Andrew Feenberg argued that democracy can transform technology and I like to believe that is true. I want to believe that my interests and values can change technology and will be considered in the development of new technology. I want to believe that I have a voice that will be heard and respected.
In the future I would like to see technology produced at its current rate of progression and I do not want to delay advancements while we sit in think tanks and discuss the affects. I want consideration for my interests in the initial design. It is a touchy area because once technology is created it becomes more difficult to change without being ceased. I want the innovators to know that they stand to lose a great deal of money if they do not consider the majority of the people. We have proven in the past that we are a nation of great resolve and when we rebel our mark is left.
Saturday, September 26, 2009
Thursday, September 17, 2009
technology as a 'Life Form'
I do agree that we can understand technology as a ‘life form’ because many innovations “that we like to think of as mere tools or instruments now function as virtual members of our society”. Langdon stated that “humans and inanimate objects are linked in various kinds of relationships”. He provided the example of the phone answering machine that handles some of the responsibilities previously assigned to full-time secretaries. The point is that technology social, cultural and political effects.
Another example of technology becoming a ‘life form’ was the el cortito tool used in agriculture. The physical tool has a very small handle. The tool has a secondary function because of the size it requires the worker to bend over or get on their knees to utilize the tool which in effect acts as an identifier of who is working and how is not. Because workers are bent over it is easier to survey a field and identify the employees not working because they are standing.
The computer was an excellent example of how technology is a ‘form of life’. Computers today have roles, responsibilities and actions that were previously assigned to humans. They process transactions, manage business data, formulate calculations and can even assess risk. They can also monitor employee production acting in a supervisor role.
The iPhone is a newer innovation that has taken on a ‘life for’. It changes relationships between humans. In lieu of asking questions when we do not know the answer we can google the answer. In lieu of asking for directions when we are lost we can utilize the GPS to find our way. We can make phone calls while traveling to receive family updates instead of receiving them at the dinner table. It can serve as the role of an administrative assistant providing phone messages, work calendars and work updates via e-mail. The were odd at first but as more humans utilized them they have now become part of our daily routine.
Langdon Winners cautions us to monitor how new technology to identify the how it will change the economy and effect our environment. What negative impacts will it have on our culture.
Another example of technology becoming a ‘life form’ was the el cortito tool used in agriculture. The physical tool has a very small handle. The tool has a secondary function because of the size it requires the worker to bend over or get on their knees to utilize the tool which in effect acts as an identifier of who is working and how is not. Because workers are bent over it is easier to survey a field and identify the employees not working because they are standing.
The computer was an excellent example of how technology is a ‘form of life’. Computers today have roles, responsibilities and actions that were previously assigned to humans. They process transactions, manage business data, formulate calculations and can even assess risk. They can also monitor employee production acting in a supervisor role.
The iPhone is a newer innovation that has taken on a ‘life for’. It changes relationships between humans. In lieu of asking questions when we do not know the answer we can google the answer. In lieu of asking for directions when we are lost we can utilize the GPS to find our way. We can make phone calls while traveling to receive family updates instead of receiving them at the dinner table. It can serve as the role of an administrative assistant providing phone messages, work calendars and work updates via e-mail. The were odd at first but as more humans utilized them they have now become part of our daily routine.
Langdon Winners cautions us to monitor how new technology to identify the how it will change the economy and effect our environment. What negative impacts will it have on our culture.
Sunday, September 13, 2009
Techonolgy and Historical Change
I always believed that technology was an influence of history but after reading The Shock of the Old: Production by David Edgerton and History as Technological Change by Rosalind Williams I was surprised to learn how much of an impact history and society have on technology. It was also refreshing to see Rosalind Williams’ perspective and explanation of the Human Habitat.
Edgerton shows examples of how certain innovations had impacts on trades and production throughout history. He also showed examples of how some products are still in use and have not been drastically altered by innovation. Singer produced 90% of the sewing machines in 1905 and even today is still producing the same machines. “in April 2002, thread operated Singers decorated with stickers celebrating 150 years of Singer machines were on sale alongside white goods, next to an internet café”. Edgerton used examples of products (automobiles) and industries (Farming, Agriculture. Mass Production and Service Industries) to show innovation was introduced and utilized differently by different societies. One of the main points given through these examples was that society impacts technology because technology is dependent on people utilize it.
Williams introduced a term called the “Human Habitat” which also showed how historical change does not equate to technological change. Williams asked that the reader identify technology as meaning change. The consensus by most is that change is “relentless and inevitable” but Williams presents a challenge that change lacks a purpose and an end. ‘Progress has a story line; change does not”. Without progress no innovation will alter how humans relate and interact and therefore not be part of any change in history.
Historical change is much more complex than the introduction to new technology. Humans must have a use for the technology in their lives in order for the technology to be justified. There must be an influence on how humans relate and interact with each other. That creates a historical change. The introduction of the tractor in the 1920’s had very little impact in the Soviet Union and therefore did not result in a historical change.
Edgerton shows examples of how certain innovations had impacts on trades and production throughout history. He also showed examples of how some products are still in use and have not been drastically altered by innovation. Singer produced 90% of the sewing machines in 1905 and even today is still producing the same machines. “in April 2002, thread operated Singers decorated with stickers celebrating 150 years of Singer machines were on sale alongside white goods, next to an internet café”. Edgerton used examples of products (automobiles) and industries (Farming, Agriculture. Mass Production and Service Industries) to show innovation was introduced and utilized differently by different societies. One of the main points given through these examples was that society impacts technology because technology is dependent on people utilize it.
Williams introduced a term called the “Human Habitat” which also showed how historical change does not equate to technological change. Williams asked that the reader identify technology as meaning change. The consensus by most is that change is “relentless and inevitable” but Williams presents a challenge that change lacks a purpose and an end. ‘Progress has a story line; change does not”. Without progress no innovation will alter how humans relate and interact and therefore not be part of any change in history.
Historical change is much more complex than the introduction to new technology. Humans must have a use for the technology in their lives in order for the technology to be justified. There must be an influence on how humans relate and interact with each other. That creates a historical change. The introduction of the tractor in the 1920’s had very little impact in the Soviet Union and therefore did not result in a historical change.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)