, who was a French philosopher trying to make sense of the world (aren't they all?). Now we do not agree on about 90% of everything when theory or philosophy is concerned and this case was no different. He argued, as does Die Hard 4 in a way, that the digital world is the new "best thing". Everybody is always online, people feel angry and lost when they cannot check their e-mail for a couple of hours or when others do not immediately respond to private messages or their Facebook status. Now according to Baudrillard, this whole internet-thing is a fake version of the real world, but a fake version that will try to overcome the real thing so that the real thing does not exist anymore and the fake thing is all that is left (I'm trying to explain it as simply as possible, also because I haven't actually read his theories myself, I just know two guys who are really into him). So basically, the fact that "we" are all finding this internet thing the most important part of our lives, is something that the internet wants, and it is something that is detrimental to the real world.
Now I have problems with several of those assumptions. First of all, what I usually do when someone is talking about "everybody doing something" is look at the majority of people, who in this case are not online 24/7 (most of my friends don't have a smartphone) and don't need to. It's just a small percentage, and that small percentage is based in the western world, because you can be sure that people in China or India are not constantly checking their e-mail, they are working their butts off. So, First World Problem. Secondly, I don't think the internet has any intention to overrule the "real world" (the whole discussion of that real world is we will just put aside for now). The internet is something that we are all making and doing together (although the US government has other ideas about that right now...), it is not a Terminator-like-thing out to get us. We are freely putting our attention and energy and love into this system, it is not asking anything of us (okay, some websites/companies are, but again, they only exist by the merit of their users). And lastly, personally, I like the internet, I like being able to go to Wikipedia or IMDB or a news website and find what I want to know within seconds. It is a brilliant system when writing essays (I cannot imagine how I would do without it, but for hundreds of years we did, so I am sure I would be able to do it too), and great for keeping in touch with friends or classmates or former friends or former classmates. But it is not the be-all and end-all of my existence. I'd rather knit another hat or read some more in my Fry book or go for a nice long walk than spend all my free time "online". I'd rather meet those friends in person than read their Facebook status (I've never done the MSN or Skype thing), and I do meet most of them regularly, at least those people that I genuinely care about meeting. People in researches show that we generally get angry or angsty when someone asks us if we could live without the internet for a week, but I think they would get the same response if they would ask people whether they could live without a refrigerator or washing machine for a week, it's just that the latter questions are never asked (because we are so used to those appliances now). It is just a tool, like so many tools, it is not a goal in itself.

That's what I think.

However, I do have to admit, to get back to the Die Hard perspective, that it is scary how many things you can only do online. There is a commercial on Dutch tv right now, in which an old man fills out his bank statement on a paper slip (like we all used to do 5 years ago), and the bank ensures the audience that you can still do things "the old way" with them. But I am afraid that will disappear too, when the "older generation" has become too small a group to profit from. Not that that would necessarily be a bad thing in itself, it's just progress (the same goes for e-books, really), but the whole idea of not having some physical evidence that your money is stored somewhere safe is somewhat disconcerting. And the "everything is connected" thing is a bit scary too, although again, that is mainly our online life, it does not truly (physically) affect our real life if something happened to our Facebook account. But it is something to think about.
But still, I do not see the world as bleakly as that we are all headed into the black digital void where we will all be glued to a screen without ever doing "real things" in the "real world". Partly because there is no "we" to speak of here, it is mainly wealthy young westerners with a lot of free time (if we all needed to do hard labour for 12 hours a day just to get food on the table this whole thing would be a non-issue), and for most of them, it is just a thing to keep their mind occupied. But maybe my outlook on things is too bright, being based mainly on my own feelings and experiences. Time will tell.
(And comments are always appreciated!)