Is there something too reassuring about today’s technology?

I am certainly not anti-technology. In fact, for the most part I enjoy it. The potential problem I see is in the way it is evolving. It is becoming cheaper and more readily available. This seems good when we think about the hard work people have done to get computer access to everyone. For instance, many public schools and libraries have raised money to make multiple computers with internet access available. Some communities are working to make free community wide wireless internet access available. I even heard a conversation recently in which someone asked, “Did those wind-up laptops ever make it to Africa?”

To get your own laptop, you can you go to your local department store (Wal-Mart) and pick one up for a reasonable price. Not only will it be affordable but it will be ready for you to use right “out of the box!” I wonder though if, like socialism, this idea of everything for the masses is better on paper than in reality or virtual reality. Especially since a lot of the motivation for this has been more about profit and capitalism than good-will towards your fellow human/avatar. This seems to be one of the philosophical questions at the heart of technology’s use by a society. I mean without the personal computer and the notions it brought into all our homes, things would no doubt be different. What would those differences be?

Beyond pricing, and since technology is another product to be bought and sold, the design aspects are changing as well. We can’t deny it is having an impact on what looks appealing to us an what doesn’t. Disposability is also no longer taboo. This has an effect on the materials things are made out of and the quality put into them. If I know that when the next version of something comes out you will want to “upgrade” I can make it with less quality and cheaper materials. This shift in our relationship to the concept of disposeabiltiy is, in my opinion, part of the reason why we are seeing more and more uses for plastic. It is also contributing to outsourcing and more things labeled “made in china”.

The other idea that has tagged along as technology has evolved and become more widely available is size. Unlike other areas of our lives, small is in! The smaller and more functions the better. We want our cellphones to do more than make calls. We want our cars equipped with DVD players to entertain the kids. We want our laptops lighter and faster and able to support us in all our multimedia adventures. Even our household appliances are seeing changes. Look at your programmable self-grinding coffee pot for example.

To meet our “needs”, the manufacturers have had to make the technology more “user friendly”. So, in an effort to appeal to the masses, the technology has become smarter allowing us to be dumber. Despite all of this, it looks like we are still a long way away from the Jetsons. Will our overly “user friendly” products keep us from striving to reach our Jetsonian dreams? This dumbing down is not just with computers. Let’s take another look at Second Life.

You log on and get an avatar and are dropped onto “Orientation Island.” There you are taught the basic workings of how to be a part of this place. I am told that “Orientation Island” didn’t always exist or you could get off much easier in the past. In theory, I think this place is a good idea. As a newb, I didn’t just automatically know how to do things there. But does it dumb down the experience of just having to ask or figure it out? And what kind of experience did it offer? I thought it was kind of lame and frustrating. Not exactly begging me to want to spend much more time or any money. I’m persisting with my exploration for university credits and artistic reasons. I wouldn’t say at this point I get the same enjoyment or needs met there as other people I know.

As for profit, to alter your avatar far beyond what was given to you, expect to spend some money. Will the money I spend make me feel like I need to spend more time there to get my money’s worth? I mean I haven’t been there for long but it looks like to fit in will require some cash. I am still asking myself how bad do I want nipples?

Businesses are also creating a presence there for profit reasons. Second Life users are almost like a captive test market. Universities are building their own spaces for educational purposes. They also want to appeal to their students or potential students (customers) as well. I also hear SL is big among libraries and they even discussed this at some big librarians conference! But despite all the money you spend, there isn’t much difference in SL. At least I haven’t seen the same difference you see in your day to day real world wanderings. Those flaws that make us unique and beautiful seem to be for the most part missing. I wonder how the SL experience differed when you still had to pay to get an account?

There is no doubt in my mind that this “user friendly” requirement has compressed our differences. Not just our differences in user ability or economic standing but difference like virtual appearance. You are suddenly interacting with virtual people in a place where everyone looks like a model and probably not much like themselves. In this way, I wonder how the soothing quality of technology is effecting us beyond the ideas I have presented here. Is this easy technology effecting our notions of difference, aesthetics, identity, and the body?