This isn't why I disagree with the article, but I think the example of a newspaper is a poor one.
Newspapers are a one-way information exchange. People take information from a newspaper and traditionally use this information as 'conversational currency' with other people within their peer groups, or such as in the picture used in the example, locality.
"They say it'll rain all through the week." "How about them Yankees?'", "I can't believe our court systems let him get away with that!"
A mobile device is different, as it is a means of two way communication. We can take in the information from this method, but we can also spread this information, or "spend our conversational credits" with the device as well, with other people linked to us by their similar devices.
A person on a device is commonly networking with a very large group of other people, and the information exchange is nearly never one way. Humans like to receive feedback on information they receive. This gives us a wider perspective that is further detached from ourselves, and is generally more well-rounded in regards to the opinions the rest of the world shares.
People now use devices like this, to gain a larger amount of opinions so to form their own views. As humans, that feedback loop with other humans is necessary.
The problem : It has not been sufficiently shown to me that we are capable of honoring both information sources very well at once. Most people who I have spoken with who are busy (different than idling on) on their mobile devices have a level of disconnect between myself and themselves that I have never experienced with someone who was simply reading a newspaper or watching a television.
I believe that this level of disconnect that I have experienced in an anecdotal fashion may be related to the cognitive overhead being higher for two way communications methods compared to information-receiving systems.
I don't believe technology is ruining us..
but, I wouldn't care to have dinner with someone who'd rather be spending time on a device that'll be there once the food is gone.
It's more a human respect thing. I don't need to believe that technology is ruining us to be irked by the fact that someone can't be bothered to turn their attention to those around them for forty five minutes out of the day when those people are doing the same for them.
This isn't why I disagree with the article, but I think the example of a newspaper is a poor one.
Newspapers are a one-way information exchange. People take information from a newspaper and traditionally use this information as 'conversational currency' with other people within their peer groups, or such as in the picture used in the example, locality.
"They say it'll rain all through the week." "How about them Yankees?'", "I can't believe our court systems let him get away with that!"
A mobile device is different, as it is a means of two way communication. We can take in the information from this method, but we can also spread this information, or "spend our conversational credits" with the device as well, with other people linked to us by their similar devices.
A person on a device is commonly networking with a very large group of other people, and the information exchange is nearly never one way. Humans like to receive feedback on information they receive. This gives us a wider perspective that is further detached from ourselves, and is generally more well-rounded in regards to the opinions the rest of the world shares.
People now use devices like this, to gain a larger amount of opinions so to form their own views. As humans, that feedback loop with other humans is necessary.
The problem : It has not been sufficiently shown to me that we are capable of honoring both information sources very well at once. Most people who I have spoken with who are busy (different than idling on) on their mobile devices have a level of disconnect between myself and themselves that I have never experienced with someone who was simply reading a newspaper or watching a television.
I believe that this level of disconnect that I have experienced in an anecdotal fashion may be related to the cognitive overhead being higher for two way communications methods compared to information-receiving systems.
I don't believe technology is ruining us..
but, I wouldn't care to have dinner with someone who'd rather be spending time on a device that'll be there once the food is gone.
It's more a human respect thing. I don't need to believe that technology is ruining us to be irked by the fact that someone can't be bothered to turn their attention to those around them for forty five minutes out of the day when those people are doing the same for them.