Friday, October 29, 2010
Reflective Post
Going into the unit, i originally expected the emphasis to be more on feminism in technology. I was pleasantly surprised to find that the lectures had a broader base, looking into the effects of technology on all individuals; male, female, black, white etc. I found the lectures interesting, but when it came to some workshops, tasks appeared pointless. The tutorials were however, relevant to lectures and my tutorial group stimulated some interesting discussions throughout the semester.
Do i now consider myself a cyborg? No. I do not feel i am so immersed in technology that it has become an extension of me. Although i use technology on a regular basis, my reliance on it is limited as i spend more time in the offline world communicating face-to-face. However, my potential to become a cyborg is everincreasing in this digital age, where the boundaries between what is biological and artificial are blurring.
Monday, October 25, 2010
All is full of love...
Sunday, October 24, 2010
Someday my Prince will come
Reflective Post
I wish I could be one of you's who arn't tragically reliant on technology, and could proudly say that I'd be fine without my computer or mobile phone, but the truth is, I really don't know what I would do without my gadgets. I lost my iPhone earlier this year, and it was a sad but very real emptiness that I felt. I remember dramatically telling people that I felt like I had lost a piece of myself. I realise this is somewhat pathetic and materialistic, but with things like hard-drives and phones, so much of your life is stored on it that when you lose it, it really is like losing a part of yourself. So from this, I will reluctantly admit that I do consider myself a cyborg.
I really enjoyed the content of this unit. I have come across most of it already in my years of doing communications/cultural studies, but still like the relevance to life that the readings hold. This was one of those units where I would find myself talking to friends about weekly topics or readings, and they would be impressed with how interesting my course sounds. :) So with this, thanks, and goodluck with your essays everyone.
Saturday, October 23, 2010
Meet George Jetson
What I really enjoyed about this unit was an alternative and more contemporary perspective of Feminist theory. I am a Feminist and I love it, so to learn of these new and exciting ideas and theories, and more technological based, is a real treat. Even more so, as I have been taking the history unit, Medieval and Early Modern Women, comparing the contemporary digital age to that of two-hundred to nine-hundred years ago was academically challenging and brilliant, as you get a little glimpse of what continues and what changes- and really, some things never do! The technological change and spread of information caused by new developments in printing, and thus education and learning, mirrors that of the internet. The fascination with how gender and sex are influenced by this revolution is just as strong in these periods. And employment, the same week we covered employment and the influence of technology, I looked at early-modern women and work. The change in technology, and the new processes, altered their lives in many similar ways. Work was in the house, and work was gendered, and still is gendered along with technology.
Reflection
Though I see how this blog could be considered more of an outlet for shy students who are uncomfortable voicing their opinions than an offline tutorial environment, I feel that posting work up on a blog made me feel ever so slightly more paranoid. What you've written is there forever and can be "judged" forever, more so than a transient spoken comment. If a blog is not anonymous, then I think that a lack of confidence to speak one's mind can be transferred from an offline situation to online. (But that could just be me.) That said, I do feel that the blog allowed access to a lot more information than I generally got out of the tutorials - although as was mentioned before, huge blocks of text can be intimidating. Perhaps the discussion wasn't as great, but the information was definitely there... forever. Also, I have never been part of a blog before and am happy that now I know how to post something and make hyperlinks.
In regards to the unit in general, my feelings are positive. I did enjoy much of the content and found the readings to be very interesting - points were brought to my attention that I had never considered before. The tutorials could also be quite informative - it was worthwhile to hear what everybody thought and some good discussions were generated.
Do I consider myself to be a cyborg? Being honest, I hated the term "cyborg" from the very beginning. Perhaps it came down to its phonetics more so than even its connotations, but I still do not like the word; as such I would never want to label myself as one out of pure irritation by it. But in the context of Harraway's article, I suppose that yes, I am something of a cyborg, because technology has become such a crucial aspect of my life. A large portion of what I know has been learnt through watching television and surfing the internet, and if we are looking beyond electronic / "modern" technologies, then most of my time is spent making use of various other technologies such as books, or language. I am happy to live in an age where these technologies are available to us. So in that context, yes, I do consider myself to be a cyborg, and a proud one at that.
As will become obvious, a Rant
Blog/tute method:
While the blog had potential, ultimately, I think it failed in this case. Logging on to look at the posts was unappealing; I’ve an aversion to looking at huge blocks of Arial, which blogs (compared to paper handouts) seem to produce. The lack of comments for most of the posts meant that discussion rarely extended beyond the tutorials. In general, I think that paper handouts could have done a better job. Most presenters read from a printed sheet containing what they had said in the blog post. Distributing copies of this would have been useful in creating discussion, as people could have something to look at; the information being right there in front of them, rather than lurking outside on people’s computers.
Blogs are not a good place for mandatory assignments. The huge influx of posts in weeks 3, 7, and 10 clogged up the blog, making it hard to find particular posts.
I suppose that it encouraged the posting of summaries, which would be useful for people who didn’t do the readings. It could be useful for people who feel awkward contributing to tutorials, but evidence would be needed for that.
The tutorials were a lot of fun, though they sometimes risked skipping over major issues. This was probably due to there being no set questions, but rather, presenters created their own. It is easier and, often more conducive to discussion, to respond to a bold assertion, even in disagreement, whereas open questions are easy to be ignored. When this happens, discussion can be lost in favour of anecdote-trading. A more directed tutorial might also increase the number of comments made on the blog.
Another thing I thought was an issue for the tutorial was the choice of readings each week. Quite often they were not closely related to one another. This meant that it was hard to get a sense of what was at stake in the different areas such as virtual communities, online activism, etc. Also, this made it difficult to grasp the interrelations between different thinkers; inter alia, this had the effect of making essay research more troublesome than it needed to be.
The Unit:
I think the unit skipped over too much. This was due, I feel, to the fact that very little theory was employed in explaining what was happening in different areas of interest. There would be a hint of Lacan here, or a nod to Baudrillard there, but never in depth, never comparing different theories, and never enough to explain the phenomena. Too often it was just a snippet from Haraway, and then an avalanche of examples. This was particularly noticeable in the lecture on video games, as theories were mentioned yet not discussed, and many examples were contentious, if not outright incorrect. On the other hand, the week three lecture on race was interesting and informative.
This skimming was a shame, because the subject matter itself was very interesting and relevant.
Do I regard myself as a cyborg?
According to Stelarc, we have always been cyborgs – from the moment our pre-historic ancestors decided to pull a burnt stick from the fire pit and scribble on the rock, thus inventing mediated communication. Actually, I suppose it would have been earlier, when someone got bored of eating roots and scavenging animal carcasses, and decided to throw a stick at an antelope.
In any case, if we are to take Stelarc at his word, we have been cyborgs for quite some time now. Certainly a long time before the advent of computers. All this makes the question above kind of moot. ‘Being a cyborg’ has very little to do with extensive use of computer technology. Cyborgs are, if anything, a useful conceptual tool. I doubt Haraway would overly care how often you use facebook. Rather, the cyborg concept should point us to things like competitive friending, the connections formed by ‘liking’ a page, and how these things give information to businesses who data-mine the site in order to target the appropriate products and services to individuals, who are now defined by their data.
If the question above is rearticulated to “Do I think that the cyborg is a useful concept?”, I would probably answer in the negative. It is interesting, perhaps, but isn’t powerful enough to replace all other theories, concepts, and metaphors that we could use to look at identity, society, and technology.
Reflective Post
This unit has been very interesting for me because it has almost been a continuation and an in depth study of topics and issues I have briefly come across in some of my Communication Studies units. It has definitely opened my eyes and made me a lot more critical in the way I view and use technology, more so than I had previously been. Donna Haraway’s Cyborg theory was probably the one I had the most difficulty with simply because I did not want to accept the fact that I am so deeply imbedded in technology, that I have basically lost my “humanity” and become a mechanical organism. Unfortunately this idea has been reinforced the whole semester, and my dependency on technology to function normally has increased significantly. And now I can finally admit that I am a Cyborg!
A few weeks prior to starting this unit I had accidently discovered blogs and ventured into the world of online interactivity and found some that were very relevant to my interests and offered a new way of sharing information and trends. The simple and concise writing manner, hearing from “normal” everyday people like myself also made blogs a lot more relatable and enjoyable than magazines or academic journals. This is the second time I’ve used a blog like structure at UWA, and I think it’s a really good way of letting people express their ideas and thoughts in “safe” environment. Firstly because there isn’t that pressure of public speaking, which hinders some of us shy ones, and secondly because you have time to think about what you want to say, your ideas are usually slightly more coherent and relevant to the discussion (well you’d hope so). I found the blog was a great continuation of the tutorial and was really helpful with some of the readings; the summaries and main points was an excellent way of getting some sense out of some of those readings and was also really useful as a recap. In terms of interacting with others, I didn’t feel very connected for instance after doing my presentation and posting it on the blog two people responded to my questions but I completely forgot to check the blog and by the time I did and answered back I never got a response simply because something new had been posted. And when I responded to a presentation I didn’t get a response either, I think this is one of the problems with a blog is that there is always new information and it is difficult to keep up with it, especially if you don’t check it everyday.
And just to finish off at first I was a bit confused and daunted by this unit because of some of the terminology and issues involved, but after a few weeks I started to see connections to things I had previously learnt which made me feel a bit more confident but also made things a lot more enjoyable. So thanks for a technologically mind opening unit! :)
Friday, October 22, 2010
Final Post - A Reflection
As to whether or not I consider myself a cyborg now, I would have to say that yes, I do. I think that in some ways it is naïve to believe that we can separate ourselves from the digital technology that we use. We are affected psychologicaly and behaviourally by our external world, by what we see, touch, the language that we use and the ways that we communicate. We are cyborgs. Technology has become a part of us, an extension of ourselves. If I forget my mobile phone at home, for instance, I become slightly anxious and paranoid that I am suddenly not reachable, that I am “offline”, so to speak. The digital technology that we have created has become part of our identity.
Finally, the unit is general. The unit is extremely relevant to our lives and our futures and I found it enjoyable. There were issues that were raised that I had never considered before. The better that we understand the digital age in relation to the self, the better that we will be able to navigate it.
All the best guys
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Week 12 Post
In some ways i think that we are certainly cyborgs, according to Haraway's definition that a cyborg is a "hybrid of machine and organism" yes i think we can be seen as cyborgs in that light, as most of us spend a fair amount of time im sure browsing the internet or having an involement with some kind of virtual community be it facebook or something similar and that to me is having some kind of connection with the machine, in that respect it kind of becomes a part of us. The machine then, helps form our identity in a way and i think in this way we are cyborgs or i certainly can consider myself one.
In terms of using the blog, i actually found that it was really quite useful. I am a pretty shy person and i much prefer to express my ideas and opinions in writing as i often feel quite intimidated speaking in front of lots of people, so for me in that respect it was a really comfortable way to express my ideas. I also found that i was kind of forced to think a lot more carefully about what my posts say whereas when i speak in tutorials my ideas are not as concise. I also found the blog useful in that it was accessible all the time and i had time to think about things that were said in the tutorials and could spend some time thinking about them before adding to them where as with class discussions it is more about thinking on the spot and your responses have to be more immediate. Overall, i have enjoyed this unit and have found it interesting expanding my ideas and learning more about how we operate in the digital age. I have enjoyed using the blog and found it very useful to read and respond to others ideas and also to express my own opinions on topics covered in the unit. Thanks everyone.
REFLECTIVE POST
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Blog/Unit Reflection (I wanted to come up with a better title, but unfortunately that was not meant to be...)
Are we cyborgs? I guess I would have to say that in my particular work environment, yes I am. I work at KFC, and I generally spend most of my time being the voice that comes through the speaker-box, pleasantly asking you to place your order when you are ready. As you rarely see me, you probably don’t see (but do logically realise) that I wear a headset, without which I could not do my job. I spend the majority of my shift with this headset attached to me, binging away in my ear whenever a car reaches said speaker-box. And in my daily life, I am connected to some form of technology most of the time. If it’s not me listening to my mp3 player while sitting in the library, it’s me obsessively checking my phone in case someone messages me. Ditto for emails. And Facebook. But does this make me a hybrid in my everyday life? I don’t believe it does. When I get to the point that I cannot live my life without technology (like I can’t do my job without it), it will be a sad day. But I think that is when I would classify myself a cyborg.
Has blogging been successful for me? I would have to say no. I have enjoyed the experience, and I think it can be a valuable tool for learning at uni (especially seeing as class sizes are increasing), as it allows a space for people who don’t usually engage in the discussion to get involved. That being said, I personally feel a bit uncomfortable with it. I have found that I struggle to come up with coherent sentences; there are so many times when I have deleted whole paragraphs and left out ideas just because I felt like I couldn’t express the ideas without sounding stupid or pretentious. For some reason, it’s always one or the other with me. Also, in a tute, if you say something that doesn’t go quite right, there is no written record of it, it generally just stays behind in the room. But with the blog, there is not only our tute as an audience, but also any random stranger who may find themselves looking at the blog. That’s a bit disconcerting. But on the plus side, I can now make active hyperlinks!! Sometimes you just need to celebrate the small achievements in this life. So will I start a blog? At this point, I highly doubt it. I think I will just leave that to the experts, and go and play a quick round of Tetris on Facebook.
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
second life
REFLECTION!
In regards to being a cyborg, i feel i am not. As Donna Haraway writes a cyborg to be " a cybernetic organism, a hybrid of a cyborg is a cybernetic organism, a hybrid of machine and organism, a creature of social reality as well as a creature of fiction," more specifically a being with both biological and artifical traits. In this i dont consider myself to bind into this definition at all as i don't consider technology to play such a huge role in shaping who i am. Although i am a regular user of multiple technologies on a daily basis, i still feel it doesn't control my every day life and hence my own embodiment and as a result why i do not consider myself as a cyborg.
I found this unit to be very enjoyable and interesting. It's been interesting particularly because of the encorporation of setting up a blog. By this use of online participationg it made the unit a whole lot more enjoyable and i found helped me alot in terms of further learning with the weekly topics. It's been a great way for those like me who are new to the whole blogging experience to learn how it's done. This unit opened up my mind to wider issues concerned with the online world and because i feel i can relate to alot of it, i feel thats the reason being for why i found it to be a great unit to study. Well, thats all from me.
Gabi :)
Sign Out.
Sunday, October 17, 2010
Flesh and Metal: Reconfiguring the Mindbody in Virtual Environments
N. Katherine Hayles in Flesh and Metal: Reconfiguring the Mindbody in Virtual Environments, uses three visual reality artworks to support her argument that our “bodies (including cognitive body) and the world are not independent of each other but rather exist in relation with the ongoing flux.” She goes on to say that it is relation that becomes the beginning rather than mind and body (as pre-existing entities), it is “flux from which the body and embodiment emerge.” There is a loop between biology and technology environments which enhance our experiences.
Hayles focuses on the artworks; “Traces” by Simon Penny which places emphasis on the immediate proximity of the body, “Einstein’s Brain” by Alan Dunning and Paul Woodrow, which emphasises room sized dimensions and placement of artefacts and simulated projections and “NOtime” by Victoria Vesna which enacts human interaction universally.
“Traces” is a three-dimensional environment in which the human body is used in a virtual reality artwork. It differs from other conventional virtual realities, as there is no separation of the human form. Penny was exploring the concept of relation between the mindbody and its immediate surroundings. The experiment used three dimensional cubes (voxels) which “trailed behind the rendered model of the user’s body, gradually fading through time.” Tracking systems and sensors were attached to the human form and were used to record movement in space and time. Results from Behaviour Traces showed that the Avatar could not only mirror movement but in fact its traces had the ability to break off and move independently as a flock. This virtual reality artwork confirms the notion, “experiences of embodiment transform and evolve through time and relation with intelligent machines”.
What would it mean to be embodied in a virtual reality that was not devoid of what Penny calls “eye candy”? Would our experience of interacting in a virtual reality (VR) with our body and mind be different to our experience of VR with our mind only?
Hayles goes on to explore the duality of the brain and mind along with the idea that the world and the body are no longer thought of as being separated by boundaries. The skin is no longer the distinction for the end of the body. She uses the artwork “Einstein’s Brain”, to explore the idea that what we perceive (in that space in time) is in fact our reality.
A virtual reality was created which consciously was not a reflection of the “real world”. Anatomically Lifelike Interactive Biological Interface (ALIBI) acted as a “navigational interface” that was activated by body warmth, breath and whispering. New, simulated worlds continually opened as a result of interaction with ALIBI. Users wore goggles which allowed them to see either the simulated world or a mixed reality with both real and simulated worlds. Helmets were worn which recorded biological responses that triggered other simulated images. Two other components added to this project were images of historical events and a viewing room where observers could watch the interactions unfold, although their perception of reality was different to the participants’ perceptions of reality.
With the use of feedback loops; user’s response-interactions with artificial body-production of simulated worlds, endless possibilities can exist. ”Einstein’s Brain” challenges our understanding of consensual reality by creating different virtual and actual realities which compete and conflict in their stimuli. Hayles supports the notion that “human experience is a mixed reality “which derives from human embodiment, the world and technology.
If “Einstein’s Brain” can alter our perceptions of reality by merging virtual and real worlds together, what does this mean for our understanding of reality? Maturana seems to believe that what we perceive is our reality. But will we be able to distinguish between what is real or not? Can we manipulate our worlds through perception?
“NOtime” came into being as a result of the postmodern condition of having no time to do all the things that we wanted to do. The idea was to create avatars that could live parts of our lives for us while we were busy doing the things we had no time for. The avatar was able to engage in all aspects of human interaction including death. The vision of virtual reality was based on the belief that human and intelligent machines have cognitive systems and that these enactments could be global but had equal importance for local interaction. In actual fact what was created was a virtual reality where time was a required element for the successful growth and interaction of the avatar, thus defeating the purpose that it would save time.
Does the time we spend online within virtual realities detract from the quality of life we could be having if our time was better spent elsewhere? Do you agree or disagree?
Just something to think about, see you guys on Wednesday!
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
A Decade of Gender and Computer Games
Capitalism: A Fairytale
The Normalisation of Flexible Female Labour in the Information Economy
Although though this may be true for the Bourgeosie, work and the public and the private spheres has been, and are, fluid realms for many other classes and peoples throughout history.
The advertisements for Software, such as Microsoft’s ‘We See’, focuses on the idea of the individual in a creative sector of the ‘new economy’, where they present independent labour away from an office, where the worker can be independent and free with a romantic bohemian lifestyle. The lines between personal hobbies and creativity and the public employment are blurred. The selling of dreams, or the promotion of fairy-stories, can also be found in the advertisements for mobile phones that present a work lifestyle that is leisurely, active and cosmopolitan. One does not have to be stuck in a boring office, they can be out and about, living their life, but work at the same time. It is promoting the individual, but my question is: by blurring these distinctions, is the worker’s private life taken over by work? One is being defined by their labour. And, is this lifestyle only accessible to a privileged few? We all would like the lifestyle of an artiste.
The most horrifying aspect of this paper is the idea that neo-liberalism has adopted feminism – it just doesn’t compute. There can be no doubt that feminism has achieved the right for women to work in the public space, because it is seen as an inherent good and a commonsense manifestation of feminism over the last century. The only problem is that it can be assumed that we are ‘post’ feminism, that feminism is no longer needed, but it is clear that we have still a long way to go.
Housewife Superstars
Sonia Williams: How you can make money in the new economy www.giveitagowhathaveyougottolose.com.au and www.showmummythemoney.com.au
Monday, October 11, 2010
Conflict minerals
Our demand for electronics fuels the world's deadliest war. It's time to end it.
As well as the petition, check out the From Mine to Mobile Phone link (bout 2/3 down on the RHS), which is a supply chain recap, & the CNN link (bottom left) Rape & Murder: funded by cell phones, which talks about the strategic & commonplace use of rape as an intimidation tactic to deter local villagers from challenging illegal mine sites.
On a personal note: I heard about this when an entire village was held hostage by militia for 4 days, and about 45 women raped at gunpoint, repeatedly and systematically, in front of their families. I was driving home, listening to ABC Newsradio. I cried during the interviews with survivors and an aid worker, shocked and horrified that this was a business decision, part of the process that my purchases fund. I spent the next week blogging about it and trying to find a company that traced the supply chain to ensure it wasn't buying conflict minerals, or was in favour of industry-wide reform and regulation. I put off buying the netbook I'd been planning on buying until I'd done the research & checked for an ethical alternative, and when I couldn't find one I bought it anyway.
Saturday, October 9, 2010
An education beyond the classroom: Excelling in the realm of horizontal academics
BLOGS HELP US TO LEARN
Hey everyone
Friday, October 8, 2010
Facebook: Are we known by the company we keep?
This article brought to mind related discussions we have had about the identities we project online and how they can be used in different ways- some not necessarily in the ways originally intended. Online, people have the ability to experiment with their identity and ways they interact with others. Virtual identities may therefore differ from the ones projected in real life. Assumptions are made that these online communities are personal and private; with users therefore exercising the freedom to post whatever materials they wish. Recently however, sites such as Facebook have been utilized for other means. For example, employers are now seeking out potential employees by locating their profiles. Based on information presented; employers are making decisions on whether these individuals are 'suitable' for the job.
This raises issues, as evidence suggests that not only does the information selected by the owner of a particular profile influence the impressions made about them, but so does the contribution of information by 'friends' onto that profile. "The possibility that individuals may be judged on the basis of other's behaviours in such spaces prompts the question: Are we known by the company we keep?" Possibilities for new social communities such as Facebook to be used in these ways, forces users to re-examine the content displayed not only by themselves, but by others on their profiles. Individuals no longer have the legal/ ethical right to such freedoms without possibile consequences reflecting negative impressions being made.
The article also included a study, which found that favourable/ unfavourable statements being made on an individuals profile directly effected the impressions being made about them. Negatively valenced messaged about certain moral behaviours increased male profile owner's perceived attractiveness, whilst they caused females to be viewed as less attractive. These findings also relate to previous discussions made about how virtual, online communities reflect the values and attitudes, even stereotypes of real life societies.
"Mobile phones get Cyborg Vision"
Offline/Online: it's a fine Line
Creating Your Cyber-Self
From BBC online, this article, published in November 2000 discusses the new technology of scanning oneself to create a virtual 3D image that can represent you online. I thought it was interesting because whilst it was written in 2000, several times in the article it discusses how this new technology will revolutionize the way we represent ourselves online. They claim that the technology, which will be ready in a year to eighteen months, will have us putting a 3D version of ourselves in different forums all over the internet and in the gaming world offline. Sadly, this didn't happen. Whilst the technology may have been developed, there has been no significant or obvious integration of this technology into the average persons daily internet use. Nowhere do I find myself seeing or experiencing an identical digital version of myself online.
I think this is interesting because of several things. Firstly, I think it reflects peoples desire to maintain a certain amount of anonymity online. People don't want others online to have a complete digitised image of themselves to talk to. Yes, we find ourselves more and more talking via webcams, on programs like Skype, but I think that that reflects our desire for human contact with each other, rather than our desire to have a version of ourselves posted up there on the internet for all to see.
I also think that people are saying here that whilst they like to have a sense of the person they're interacting with online, they realise that a virtual scan of someone is not that person, but rather just that, a virtual scan of them. It seems that it is integrally different to have a photo of oneself (a true and accurate snapshot of a moment in that persons history) online, rather than a 3d image. I think the image suggests a certain loss of humanity, rather than a gain in humanising technology, which is why I think it never took off.
I think this article is also pertinent in its dealings with personal information. Whilst we seem to all be happy to represent ourselves online via websites like Facebook, Twitter and MySpace via text and graphic media, there seems to be a recognition of the fact that we would be able to manage the flow and use of information about ourselves online. If a digital image of ourselves, accurate from head to foot, was to be available to others on the internet, personally I would be scared people would start stealing my image. Its ironic, because we publish so many images of ourselves online all the time, but the concept of someone having that kind of data about me- the exact proportions and measurements of my own body- feels like too much to let loose on the internet. But maybe that's just my own irrational insecurities, because realistically if someone wanted to steal my identity there is surely more than enough information on me available already online.
On that lovely thought, I'll say farewell :)
Is Google Making Us Stupid?
YET EASILY TWISTED ON JOURNEYS.
PATIENCE AND TACT ARE REQUIRED IN ABUNDANCE
AS WELL AS FINE FINGERS TO USE US."
“Our writing tools are also working on our thoughts.”
In what should be terrifying news for self-declared technophobes, the internet is devastatingly (and perhaps irreversibly) changing the way we think. The reason for this is simply the way information is given to us on the web. The huge proliferation of blogs, many with posts of only a few paragraphs; news feeds; multiple tabs; and status updates limited to 420 characters in length – these things may be making us stupid. This superabundance of readily available and instantly accessible information seems to destroy our ability to concentrate on longer texts. We skim, but don’t read. There is too much out there to sit and think about what we have just finished reading. In short, we are being trained – programmed, if you will – to think in a new way, a way that is incompatible with the style of thinking that has been common to most humans throughout history. Taking this argument to the extreme, it will not be long before people will find it a great struggle to get through one of the books that populate our libraries.
This may mark me as a Luddite, but the possibility of becoming a pancake person scares the shit out of me. Even as I write this in one of the eleven tabs open in this browser, I fear that my cognitive abilities are slipping in a way that cannot be accounted for by stress and sleep loss. We may have always been cyborgs, but I never signed up for this. My only hope is that there is a way to make the most of the Net’s liberating potential without losing contact with history, without losing my mind.