This readin' and writin' business is turning us into helpless idiots.<p>I mean what will become of our natural memory if all we have to do is write stuff down and read it later on. When I was kid you memorized what was important. And we were _strong_!!!<p>Then there's the effect on personal communication. What ever became of traveling days and weeks to go talk to someone else far away. We miss all that travel and and seeing what the world is like. (Not to mention the effect on the travel industry.) A written letter just doesn't have the same effect on someone as a face to face visit. And besides, if its in writing, how am I gonna wiggle out of terms and conditions I don't like?<p>I tell you, I don't like it.<p>And don't get me started on that damn printin' press...<p>edit:<p>Seriously (huuuur hur hur hur) people aren't getting stupider.<p>There've _always_ been stupid people in great numbers. Never been a shortage. Its just that its easier to see them or have to deal with them. Anyone can post a blog or get hits on youtube. That's a good thing. The problem isn't too much information technology, its too little filter and editorial technology. It'll happen. We're, what, 15, 20 years into this internet thingie. 40 years if you're generous. It took over a hundred years for the printing press to stabilize technologically and several hundred years for people to learn to deal with its societal implications (actually we're still working on that one...) Sites like this (hacker news) are just the beginning.<p>In the meantime, I've started doing a little grassroots filtering by no longer reading Newsweek technology articles...
My take is that there were a lot of tasks that were clearly delineated in the past: watching TV, reading news, paying bills, balancing the checkbook, playing games, catching up with friends -- no-one could see you doing one and confuse it for something else.<p>Now, we do all these things through a couple devices. I don't buy the idea that we're <i>really</i> doing that much different. It's just really hard to tell tasks apart; all we see is "guy staring at screen".<p>But that guy staring at that screen? He could be checking a Twitter stream, or he could be reading a letter from his mother. He could be watching porn, or he could be studying for an exam. He could be playing Peggle, or he could be looking at photos of his new niece.<p>The only thing I know for sure, is that it's wildly presumptuous to think I <i>actually</i> know what he's doing, just because it involves a screen.
"Beck and Palin are the inevitable outcome of that devolution. They are what we deserve. They are, in fact, what we've created."<p>Right. Would Fr. Coughlin have got where he did without the Internet deluge? Or William Jennings Bryan or William Duane? What half-ass posturing. Demagoguery does not and never has depended on the existence of a technology, though various technologies have given and advantage to one or another style of demagoguery.<p>Newsweek should know better than to publish this--or perhaps print has rotted their wits.
Or it could be that he just does not see how these new devices, which are today geared only to entertainment, could some day be used to further empower us. Perhaps, in the future we might see the iPad or other devices like it, be used in schools for delivering instructional, interactive content. They might serve as rich clipboards for carrying and streaming medical information in a hospital or other medical centers. As for Facebook and Twitter, while they are still mostly used for entertainment, they have also been useful for pushing up-to-minute status of things going on in places of political unrest or from the hospital rooms. When I was at the hospital with my daughter after her surgery, I used Facebook to provide continual updates to my friends and family about her condition.<p>So maybe Obama's comments simply lack imagination of how these devices could be more useful in the future. And I believe it's also true that some of the most significant technological innovations start out as toys.
"With iPods and iPads and Xboxes and PlayStations, - none of which I know how to work - information becomes a distraction, a diversion, a form of entertainment, rather than a tool of empowerment, rather than the means of emancipation"<p>100 years ago, people had less truly leisure time. Books were not as common and news didn't travel fast. I got to see photos of the plane going down in the Hudson minutes after it happened thanks to twitter and an iPhone. We are still adjusting to the new world and it will be some time before the filters get internalized. It isn't the gadgets its biology.<p>Now the quote. I find it disappointing for two different reasons. The first is simply that I felt we had elected a technology clued in President. It seems that was either a lie or he is being disingenuous in his speech. I really have a tough time believing he doesn't know how to work and iPod.<p>The second problem is that I hate how he claimed ignorance to make himself look better than the people he was admonishing. There were so many ways to give that speech that would have not put down geeks. "I don't play with those things so I am cool" cliche of his speech writer is a little heavy.
Is it possible we are just temporarily distracted by all the amazing advancements that have developed in a very short period of time? New technology is very fun and exciting for most people. There may come a time when this always-on, constantly updated tendency has lost a bit of its luster and we will get down to business with tools that are multitudes more powerful than those our parents had.
I think people are overly poopooing the iPad's effect on the world. I think people who buy them INSTEAD of a computer for anyone born since 1950 is being a moron. However I think 99% of people who use them view them as a device slightly more mobile as a laptop which is nice for certain activities, and is a nice auxiliary.<p>I know I personally have used it to answer quite a few emails (but then again, if I was buying it for just personal use, I likely wouldn't have; I'm a professional iPad dev), as well as keep up on rss feeds and used it as a pdf reader.
I read this as 'don't hate the playa hate the game'
If somebody wants to use their iPad to play Farmville, great for them. They can and still will find something just as pointless or stupid to do without the iPad or without Facebook. Just because it lets you do some pointless crap doesn't make it a bad tool, and it certainly doesn't mean that everyone who uses the tool is using it for that pointless crap.
Technology use does not distract us from political engagement: <a href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/social_media_is_slowly_changing_the_demographics_o.php" rel="nofollow">http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/social_media_is_slowly_...</a>
Tyler Durden: <i>The things you own end up owning you.</i><p>Information can be a <i>thing</i> too. Sometimes information liberates us, and in other circumstances it weighs on us.<p>Obama is right.