More is More: Tapscott I

The Net Generation. A generation of people fluent in technology; namely, the Internet.

In the book, Grown Up Digital, author Don Tapscott illustrates what it looks like to live a lifestyle laden with technology that is rapidly advancing. He says that "technology is like the air" (pg. 18). For those who grew up with technology, it's as common and expected as anything else in our society.

We use technology on a daily basis to communicate, produce and find information, create and/or view art, etc. There are countless ways in which technology is used on a daily basis. It has literally infiltrated our lives; rather, we have welcomed it in. But is this all good? Are we benefiting from it all?

Yes. There is great benefit, but it is also important to not turn a blind eye to the negative side of technology. In reference to the Net Generation being immersed in technology, Tapscott wrote that "their immersion has not hurt them overall". (pg. 10) Maybe it's just a bit too early to make these types of claims. There is an article that was published several weeks ago stating that a 16 year-old-girl was set to have surgery due to serious carpal tunnel injuries in both of her wrists. The injuries were caused by excessive texting. There are other teens and young adults as well who are literally addicted to being "online" and have a need to be somehow connected to the Internet at all times.

Now, this isn't to say that all technology is bad or will harm you physically or otherwise. It is simply worth pointing out that there needs to be more education in regard to technology. Most new innovations require some sort of education. Take the automobile for example. We don't get to just start driving without any sort of education-- it's not a trial and error sort of thing.

Perhaps our society would benefit from knowing the pros and cons of various types of technology (Internet, cell phones, computers, etc) from a younger age spanning from the physical, mental, and social effects of technology. The more means we add to our culture, the more awareness and alertness is needed in order to enjoy the new additions in a healthy way.

Then and Now: Baron II

Over time the legitimacy of information in its various forms has changed. Merely verbally saying you would do something used to imply that what you said would actually come to pass. A handshake was once generally good enough to seal a deal and establish at least some level of trust. And what is it now? Have we moved into a time where a signature is required to prove everything? Or is even this becoming outdated?

As Baron states, "Seeing for ourselves is often a way to determine trustworthiness, whether of a memo or a person. Seeing, after all, is believing. Or is it?" (pg. 117)

By the nature of our culture, we have tended to believe that if something is visually displayed, then it must be true. Whether that be a photograph or handwriting-- it must be true. Consider a signature, for example. "Since Hancock's time we have come to invest a lot of meaning in a signature--it carries the identity and the individuality of the author". (pg. 125) However, even in my office we have "e-signatures" on file (scanned images of signatures) in the event we need to "sign" something for someone who is not present (with their permission, of course). The signature is now visually displayed, and may even appear hand-written; but it is, in fact, merely a copy of something that was once hand-written years prior.

We see this same issue happen on a daily basis with programs like Photoshop. Now many photos are referred to as "images" rather than photographs due to their heavily edited and altered nature. So what does this all come down to?

In the past, we could see images, signatures, etc and believe what we saw with a great degree of success. Now, there is much more wisdom in researching what you see in hopes to discover the validity.