A few words have jumped out at me in the midst of Rheingold's technical descriptions: translation...health...defense intelligence..."His frequent travel to India and the entire Digital Nations consortium is based on a belief that pervasive computation can provide relief to some of the more urgent problems in the world's poorest countries."
Why hasn't technology been cultivated to help those who may truly benefit from it?
The idea of "wearable computers" especially poked me. Wearing headgear that explains everything about all of the items around you seems to be an inundation of the senses; unless, of course, as Rheingold mentions, the words can be translated. Wearable computers overall, however, are toys for the rich and technologically savvy. The "Wearable Internet Appliance, combining a head-mounted display and eleven-ounce computer...was around $2,200" in 2002. Are they necessary for, well, anything? Who wants to converse face-to-face with someone while that person is constantly distracted by e-mail and answering questions with the help of a search engines?
Since technology is indeed for the rich, I suppose I can see why companies don't strive to be philanthropic. But the offshot of these advancements seems to be to further our personal communications and knowledge, relying on the recommendations of those like us instead of holding a more global perspective.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment