Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Money making? Yeah, duh. Scam? No... New tech for the most part does what it says on the tin.
I agree. On the flipside, people will always use technology to run a scam. Technology itself is innocent, it's the nefarious acts of bad humans that's the problems.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rstevens62
A lot of it has to do with 'govts ability to exert its authority' too, any new technology will be scrutinized for any way it COULD potentially effect their ability to exert authority, example, someone COULD instruct their robot maid to go rob a bank, or kill someone, or come break them out of prison, etc etc, its always about what it COULD be used for. I assume LOTS of tech has been suppressed for this very reason.
I'd settle for my old Nextel Motorola phone back from 1999, which was so simple.
My new Moto droid is ridiculously complex, more so than an Iphone.
I also replaced the car receiver after the OEM died, do I really need 25 different display colors to choose from along with dozens of navigation options etc etc etc I'll never use?.
Thats another thing holding back hover cars, or flying cars, the simplicity of anti-gravity, electromagnetic, etc. these propulsion systems are generally pretty basic, almost 100% solid state, and rarely if ever have anything break down or need replaced/ repaired. This would be financially disastrous for vehicle manufacturers and industries that rely on the auto industry (repair industry, parts industry, etc)
As I sit here using a 12 year old computer with Vista software, I am pondering this question.
Supposedly this non-supported Microsoft product should function very poorly at best.
Yet it only slows down at night, when my poor ISP is at peak usage.
And the cell phones, mine is outdated after only 4 years. My next one will be even more outdated, a waterproof/shock proof flip phone. Smartphones cost as much as laptops now, and I do need a new computer.
Taking into account our destruction of the planet, are we as a society more efficient in 2017 than we were in 1990?.
I think we accomplished more without all the distractions.
So... you're happily using modern technology. Make no mistake, that computer you were using last year may have been a dozen years old, but it still represents technology that was unavailable for 99.99+% of the course of human development.
People who complain about 'technology' invariably love most of it. They wax nostalgic about something that's twelve or twenty of fifty years old, not bothering to note that such things are still very recent technological achievements. Upon scratching a bit beneath the surface, it becomes clear that by 'technology' they just 'stuff that I'm not comfortable with, because it wasn't around during my developmental years'. Like your complaints about mobile phones, when landlines are still something that most Americans didn't have for the majority of this nation's history, and the United States is an upstart when it comes to the arc of human civilization.
Technology isn't bad just because you find new technology annoying. It's not wrong to be so discomfited, but it is woefully misguided to try and blame technology as a concept when the issue is just your own personal discomfort.
So... you're happily using modern technology. Make no mistake, that computer you were using last year may have been a dozen years old, but it still represents technology that was unavailable for 99.99+% of the course of human development.
People who complain about 'technology' invariably love most of it. They wax nostalgic about something that's twelve or twenty of fifty years old, not bothering to note that such things are still very recent technological achievements. Upon scratching a bit beneath the surface, it becomes clear that by 'technology' they just 'stuff that I'm not comfortable with, because it wasn't around during my developmental years'. Like your complaints about mobile phones, when landlines are still something that most Americans didn't have for the majority of this nation's history, and the United States is an upstart when it comes to the arc of human civilization.
Technology isn't bad just because you find new technology annoying. It's not wrong to be so discomfited, but it is woefully misguided to try and blame technology as a concept when the issue is just your own personal discomfort.
When it takes 2 steps to answer my new phone, as opposed to 1; there's a problem.
New isn't saving me time, and certainly not saving $$.
Vehicles are another problem, as they have turned into expensive, sensor filled, repair nightmares.
This doesn't save any time either, my next will have a carburetor.
However, I do love my sonic toothbrush.
The “scam†is in the fond belief that our lives will become substantially better. They have not. New conveniences are accompanied by unforeseen problems. New options bring new frets. I like my smart-phone well enough, and am grateful for the shortcuts that it enables. But with everyone having smartphones, the settled expectation is that everyone takes those shortcuts. So, more is demanded of us. And if we fail, or misunderstand the technology, we look like idiots.
For example, in the days of paper maps, there was ready excuse for a newcomer to be late for an appointment. One might simply have gotten lost, or stuck in traffic, not being familiar with the place and not knowing what to expect. Today, it is assumed that not only does the phone guide us along optimum path, but warns of traffic, and routes us around it. The tardy arrival has no excuse. Or consider ordering a meal at a take-out place. I arrive, get in line, reach the counter and place my order, expecting the filling of that order in 10 minutes or so. But several other people have already ordered by internet. They arrive, their order is brought out; they grab it and leave, while I seethe petulantly in my corner, waiting. Had all of us arrived in-person to place our orders, at least I’d be aware of the line ahead of me, or considering said line to be excessive, I’d leave, and find some other restaurant.
But to the OP’s immediate concern, we ought to be mindful of generations of technology. The original concept of using electricity for communication was profoundly revolutionary. I speak of the telegraph. Next came the telephone – a very useful improvement, but more a variation on the telegraph’s theme, than something totally new. Then came wireless phones, connecting by radio to networks of towers, which then used wires or satellites. Finally, the smart-phone, which upgraded the wireless phone with a beautiful screen and a powerful computer-processor. As technology evolves, it does precisely that – evolve. The telegraph was revolutionary. The telephone, less so. The cell phone and smart-phone even less so. They’re evolutionary changes, not revolutionary changes. This is why the OP can type on a 10-year-old laptop and not feel enormous deficit relative to the latest laptops. But had the OP’s computer been from say the 1980s, the deficit would be large indeed. Had the computer been from the 1960s, the deficit would be enormous. Go back one or more decades, and the very act of typing on an electronic machine would have been impossible.
This is also why I think that innovation is slowing down, rather than accelerating. Will we have some presently-inconceivable innovation over the smart-phone or laptop? Likely so. But how much better would it be? 10 or 20 years from now, would the devices that we use to record our thoughts and to communicate them, be all that much more powerful, faster or more useful? Somehow I doubt that.
Billions of dollars have been spent on equipment and software collecting data to use to make better decisions, only to have it used just as poorly today as the early 90's. We could easily do just as well analyzing green bar printed reports today.
When it takes 2 steps to answer my new phone, as opposed to 1; there's a problem.
New isn't saving me time, and certainly not saving $$.
Vehicles are another problem, as they have turned into expensive, sensor filled, repair nightmares.
Arguably, airplanes were a lot less complex and easier for pilots to fly before we added tons of sensors and software safety features. The good news is that technology has allowed air travel safety to improve by leaps and bounds. Mid-air collisions are basically a thing of the past and planes can actually fly and auto-land themselves if weather conditions are dire - all of which were unheard of until very recently.
New software features are increasingly standard in personal automobiles such as automatic braking, lane departure detection and other features to improve passenger safety and reduce accidents. Level 2 autonomy features mean my car can accelerate, brake and steer better than I can in about 70-80% of road conditions. Just last week I avoided a collision because my car braked in response to 2 cars *ahead of it* braking suddenly to avoid a flying obstacle. Using a combination of radar and sensor fusion, it reacted, calculated the stopping distance and applied the brakes before my brain even registered the danger. This technology was unavailable as little as a decade ago.
My point here is that if the tradeoff with technology improvements is having to spend more time and $$ on repairs or more $$ on a plane ticket to ensure a statistically significant decrease in the probability of dying in an air or car accident, then I think that's a pretty good tradeoff! And we're pretty lucky to be alive for it.
The main reason for the planned obsolescence of technology is Moore's law. That is coming to an end soon, so we may start seeing technology planned with a longer use life, as changes are more likely to happen through software updates.
I cannot concur with car maintenance, as the electronics have actually added to my mechanic trips.
The next one will have been built prior to 1984, before fuel injection.
And Google maps/mapquest have failed me on a number of occasions.
That said, may I ask you this:
Do you have more time now as opposed to before the technological conveniences?.
Although Google maps and GPS are useful on a smart phone to get from Point A to Point B, they have dumbed down most people's knowledge of geography and the layout of a city or regional roadway system. This is because Google Maps/GPS gives you a tiny local view of the road you are traveling on a very small screen.
You do not get any comprehension of the overall freeway or roadway system on a phone. You either have to go to a physical map or a desktop with a large monitor where you have sufficient screen real estate.
But as far as your question goes, I would take it in a little different direction. Technology for the most part has one purpose only. To harvest data from you and me to more effectively market to us and more efficiently separate us from our hard earned $$$.
My point here is that if the tradeoff with technology improvements is having to spend more time and $$ on repairs or more $$ on a plane ticket to ensure a statistically significant decrease in the probability of dying in an air or car accident, then I think that's a pretty good tradeoff! And we're pretty lucky to be alive for it.
This is the the exact reason I'm keeping a 15 year old vehicle until the wheels fall off.
Haven't had an accident since 1986, and new vehicles are over-priced.
In the auto forum here, many new owners are complaining there are too many gadgets they don't wish to pay for; adding unnecessary cost.
I must concede this though, I did upgrade the stereo and love music on demand. But again, who needs 5 different shades of purple to choose from on the monitor?.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
