SmartBlog

Once again here is my last final paper for my blog that my fellow classmates and view it and see my opinion on the same topic.
Technology seems at times to be the most important aspect of our lives. Those who have the best technology have the brightest future. After all, its "brains over brawn." As a race we have become rather dependent on our technology. The dependence that has been formed can be described in many ways. Ray Kurzweil calls this dependence the evolution of man and machine or “singularity.” I agree that we have that mergence or dependence and that it will continue to grow in the future. In this paper I will show why I agree with this opinion. However I feel from his statement that he looks upon this evolution as only having positive effects and anyone that resists it is merely being naive. Despite being labeled as naive, I see some negative aspects that would make me hesitate to embrace this evolution.
My first thought on our evolution with machine was one of skepticism as my understanding of evolution was distorted. I thought of it as any organism whether intelligent or simple, going through an unknown process of adaptation to a situation or environment. Usually that change is for the better and into a more complex organism. I looked at it as God, Mother Nature, or whomever; adjusting an organism so that it would be more equipped to handle the environment it was placed in. Where my skepticism arose in calling this change as stated by Kurzweil between humans and machines an evolution, is due to the fact that we are playing God with ourselves. We are taking the adjustment of our beings into our own hands as we merge with machine, and not necessarily out of the need for change.
The dictionary defines evolution by a gradual process in which something changes into a different and usually more complex or better form. Some of this is relative. I wear contact lenses, which most people wouldn’t refer to as a machine, but it is an unnatural instrument that is attached to my body to increase and improve performance. I still have other shortcomings that go unaided. You could call these shortcomings weaknesses. I recognize these weaknesses as I compare myself with those around me. I am only slow if I see someone faster than me. For example I didn’t know that I needed contact lenses until I was 14. I was driving with my dad on the highway and he asked me to keep an eye out for a certain exit sign. As he saw the correct sign from a considerable distance he asked me if I was paying attention and if I was going to tell him about the sign. I wasn’t able to see the sign for another 5 seconds. It was then I realized that not everyone saw things the same way that I saw it, and obviously I needed glasses. If I wanted to advance quickly to the level of those around me, I would need to merge with technology. The merger of the contact lens with my eye didn’t follow the exact definition of gradual evolution, but the development of visual technology was a gradual process from a simple to more complex form. When it finally reached the point where it exceeded the ability of those who are disabled, it was implanted or used on people. This technology then came abruptly to me rather than that usual slow gradual evolution found in nature. This is what Kurzweil saw this as an unprecedented advancement. Another example of technology that is already merging with humans might be a pacemaker, which is a small device that controls the heartbeat. Another example might be a hearing aid which is a small electronic apparatus that amplifies sound and is worn in the ear. Other examples might be a respirator, prosthetic limb, or artificial voice box.
Most of these products are for those that have disabilities or below average usage of their bodies. However, it is easy to assume that if one can fix what is broken to the comparative average level of other people, why can’t they exceed that level? Why can’t we have super vision, super hearing, or super lungs? There are many parts of the human body that could benefit greatly from an implant of superior technology. An example might be strength. But this is where my opinion differs from Kurzweil. The beauty of humans is that they are limitless; it is impossible to know how much one can do. The brain especially is limitless, yet machines have their limits. It is the limit of how they are programmed. Now that limit might exceed the capabilities of humans today, but those implants would simply place everyone at the same strength, intelligence, vision, hearing, etc. If you turn every person into super human, then they aren’t super human anymore. And why wouldn’t every person become the same? Who would stand by with horrible vision as everyone else became superman? Who would go out and choose the lower level eye vision when they could get the greatest? It’s not the same as people buying the cheap DVD player versus the best. When faced with such advancements to super humans, no one would want the cheaper version.
I mentioned before that this evolution can be looked at as a sort of dependence. After wearing my contacts for the past 8 years my eyes have become progressively worse and my prescription progressively stronger. Through his hard work as a certified public accountant, my dad has gotten better at making money, but worse at managing a garden as he did when he was a boy. Many of us have become so dependent on technology, that we have placed ourselves into a whole new realm. This realm is more comfortable, easy, and productive. But what if it all fell apart, what if there was a massive world war, what if all technology failed? Could we survive? You ask some kids today where milk comes from and they honestly think it’s the grocery store. It really scares me to think what it would be like for me if I was stranded somewhere without my contacts. I couldn’t function and I couldn’t survive. Note that the definition of evolution again is that usually something changes to a more complex or better form. So it is possible for something to evolve into something more complex, but not better. I guess a more appropriate word for this might be mutation.
In conclusion I believe that Kurzweil is right about our accelerated change from simple man to one who is combined with his technology. I agree that this was a change like nothing before with many isolated advantages. From the points I mentioned above, this is not a move to singularity, but one of conformity. I do contemplate stopping the progression but not for a “misplaced fond remembrance of what human beings used to be,” but for the uniqueness that comes to us from chance and simply leaving the implanted technology for those who are suffering and disabled.

In the beginning of the class we were asked what we hoped to get out of this class, what we wanted to gain. I think that my answer was something the effect of learning about the many technologies out that so that I could improve my life. I also intended to learn of what was out there so that I could more accurately judge what is important and unimportant. Importance meaning how dramatically our society is changing due to these technologies. Before this class I wasn't sure how to side or voice an opinion about the ethics of our changing society since I didn't know all the facts. I had no understanding of the whole piracy over the internet debate. After having taken this class, read the articles, and discussed it with my classmates, I think I have that base knowledge to voice an informative opinion.

Because of my natural stubbornness I hesitate to accept some of the supposed studies done to prove video games as extremely beneficial. I do concede that video games improve some motor skills, hand eye coordination, and reflexes, but it is a question of pros and cons. It's not like you can't learn those skills even better doing something that doesn't keep you on your butt for 15 hours a day. Though you gain those skills through video games, you lose much more. Don't get me wrong I like video games. It is a form of entertainment that can be relaxing and enjoying, but like most things there needs to be moderation. I like drinking water, but too much continuously and I will drown. I like to go running, but doing it till I collapse isn't' healthy. I like to watch movies, but if I do it all day long every day, then nothing gets done. So these idiots are actually trying to justify playing video games as being better than doing anything else. That playing it 8 hours a day is beneficial. That is so stupid. So it comes down to a list of priorities and importance. Reading a book is important to your mental growth, but if you do that and not eat, you will die. I can take this example further, but it a nut shell to have a productive life and a one of worth you have to manage your time and activities by their importance and benefit, and sad to say that video games is way way down the list.

After during the web page project for mobile phones, I have changed my opinion of it. I imagine that was the purpose of the project and even the class for that matter. The purpose was to educate to the point that one could make better decisions about the many aspects of cyberculture. Since it is such a powerful it is important to be informed of what is happening in the world around us. It is important to have that information as we may be the ones that "draw that line" that we talk about so often in class. So anyway I regards to cell phones that I saw as somewhat of a potential nuisance in the wrong hands has become more and more of a positive tool. Of course in my project I listed the pros and cons of the mobile technology on the rise, but after doing more research I was surprise to see more pros then cons. This may change as it evolves beyond what I could see, so obviously there are unforeseen problems that can arise. As mentioned in class it is ironic how people make sarcastic comments about the cutting edge of technology, then later find themselves unable to live without those technologies they mocked and said they would never get. I foresee that happening with mobile technology in my life.

I think it is pretty clear that we are behindin cell phone technology, but that isn't neccessarily a bad thing, maybe it is just my arogant american attitude that wants to say its ok, but honestly I realize what options are out there in Asia and Europe, i realize the advanced technology in mobile technologies, but i don't see too much need for them. And that is just a personal thing. Someone who had more time to watch tv on their cell, or text a billion friends in a minute would find those features as usefull, so would i if i was like that. But i simple don't have time for those things even if i had them. A cell phone with a T.V. connection would be great for someone on the go wished they had more time to watch their favorite shows, but i don't even have T.V. home, so why would i get a phone that had those capabilities.