Nobody does it better, motion graphics

Carly Simon - Nobody Does It Better

September 25th / a.k.a. Post IV

Carly Simon was right. Nobody does it better. I mean, no human body does, that is. However, there is a technological body that can do it better, or maybe, to put it more correctly, help us do it better. Today's "it" (for the purposes of this post) is human communication. Consider the irony: inanimate wires, microchips and plastic assisting flesh and blood humans in being more human. Is face to face communication soon to be a thing of the past? Joseph B. Walther in his article "Computer Mediated Communication: Impersonal, Interpersonal and Hyperpersonal Interaction" points to such a possibility. Does CMC really provide us humans a better platform for human interaction? Mr Walther cites numerous research that supports a phenomonology that CMC is superior to face to face (FtF) communication concluding: " ...a new perspective is offered here--a fully integrated view of CMC taking into account the sender, receiver, channel and feedback as each contributes to hyperpersonal interaction in CMC, interaction that is more desireable than we can often manage FtF (P.28)". I, for one, find it disturbing that interpersonal communication is being left to computers. Can we really call this human interaction? I have a problem with my fellow man's "abdication of real life" (ABORL). [Side note: I just love it when these researchers create their own acronyms, so I made one too]. Is the real world so bad, and are people so socially backward that they can't, or choose not to, exist in this life, but can happily exist virtually in Linden Labs "Second Life"? I just don't get it. Am I hopeless humanist? Does CMC really enhance intercourse? Maybe, just maybe it does, but I ask you this: Can two people fall in love online? I say no, humans can only fall in love in person. Can a person live a real human life in a computer's virtual world? I say no, s/he only live it here in the real world. Communication is indeed a human desire, but ask yourself how much fun would a wedding to, and a honeymoon with, a real person be if it took place in cyberspace?

Arcade Original Pong

Arcade Original Pong

Okay before you get the idea that I am a negative, "glass is half-empty" type of guy, allow me to tell you that I am genuinely very excited about all this new technology. Heck, I think "Cyberspace" is great. In their statement Cyberspace and the American Dream, E. Dyson et al., (despite the fact that they represent an organization whose raison d'etre is " to create a positive vision of the future....") have cogently argued the positive effects on society of a "Third Wave economy" and "the knowledge age" it has spawned. I mean who can't get behind the ideals of "freedom", "opportunity", "individuality", and a benevolent society free from tension and conflict that is rich with "symbiotic relationships". How awesome is the idea of unlimited information (you can read that knowledge if you'd like) at your finger tips, not to mention really cool video games! Yet, I am still hard pressed to believe that the advent and advance of computer technology was brought about by something other than good old fashion greed. My employment in the financial industry for the last 25 years has rendered me (understandibly) preconditioned. I am not ashamed to say I am a proponent of the famous "money makes the world go around" theory. What evidence do have to support this hair brained notion? The original Atari Pong game (1972) was simply brilliant, and it launched a multi-billion dollar industry with just a five hundred dollar investment. What was the real impetus for all the subsequent technological innovation and development? I'll tell you... It was the desire to make a buck. Sure, it's an extremely narrow example of how the "Third Wave economy" has had a positive influence, but I am sure you will agree that freedom, opportunity and individuality abound in the world of computer games. Yep, there is no question that today's world is a better one. (Do you detect a note of sarcasm?).

In the Year 2525

imagine this

In the Year 2525

imagine this

Okay, this is my "catch up" post. So ...did you here the one about the baby tomato that kept falling behind? His mother stepped on him and said: "Now Ketchup!" Questions, questions, questions. I think for starters I'd like to ask this: Can the created become the creator? More specifically, has technology become an independent force that renders the society that produced it technologically fatalistic (think: "Hard Determinism")? Please indulge me whilst we go back to some basics: God created man. Man created machine. Machine changes the course of human history? Nope sorry, I don't buy it. I embrace the tenets of “free will’ and reason. An inanimate object is the product and agent of the human culture that created it. Technology must follow a necessary path within the structure of that which we label “society”. It must be imagined, discovered, developed, constructed, tested, marketed, distributed, purchased and utilized. (I am sure I missed a few). At every stage of technological development a “human touch”, is necessary to advance it. Why has society become so willing to abdicate its place as first mover? The idea that man has “succumbed” to the panacea feebly advanced as “progress” (read that as technological determinism) is truly beyond me. I can’t accept anything that runs contrary to THE NATURAL DESIGN. “What the hell is he talking about?” I hear you saying (I think). FLASBACK: I am 9 years old. I have seen “2001 A space Oddity” and I am intrigued. I flip on the radio and I hear: “ In the year 2525”. Okay, let me just come out and say it. These fabulous inventions…do we really need them? Do we want them? Do they improve the quality of our lives? I can say with great certainty that young men and women living their lives during the late 1960’s and early 1970’s were asking the very same questions. So…Let me ask you: Do you really believe your life is better with today’s technologies, or could you be just as happy living without cellphones and computers in the Hippie Dippy days of 1969? As for me, I have fond memories.

A Space Odyssey 2001 / H.A.L.

A Space Odyssey 2001 / H.A.L.

First Post - MSTU 4020

Okay, I am in. So ...um ...er ...like ...where to begin? What to say? How to make this space more than just the same old blah, blah, blah. The last time I was in a classroom the "internet" was just a glimmer in Vice-President Al Gore's eye (hah). Now, thirty years later (yes, time does, in fact, fly) it appears as though technology is poised to take over the world. "That's total nonsense", I hear you say, "it's not possible for computers to control the course of human events". Yet, I distinctly remember seeing Stanley Kubrick's science fiction classic "2001 A Space Oddity" when it debuted in 1968. I was thinking: WOW! If humans can land a man on the moon then why can't they also invent a computer like H.A.L. that could take over the world? Considering how far technology has come and how fast it continues to advance (happily short of Mr Kubrick's best guess) certainly anything is possible, right? Has science fiction actually become science fact? The caveman (think Geico commercial), was powerless to change the world he lived in. Not suprising, really, considering he had ZERO technology. Now 21st century man seems to have created a world in which his his own technology has seemingly become the "straw that stirs the drink". Are we really subject to newly created forces beyond our control? Let's find out.