Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Has technology gone too far?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Has technology gone too far?

    My answer is no, but at the same time I know people who think that their phones have too many features as it is, and that iPods shouldn't need to be able to browse the Internet.
    So, i'm wondering what everyone else thinks: is technology going too far, or are people just taking things to far.
    9
    Definitely
    11.11%
    1
    Never
    77.78%
    7
    It already has
    11.11%
    1
    What's "technology"?
    0.00%
    0
    Last edited by Dragon Writer; February 2, 2009, 04:38:16 AM.
    I'm baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack.
    For those of you who don't recognize WHO'S back, I'll give you a hint, and I don't mean the typo's in my posts - YR.

  • #2
    Technology does not technically mean multifunctionality, but I understand what you mean about the iPhone - generally the more functions something has, the worse it does each of those functions when compared to a dedicated technology. (video games are nicer on console then on mobiles, for example.)

    However, regarding the question of has tech gone too far in general... I voted never. Technology does not have an inherent value of good or bad: It just exists. The science behind the atomic bomb is not inherently evil, it is the applications that people use it for that has a moral value - as you said, it is the people that can go too far in a lot of ways. However, I don't think our own moral shortcomings as a species is enough reason to cease progress.

    If by "too far" you're also referencing the price of progress, well.. My opinion stays the same. It sounds a little harsh in some ways, but I don't care how many rats we have to kill if it means a cure for cancer.


    As a slightly non-related factoid that's been bothering me: A few days ago, Apple was approved for a patent for "multi-touch" technology. Hello monopoly. Argh.
    Last edited by Jacq; February 2, 2009, 02:28:10 AM.
    I would EAT THE HELL outta that steak, then try to guilt the cow into dying just for being a cow. I'd be all "NOM NOM HEY COW YOU'RE NOT MEAT YET WHAT GIVES JERK" and then I'd glare and give it the silent treatment. Same goes for pigs and chickens... I would guilt a FLOCK of chickens into poultrycide in a heartbeat. "HEY YOU'RE A CHICKEN HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT THAT"- Madhatte

    Comment


    • #3
      The other side of the rat thing - can't they just create technology to do the same thing without the rats? I don't generally object to the rats themselves, but they also test offer things, and some are cruel... And I can accept it as being neccesary, but not if it ISN'T necessary.

      Feel free to use this topic for any case where you think technology has gone a little but crazy - easier than creating many, small, topics. I personally think it's more in the people - by which I mostly mean they exaggerate, but also, in reference to your post, that it's people who misuse it.

      Right now everyones panicking about a worm making a botnet, and all the nefarious purposes it could e used for - reality is, it's probably not a criminal mastermind but a kid looking for a quick laugh, whose already forgotten it exists. Classic example of both.
      I'm baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack.
      For those of you who don't recognize WHO'S back, I'll give you a hint, and I don't mean the typo's in my posts - YR.

      Comment


      • #4
        Animal testing... The last few years there's been quite a lot of progress in "virtual rats", but that technology hasn't yet hit a point where we can safely remove the crucial animal testing step before human trails. But even the other things they use animals for, like make-up, still exists for a reason outside of cruelty. To me, whether a hairspray causes blindness or the effects of prolonged exposure to air freshener are just as crucial as purely "medical" animal testing. Even if the application isn't as noble as curing cancer, it is still a product that could harm me, and if it's going to be on the market I want to make sure it won't.
        The only truly "unnecessary" animal testing I can think of is that used for educational purposes - undegraduate students repeating classic tests for learning purposes. But even then, I have to agree with the necessity of it for properly preparing students. I think most of the truly unnecessary testing went out in the 70s-80s, with the general ethics movements throughout the institutions.
        (Simcyp virtual rat information: http://www.manufacturingchemist.com/...sectioncode=73 )

        Maybe I troll /g/ too much, but the botnet thing seems ridiculous to me. You can't get one of those things set up on your system unless you actively give it access to your machine. If someone is silly enough to've DL'd a dodgy torrent or downloaded a .jar file then they will learn more through dealing with the problem and preventing a recurrence.
        (but on that note, since joining these boards I've gotten quite an influx of zedo spyware. I dunno if it's this website or not, but ewwww)


        Other tech... A while back my mind was been blown by the fearmongering surrounding the Large Hadron Collider. Ten minutes of google would have assuaged any reporter's fears.
        Last edited by Jacq; February 2, 2009, 04:18:46 AM.
        I would EAT THE HELL outta that steak, then try to guilt the cow into dying just for being a cow. I'd be all "NOM NOM HEY COW YOU'RE NOT MEAT YET WHAT GIVES JERK" and then I'd glare and give it the silent treatment. Same goes for pigs and chickens... I would guilt a FLOCK of chickens into poultrycide in a heartbeat. "HEY YOU'RE A CHICKEN HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT THAT"- Madhatte

        Comment


        • #5
          My only wonder is if they're putting as much effort into finding alternatives as they are into running tests. Still, I don't know much on the subject, so I don't pass judgement. They better find a substitue for apes though - some countries are giving then rights. Makes the tests illegal
          the worm gets in through portable USB devices, I believe, and makes use if a as in micrrosoft most people don't have a patch for. The problem, as far as I can tell, is they don't know HOW to combat it, really.
          Last edited by Dragon Writer; February 2, 2009, 04:37:14 AM.
          I'm baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack.
          For those of you who don't recognize WHO'S back, I'll give you a hint, and I don't mean the typo's in my posts - YR.

          Comment


          • #6
            Never. I don't think techonology itself can actually go too far, but I think that our reliance on said technology can. I've experienced this, and part of me mourns for the day when I would have gone to the library, and looked for a book to answer any given question, rather than to just ask Google or Wikipedia.

            Mobile/Cell phones are another thing; and something that really annoys me. People are now able to (try to) contact me at any time; whether I am busy doing something or not, and then get annoyed when I don't respond instantly. I am also the kind of person that is wont to forget said phone, or to forget to charge it, and people seem to get doubly annoyed when this happens. My response is usually to say 'Well, think about what it would be like ten years ago before everyone had a mobile phone.'

            I disagree about it being a problem that we now have iPods that can surf the internet. I think its cool, but then its a gimmick, and I am a sucker for gimmicks. I have an iPod Touch, and one of my friends has an iPhone. I plan to get an iPhone some time in the next year or so. I like the functionality that they have. I like being able to carry a device that can do so much stuff; watch videos, surf the internet, play games, music; and some of the apps that are out there are really good. I have the AirSharing ap, that allows me to read and study on the go, without having to print out and carry around over 100 pages of printed out articles.

            Jacq:
            As a slightly non-related factoid that's been bothering me: A few days ago, Apple was approved for a patent for "multi-touch" technology. Hello monopoly. Argh.
            Not quite non-related to the topic; its still about technology. I think that they should be allowed to patent it. The patent is there to protect their techonology from being reverse engineered and used by compeditiors. They've spent time and effort developing and improving that technology, why shouldn't they be allowed to patent it? (Just my opinion, sorry if it comes off a little harsh)

            Comment


            • #7
              I have an iPod touch, but don't see mich need for an Iphone - not if you already have a phone anyway. If you don't, that's one thing, but if you do, IRS cheaper to just buy the iPod touch.

              I think perhaps people are going to far with what they expect from phones, though that's not the fault of technology. They're becoming less an item of convenience and more, as my dad calls hid blackberry, an ectronic leash.
              I'm baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack.
              For those of you who don't recognize WHO'S back, I'll give you a hint, and I don't mean the typo's in my posts - YR.

              Comment


              • #8
                I think that we're going too far, not the technology. It's good to have available features (iPods browsing the Internet), but we don't have to use them all the time. We don't need to whip out the cell phone every time it beeps (my mom and sister do that and interrupts conversations we sometimes have and it drives me insane), we don't have to text message at every second of free time, we don't have to check Email every time we pass a computer, we don't have to use the cell phone to call home and tell someone to come out and help with the groceries when we can take a load in and ask someone else to take over....

                So I don't think that technology is getting too sophisticated/time-consuming... we're just letting it dominate our lives.
                "...Some of growing up is the knitting together of our cognitive webs, and some things take time and experience to make sense...." - Taran

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by EricG1793 View Post
                  So I don't think that technology is getting too sophisticated/time-consuming... we're just letting it dominate our lives.
                  I think I'm okay with the domination, to a point.
                  On one hand, I'm typing this post on my Acer AspireOne (netbook). I bought this thing about a year ago and it's probably one of the best choices I've made. No more lugging binders and textbooks around, or trying to puzzle out my own lecture notes.
                  But on the other, if this thing falls in a puddle then I'm in big trouble. Also, I find technology invasive in a lot of other ways. You mentioned mobile phone irritation, and I agree with that. I don't particularly like the fact that my online purchases are filed away somewhere, or that the pizza place knows what I ordered last time I called. It's not really a big deal, but it makes me itchy.

                  Is tech a time-waster or a time-saver? my microwave is definitely a time-saver, but I've probably spent upwards of 100+ hours in the last month building / breaking / fixing my desktop.

                  Originally posted by alla View Post
                  Not quite non-related to the topic; its still about technology. I think that they should be allowed to patent it. The patent is there to protect their techonology from being reverse engineered and used by compeditiors. They've spent time and effort developing and improving that technology, why shouldn't they be allowed to patent it? (Just my opinion, sorry if it comes off a little harsh)
                  I understand your view, and I'm not totally against copyright law in all instances, but copywriting hand motions just doesn't wash with me. Partially this is because the news came close on the heels of Palm announcing development of a touch-sensitive new Pilot model, but mostly it's just because I think a line needs to be drawn between proprietary technology and things that should be open to all, especially if they are quickly becoming the industry standard. What if Windows had managed to copyright the "GUI-based Operating system" or the Queen the "one-handed verticle wave" or IBM the "input device keypad" and sued and/or forced people to pay royalties on it? No more Linux
                  Apple can copyright it's source code for "multi-touch" nine ways from sunday for all I care, but to they've been granted a patent on a hand gesture - in a hyperbolic nightmare future that means you can't pinch your little brother without giving Steve Jobs a nickel.
                  I would EAT THE HELL outta that steak, then try to guilt the cow into dying just for being a cow. I'd be all "NOM NOM HEY COW YOU'RE NOT MEAT YET WHAT GIVES JERK" and then I'd glare and give it the silent treatment. Same goes for pigs and chickens... I would guilt a FLOCK of chickens into poultrycide in a heartbeat. "HEY YOU'RE A CHICKEN HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT THAT"- Madhatte

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Perhaps if the technology itself is patented, but they have to put it they have to allow others to buy the right if they're doing it in the same manor.
                    I'm baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack.
                    For those of you who don't recognize WHO'S back, I'll give you a hint, and I don't mean the typo's in my posts - YR.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      yeah ( sigh ) it has gone a little far...
                      not like I have a problem with it or anny thing but they shold at least slow down enugh to let my parints have time to get the newist TV.
                      I am writing this on an olld slooooow compeuter by the way so keap it comming ...but not so FAST!!!
                      Life is short, eat dessert first!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Lol we were discussing this in English after watching time machine. We are(or were) in a sci-fi unit while that class was dedicated to nothing. I'm serious in that class we've had so many random tangents. We've had more parties in that class than what we've done learning. Though most of our conversations are intelligent, except for pet smart or pets mart.

                        On topic: I think it's the people that take technology to far, not the technology itself. As said before, technology merely exists. It's not good, not bad, not even neutral. It just simply exists. It's humans that decides what to use technology for.

                        For example: splitting of the atom. It has lots of potential energy wise. But there are people that decide to go to far and we have a nuclear weapon.
                        Visit KasChat Network!

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X